Ladies and gentlemen, dear colleagues, good morning. This is the next of the last day of our session. And as I said yesterday, I announced it yesterday, today. Our schedule hasn't that from 10 to one and from three to six, we will review the last reading of the final text of the convention. Except for the compromise proposal, which we set aside and the articles which are part of the attempt to compromise by the chair, as well as articles 13 and 15, which will be the subject of informal consultations open ended, led by Nigeria, in conference room three at 115 to five to 15. So we will have sessions in the morning and in the afternoon in order to review and do the last reading of the final text except for the attempt attempted compromise by the chair on certain articles, which will not be examined in plenary and articles 13 and 15, which will be considered an open ended group and formal group open to all delegations from 150. From 150 to 250. So this is the agreement with the led by Nigeria so if there are no questions or or remarks, we will begin reviewing the preamble and the text of the convention.
Preamble you'll see it on the screen. You must have received it yesterday. Midday, it was on the website of the ad hoc committee in English for the moment. We have to agree in order to send it forward. Further, any comments on the preamble?
Is it destiny, United States?
Good morning, Madam Chair. And let me begin by thanking you once again, I don't mean to repeat it. But it is always due to you and the team for the tremendous effort that goes into making these revisions and collecting and reflecting the views of member states. We believe that we have made a lot of progress and are moving forward. We want to continue to be constructive and do as much as we can to reach a consensus text in the short time that we have. And at the same time, we do need to make a few observations regarding this updated version of the of the preamble. We have shown as much flexibility as we can on on many issues and that includes the issue of the word voluntary in relation to the transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms. This is a very important issue for the United States and yet we were able to show flexibility in the interest of consensus on the use of that phrase in the technical assistance chapter. We note however, that in what I believe is the fourth or fifth preambular paragraph here that begins stressing there has been reference to technology transfer that has been inserted here and that once again includes the phrase that we are able to go along with only very reluctantly and subject other qualifications that were discussed when we discussed the technical assistance chapter. And so we would request that those references in the technical assistance chapter are sufficient and that we not include an additional reference to technology transfer here in the preamble, it's covered in the technical assistance chapter. On a perhaps more technical note in the preambular Paragraph beginning determined to prevent further down in the preamble, there's also a continued reference to the recovery and return of the proceeds of crime. And here we are negotiating and concluding a Cybercrime Convention and so we would simply ask that that be amended to reflect cybercrime rather than crime. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Merci beaucoup,
thank you very much. I think I will thank you all. For the thanks to the chair and the team by the United States. So on behalf of my colleagues, I thank you all for your sense of responsibility, and for your professionalism and your discipline. I truly admire the your presence and and your participation. So, we will save some time and I will no thank you all. I consider that we will all be congratulating each other. And if you have any specific concern, let us hear it clearly. Please make a proposal. At this stage, we no longer have time for negotiations. So if you make a concrete proposal, we would know what you are proposing by way of a word or a phrase to replace what is there and then we immediately decide whether we keep it or not. Thank you very much. And now I follow the open list. Iran, Mauritania and Canada follow Iran please.
Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Good morning to you and all of the distinguished delegations. Regarding to the preamble, my delegation several times declared its concerns about the some activities on weakening of international cooperation to effective implementation of the future convention for disregard that we mentioned that the unilateral coercive measures should be removed in our corporations for this process. But, Madam Chair, for showing the flexibility that my delegation would like to propose some wordings, in paragraph six of the preamble that regard for distressing strengthening the need to enhance our coordination and cooperation among the states. And so, we are going to propose that add this wording removing your or avoid avoiding any impediment or harm hampering of international cooperation among the state parties. Thank you
to more than likely not everyone has taken note of this proposal. I propose that we take note of all possible proposals that will come in order to consider them and be able to decide whether we approve or not, but please at this stage. One we will not have general speeches or statements we don't no longer have the time to listen. I will go to to English, the expert explanations of the logic of the proposal. We have been listening to the same speeches for two years. And we know exactly what we all think. So we need to propose. And if you read out your proposal at dictation speed so that everyone can take note, including the Secretariat, and then we will see whether we can keep it or not. And we will follow the following the general balance of the preamble. The preamble, as currently drafted is not perfect far from it. This is not a Nobel Literature Prize, but I think, is that it does provide a balance. And of course, each one of us might prefer different words. But let's think of the overall balance of the text. This is a preamble and it's not a General Assembly Resolution, which has to be negotiated word by word. This is a preamble, which provides an introduction as it states an introduction to the convention. It's the introductory part, the practical part. And for my part, I think, frankly speaking that as drafted, I don't really see how we could refuse it. That, of course, understood, we're all sovereign. Mauritania has the floor.
Thank you, Madam Chairperson. Good morning, everyone. I have a remark on paragraph three. In line with your directors, Madam Chairperson, I'll tackle my remark directly. This paragraph includes a list of offenses that are referred to as a source of concern. And it is a basis for this convention. However, that list is not all inclusive, for eight has disregarded so many offenses. Thus, we believe that there are no comprehensive lists. Therefore, instead of that, we would like to refer to the offenses provided for in this convention. So it is a concern that would be a basis for this convention. Thank you.
JK couscous. I have a proposal for you. Could we perhaps add the words into Aliah instead of including we could put into Aliah which would imply that those that aren't mentioned aren't concerned. So perhaps we could put into Aliah. Thus, we can incorporate your idea of not every single crime being listed that idea would be included would be covered. Mauritania, police, law manhandling. We don't have any objections. Madam Chair, this proposal will take our concerns on board. Chair very well, we'll change that later. Not right now. But we will replace including with inter alia in para three Canada.
Yes. Thank you, Madam
Chair. Our proposal is to end the paragraph after criminal offenses. And if we don't do that, we would like to express our reservations regarding this paragraph, because it's related to our ongoing discussions about the scope of the convention. Thank you, Madam Chair. Very well. We've taken note of your proposal. Thank you, Canada, South Africa, please.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. So my delegation believes that transfer of technology should be free of conditionalities for technical assistance and capacity building to be truly effective. Manager We think that caveats are unhelpful and unconstructive. Also, we are disappointed to see the transfer technologies still double caveats, nautical 54 And come pletely removed from article one on statement of purpose. And as the African group has said on several occasions, international cooperation lies at the heart of this convention, and state parties need to be fully capacitated and how to render effective assistance. And this includes transfer of technology. At the very least, Madam Chair, we are pleased to see reference to transfer technology included in the preamble, the Committee will recall that there has been a sizable number of countries alongside the African group, which has specifically called for its inclusion and outlined the importance of its implementation for the convention. So Madam Chair for the African group, we would like to see transfer of technology maintained in the preamble. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. We've taken good note of your proposal. Saudi Arabia should say the rise. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, colleagues. We have a proposal
in paragraph 11. The paragraph which begins with the word mindful we'd like to add something to this paragraph. States.
We would like to say in keeping with instruments in keeping with applicable international and regional instruments to which the state is a party, to which the state is a party. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Pakistan, please.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, since you have invited very quick comments, and so we would like to refer to BP which has a list of crimes and would like to propose after culture property, which reads as follows, as well as incitement to violence, comma discrimination, and desertification of religious values. Madam Chair, with regard to the term transfer of technology, we would like to support what our colleague from South Africa mentioned. We would like the transfer of technology to be maintained in this paragraph. Thank you very much.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Pakistan, before giving the floor to Cuba. I would like to say that they do see attempts to reopen the debate, which we might have not had in plenary in other negotiation format. There are attempts to reopen the debate at this stage. I don't think that's a good idea. It's a dead end. Cuba, Tunisia, Guyana, Morocco, Iceland, Namibia, Colombia, Cuba, you have the floor,
which I could ask. Yes, sir. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Good morning, colleagues. Madam Chair. We think that at this moment, the preamble seems to be a well balanced exercise or a sufficiently balanced exercise, so that we can move forward with the process. However, my delegation takes note of the fact that some delegations wish to reopen some elements, which are crucial for developing countries. And I would, in that sense, echo the comments made by the delegation of South Africa, as well as by other developing countries with regard to the need to maintain the reference to the transfer of technologies. In paragraph six of the preamble. My delegation also indicates that this paragraph does not establish any obligation under international law does not establish an obligation under this instrument, and it is quite a weak paragraph. So we would support not very enthusiastically because this paragraph refers to transfer of technology, with ample safeguards with which my delegation and principle does not agree. But moving toward a consensus, we think it is an acceptable paragraph. Since there are delegations that wish to maintain paragraph three, open until the scope is determined. My delegation could do the same with regard to paragraph eight concerning the promotion and protection of human rights, since this is also a matter of which is pending agreement. But in conclusion, And in a more positive vein and trying to help you, I would propose to change. The first three words of the first paragraph of the preamble because it seems to us that an instrument of this kind, which has provisions on sovereignty and human rights and other elements should reaffirm the purposes and principles of the charter. And I should think that this is not a matter that would lead to a major debate since I assume that we're all deeply committed to the purposes and principles of the charter. Thank you. Beaucoup.
Thank you very much Cuba. I think that indeed we can reaffirm the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. We've taken good note of your proposal. Tonight, Tunisia, you have the floor. Next to Madonna. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, colleagues. I'll keep my comments brief given that time is of the essence. We fully align ourselves with the position expressed by the African group, visa vie, the inclusion of technology transfer in the preamble, and we're very much in favor of the current wording of the preamble. Chair. Thank you Tunisia, Guyana, you have the floor.
