YouSaid · the spoken record

Nufiez De Odreman

lines on the record
21
first
2006-05-30
most recent
2006-06-22
sittings or episodes
2
sources
un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

  1. “Strictly speaking, the sanctions mechanism was established to be applied in cases of conflict between States, as is set out in Article 41. In conclusion, we would like once again to express our appreciation for this opportunity to exchange views and in the Security Council, and we 06-4010] congratulate Denmark on the work it has done during its presidency for the month of June 2006.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  2. “That tendency must be curbed in order to strengthen the legitimacy of the Security Council. Finally, Venezuela is concerned also at the fact that the Security Council is increasingly resorting to the practice of imposing sanctions on individuals allegedly involved in acts that threaten international peace and security. The problems pertaining to the listing and delisting of names on the lists drawn up by sanctions committees have still not been adequately resolved, nor do we have a suitable mechanism in place to ensure due process and appeals procedures for the individuals included on those lists. Our country is of the View that those steps go far beyond the provisions set out in the Charter of the United Nations governing the actions of the Security Council.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  3. “The aim of sanctions should not be to punish the population. Sanctions regimes should have clearly defined objectives and should be imposed for a specific period of time, on the basis of legally sustainable principles, and should be lifted once their objectives have been met. Sanctions should be imposed only after diplomacy and negotiations fail to achieve the desired results in a situation where a threat exists to international peace and security. They should be imposed in accordance with the Charter and never preventively. Unfortunately, on a number of occasions the Security Council has had recourse to the provisions of Articles 41 and 42 of the Charter in too hasty a manner, before the mechanisms provided for the pacific settlement of disputes had been fully exhausted.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  4. “Venezuela is of the view that sanctions are an important but exceptional mechanism that should be used to resolve situations that might endanger 06-4010] international peace and security, once those mechanisms for the pacific settlement of disputes provided for under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations have been exhausted. However, our country is concerned at the fact that, on a number of occasions, the Council has rushed to impose sanctions in situations that do not necessarily constitute a threat to international peace and security. The indiscriminate use of sanctions has had a negative impact on the people of the countries subjected to sanctions and on their human rights, in particular on their health and nutritional status, as well as on the physical well-being of women, children and the elderly.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  5. “The establishment of the Court represents a step forward in the fight against impunity and in the prosecution of individuals accused of committing serious violations of international law. The fact that the international community can now count on a legal body that is independent in nature represents major progress in the development of international law. However, we are concerned by the attempts made to weaken it, such as the conclusion of bilateral immunity agreements for a number of countries. The Security Council must support the strengthening of the Court and should not accept any regime that provides for exemptions, which in turn would modify the spirit of the provisions of the Rome Statute.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  6. “Moreover, peacekeeping personnel and troops must, without exception, fulfil their respective mandates in strict compliance with international law. In that regard, Venezuela supports Secretary-General Kofi Annan's policy of zero tolerance for all those who commit abuses when representing the United Nations. Venezuela views the creation of the International Criminal Court as a milestone in the field of international criminal law. The Court's establishment provides a fairer and more equitable option than ad hoc tribunals, which are not provided for by the Charter of the United Nations or by any international treaty resulting from extensive negotiations among Member States, but are set up on the basis of a political decision on the part of the Security Council.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  7. “The mandate of the Commission must not be misused - the Commission should have no other purpose than supporting efforts aimed at national recovery and sustainable development. Peacekeeping operations clearly represent a valuable mechanism for the Organization in helping to resolve international conflicts. Venezuela is of the View that, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, the basis for the deployment of peacekeeping operations in the field must be the strict fulfilment of essential requirements in order to ensure their smooth functioning, such as the consent of the parties involved in the conflict and impartiality in the implementation of their mandates. A peacekeeping operation cannot assume the functions of a "peace-imposing" force.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  8. “We are aware of the importance of preserving the rule of law when strengthening States' political and legal structures in a participatory democratic framework. To that end, respect for States' sovereignty - which, traditionally, resides with the people - is vital in the process of defining the political and legal framework of each and every nation, free from interference by any supra-national body. As long as international legality is respected, then international peace and security will be strengthened. The Peacebuilding Commission was created to support, with the consent of the Member States concerned, national recovery efforts in post-conflict situations. In discharging its mandate, it must strictly adhere to the norms and principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  9. “Venezuela believes that the issue of strengthening the rule of law falls under the exclusive purview of Member States and their respective citizens. In that connection, we believe that in both conflict and post-conflict situations, the support that international organizations can give in this regard must be provided on the basis of the consent of the States affected and in the context of international cooperation, avoiding the imposition of external criteria that do not take the needs of those States into account. Such criteria ultimately violate fundamental rules and principles of international law - such as respect for sovereignty and non-intervention in the internal affairs of States - whose provisions Venezuela firmly promotes.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  10. “Article 24 of the Charter does not necessarily provide the Council with the competency to address issues that correspond to the functions and powers of the General Assembly or of the Economic and Social Council - including the establishment of rules, legislation and definitions - since the Assembly has the main responsibility for the progressive development and the codification of international law. Therefore, the Council should avoid the practice of using its authority to impose legislative requirements on Member States or assuming powers that could be considered a usurpation of the Assembly's competencies. Promoting the international legal order requires the firm commitment of States to comply rigorously with the rules and principles of international law in order to help strengthen international peace and security.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  11. “Moreover, the Council's action in a number of cases has not been free of controversy. As a United Nations organ whose competencies are derived from the Charter - which was agreed among Member States and which serves as a constitutional framework for the Organization - the Security Council must act in strict conformity with the Charter in carrying out its functions. The Council's role in promoting international law depends on its actions complying with the provisions of Chapter VII of the Charter.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  12. “It is clear that conflict prevention and resolution necessarily involve the negotiation of multilateral agreements within the United Nations framework. That in turn has a positive impact on the strengthening of international public law and international peace and security. In that connection, Venezuela believes that the Security Council's action in this area should complement the General Assembly's leading role because of the Assembly's strengths as a deliberative, legislative, democratic and representative organ of the Organization. Since the early 19905, we have seen the Security Council spontaneously increase its powers in dealing with issues that, by their nature, could not be categorized as threats to international peace and security as stipulated in Article 39 of the Charter.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  13. “With regard to the topic of this debate, we consider it necessary to refer to Article 1 of the Charter of the United Nations, which provides that the United Nations, in order to maintain international peace and security, shall take "effective collective measures for the prevention and removal of threats to the peace, and for the suppression of acts of aggression or other breaches of the peace, and to bring about by peaceful means, and in conformity with the principles of justice and international law, adjustment of settlement of international disputes or situations which might lead to a breach of the peace". If we examine the scope of that Article, we can see that the competencies in this area extend to the whole Organization, including Member States.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  14. “Mrs. Nufiez de Odreman (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela) (spoke in Spanish): The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela thanks Denmark for the initiative to draft a non-paper on "Strengthening 06-4010] international law: rule of law and the maintenance of international peace and security" in the context of the Security Council (S/2006/367, annex), as well as for convening this open debate on the subject of that document. We also thank Mr. Michel and Judge Higgins for their valuable statements.”

