人权理事会召开小组讨论纪念《发展权利宣言》通过三十周年（部分翻译）

上午

日内瓦（2016年6月15日）——人权理事会今天上午召开了小组讨论，纪念《发展权利宣言》通过三十周年，讨论集中于促进和保护发展权，包括在《2030年可持续发展议程》和可持续发展目标的背景下，旨在形成实现所有人的发展权的政策建议和实践措施。

在人权事务高级专员办事处关于联合国《发展权利宣言》通过三十周年的视频展示过后，人权事务高级专员扎伊德•拉阿德•侯赛因（Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein）召开了小组讨论。

高级专员扎伊德在开场发言中表示，三十年前，《发展权利宣言》在为更大的自由、平等和正义斗争的过程中开辟了新天地，并表示，三十周年应提醒国际社会发展的真正目的：改善社会所有成员的健康幸福。高级专员指出了实现《宣言》愿景进展的不平衡，表示，《2030年可持续发展议程》涉及不利于贫困人口的许多系统性障碍，包括承诺更好地管理全球金融市场和签署发展中国家的特殊和差别待遇原则。高级专员表示， 发展权的范围甚至超过了大量可持续发展目标全球议程，他提到，人人毫无差别地有权享有实现人权和自由的社会和国际秩序。

埃及常驻联合国日内瓦办事处代表兼小组主持人阿米尔•拉马丹（Amr Ramadan）在介绍小组讨论时表示，今天的辩论将以一些问题为指导，涉及联合国系统在实现发展权中发挥的作用、联合国系统在克服承认发展权是独立和独特权利所面临挑战中发挥的预期贡献、国际社会在落实这项权利中发挥的作用以及对于《2030年议程》对实现人权贡献的看法。

小组成员包括巴西司法部人权部长弗莱维娅•比奥维森（Flavia Piovesan）；牙买加常驻联合国日内瓦办事处代表及七十七国集团主席韦恩•麦库克（Wayne McCook）；哥斯达黎加国际法和人权部长兼联合国授权的和平大学人权中心主任米希尔•卡纳德（Mihir Kanade）；以及南方中心执行主任许国平（Martin Khor）。

比奥维森女士表示，落实基于人权的发展方法包含一些关键要素：社会正义、参与、问责和透明度以及国际合作，她还指出，各国的首要责任是创建利于国际合作的条件，消除发展障碍并依据共享责任的原则参与国际合作。

麦库克先生表示，发展权承认最残忍的否认权利的行为建立在经济和贸易的祭坛基础上，并表示贸易与经济、社会和文化发展应该以为人们服务为终极目标。《2030年议程》的基本原则与《发展权利宣言》有着“天然协同”，可以通过将言语转化为行动并终结将人权划分等级的辩论而加以利用。

卡纳德先生表示，实施发展权是必不可少的，也是在现实中落实《2030年议程》中设想的可持续发展目标的唯一方式。这不仅要求关注成果，还要求关注这些成果必须达到的进程，并尊重各国及其人民决定和落实其自身的优先发展事项的政策空间。

许先生谈到了实现发展权面临的障碍，如全球经济危机对发展中国家的不利影响，尤其是缺乏国际主权债务重组机制；制定和落实适当有效的发展策略所面临的挑战；气候变化已成为人类面临的生存问题，存在减少排放的负担将主要转移到发展中国家和最贫穷国家的危险趋势。

在随后的讨论中，发言者强调，实现发展权必须成为落实《2030年可持续发展议程》的核心，并警觉避免使发展权弱化为根除贫困的次要目标。各国作为责任承担者既要独立行动又要共同行动，他们一致同意其首要责任是确保实现这项权利，并强调了以共同和共享责任的精神履行承诺的义务，还强调了为实现这项权利创建有利的国际环境的重要性。他们表示，在《宣言》通过三十年后，必须克服讨论发展是否为一项权利的问题，必须将关注转向落实《宣言》的义务。现在的发展模型并非是可持续的，需要开展集体行动以恢复增长，尤其是对发展中国家，并解决共同威胁问题，如越来越多的不平等现象、不安全、缺乏和平和气候变化。