Thank you Madam Chair, Madam Chair on behalf of CARICOM, I wish to register that CARICOM supports the preamble and its current construct, we believe that it's balanced. However, we will just like to make this intervention based on what we would have heard on the floor with respect to preambular paragraph three. CARICOM comes preference is for retaining the word include and we also know that in this paragraph, the words such as is also used. So this means that the category of offenses listed there is not close, we believe it's inclusive, and it would keep this particular preamble contemporary so we would prefer that it remains as is. With respect the preamble the paragraph and name CARICOM supports retaining proceeds of crime instead of cybercrime. Cyber crime is not defined and we believe that proceeds of crime is already clear as to what this preambular Paragraph speaks to. Thank you, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Morocco to be followed by Iceland. Morocco.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll be quick as you have indicated on the preamble, first, to PP three, with the Rectorate. Our request that we would like to end the poll right after the second line without going in details about the crimes that we want to see as it has been highlighted before. By my distinguished colleague from Mauritania, we cannot have an inclusive approach and cite all the types of crimes that could be covered. So we would be of preference of keeping a general scope on PP six, we join our voices on national capacity to support the African go up on the retention of the the transfer of technology. And also on the line before the last when we talk about to deal with cybercrime we'd like to add after in all its forms and manifestations on PP seven, we have here a terminology that refers to address the needs of, of persons in vulnerable situations, we would call to have the comprehensive language that we have in the SDG agenda, which is people who are vulnerable or in vulnerable situation. By definition, there are two types. There are types of people who are inven, who are vulnerable, like when we talk about senior people or people with disabilities or people with rare diseases, whereas there are people who are vulnerable because they are in a situation of vulnerability if they are displaced or if they are affected from armed conflict. So we would like to have PP. Seven reflecting the SDG language. It's an agreed language, that we have a cause of many GA resolution and dialogue, Pete to address the needs of those who are vulnerable or in vulnerable situations. Thank you.
Very well, thank you very much. Iceland, please.
Madam Chair, good morning. And thank you for your continued efforts. Now, Iceland continues to be concerned about the scope of this convention. It has got to be clear and focused, because this is criminal law we're talking about in PP three We would therefore support Canada inputting full stop after criminal offenses. And Madam Chair, I believe this could also save us some precious time because it seems obvious that it is hard, very hard to agree on what exactly is up in there. I hope this was clear enough. Thank you very much.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Namibia please.
Thank you Chair and thank you for for the draft text as it is presented. My delegation is quite content with with a text as it is. Madam Chair, let me align myself to the sentiments expressed by the distinguished delegate of South Africa on the transfer of technology. Of course, we would have wanted to see transfer of technology more in the in the draft text. For example, as we have also noted, it is no longer reflected in the state of statement of purpose. However, we are happy and we are in support of the retention of it in the preamble. Thank you, Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. We've taken good note of your comment, Columbia, please.
Gracias, Senora. Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation has reiterated the need for our countries to have the transfer of technology. We therefore support the explanation by the delegation of South Africa. And we maintain the wording of paragraph six in the preamble as it is. Thank you. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Burkina Faso please. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation is very much in favor of keeping in the reference to technology reference, we staunchly support the statement delivered by South Africa.
As for Article Three, we believe that the list of offenses set forth in paragraph three is not exhaustive. We're of the view
that it is in fact impossible to be exhaustive. Therefore, we agree with Mauritania's suggestion.
We should focus on the offenses set forth in this convention without referring to specific crimes. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thank you, United Kingdom.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, colleagues. So, Madam Chair, we like to add our voice to those delegations thanking you for the text. We are largely supportive of the preamble, just like to make two very brief points. In preambular, paragraph three, we've long voiced our concerns about having a list here. And what we've heard today from some delegations, adding, adding more in perhaps taking ones out, it only serves to re emphasize these concerns. For the sake of simplicity, we would support Canada's proposal to stop the sentence after the phrase criminal offenses. Turning to be under paragraph six. We also don't understand the need to single out one form of technical assistance and compact and capacity building, hear over other forms, and would prefer to leave the detail to the chapter on technical assistance. Therefore, we support the US in deleting the reference to the transfer of technology here. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. Okay, Nigeria, you have the floor.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Nigeria would like to join our delegations in expressing our profound appreciation to you for your work. As we do not have time. Madam Chair, we would like to point out that at this stage, Madam Chair, what should be considered new proposals that has the possibility of enjoined consensus, where a proposal is deeply contested by different groups Madam Chair, that proposal should be disregarded because we do not have have time to go into additional debate on new proposals as it were. Madam Chair, let me also point out that from the outset, my delegation was not comfortable with the inclusion of preambular Paragraph 10. Because we do not understand the essence of affirming agenda perspective and mainstreaming in a criminal justice convention, we think that if this paragraph should actually appear in this draft, it should be in the preventive measures, where states may try to initiate strategies or as to how these crimes impact different groups different individuals, but we have decided to live with it and we will not be calling for deletion at this stage because we do not have time. It is in the same manner that we do not understand why some delegations are requesting for deletion of transfer of technology. So that will go back to the debate as to its importance or relevance at this stage. That is not the way to go madam chair. So we would like to endorse the statement of South Africa on behalf of the Africa group to keep transfer of technology the way it is reflected in the paragraph. In the same manner, we had gone beyond the issue of listening article in paragraph three. We've gone beyond that, I saw what Madam Chair said to the delegation of Pakistan, we cannot reopen the debate now. So the idea whether or not it is important or not important does not matter. The state Madam Chair, so I enjoyed delegations to Allah was make progress we do not have all the time in the world. Let's stop reopening. paragraphs are language that has been there since we started this conversation. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup. Thank
you very much, Nigeria. Thank you for your flexibility. I'd like to remind everyone that you're absolutely right, we negotiated this text at length. And therefore, I believe that we've struck a balance a fragile balance, of course, because we cannot be completely and utterly satisfied with each and every word. And yet the main concerns that have been voiced have been reflected in the preamble. Therefore, I believe the preamble does indeed reflect our debate. Reopening the discussion is not a good idea at this stage of our proceedings. May I remind you that we will conclude this process tomorrow at 6pm. Kenya, you have the floor?
Thank you, Madam Chair. The preamble as it reads is acceptable. However, my delegation would like to support the statement by our South African colleagues on returning technology transfer as a key element in this convention. Technology Transfer should therefore be unqualified, as we support the preambular paragraph as it is.
Merci beaucoup lucchini Thank you, Kenya, China.
US use. Thank you, Madam Chair. Regarding PP three. We know the logic behind it. We know where this clause comes from. If we insist on changing it, we hope to add something add a paragraph. I will say it in English
before such as before, such as we would like to add acts that pose a serious threat to public safety. So, if you don't go down for the equality, this
is a consistent position of the Chinese government which I believe you are all clear about.
If improved, amble
we cannot discuss this issue. Then I my suggestion is to discusses under Article Three, the scope of treatment criminalization. And we also agreed with the Nigerian delegates that at the final stage of negotiations, if some countries cannot take into consideration the concerns of other countries and insist on deleting the contribution made by other countries, then other controversial content or elements should also be deleted should also should be deleted at the same time. Thank you, Madam Chair,
Mitzi. Thank you
very much China, Algeria, to be followed by the Holy See.
Madam Chair, my delegation would like to support the preamble as drafted. Nevertheless, my this delegation would like to join South Africa and the position of the African group regarding the inclusion of a direct reference to transfer of technology in the preamble. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Merci.
Thank you very much. The Holy See.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair and Good morning colleagues. At the at the outset, we would like to thank you, the Bureau and the Secretariat for your hard work. Going straight to the to the preamble with regard to it, we think it is overall acceptable in the current form, and we're ready to accept it as it is wherever we feel obliged to reiterate and put on record our concern on paragraph 10 as legally unclear, not belonging to the criminal justice system and unprecedented in other UN glaring conventions. With regard to paragraph seven. We previously requested the deletion of persons in vulnerable situation, as we consider it a paragraph focusing on victims. However, we can accept your proposal, noting that it also refers to preventive efforts. We also support the reference to vulnerable situations as it is, as we think that no one is inherently vulnerable. Thank you. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much the Holy See, El Salvador. Gracias.
Thank you, Madam Chair. With regard to the preamble, we'd like to first of all to thank for the efforts to present a revised text, which includes elements we've consulted. As part of the negotiations of the package, I'd like to comment on the granular paragraph, which reflects transfer of technology. And we thank you for incorporating it. We believe that with this introduction plus article 54, paragraph one creates a minimum balance which my delegation can support. We recognize that one delegation withdrew its proposal to characterize as voluntary the obligation on transfer of technology. And we think that delegation provides flexibility, it would be prudent at this time to maintain the balance text of article 54, paragraph one, as is an preambular. Six, as submitted by you in your revised version. Thank you.
Thank you very much, El Salvador, and thank you for recalling the backstory, the history of our negotiations, specifically, the fact that this preamble reflects the flexibility exhibited by the various delegations. On several occasions. At this stage, we are insisting on a wording that hasn't received sufficient sufficiently broad based support, and therefore I, I really urge delegations to think long and hard before reopening the debate, because yes, each and every one of us can revert to our original position and insist on that position. Nigeria reminded us about this, they were not in favor of paragraph 10. And yet they've rallied they're really behind consensus towards the end, because they understood, they took into consideration the fact that this is a negotiation process, whereby other countries have had to make concessions. And that means that at the end of the day, on the whole, this paragraph, this preamble is agreeable. I would now like to give the floor to Senegal to be followed by Brazil, Senegal. Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. Senegal would like to join its voice to the voice of the African group. We are in favor of keeping technology transfer. In the preamble, we'd like to remind everyone that technology transfer comes with sufficient safeguards, which can alleviate concerns. Related to it's mentioned, specifically in parrot 54. One of the previous speakers recalled this, that's the first thing I have to say. Second, technology transfer is absolutely vital for all states. For states, which are less technologically advanced, and the advanced the developed states as well, because this contributes to effective cooperation specifically on prevention. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much, Brazil, you have the floor.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I'd like to join the main delegations that have already supported the statement made my distinguished delegate of South Africa on behalf of the African group in support of retaining PP six s It is currently drafted with a reference to capacity building. And our support to the preamble as a whole. We believe that as with any balanced, multilateral document, no one is entirely happy with it. But it's something that has managed to find the balance between all the different priorities of the states represented here. And so we would very much urge us to, to keep the language as it currently stands, and to hopefully be able to move on to other parts of the text. Thank you.