    2006-06-22 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5474Resumption1 (2006) · source

  15. “Finally, our Government, which is committed to the true fight against terrorism and does not justify any form of terrorism, formally requests that the item of State terrorism and the consideration of actions by the international community against such cases as the United States of America, which we consider to be dangerous to our peoples, be included in this meeting and subsequent deliberations of the Security Council.”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source

  16. “On 28 April 2006, the current United States authorities granted those terrorists freedom within United States territory. The current Government of the United States has not responded to the request made by the Venezuelan judicial system to extradite - in compliance with existing treaties and international law - those citizens accused of carrying out terrorist acts in Venezuela and to bring them to justice for their actions. On the contrary, it is protecting them with baseless excuses that are indefensible in the eyes of the international community. The double standards with which this subject is being addressed are obvious. Will the following questions remain unanswered? Who is the terrorist? Who is the destabilizer? Who does not implement its national counter-terrorism laws or even international agreements when it is convenient?”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source

  17. “In paragraphs 2 (c) and 3 (g) of that resolution, States are prohibited from offering safe haven to those who commit acts of terrorism and from recognizing claims of political motivation as grounds for refusing requests for the extradition of alleged terrorists. Here too, examples abound. Public opinion is aware of the protection that Sll'V.5446 the Government of the United States of America is providing to one of the most infamous terrorists in the Western hemisphere, Luis Posada Carriles, a well- known assassin on the CIA's payroll. Another case worth mentioning in this Chamber is that, on 15 March 2004, a formal extradition request was made for the citizens Jose Antonio Pulido and German Varela Lopez, accused in Venezuelan courts of having planted explosive devices in diplomatic headquarters of Spain and Colombia.”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source

  18. “Moreover, in the current asymmetrical war, the concept of collateral damage of military action makes no sense, since the most powerful State is confronting an entire people. Acts of mass destruction produced by weapons of mass destruction are directed against people without any distinction. That enables us to describe such acts as State terrorism pure and simple. Examples abound, such as the terrorist actions carried out by the Government of the United States of America against Nicaragua or the current case of the people of Iraq. However, what is regulated and considered inadmissible is support in any form for entities or individuals who participate in terrorist acts or provide safe haven for those who commit such acts. Such support would be in flagrant non-compliance with Security Council resolution 1373 (2001).”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source

  19. “In the fight against terrorism, the international community has no other choice but to work together and to adopt policies aimed at combating this scourge in order to mete out effective justice. Policies employing double standards compromise the credibility, trustworthiness and good name of any organization or State that deliberately uses such policies to elude terrorism, particularly State terrorism. At present, penalties against acts of terrorism committed by the armed forces of a State are insufficient under the norms provided by international humanitarian law. The so-called collateral damage of today's military actions is not really collateral damage, but rather principal damage, every time innocent men, women and children are killed.”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source

  20. “In its firm resolve to fight terrorism, our Government has ratified many international conventions in this area. At the domestic level, we have developed a broad set of counter-terrorism laws and 34 have created a national counter-terrorism authority. Thus, we have complied in a committed, responsible and consistent manner with our obligations in this field. We have also regularly submitted the relevant reports to the Security Council's Counter-Terrorism Committee and to the Inter-American Committee against Terrorism. With the same conviction and perseverance with which we are fighting this scourge, we wish to express our condemnation and repudiation of the use of terrorism as a political instrument for the outright killing or intimidation of innocent, weak and helpless people anywhere in the world.”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source

  21. “Mrs. Nufiez de Odreman (Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela) (spoke in Spanish): I should like at the outset to thank the representative of the Republic of the Congo for convening this meeting of great importance for the international community. We also wish to thank the Chairs of the Committees established pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999), 1373 (2001) and 1540 (2004) for the information they have presented today. Terrorism in all its forms - particularly State terrorism - is a grave threat to international peace and security, including to the very coexistence of the community of nations. We wish to reaffirm the position of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela: we condemn terrorism in all its forms and manifestations, by whomsoever and against whomsoever committed.”

    2006-05-30 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.5446 (2006) · source