代表不结盟国家运动的伊朗、欧盟、代表意见相同的会员国小组的中国、代表拉美及加勒比国家共同体的多米尼加共和国、代表非洲集团的南非、代表葡萄牙语国家共同体的巴西、突尼斯、尼日利亚、萨尔瓦多、阿拉伯联合酋长国、埃塞俄比亚、纳米比亚、印度尼西亚、巴基斯坦、 马来西亚、美国、伊朗、塞拉利昂、委内瑞拉、厄瓜多尔、沙特阿拉伯、南非、古巴、孟加拉国、菲律宾、玻利维亚、约旦、埃及、斯里兰卡、伊斯兰合作组织、印度、阿尔及利亚、葡萄牙和塞内加尔在讨论中发言。

以下非政府组织也作了发言：南美洲印第安人理事会（Indian Council of South America）、阿拉伯人权委员会（Arab Commission for Human Rights）、国际青年和学生拥护联合国运动（International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations）、加拿大行动组织（Action Canada）、中国人权研究会（China Society for Human Rights Studies）、希望国际（Hope International）、教皇约翰二十三世协会（Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII，联合声明）以及支持公平审判和人权国际理事会（Conseil international pour le soutien à des procès équitables et aux droits de l’homme）。

理事会在今天举行全天会议。理事会将于下午1点继续与健康权问题特别报告员以及贩运人口问题特别报告员的集体互动对话，特别报告员们将于6月14日呈交他们的报告。报告摘要可访问这里。

Video

At the beginning of the meeting, a video was shown marking the thirtieth anniversary of the adoption of the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development, in which the narrator said that the Declaration defined development as an economic, social, cultural and political process aimed at the constant improvement and well-being of the entire population. Development had been impaired by States not always respecting human rights in their development decisions. There were growing inequalities in the world. The Declaration, which was a roadmap for transformative change, called for accountability at all levels, and required States to ensure that they were responsible for their actions and their impact at home and abroad. Achieving the right to development improved and saved lives; the right to development was simply development done right.

Opening Statement

ZEID RA’AD AL HUSSEIN, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, said that 30 years ago, the Declaration on the Right to Development broke new ground in the struggle for greater freedom, equality and justice. It re-asserted equality for all nations and peoples, including their right to self-determination and their right to sovereignty over natural resources. But its central focus was on the human person, as it called for every member of society to be empowered to participate fully and freely in vital decisions and demanded equal opportunities for all. It also demanded better governance of the international economic framework and re-defined development as far deeper, broader and more complex than the narrow, growth-and-profit focus of previous decades. This thirtieth anniversary should remind the international community of development’s true purpose: to improve the well-being of all members of society. True development generated greater social justice, the High Commissioner added. Some progress had been made in global efforts towards realising the vision of the Declaration, he noted, but that progress had been uneven. Insufficiently regulated globalization, persistent poverty and rising inequalities continued to rob people of their rights, and fuelled multiple crises and conflicts. The engines of globalization – among them, trade, investment, finance, and intellectual property - must be made compatible with the human rights obligations of States, he underlined.

The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development addressed many of these systemic obstructions that disadvantaged the poor, including by promising better regulation of global financial markets and by endorsing the principle of special and differential treatment for developing countries. With its strong commitments to provide access to justice for all, with effective, accountable and inclusive institutions at all levels, the 2030 Agenda echoed the Declaration. But the right to development extended even beyond the massive global agenda of the Sustainable Development Goals, said High Commissioner Zeid. It offered a framework in which to address gaps and failures in responsibility, accountability and regulation in both national and global governance. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights would continue to reach out to all States and stakeholders for the realization of the right to development. As the Declaration so clearly stated, everyone, without distinction, was entitled to a social and international order in which human rights and freedoms could be realised. That included the millions of youth facing unemployment in countries both North and South, the people crumbling under the burdens created by economic and financial crises, the millions of women, men and children in poverty, and those suffering war and displacement.

Statements by the Moderator and the Panellists

AMR RAMADAN, Permanent Representative of Egypt to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Panel Moderator, said that the right to development was an inalienable human right which encompassed many other human rights, but the progress in its realization so far had been uneven, particularly for people in Africa, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, and small island developing States. The year 2015 had provided momentum for realizing the vision of the Declaration on the Right to Development, with the commitments made in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda on Financing for Development and the Paris Climate Agreement giving new impetus to its vision. The 2030 Agenda constituted an important vehicle for the realization of the right to development and it was important also to affirm that the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action recognized the policies at the national level but also the creation of a favourable environment for the right to development at the international level. The debate today would be guided by the questions concerning the role of the United Nations system in the realization of the right to development, the expected contributions of the United Nations system in overcoming challenges in recognizing the right to development as an independent and distinct right, the role of the international community in the implementation this right, and the perceptions of the contributions of the Agenda 2030 in the realization of this right.