Merci. Thank you very much. Indeed, it's already 11am. And if we continue at this pace, I fear that in the afternoon, we'll still be discussing the preamble, which we've already negotiated at length. And on the whole, we actually agreed on the preamble in plenary and in informals, Eritrea to be followed by Tanzania.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, colleagues. Thank you for representing us with a text. All preamble. It is a text that we believe is balanced. Having said that, Madam Chair. My delegation support the statement made by South Africa with respect to the retention of technical transfer by delegation also support the proposal by Iran with respect to unilateral coercive measures. My preference was to have a very explicit reference to it. But I think we can go along with what Iran has proposed this morning. My delegation of support your proposal to address the concern of more Italia, the respect to PP three on the list of offenses by adding the war, inter alia after including, finally, about a chair my delegation support Saudi Arabia's proposal on pp 11 To have the qualifier in which the parties in which in which state parties
after international convention in which in which state parties are purchasers of evasion, thank you. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. Before I give the floor to Tanzania, I will read the list of speakers. Cameroon, Costa Rica, Egypt, and Cote d'Ivoire, European Union, Brazil, Paraguay, Peru, Nicaragua, Ecuador, Cape Verde, Malaysia. Tanzania has the floor.
But I'm sure I'll be very brief. But I'm sure my delegation aligns itself with a statement made by South Africa on behalf of African group on the retention of technical systems the way it is currently drafted in PP six. We will also call for the retention of the current formulation of PP three. And Madam Chair, just like Nigeria, we are opposed PP nine and PP. 10. But we think the current formulation strikes a proper balance and we support your text as it is currently drafted. Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, it will.
Thank you very much, Cameroon. Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation endorses the comments made by delegations that are in favor of including technology transfer in this text. My delegation also believes that there's no need to mention the offenses. And my delegation would also say say that, including criminals in this text would be would be limiting. Thank you very much. Costa Rica. Thank you, Costa Rica.
Good morning, Madam Chair delegates. We can support the preamble as proposed by the chair. It is well balanced, and it reflects various positions which have been proposed over these two years of negotiations. We believe it reasonable to have Canada's proposal and preambular three However, we reiterate our support in general for the proposal by the chair. Thank you. Thank you very much, Egypt.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, your colleagues regarding PP three, Egypt aligns itself with the intervention made by the distinguished delegate of Nigeria, pertaining to the retention of this paragraph as proposed by the chair and taking into consideration that this come after compromise regarding the current list of the crimes that we have did we have the coming protocol regarding PP six Egypt aligns itself to the letter with the intervention made by the distinguished delegate of South Africa pertaining to the retention of the paragraph as proposed in the further device text regarding PP seven Egypt aligns itself with the intervention made by the Holy See regarding the that the reference to the persons in vulnerable situations is correct in its language, but I think we it is irrelevant in the in the context unless we make a minor amendment, madam chair in the second line, to delete after the word victims and their and to put a comma and to add as an assisity to address tattletale so that it makes it relevant to the addressing the the circumstances of the of the victims in this is a minor amendment to make to make the sentence relevant to the to the to the victims, Madam Chair, in pp 10. We align ourselves with Nigeria who is here in Tanzania regarding our concerns regarding this paragraph from a substantive and legal point of view. But we can show flexibility, Madam Chair, taking into consideration that we want to move forward on a conceptual basis on article on PP. 11. Egypt aligns itself with the intervention made by Saudi Arabia to add the term to which they are 40s. i Thank you, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Andrea.
Thank you, Madam Chair. We support the preamble in its present form. And we completely oppose changing the language at this stage unless it brings more clarity. We also have certain suggestions, but the mere thought of suggesting it here at this stage appears to be completely counterproductive to the negotiations. Therefore, we oppose any changes suggested in PP three. We however, support your proposal of adding the word inter alia before the word including because it brings a lot of clarity to it. And similarly, in PP six, we oppose any changes in the draft by removing the words transfer of technology. Thank you. Merci. Merci.
Thank you very much India, Cote d'Ivoire. The our delegation supports the preamble as drafted currently because it reflects the results of lengthy negotiations for years now. We believe that we are we support the balance and the inclusion of transfer of technology as requested by South Africa on behalf of the African group. And in terms of the effectiveness of prevention, and for punishments for such crimes. In terms of paragraph three, we maintain the paragraph in support the paragraph in its current wording. Thank you. Thank you, European Union.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The EU and its member states can also accept the preamble as drafted. We agree with you that the text is not perfect, but it is indeed as several speakers have already said the result of a fine balance. So as a result, we strongly object to the inclusion of any new crimes in PP three. If that would be considered then all crimes should be deleted. Let's be clear on the new position on that. On the amendment put forward by the Question to introduce paragraph on the new atoll coercive measures, do you strongly object to that amendment? And again, I don't see the point of trying to introduce new provisions that are, for sure, absolutely unlikely to be acceptable by the committee at this stage. And finally, on pp 11. We strongly object to any challenge to that article. And let me be clear, if we start considering this type of changes, this means that we can also start reopening other amendments also, I mean, other parts of the text that we did not like but that we did accept for the sake of compromise. So if we start this game, let's be clear about what it will wear, it will bring us joy. Marcia, President.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Russian Federation.
Special. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair. First things first, we don't quite understand how we can consider a text which has not yet been submitted in full. Once again, we have to complete our work tomorrow, and we have hardly any time to calmly analyze its content. And we also have to send it to capitals for their consideration as well. But that's not the most surprising thing. We deliberately waited to take the floor so that we could hear other delegations first to see if anyone noticed the elephant in the room. Let's start with the title of the convention. To be perfectly frank, we're just made to put it lightly. Yesterday when we completed our work. On the convention, we discussed countering the use of ICT for criminal purposes. Today we're talking about a UN Convention on cybercrime, countering cybercrime. The Russian delegation has a question in this regard. How did this happen? How did we change the title was the ad hoc committee tasked by the UN GA to come up with a convention on combating cybercrime? We don't understand why and at what stage this title emerged. As far as we're aware, the discussion of the title. There wasn't such a discussion at this session, at least, the Russian Federation was not party to it. Therefore, we believe it's necessary to go back to revert back to the original title, which is in keeping with the spirit of the text, and the mandate to set forth resolutions 74, stroke 247 and 75 Stroke 282. And we also would like to know whether we're going to have consultations about the title of the convention, if such consultations are going to be held, we'd be grateful if we were informed about it. Madam Chair regarding the preamble, we don't really have any issues with it, although we see that it has not reflected our calls and the calls of many states to incorporate into the text mentioned of resolutions which breeds life which gave life to this ad hoc committee. Aside from that when in fact, very much gets the use of the term cybercrime in this preamble apart and also an article one, let me remind you cybercrime is not a term that has a definition. We support China on Article Three, we need to keep that provision in there. We believe Saudi Arabia suggestion is valuable. In Article 11. We should add the words to which they are a party. Madam Chair, we will be providing a separate comment. So when we move on to specific provisions of the text microphone for the Russian Federation, please the Russian Federation The interpreter did not get the last sentence because the microphone was cut off the
the guests are reason to say it.
I see that the Russian Federation did not stop out the reading of the title. We have technologies of it information and communication technologies in the title. So we you participated in all the negotiations. There were no negotiations for Russia was not represented. So I really invite you to be aware of the fact that this that the that it's not just the title, we have the entire convention Every one has the same right and the same duties here. And I. Well, Paraguay, followed by Peru. Thank you, Madam Chair. My country's delegation finds that the preamble is well balanced. It reflects flexibility as has been mentioned, on several locations. So we request that the revised text be maintained. Thank you. Thank you, Peru.
Good morning, Madam Chair excellencies and distinguished colleagues, the delegation of Peru, Madam Chair wishes to join what other delegations have said that we are in a position to support your proposal. And in Peru, we have a saying that the perfect is the enemy of the good. The this is not perfect, but it is good for purposes of these negotiations. We believe that it includes the necessary unjust elements given the major lines of this convention in combating cybercrime, and I will mention Madam Chair, that our preference would also be along the lines of what was said by the distinguished delegation of South Africa on paragraph six, to maintain the reference to technology transfers, and on paragraph three, we would also be in a position to join your proposal on inter alia, thank you. Merci.
Thank you, Peru, Nicaragua, followed by Ecuador.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Nicaragua joins in what was said by the delegation of South Africa on behalf of the African group to keep in paragraph six the transfer of technology. We also support the delegate the proposal by Iran to include at the end of paragraph six, that to avoid any impediment to international cooperation among the states parties. Thank you.
Thank you, Ecuador.
Thank you, Madam Chair briefly. Ecuador supports the text of the preamble as it has been proposed. And we would only emphasize the importance of maintaining in paragraph six the reference to the transfer of technology, since this is essential for developing countries, so that we may implement the instrument efficiently. Thank you.
Thank you, Cape Verde. Gobble Verdun.
We support the preamble, as presented, specially PP three, pp. Six as African group was playing at the pizza seven, pp. 10 and 11. Finally, we supported the name of the convention as stated in the preamble. Thank you, Nessie.
Thank you very much Kabul, Malaysia.
transfer of technology is the foundation of this convention. Otherwise your Statement of Purpose renders
the weak and discriminatory in nature, as no countries have the same advantage in technological advancement. Therefore, Malaysia thinks we should assert our unissued support to African countries. Thank you.
Yes, thank you very much. Chin. Can you see Madame la President? Thank you, Madam Chair. Delegation of a child. Thanks, South Africa for its support for the transfer of technology text that give Thank you Chad Mali. Sorry, Iran. Iran has the floor. Thank
you, Madam Chair for giving floor to again to me, regarding to for the title of this, this convention, madame chair that we don't have any, you know, concrete decision in this committee and so so we reserved the name of the arted on the title of the convention regarding the PP three by delegation would like to support the initiation made by Pakistan and as well as China. PP six, we are besides that, we know, our suggest suggestions, we are going to support the African group made by the distinguished delegation of South Africa. Regarding PP seven vulnerable persons in vulnerable situation, there is no, there is no any definition about this matter, we reserved this, and we propose to put women and children instead of persons in vulnerable. And the other hand, pp 10. Madame Chair, as you know that we have a very strong preservation of our using of the gender in this convention. And so we prefer to, according to the Nigerian delegation mentioned about this matter that we reserved about this. And the other hand, regarding for the ppsf, elephant, Madam Chair, about the for the Human Rights mother, as you know, our principal positions about this, and we do believe that the this convention is the convention for criminal context, not human rights. Thank you so much.
Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much. That's what I was saying, Dear colleagues, that we know our positions, but as chair, I nod in in favor of expressing them again, as chair I am in favor of a consensus. And I invite you to consider maintaining this fragile balance as it appears on the screen. Molly, please. Thank you, Madam Chair. The delegation of Mali's supports the position of Burkina with regard to the list of crimes. Today, the list of the established it is known. But yesterday, there were formulations that when we're not really known, so we have to close the list because there may be other crimes that we're not aware of. So I think the list should be open. That is my first position with regard to the transfer of technology. We are in favor of maintaining the paragraph as it is to ensure a good transfer of technology. Thank you. Thank you, Bahrain
should arise. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning, all. In relation to paragraph three. We support maintaining the crimes contained in this
convention as indicated by Mauritania, especially that we are here discussing the preamble and we should not limit ourselves when talking in a field that continuously evolves. We agree with Nigeria and the holy sea in relation to attend. In conclusion, we agree with the delegate of Saudi Arabia in relation to adding to which they are parties at the end of paragraph 11. Thank you Madam Chair.
Chakra. Thank you, Zimbabwe.
Good morning, Madam Chair and Good morning colleagues. Thank you very much for affording the Zimbabwean delegation and opportunity to make a statement on the preamble. Madam Chair, considering the centrality of technology in the fight against cybercrime, Zimbabwe fully subscribes to the African group position is aptly articulated by the South African delegation, thus supporting the retention of the preambular paragraph on technology transfer. I thank you Madam Chair. Miss Siebel
Thank you very much. Oh, Central African Republic. Thank you, Madam Chair. The delegation of the Central African Republic would also like to join the list of countries to approve the preamble as a whole However, my delegation supports a proposal of South Africa and the African group with regard to them, maintaining the transfer of technology in paragraph six. Thank you. Thank you, Vietnam.
Thank you, Madam Chair, for giving us the floor like to join a vote to support your suggestion to add an inter alia, as in the PP three. We have mentioned in number Keishon that the preambles words serve as the philosophical foundation for the convention. And people in the future will look at the preamble to know how they could interpret the convention and indication in PP three will be helpful in that situation. Thank you, Madam Chair. Merci.
Thank you, Albania.
Thank you, Chair. Also, when you're supposed to the preamble, as it is in general appreciating all efforts as of now for this common text. But also we object. The encoding of new cramps on PP three, we oppose also the encoding of new paragraphs. And on any any change also, we have object on the PDP 11. Thank you. Merci.
Thank you very much, Governor.
Thank you, Madam Chair for giving my delegation the floor. Ghana wishes to thank the chair for her hard work put into the draft text presented on the preamble. My delegation is generally in support of the text as proposed by the chair. We would also like to add our support to the statements read by South Africa on behalf of the African group on the reference to the transfer of technology. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Panama. Good morning. The Panamanian delegation supports the text of the preamble as a whole without any change, we consider that all the items have been debated. And our position is to move forward with the process. Thank you. Thank you, Vanuatu.
Thank you, Madam Chair, I want to support the current language of your tics of the preamble, Madam Chair, including the title, PP three and PP six. Without any addition, or deletions, we believe that it is a better balance document, reflecting the numerous consultations and negotiations that have taken place in the past. And we echo the statement of the European Union about the spirit in which it should be received. Madam Chair, it might not be a perfect document. But going forward, it is something that we can use in order to advance the work that we are doing. It does not contain everything that what all the delegates wanted. But as I said, it is something that we can all accept. In relation to PB three, we support the the view expressed by the delegation of CARICOM that we've we favor the word including because it is a readily understandable term, as opposed to inter inter alia, and we echo the sentiments expressed by Vietnam, about how it'll be helpful to users in the future, who may not be diplomat. We may not be lawyers, but we would like to read and apply the words of this document. In relation to PP six is a small island developing states state, we support the present language. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much, Tilly.
Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation supports the texts proposed by you in its current wording and we disagree with any attempt to reopen discussion of paragraphs 10 and 11. Thank you Thank you very much Toyland.
But I'm sure I'll be brief.
I prefer the coffin
start over again. Thailand generally supports the text in the preamble as currently drafted, we would like to avoid or support for the inclusion of the reference to transfer of technology in the preamble of the convention. And this is important for the effective implementation public of the obligations under convention. Thank you. Merci.
Thank you very much, Congo.
Thank you. We support the transfer of technology, together with other countries, including South Africa. And we also agree that the list of crimes should not be exhaustive in paragraph three. Thank you, Madam Chair for all of your efforts. The delegation of the DRC agrees with all of this preamble. Thank you. Thank you, Ben. Thank you, Madam Chair. Permit me to recall that we should not aim for perfection. But this preamble, in our view is sufficiently hybrid and well balanced, so that it takes into account views on cyber crimes or others. That is why we support it. Also, the paragraph on transfer of technology in our view is very important and should appear in the preamble, because it is the right to have solidarity is one of the main categories and in terms of human rights. So, Ben, is has these views about the preamble. And in conclusion, we would like to express our thanks to Madam Chair, and for the Bureau and the support team. It is true that we have had to work hard on this end. But we're not reopening that debate. We you have chaired very well that you have told us that we don't want you don't want us to depart. So we thank you and recognize and congratulate all delegates for their colossal work.
Thank you. Merci, Davina.
Thank you. Thank you very much been in Indonesia, please.
Do everyone. My delegation, take a positive not only the current preamble of paragraphs as you prepare, and I'd like to thank you for the hard work that had been done by you Madam Chair. In particular, we would like to have the PP six as it is now, especially with regard to the transfer of technology. But also, since we are now engaging again in discussion, and we are some proposal from an allegation. We also can consider positively the suggestion made by the delegates of Saudi Arabia with regard to people spend on the exclusion of the wish they are party to thank you.
Thank you very much, Mozambique.
Thank you Chair for the opportunity hula. Thank you chair and the team for the balance balance texts of the preamble. Mozambique, Colette joined African group and other member states supporting the tax on paragraph six of the preamble proposing the maintenance of the reference to transfer of technology. Thank you. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Sierra Leone.
Thank you, Madam Chair for all your hard work. It is quite inspiring to see how you're trying to make the impossible possible. We suppose the preamble in general, my delegation would like to lend its voice to the statements made by the distinguished delegate of South Africa for the maintenance of transfer of technology to PP six. We think this would help with the effective implementation of the Convention. Thank you, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. Venezuela, please.
Gracias. Thank you, Madam Chair. Firstly, we support the original title on the use of infant information and communications technologies for criminal purposes. On the preamble, the proposed paragraphs offer a good basis very close to our our delegation wishes. But we would like resolutions to be mentioned the resolutions mandating this convention, we support paragraph three as proposed by the chair. We insist on the need, that it includes serious crimes, including in particular attacks against the critical structures and those related to terrorism. And paragraph six we join and the proposal and transfer of technology, we think that it is necessary to strengthen without conditions. On paragraph seven, we can support the strengthening with regard to the victims of all crimes. And we support Iran's proposal on making a reference to unilateral, coercive measures. We think that opportune and necessary Thank you.
Nicaragua, Nicaragua. Tokenizers. Thank you, Madam Chair, for giving us the floor again. Nicaragua wishes to support the statement by the delegation of Russia on the title of the convention. And we'd like to appeal kindly to the chair to take into account that many delegations and plenary meetings where the title was discussed, did not show consensus. So we would like to leave discussion of this matter open. We would also like to request that we keep paragraph three of the preamble as proposed by the chair. Lastly, on paragraph 10, our delegation is flexible on its formulation. But we believe that to avoid contentious and non consensus drafting take into account the concerns of all the link in delegations would lead us to a spirit of consensus, which is what we want. Thank you. Thank you, Yemen.
Thank you, Madam Chair. We will express flexibility, but we wanted to share some remarks. paragraph three, included some offenses and we could stop at criminal offenses, we can say the the new or traditional offenses, or we can keep the paragraph as is. However, it is not comprehensive. Turning to paragraph 11. We would like to add where this the part of the status party wins. But turning to paragraph four and five, there are terminologies that have been approved so we don't see any problem with that. Thank you. So many Principi
subdomain Principi
me think flow madam simplement principle is also supportive to the preamble as it stands as it reflects enlarge the contribution of each and every country represented in the room. Throughout the intensive discussion we've had along these two weeks. We are also favorable to the retaining of the paragraph six, referring to the transfer of technology, just like it was stated by South Africa in the name of Africa group, as it seems along with the capacity building, one of the key elements for the success and effectiveness of the international cooperation and countering that A cybercrime worldwide. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Malawi.