FLAVIA PIOVESAN, Secretary for Human Rights at the Ministry of Justice of Brazil, said that in 1986 the United Nations had adopted the Declaration on the Right to Development which proclaimed development to be a right, with active, free and meaningful participation in development and fair distribution of its benefits. Since then, the approach had guided the development of norms, standards and principles into the policies and processes of development, including in the Agenda 2030. The recognition in the Declaration that the human person was a central subject of development and should be the key agent of development shifted the economic approach to development and human development and so took a holistic and human-centred approach to development. The implementation of a human rights based approach to development encompassed key elements: social justice, participation, accountability and transparency, and international cooperation. Such an approach pointed out discrimination and exclusion and so assisted policy-makers to identify those in need of an intervention. According to the Declaration, States had the primary responsibility for the creation of international conditions favourable to international cooperation and removing obstacles to development, and also they had individual and collective responsibility to create cooperation rules favourable to the realization of the right to development. So besides their obligations to adhere, promote and protect human rights, States also had the obligation to engage in international cooperation under the principle of shared responsibility.

WAYNE McCOOK, Permanent Representative of Jamaica to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Chairman of the Group of 77, quoted Bob Marley on hunger and resource allocation, saying that “them belly full but we hungry, a hungry mob is an angry mob.” He asked the assembly before him whether the international community should agree that the rights agreed upon were limited to breathing, speaking, listening and moving freely, or was there more. Answering his own question, he said that the globally accepted right encompassing civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights laid a foundation on which the international community based its promotion and protection of fundamental human rights. Jamaica came to the right to development through the context of a legacy of slavery and colonization. The right to development recognized that it was at the altar of economics and commerce that the most brutal denial of rights had been based, the most horrific manifestation of which was the transatlantic slave trade. Commerce and economic, social and cultural development should serve the human person as the ultimate purpose. To pursue the right through policy, affirmative measures were needed to help restore the balance and bring equity. The fundamental principles of the 2030 Agenda enjoyed “natural synergies” with the Declaration on the Right to Development. Those synergies could be harnessed by moving from rhetoric to reality, and put to rest the debate about a hierarchy of rights.

MIHIR KANADE, Head of the Department of International Law and Human Rights, and Director of the Human Rights Centre of the United Nations-mandated University for Peace in Costa Rica, said that operationalizing the right to development was indispensable and the only way forward for realistically implementing the Sustainable Development Goals as envisioned by the 2030 Agenda. This meant embedding the implementation of the Goals firmly within the normative framework provided by the 1986 Declaration. This required focusing not only on the outcomes but also on the processes by which those outcomes must be achieved, and respecting the policy space of States and their peoples in determining and implementing their own development priorities. Development, in order to be sustainable, must not be seen as a charity, privilege or generosity, but as a right of human beings everywhere, he said. All States were duty bearers with respect to the right to development. This duty extended not only internally towards their own citizens, but also within international fora and through revitalized international cooperation. Operationalizing the right to development also meant insisting on a comprehensive, multidimensional and holistic approach to development as a human right, and to ensure that no goal was achieved at the cost of some other human right. Lastly, it required understanding that States had duties to ensure development as a matter of human rights, and ensuring that the indicators for the Sustainable Development Goals and the targets were compatible with the objective of making the right to development a reality for everyone.

MARTIN KHOR, Executive Director of the South Centre, said that the right to development carried a great sense of meaning and of hope. This right was human and people-centred, and human beings had to be allowed to participate in operationalizing and benefiting from this right. The right to development gave a responsibility to all countries at the international level to assist developing countries through cooperation, and to remove international and national obstacles to its realization. One obstacle was that the global economic crisis had had an adverse impact on developing countries, particularly in the absence of an international sovereign debt restructuring mechanism. A second obstacle was that developing countries faced challenges in formulating and implementing appropriate development strategies that worked, which was further exacerbated by the agreements enabling foreign investors to take advantage of gaps in arbitration systems. Thirdly, climate change had become an existential problem for the human race, he said. The danger was that the burden of cutting emissions would mainly be passed on to developing and poorest countries, and affect the most vulnerable populations. Another possible existential issue was antibiotic resistance, which required solutions applicable to developing countries, through funds and technology and diagnostic tools. The last challenge was the extent to which the ambitious 2030 Agenda could be fulfilled, which would depend on will and means put forward by all States.