Thank you Chair for giving this delegation an opportunity to make a contribution on this debate. Madam Chair Malawi would also like to join the long list of delegations that speaking to paragraph six or the preamble, making reference to transform technology. Madam Chair Malawi supports this provision, and it's a provision that is necessary for effective implementation of this instrument. Thank you, Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Mexico.
Gracias. Thank you, Madam Chair. With regard to the preamble, Mexico can support it in its present form. We will not make specific comments or was not to reopen previous discussions. But we wanted to take the floor briefly this morning to inform a members that we have submitted a an official proposal for the closing session of the ad hoc committee on Article 64 of the current text of the convention, and increasing the threshold for ratification prior to entry into force. We thank all states for considering this proposal. And we hope that this will be discussed among delegations prior to our meeting this afternoon. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much.
Any other requests for the floor? Any other delegations wishing to speak to the preamble?
Molly? Thank you very much, Madam Chair. My delegation believes that the title should remain in keeping with the content of the preamble. If ICTs is a term that's contained in the text, well, that should also be reflected in the title, especially given the fact that the discussions we had the other day regarding keeping in ICTs. During those discussions, the majority of delegations spoke out in favor of keeping ICTs information and communication technologies. That was the original proposal. So it would be preferable to stick to this wording in the title as it should reflect the content of the text itself. Thank you, Chair. Thank you.
So you the rise. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good morning to you all. We would like to reiterate the proposal of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia regarding paragraph 11. We stress the need to add the the countries that are state parties. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. I think we've gone through all of the issues, once again. We had very lengthy negotiations, and I think everyone has had an opportunity to submit their delegations ideas and proposals. So I think as things stand, we've managed to strike a balance. On this note, I'd like to assure you that we've taken good note of all of your remarks. But my personal opinion, is the following. It's better to have a text that is balanced. That is sufficiently inclusive. That's preferable to continuously trying to improve the text at this stage, as we're probably not going to get there. Nor are we absolutely sure that we'll be able to garner a compromise. I'd like to draw your attention to one or two things first. Technology Transfer. It's true. Throughout the negotiations, some delegations did ask for the convention text to include. Wording that's how should I put it? Stronger wording on technology, transfer stronger language on technology transfer. And then little by little following the debate and the discussion, we had these delegations showed much flexibility by scaling back their ambitions. This is why I'm urging and appealing to those who possess this technology because it's the possessors of the advanced technologies which have spoken out against transferring the aforementioned technology to those who need it. That is the overwhelming majority of delegations who took the floor with the support of some developed parts of the world who do endorse this very generous idea of technology transfer. Having said that, regarding this generosity, well, I don't think it's true to say that a greater technology transfer amounts to absolute generosity, because at the end of the day, and I promise you this is the only speech I will make today. When you accept to transfer technology, what you're accepting is you're accepting to enhance the level of development of countries which continue to experience difficulties which need to develop, and in so doing, you're also reducing poverty, thereby prompting greater growth for all of humanity, and definitely fewer conflict, there'd be fewer conflict. So when making decisions, we must remain cognizant of all of the aspects of the moving parts of this issue and the overall human development framework within which we operate, when we reap what we sow. As the proverb goes, you reap what you sow. On the contrary, if we erect barriers and walls, if everyone remains closed off from others, at the end of the day, we won't be able to develop we won't be able to live in peace and security. So we must think about our people not about diplomatic horse trading. That's what I wanted to say, by way of conclusion on technology transfer. Turning our attention now to the other issues, which were reopened in the room this morning. It's clear throughout the negotiations, and of course, everyone has the right to reiterate concerns even these concerns are heard by just one or two delegations, but this is of course, a multilateral negotiations process. If we want to combat cybercrime, well, it is not by insisting on some of these aspects, which are not necessarily directly linked to cybercrime, it's not by doing that, that we'll be able to reach our objective. Therefore, I invite you to think long and hard. This should really give you pause. What is it that we want? Do we want a practical effective convention for combating cybercrime? Or do we want at all costs a convention that reflects political ideas, which have not garnered, and this is not me taking a stance, we know that there are some ideas, some positions that have been put forward which have not received sufficiently broad support to be able to be adopted by consensus. Leave it there, it's 10 to 12. Therefore, I invite you to move to the operative part of the text. We don't have much time left the time we do have left we're going to devote it to our consideration of the final version of the text. You should have received it yesterday. First, it was emailed through the informals after that was published on the ad hoc committees website. This happened yesterday at midday the publication that is General Provisions The floor is open for a discussion on general provisions. They can convention itself General Provisions who would like to take the floor
Sure. MVP did. I invite delegations not to reopen the debate on those points where it says in brackets agreed at referendum in screed in square brackets. Please do not reopen the debate on these issues. To be honest, I just think it won't be of any use whatever has been agreed following a two year negotiations process. It's ready for adoption, it means that states are ready to adopt the language on these matters. If we reopen the debate, everyone's going to revert to their original positions. I mean, I'm going to I'm done. I'm going to leave if you want to stay here another 10 years. That's up to you. And in the meantime, cybercriminals will be developing their means and methods by leaps and bounds. All right, the speakers list is open who'd like the floor?
I'm Paula Gupta. So can we adopt it then? No one wants the floor. I see you smiling. I see you smiling.
Oh, I see. I see my colleague from Tunisia, beautiful smile.
Along Zambo Luffy. Do
we have the Russian Federation, South Africa, Vietnam. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you for giving me the floor. With your leave, we'd like to comment on Article Two. The delegation of the Russian Federation took an active part in the work of the relevant subgroup, we're grateful to the chairs, Brazil, and South Africa, not all of our proposals were taken on board in full. Nonetheless, throughout these discussions, the Russian Federation has shown flexibility on numerous occasions. So in order to move forward, we stand ready to agree to the lion's share of this article with one exception. The definition of service providers we've said time and again, in this subgroup, specifically, the fact that the definition of service provider, as given here only covers providers providing communication services. That's it. This language strips, law enforcement authorities have the opportunity to cooperate under convention with providers of other kinds of services, not just communications. And there are myriad services, for instance, services provided related to the storage of data, service providers storing data, for instance. Therefore, it's very difficult for us to be flexible on this point. Because what we're doing here it appears is we're deliberately deliberately excluding categories of service providers. And there was no rationale given against our position during the subgroups discussions, nor did we get an explanation or an answer to our question, why is it like this? Therefore, it's difficult for us to understand the logic for having such a narrow interpretation of a service provider. As a consequence, this issue in this article, this is the issue we cannot live with. Another issue, which my delegation mentioned, as did other delegations, is the fact that there's no need to define a regional economic integration organization. I don't think it's worth me going through all the arguments again. And as we said in our previous statement, we do not support them in the title of the convention. We don't even understand why it was amended in the first place. Thank you.
Please, please, those delegations which want to put forward proposals on the substance. Also, proposals related to editing, fine tuning the language. You don't have the text in your various languages. But I'm saying this in advance for next time. Whenever you have any linguistic issues, please park those please send those issues to the secretariat. As for proposals on the substance, please word them as you want them to be seen. As for the editing the semantics the linguistics, please submit those to the Secretariat, but clearly stated that these are editing issues. I'd like to recall that you have three minutes each three minutes speaking time per delegation, as we are running out of time. When your microphone light begins to flicker, that indicates that your time is almost up, you can ask the floor for several times, but you can only speak for three minutes at a time South Africa. And
I'm taking the floor on behalf of the African group. Madam Chair, as I indicated previously, we did note with disappointment that you and your infinite wisdom had removed the word including transfer of technology from article one. I think some parents see if we could just grow up to that, please. Yeah, so So parents see, Madam Chair for consistency purposes with the committee have the appetite to maybe include after capacity building, including transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms. That was also the language that was proposed by the US and is what we currently have reflected both in the preamble as well as an article 54 For consistency purposes. Thank you. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much South Africa, Vietnam.
But I'm chair, delegation, Vietnam a light to once again reiterate, I fully support for your leadership at the ad hoc committee. We also highly appreciate the further revised tax convention with the belief that this draft tax will bring as close as possible to the consensus. However, we like to make some observation regarding the definition of properties in Article Two. Firstly, Vietnam is of the view that the definition of properties under Article Two of this convention should not go any further than the formulation adopted by the UN Convention on crimes against corruption, and United Nations Convention against transnational organized crime. The formulation of ISOC and uncocks, if retain, in this convention would ensure the stabilities efficiencies and consistencies of international cooperation against criminal activities, including those cover by this convention. Therefore, the delegation of Vietnam is in favor of the definition of properties as proposed by us Madam Chair at the beginning of the concluding session. Second, Vietnam recognizes the increasing significance of virtual assets in the global economies and their potential impact on cyber crimes. Similar to many member states, we are currently in the process of developing a comprehensive legal framework to adequately address and regulate virtual asset. In such context, Vietnam has been actively handling virtual asset related issues and we are more than willing to cooperate with international partners in dealing with criminal activities which involve virtual asset. Therefore, the delegation of Vietnam like to register is understanding that regarding the additional reference to virtual asset in nautical to that first second edition, shall solely be dedicated to the criminal justice cooperation activities established under this convention. And this addition shall not apply its member state to modify its respective laws and regulation to legalize or recognize virtual asset as legal tender or lawful means of payments. I thank you madam chair for your attention.
UFC beaucoup. Thank you very much Iran.
Thank you Madam Chair cybercrime again. First of all, I would like to thank you Madam Chair. And also, I would like to thank distinguished delegation of South Africa for bringing, bringing up the proposal, transfer of technology. Madam Chair, one of the issue really I have with this, especially with definition of broad support, you know, I have a big problems with that we made many proposals, many views. And unfortunately, our views and positions have been ignored. But there was, there was no consensus on views and positions which raised by by some countries, those views inserted in the text, but our views and positions and suggestions have been ignored one of this, it's transfer of technology, which my my delegation from the first day of this discussions, proposal of that. So, here we are talking about Statement of Purpose of this convention, one of would be a alongside of technical assistance, and capacity building is transfer of technical technology. Because of the nature of this convention. I will, I wouldn't like to go in details and to give reasons, but you don't would like to have this term in the in the article one. And Article Two, I would like to thank distinguished delegation of the distinguished delegations of Brazil and South Africa for their efforts, we are close to reach a consensus but also the my delegation has many concerns on that, but we can show flexibility, but on some areas, it would be very difficult to show flexibility. For example, in service provider, Iran would like to support the proposal made by a distinguished delegation of Russian Federation. So many elements have been removed from this, this definition. On title also, we have great concern, which we don't have definition of ICT in this definitions on lovely paragraph on all on regional economic integration organizations, we mentioned that there is no this practice, we don't have this definition in own talk. This definition used only in own CAC, because of the nature of the convention and purpose of this convention, but here this definition as I mentioned and reiterated many times, it only fits one organization and we are not here to appease one organization here. So, it will not apply to many organizations and there is no necessary to have this definition also there is no any consensus on emergency. And as we mentioned many ambiguities in this definition also Iran it will be difficult to go along with having emergency definition in the in the use of them. Thank you Madam Chair. Merci
beaucoup.
Thank you very much. I remind delegations that you have three minutes. So please try to be concise. Otherwise, I will give the floor directly to the next speaker Jamaica.
Madam Chair, Jamaica is pleased to deliver this statement on behalf of the 14 member states of CARICOM. Regarding article one statement of purpose as it concerns part subparagraph C. CARICOM can support the language as drafted. Regarding articles to CARICOM can support the definition of information communication technology system, I just article to one be electronic data, telecom can support the definition of electronic data. One See, CARICOM knows that there was general agreement on the definition of traffic data, and hence we can extend or support. Regarding service provider, CARICOM can support the definition as drafted. Regarding subscriber information Karakum can support this definition. Article Two, one G personal data comm can support the definition of personal data regarding serious crime. The definition is const sistent with the on top definition and reflects comments position regarding the definition of child Terracom supports the definition as presented as it is consistent with the CRC. Regarding property kharkom can support the definition of property as presented. Regarding regional economic integration, organization, CARICOM offers no objection to the proposed definition, if there is an appetite for its retention regarding Article Two to CARICOM can be flexible on the inclusion of Article Two subparagraph. Two, this would allow member states the flexibility to implement the convention without delay, in accordance with the established terminologies in their domestic law, provided that the interpretations of the terminologies are aligned with the spirit and intent of those reflected in the instrument. Thank you.
Merci. Thank you very much. At this stage, I will read out the list of speakers Pakistan, Peru, Paraguay, Russia, Federation, Mauritania, United Kingdom, United States of America, Azerbaijan. I would like to remind that we are on chapter one, and there are nine chapters or the other chapters are more complex. So if you think that there is a chance of compromise on your proposal, please make it but if you're repeating the same position, that has does not have the necessary support to succeed, then please think about it because we would be wasting our time and our money. Pakistan, Peru, Paraguay, Russian Federation, Mauritania, United Kingdom, United States, Azerbaijan, and European Union, Pakistan three minutes. Thank
you very much, Madam Chair for giving me the floor. Madam Chair first with regard to title we say are the similar views expressed by a distinguished delegate of Russia, Iran before me. With regard to Article One, paragraph C. My delegation recalls that in C and D discussion V proposed inclusion of capacity building and transfer of technology, we are thankful to the house that they unanimously accepted inclusion of technical assistance and capacity building, we understand that there is a disagreement or not full agreement on transfer of technology. But at this time, we would like to thank a distinguished delegate of South Africa for repurposing it and we would like to fully subscribe to it with the language as mentioned in the preamble. Madam chair with regard to Article Two subparagraph B electronic data, we generally agree with the definition. However, in the first line, after information or concepts, we would like to remove on concept. Moving on, we also shared a similar view expressed for the definition of service provider. We believe that the term emergency needs our domestic definition and therefore needs not to be reflected, since it has only appeared once in the whole convention, and to be removed. And we subscribe to paragraph two as drafted. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. UFC,
thank you very much. I remind everyone here that article to use of terms was negotiated from the first day until yesterday by Brazil and South Africa until two days ago, actually by Brazil, and South Africa, and everyone here participated. So we all know what the situation is with regard to definitions and the various positions. So that before thinking of any new proposals, thank you, Drew. Thank you very much, Madam Chair for giving us the floor again. With regard to Article One The delegation of Peru would also like to express support for the South African proposal to retain and see a reference to transfer of technology, we don't see that any differences would come up with regard to this same concept already, which would be reflected in other parts of the convention. The it would be consistent with the preamble and the corresponding chapter, and unethical to the use of terms. We'd like to take this opportunity to welcome the Peruvian proposal, consider considering the inclusion of virtual assets and properties, and property. And we'd like to thank for the very important support we have had from the majority of delegations that discuss this matter in informals. We think that this has added value in terms of the terminology of the convention. On the other hand, far from me giving rise to differences of interpretation, it would help to define the scope of property, something which didn't exist 20 years ago when this concept was considered for uncocking on talk, and it will have a positive effect for international cooperation in the in combating cybercrime. Thank you. Thank you very much Paraguaya. Thank you, Madam Chair for giving me the floor again. For our part, we would like to support once again, the proposal by the distinguished delegate of Peru that these assets be mentioned under property, we are clear to say that virtual assets aren't defined here, but we consider that they are important for this convention dimension will have an impact on the implementation of this convention and the fight against criminality. It will allow us to have a better dialogue and better development of the law and legislative as well as academic terms to define and regulate these type of very specific assets. Consequently, we also reiterate that, just like untuck was a turning point that the fight against organized crime, this treaty will be a turning point in the fight against cybercrime. Virtual assets are a reality, and they're mentioned will offer as a tool, which today is necessary in fighting crime. Thank you. Thank you very much. Your Russian Federation
was short. Thank you very much. Once again, I'll be very quick. We also believe it's worthwhile to use the non consensus term cybercrime under Article One of the convention, we believe that this is not an editing style amendment. This is an issue which is directly related to the technological scope of the convention we're currently elaborating. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Mauritania. Thank you, Madam Chair. So she's with regard to see under Article One, we would like to keep transfer of technology with regard to articles to use of times. We would like to include a definition of pacing with regard to H. Definition of serious crime serious offense. Serious Crime. We would like to delete the word maximum in order to be consistent with on top and paragraph B of Article Two of untuck. Thank you. United Kingdom followed by the US. Thank
you, Madam Chair. UK would like to comment on Article two paragraph two. Madam Chair. This did not in our view, come close to consent. Isn't the informals and we're raising it because we're concerned that it risks undermining the definitions of the Core terms that the CO facilitators from Brazil and South Africa work so tirelessly on a Madam Chair, we're concerned also from a treaty law perspective. Article Two Two, in our view reflects a basic principle of treaty law. But its inclusion in terminology risks suggesting that in relation to the rest of the convention, states parties could be somehow required to use the exact same wording in their domestic laws. Madam Chair, we don't think that's right. But we're worried about the legal uncertainty that that could generate. So we would recommend deletion and only if it's felt that it's needed by you, Madam Chair, inclusion in setting the explanatory notes. And very quickly on the definition of the other child, we really think the solution is the solution is in your original proposal, Madam Chair, below 18, because differences in the need for flexibility can be well accounted for in article 13. Thank you.
Merci. Thank you, United States.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to start with Article One. And we took note of the proposal from the distinguished representative of South Africa. To test the appetite in the room for adding additional language to paragraph C. I would say the United States has no such appetite. The language that has been heavily negotiated in the technical assistance chapter is in fact, not the language that the US prefers. And taking note of your comments, Madam Chair, I don't want to elaborate further on the significance of technical assistance, including technology transfer to delegations across the spectrum here in the room. But I do just want to reiterate that, for the United States, it is most appropriate to focus on the highest level of purpose here in the statement of purpose. Just as international cooperation appears in paragraph B, we think it is fully appropriate to refer to technology to technical assistance and capacity building at the high level here and the statement of purpose and elaborate that further in the relevant chapter. I also want to thank the UK for their intervention with which we can fully agree, paragraph two of Article Two for us is problematic for exactly the reasons that they offered. We believe that this is useful explanatory guidance, but creates problems when included in the primary tax of the convention, that can be avoided by reflecting this principle, if needed at all, in a supplementary document to the convention. And we would also agree that the definition of child should go back to your original draft tax, Madam Chair for the reasons that the UK offered, and which I think many other delegations agree with and address any needed issues in the criminalization articles in which those definitions may apply as needed. Thank you, Madam Chair. Massey,
thank you very much as your budget.
Madam Chair, for the article two and the sub part one A and one B, we want to just re reiterate our position again regarding the information and communication technologies and electronic data terms, which we do not support. Because, as far as many countries, over 60 countries are part of the Budapest convention, have already incorporated this convention to their national law and use these terms in their criminal law and criminal procedure code. And for the new convention to be different from the such terms should be for difficult to and can become a collision in the domestic law of many countries. So we support the computer system or computer data in one A and one B. Thank you.