Discussion

Iran, speaking on behalf of the Non Aligned Movement, said that the realization of the right to development was a necessity and required a political will to ensure a better future for all, and stressed that this right must be central to the implementation of the 2030 Agenda, and must not be reduced to secondary objectives of the eradication of poverty, access to adequate housing, and others. European Union advocated a rights-based approach to sustainable development, with all human rights respected on an equal footing, and respecting the core principles of non-discrimination, inclusion and participation, transparency and accountability. It was States, acting individually and collectively as duty bearers, that owed the primary responsibility to their citizens as rights holders to endure that the right to development was realised. China, speaking on behalf of a Like-Minded Group, said that the 2030 Agenda was inspired by the Declaration and that the obligations therein agreed must be implemented in the spirit of common and shared responsibilities, while human rights mechanisms must give due priority to the realization of the right to development. Dominican Republic, speaking on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, said that international cooperation played an essential role in the realization of the right to development and that was why it was crucial to establish a favourable external environment for the realization of this right. South Africa, speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that long before the adoption of the Declaration on the Right to Development, the issue of development had already been high on the African agenda. South Africa fully acknowledged that the development of African people rested with African States, and cooperating with each other in eliminating obstacles to development. Brazil, speaking on behalf of the Community of Portuguese Speaking Countries, said it was essential for the Council to analyse ways and means for the effective realization of the right to development in the framework of the recently adopted 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and said that 30 years after the adoption of the Declaration, the discussion on whether development was a right must be overcome, and the attention must be turned to the implementation of the obligations under the Declaration.

The unanimous adoption of the 2030 Agenda was a crucial step forward in the recognition and the realization of the right to development and all human rights for all human beings in all countries, said Tunisia. The right to development was a fundamental right which embodied all other rights, said Nigeria, noting that its universality and applicability meant that all States were equally responsible for its implementation. El Salvador said that the current model of development was not sustainable and that collective action by all economies was necessary to reactivate the growth, particularly in developing countries, while threats such as inequalities, insecurity and lack of peace must be addressed. United Arab Emirates paid particular attention to the right to development as seen through support and assistance to many countries to promote their development, including through multilateral channels. Ethiopia stressed that States had the right and the duty to formulate appropriate national development policies that suited their concrete political, economic, social and cultural conditions and said that the absence of peace, increase of terrorism, and climate change were an increasing impediment to the full realization of this right. Namibia said that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its 17 goals was a tool for the implementation of the right to development.

Indian Council of South America said that the effort toward realizing the right to development must not exclude the right to equal participation and consent of indigenous peoples, including the right to say no to certain aspects of development. Arab Commission for Human Rights asked which measures the international community could propose to allow the Working Group on the right to development to overcome its impasse and achieve a binding international instrument. International Youth and Student Movement for the United Nations said that the right to development was fundamental in meeting the challenges of our time, calling for the Human Rights Council to formally include the Declaration on the Right to Development in the international bill of human rights.

Remarks by the Moderator and Panellists

AMR RAMADAN, Permanent Representative of Egypt to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Panel Moderator, said that most speakers had highlighted the fact that there could be no trade-off between different rights.

FLAVIA PIOVESAN, Secretary for Human Rights at the Ministry of Justice of Brazil, stated that the Human Rights Council had a special locus to promote international cooperation. The 2030 Agenda was characterized by its universality and guided by the same principles as the Declaration on the Right to Development. The transfer of technology was an important aspect to be considered, as it could help developing countries reach higher levels of development. The empowerment of women was an essential condition for the furthering of development.

WAYNE McCOOK, Permanent Representative of Jamaica to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Chairman of the Group of 77, responding to the question on knowledge-sharing, noted the importance of internal policy dialogue among stakeholders, the use of national legal systems, and joining effectively norm-setting processes. Knowledge sharing could be enhanced through seminars, in non-negotiating settings. Indigenous groups should further intensify their already strong engagement. The right to development recognized the right of indigenous communities over their national resources. Consequences of unjust historical conditions ought to be fixed, for which there were various strategies.

MIHIR KANADE, Head of the Department of International Law and Human Rights and Director of the Human Rights Centre, University for Peace in Costa Rica, stated that one of the most important roles was to reinforce the right to development, not as a charity or a privilege, but as a duty of States. The right-based approach tended to focus more on national actions, but it should take into consideration the international aspect as well. The Human Rights Council had a duty to promote the right to development through education. On indigenous rights, Mr. Kanade said that the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Persons explicitly recognized the right to development as an inherent right.