Thank you very much. We have on the list European Union Albania, India, Egypt, South Africa, Malawi, Malawi and Canada, European Union. Join us. Thank you Madam Chair.
States. On Article One, we can see voted as it is and we object to any further changes at this stage. On Article Two, as you said it has been discussed at length Senate is a result of difficult compromise. So we can, we can support most of the definitions, I would like just to tries to stress differing things for. I mean, there seems that some delegations will object to later, all regional economic integration organization seems to have no objective, as a result to exclude the EU and for all its member states, to ratify this convention, let me just trust that it will not exactly go into the direction of our common goal to have a universal convention which improves international cooperation. Now on letter I the definition of child, we agree with the UK that it would be probably better to and the definition after 18 years, we are well aware that this definition as it stands is in copied from the Convention on the Rights of the Child. But because in our case, for the application that we have in this convention, it is related to to child sexual abuse, it might not be appropriate to have this extension there. And finally, on paragraph two of Article Two, we fully agree with what has been said by the UK on that paragraph, which does not enjoy majority support which did not enjoy manual majorities revolt sorry. And I don't need to repeat what I've been very adequately cited by the representative of the UK Giovanna simile, Mr. President, thank
you Madam Chair. Thank you very much, Albania please co
chair reference to the article one we support as it is draft drafted reference to Article Two also on i on the definition of child, we have also expressed some informants that this definition has to be in full stop after an eight after 18 years. So we are going to delete unless under the law applicable to child majorities attend earlier reference also to the paragraph two of this article. Also we oppose this paragraph here. We support the deletion of this paragraph is also we consider that this cause legal ascent uncertainity as a whole for the old definitions beforehand. Thank you, Madame Massey,
thank you very much. India, followed by Egypt, South Africa, Malawi, Canada, Namibia, New Zealand and lift aside, India. Under
Article One See, we support the inclusion of transfer of technology as has been mentioned in the preamble. Thank you. Merci. Merci.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you, India, Egypt.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Regarding Article One. Egypt aligns itself with the statement made by South Africa and Peru regarding the the regarding the inclusion of technology transfer of technology on mutually agreed terms in paragraph C. And also we align ourselves with the concerns raised by the Russian Federation, pertaining to the use of the term cybercrime. Regarding Article Two, Madam Chair, allow me to express this delegations full appreciation to the effort exerted by the distinguished representatives of Brazil and South Africa for facilitating the negotiations regarding this important article. And in this regard, we align ourselves with the proposals made in this in this article without amendment, particularly Madam Chair, particularly the definition of the child, which is consistent with the with the with the definition in the CRC and there will be no flexibility regarding this issue. Also, Madam Chair regarding paragraph two, it's of paramount importance to have this paragraph, Madam Chair, because we were under the impression that this paragraph will continue exists in this article. That's why we had shown flexibility regarding the nitty gritty details of each of the technical definition to make sure that we will not be in a position to alter our Were domestic laws regarding the definition of these technical terminologies. I thank you, Madam Chair.
Yes, thank you very much. South Africa, followed by Malawi. So
firstly, my delegation thanks to all delegations that participated very constructively in the informals. We can attest to the flexibility shown by by all all delegations, and we take this opportunity to express our sincere gratitude to Eric from Brazil for his tireless efforts in this regard. Madam Chair in our national capacity, we could support article two in its entirety. With regard to para two, we are flexible on whether it's contained in Article Two or whether it's moved to an explanatory note. Thank you very much.
Merci. Thank you, Malawi.
Thank you, Chair, Mullah, we would like to comment in reference to Article Two H. On the definition of serious crime. Malawi supports the deletion of the word maximum in the definition, as it as we believe it is misplaced and is creating confusion. In fact, it is proposed removal does not take away the meaning or the definition as intended. So it is our proposal for its removal. The word maximum. Thank you, Chair.
Merci. Thank you, Canada.
Thank you, Madam Chair, I believe there's a lot to be said about the definition of serious crime in the maximum penalty. Some is a question of substance and others is a question of confusion. So I'm happy to discuss this with any delegation that likes it. But for reasons of substance candidate would reserve for the time being on Article Two H on Article Two, I, we support a simple definition of a child or else no definition at all. And on Article 2.2, we think that explanatory note might be the way to go on this. Otherwise it would be best to delete it. Thank you, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Namibia.
Thank you Chair. I'd like to just echo the sentiments by the South African delegation on Article One C as was previously discussed, that this is something that my delegation and in the broader scope as the African group, we wanted to have included the reference to transfer of technology. And Madam Chair based on the number of countries who have called for, for the return or inclusion of this reference, I we are also calling on other delegations to you know, try and find the appetite to have it included this is really something very important to us as developing countries. So that is that on transfer of technology on one see, and then chair, let me just lend my support on Article Two J. The reference to virtual acids. I think the delegate from Peru has a look eloquently elaborated on on the inclusion of this article. So Namibia supports the inclusion of virtual assets in this article. Thank you, Chair. Merci.
Thank you very much, New Zealand.
Thank you, Madam Chair, we make the following comments on Article Two. Firstly, the definition of a child in subparagraph AI should end after 18 years and not include unless under the law applicable to the child majority as attained earlier, we have not heard a compelling argument as to why this phrase should be included. And quite to the contrary, the definition of a child in the protocol to prevent, suppress and punish trafficking in persons, especially women and children. supplementing the United Nations Convention against transnational organized crime did not include this phrase a majority. Secondly, despite broad opposition in the informals article two paragraph two has been included in the text. We see this provision as an inhibitor rather than an enabler for tackling cyber crime nationally and internationally, and it should be deleted. There is no precedent for such a provision in any recent UN can Tensions and for any legal drafting of definitions, there must be legal certainty. A similar provision has not been included in any other part of the convention for good reason. Otherwise, it would leave text open to interpretation. The definitions which the whole text of the convention rely upon, need certainty when transposed into national law. Article Two, paragraph two does not provide the certainty and leaves open the possibility of different terms and definitions being used, which are fundamentally different between member states. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much listed Stein.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Lichtenstein agrees with the statement by the UK and calls for the deletion of Article Two part two, or it's movement to an explanatory Terry roll report. Furthermore, Liechtenstein wishes to keep article one as it was drafted. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Gracias.
Thank you, Madam Chair. With regard to articles one and two, the Republic of Colombia considers them acceptable in their current drafting. However, we would like to emphasize the possibility of including in Article One C, a reference to transfer of technology as proposed by the delegation of South Africa. Also with regard to Article Two Columbia wishes to emphasize that that is a tool which helps adopting the instrument builds bridges between the various legal instruments under the instrument. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Burkina Faso. Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation like to speak to the title. We take issue with calling it cybercrime as opposed to talking about countering the use of ICTs for criminal purposes, something we've been defending since the start of this process. On this note, we'd like to join Mali, the Russian Federation and Egypt in requesting for the following title to be used countering the use of ICTs for criminal purposes Article One Paris see we support South Africa's request to refer to transfer technologies in that sub para article to the terms we can consider the text as it stands, specifically the current definition of the child with the proper reference to the applicable law. Oh, yes, the applicable law. Thank you. Vietnam, Vietnam.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Only very brief. The delegation of Vietnam Joy many other delegations in supporting the retention of paragraph two Article Two scene is it brings us perfect balance. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Cameroon. Thank you, Madam Chair. My delegation would like to make two marks one see, Article One C, transfer of technologies should be included
to AI. Article Two AI. We believe we should refer to the age of majority 18 years old.
And we should avoid introducing conditionality in there. Which could give rise to the legal insecurity of the very people we're trying to protect. Thank you very much since the chair Nicaragua. One second.
Thank you, Madam Chair. We support what stated by the delegation of South Africa and article one C with regard to including a reference to transfer of technology. There is no need to mention the importance of this element in all the terms of the convention. We also support the statement by the delegation of Russia, Egypt and others. With regard to the use of the term cyber crime, the ICT term should be used with regard to Article Two, we support its retention. Thank you. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Iceland please. The only wrong way to apologize Iran Iran sorry. Thank
you mister. Thank you Madam Chair I try to be brief as usual, on on. On the definition of child, Madam Chair, there is no any space to show flexibility on this issue. This definition has been accepted in legal, binding, binding legal treaty which almost universal, and we cannot go along to rewrite the definition of child on paragraph two, Iran would like to support to keep it in the main body. Well, this this paragraph provides flexibility for countries to domestic law of countries on definition so we are against to remove it from the text. Thank you very much. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much for being succinct. I spend.
On Article One, Iceland would like to keep the wording as it is. And Article Two, there are two points that I that Iceland would like to highlight first on the definition of child as my colleague from Iran mentioned here. I do not think that this. This approach, as we see in the text here fully reflects the discussions as they were in the in foremost, and I slept Lancet report to the shorter version of the definition of child that is an thing after the wording of 18 years. And I think what New Zealand referred to in their statement is helpful in this regard. If not, Iceland is of the opinion that we should delete the clause, rather than keep it as it stands on right now. And on para two, in Article Two, we find that this is not a very helpful provision, and that it does not belong in the main text of the convention. And we would refer to points raised by others on moving these points to an explanatory note. Thank you, Chair.
Massey, no, thank you.
No way please.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Regarding Article One, we fully understand the importance of the transfer of technology for developing countries, we can in the spirit of compromise, except for the inclusion of the addition of this price in the preamble and article 54, but we cannot support the inclusion of it in Article One C. on Article two letter A Way supported definition as it is, however, concerning the term ICT system, we are concerned that the use of this term might lead to confusion in relation to the ITU working definition on the same term. In our system, we have the term computer system, but in the spirit of compromise, we are willing to accept other appropriate terms. We propose to use the term data system or information system instead, to avoid possible confusions. Regarding the definition of the child with support what has been said by the US the EU, Albania and other delegations and support full stop after 18 years. It might however, not be necessary to have a definition on child as Canada has said. And we support the rest of the definitions in this article as drafted. On paragraph two, we support the interventions made by the UK, US and other delegations and support the deletion of it. Thank you Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Georgia.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Georgia shares the concerns raised by UK regarding paragraph two article two and we call for deletion as many other countries before us. We also support shorter definition of child's and deleting reference to domestic law. We have some reservations regarding we had some reservations regarding several definitions, including ICT system but for reasons of consensus, we can agree And we object to any proposals for amendments including Article One. Thank you Madam Chair.
Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much, Uganda
Thank you chair, Uganda, I would love to support the use that definition reflected in, in Article two paragraph I on the right on the definition of a child because it's reflected on the reflected the same way in the Convention of the Rights of a child. And then Uganda also knows or is aware of the need to protect the children, but also the persons that should be have attained the age of majority to be responsible for the crimes committed because that's the reason we are doing the convention. The lack of clarity will make it difficult to actually hold persons who have attained the age of 18 to responsible for the crimes committed under the convention. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much, Australia.
Thank you Chair for your significant efforts to bring together the further revised draft text on the basis of the years of ad hoc committee discussions. Australia appreciates that the general provisions chapter seeks to find a careful balance, including on key concepts and terms. Australia reinforces our support for the use of cybercrime throughout the convention, upon the recommendation of the vice chairs of South Africa and Brazil as CO facilitators of the lengthy discussions on terminology. That's Australia would like to speak to the definition of child in Article two paragraph I. We are mindful of the connection between this definition and the offenses in articles 13 and 14 to protect children. We remain concerned that defining a child in terms of the age of majority could undermine the protection of children from sexual abuse and exploitation. Amongst our diverse jurisdictions, the legal age of majority could relate to the legal age to vote, to gamble, to buy alcohol to sign a legal contract. Those other legal rights are not relevant when dealing with sexual abuse and sexual exploitation of children. The interaction of the definition of child in Article two paragraph I with the offenses to protect children in articles 13 and 14 must be carefully considered to ensure we're not creating any unintentional gaps. Therefore, we propose that the definition of child and at 18 years Thank you. Yes, he will.
Thank you very much. Switzerland. Merci, Madame. Thank you, Madam Chair. Switzerland supports the wording of Article One. As for Article Two, we'd like for the last part of the definition of child be deleted. We need to end the definition after the words 18 years. As for new two and Article Two, we support the deletion of the new pair two, or perhaps it could be included somewhere else. Thank you.
Merci.
Thank you, Russian Federation. Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, once again, the Russian Federation would like to draw your attention to Article One. We understand the desire to agreed all articles as soon as possible. And indeed, we did agree to them previously. But we had dual terminology, cyber ICT, we have this new terminology, which is heavily skewed towards cyber instead of the dual terminology. And it really limits the scope of the convention, especially its scope of implementation. And clearly we cannot take these issues as having been agreed. I'd like to underscore once again that far be it from us to suspect anyone have anything here, but if we recall correctly, Article One was agreed with a jewel terminology. Could you please clarify the situation? Thank you. Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much, Venezuela. That says,
Thank you Madam Chair. We are grateful for the working group on terminology and on Article One we support the reference to the transfer of technology. As discussed from the start, we have tried to be flexible toward consensus but the text does not include a clear and consensus based definition of cybercrime. Since this is a crucial concept, it is hard for us to support a change which is not clearly defined, we prefer the use of ICTs for criminal purposes, as we have been stating for the last few years. Lastly, in accordance with the child's definition, we agree with the current wording in keeping with the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Indonesia.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I will be very brief on Article One see, we can support the inclusion of transfer of technology as proposed by South Africa on Article Two, let me thank Brazil and South Africa for their hard work in facilitating the discussion on this particular article. My allegation that the standard we have long discussion in informal in defining this, the different technology, the different terminology. We, however, disagree with the deletion of article 2.2 or position is to retain the Article Two, paragraph, paragraph two under thermal terminology of child as Indonesia stated in the former, previously, we support the term as defined in the conventional route of child. Thank you.
Merci beaucoup. Thank you very much, Chile. Mortara
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. My delegation wishes to thank the Vice President from Brazil Eric for his efforts to move forward on these definitions to i My Location supports the definition of the child ending with the 18 years of age with regard to the definition of property and J. We support virtual assets. Thank you, Madam, merci
beaucoup. La vie. So
thank you very much Saudi Arabia
can tell you the rise. Thank you, Madam Chair, in relation to the definition of the trial that we support, retaining the definition as
as proposed by Egypt, and we support the retention over a tutu. Thank you.
My delegation is in support of the chairs further revised text in chapter one of the general provisions, as drafted and further supports the addition of the text in Article One C, of inclusion of transport transfer technology, as proposed by the distinguished delegate of South Africa on behalf of the African group. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Uruguay.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Uruguay is in a position to accept the proposal proposals for articles one and two as they stand right now. And we take this opportunity to thank the CO facilitators, Brazil and South Africa in particular for their wonderful work in achieving definitions under Article Two. And lastly, Uruguay reiterates its position on over the use of the term cybercrime throughout the convention. Thank you.
Thank you very much, China.
Thank you, Madam Chair. With respect to Article One, we welcome and the support one see, and we support the proposal by South Africa regarding Article Two, to 2.2, paragraph two, we think that this is conducive to defining the relationship between the convention and domestic legislation. So we remain flexible on this one, we think minor adjustments or proper adjustments can be made, but we are in favor of retaining this paragraph regarding one P emergency This has only occurred once in article 41. We can support is deletion. Thank you, Mr. Madam Chair. Miss Tebow.
Thank you very much. We have no more speakers on the list. Unless, oh, I spoke too soon, Yemen, Chad, and Pakistan, Yemen please.
Thank you once again, Madam Chair, minor remarks. As to ah many laws do not have a full year as a maximum limit for serious crimes in Yemen. The minimum is three years. So if we add or according to what is defined in national laws,
because they are called serious crimes, they have different naming in other countries. So, maybe we add this to the end of the paragraph according to what is defined in domestic laws. Because if we retain the text as is there might be a caveat applying it in domestic laws as to the title of the crime. Either it is a cyber crime or crimes as a result of the misuse of ICT. We said from the beginning that to add crimes, the crimes that are emanating from the misuse of ICT and not to counter the use of ICT since we believe that countering the use of ICT implies that the technical side more than the legal side and we are fighting crimes. So it just a rearrangement of or paraphrasing Goethe word
we support the use of the inclusion of our the crime in the title. And we are in favor of providing a definition of cyber crime. So that it will be all encompassing, all comprehensive and that will delete any chance of confusion about the understanding of the title. Thank you, Chad. Madame la.
Thank you, Madam
Chair. My country is in favor of technology transfer proposed by South Africa we want that included in sub Paris See, this is a crucial for developing countries. Jeff, thank you very much Pakistan, you have the floor. Thank
you very much Madam Chair for giving me the floor once again. Madam Chair my delegation do not subscribe to changing the definitions of serious crime and child as mentioned in your current draft, and which is in line with and talk and CRC respectively. We also do not support deletion or movement of paragraph two, which is mentioned and drafted in your current draft. We feel that this is a balance which you talked about earlier and it should be retained. And honor departing note, Madam Chair. My delegation do not recall the discussion held on defining cyber crime to be replaced throughout the text. And we do not subscribe to its replacement throughout the text. We also feel that we had no agreement on its definition, but the element of replacement throughout the text was not discussed. So we would like to endorse our reservation on replacing the term cyber crime as it appears on various instances throughout the tax. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much. Engineer.
Thank you Madam Chair. Madam Chair, my delegation aligns itself with the statement made by South Africa in support of the the addition of the transfer of technology in one seat. And on Article Two, Madam Chair, we understand there were compromises made in terms of how the terms were to be defined. And in that regard, we will support the the text as it is the paragraphs, and in that spirit, we will also support to retention of para tu tu we understand the proviso and which is contained in the single in the second part of the article addresses the concerns that may arise in terms of sanity in way terms are to be defined. And therefore we would support the retention of tutu, which we understand was included as part of the compromise. Thank you, Madam Chair. Merci beaucoup.
Thank you very much Tanzania. Very well. We've reached the end of the speaker's list. Before adjourning the meeting for the lunch break. I'd like to remind you that there are informal consultations and articles 13 and 15. scheduled for this afternoon between 1:50pm and 2:50pm. In C, R three, unless I'm mistaken.
I'd like to give the floor to the Secretary.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It was to explain that the informal consultations on Article 13 and 15 under the chairmanship of Nigeria open ended informal consultations will be from 1315 to 1450. Thank you, Madam Chair. While I was early, I've worked with the tang. So
that means you have more time, actually, very well. Thank you. I'd now like to thank the CO facilitators. The vice chair from Brazil, as well as the representative of South Africa, my very dear colleague, who replaced a metabolic County. Thank you so much for your immense efforts. I'd also like to use this opportunity, please. Could you remain seated? I haven't finished I'm not quite done. I'd also like to thank you, Vice Chair Briony from Australia. And my colleague from Japan who the day before yesterday, burned the midnight oil with us to put the finishing touches on the text. And of course, the vice chair from Nigeria as well. I left him until last because he's still suffering is still working with you, including this afternoon. So we spent the night together. And also the secretary with John as well. We spent the entire night together not dancing, but trying to put together a text that was as close to consensus as possible. So bon appetit. We'll see you back here this afternoon.