MARTIN KHOR, Executive Director of the South Centre, Geneva, said that the Human Rights Council should keep promoting the right to development, and the tenth anniversary was a good opportunity to give it further visibility. There were a number of working groups dedicated to key issues, but a big challenge was in the international arena, where actions were lacking. The Council could also provide inputs to the Sustainable Development Goals process, some of which were more obvious than others. The role of the Working Group on the right to development ought to be re-conceptualized. In order to protect appropriating traditional knowledge for private gains, one idea to be considered was not to allow patenting it. Another area of consideration was how to protect and pass on traditional knowledge to younger generations.

Discussion

Indonesia said it was pertinent to place the right to development at the heart of development policies, and that Indonesia was ready to work for the fulfilment of making the right to development a reality for all. Pakistan said that the Declaration on the Right to Development recognized the interdependence of all rights, and that Pakistan’s development framework was people-centric. Malaysia said that development was a comprehensive process, and that equal attention should be given to the promotion and protection of all rights, calling on all stakeholders to implement fair strategies based on cooperation. United States said that truly sustainable development depended on governments following the rule of law, among many other factors, and that to ensure successful development, countries had to address discrimination against women, which was a reality recognized by the Sustainable Development Goals. Iran said that the right to development should be recognized as a separate right and not be incorporated with other rights in the name of mainstreaming. Sierra Leone said that the right to development promoted the need for better governance of the international framework, adding that the Declaration was as pertinent now as it was 30 years ago. Venezuela said that history bore the marks of colonialism and slavery, and that since the adoption of the Declaration, and the imposition of an unequal international order, it was necessary to promote an enabling environment based on solidarity. Ecuador said that development was primarily a political problem, and that some developed countries were seeking to make the right to development relative.

Saudi Arabia stressed that the Declaration was one of the pillars of the human rights system and had to be developed locally, regionally and internationally. Saudi Arabia was working on a developmental methodology and using developmental indicators, and it had regularly provided assistance to poor countries. South Africa reminded that a minority of countries had not joined the consensus when the Declaration on the Right to Development was adopted. While cognizant of the commitments by world leaders, such as the Sustainable Development Agenda, South Africa believed that tangible steps had to be taken if the right to development was to be realized. Cuba restated that the operalization of the right to development had to be undertaken in the context of the 2030 Agenda. Best practices from Latin America could be replicated around the world, and developed countries needed to adhere to the minimum levels of development assistance giving. Bangladesh said that the realization of human rights was not possible without addressing the challenges of development. Bangladesh believed that the realization of the right to development was a basic mantra for achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

Action Canada stated that the discussions on whether the right to development was a human right did not make the responsibilities of States any less prominent. Since there could be no human rights without addressing human needs, the right to development ought to be fully addressed. China Society for Human Rights Studies noted that the development of human rights needed a reliable and safe environment. An appeal needed to be made to States, nations and the whole international community. For individuals, the best way to achieve their rights was still through the rule of law and legal proceedings. Hope International said that today the results in the realization of the right to development were uneven, with many countries finding themselves in a situation of regression and many developing countries crushed under the burden of debt.

Philippines recalled that the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development as well as the Declaration on the Right to Development were based on the principles of the United Nations Charter, and that they addressed the need of everyone. Bolivia said that the problem of inequality must be approached through the recognition of different states of development and different approaches and visions of the future. Jordan stressed the importance of developing international cooperation and partnerships at the international level, and establishing adequate policies at the national level, as well as finding resources to implement human development plans. Further mobilization of international efforts was needed to realize the right to development and the adoption of the Agenda 2030 was a step in the right direction, but the revision of the global trade system was also needed, said Egypt. Sri Lanka reaffirmed the need for the commitment at international and national levels to the realization of the right to development and spoke about its national efforts in this regard.

Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, on behalf of severals NGOs1, shared a big disappointment by yet another delay in the Working Group on the right to development in the adoption of meaningful criteria and operational sub-criteria for the realization of the right to development.

Organization of Islamic Cooperation said that the denial of the right to self-determination and the right to govern their own natural resources were among the key obstacles to the realization of the right to development. India said that the Council and its mechanisms were key in ensuring that the right to development was mainstreamed in their own work and in the wider United Nations system.

Algeria said that the international community had a duty not to stand in the way of development processes for the most disadvantaged individuals, and expressed regret over the political impasse of the Working Group on the right to development . Portugal said that the right to development should be based on the interdependence of all human rights, and that the role of the State was fundamental in creating a far-reaching set of rights, adding that it was time to translate words into deeds. Senegal said that it was more than ever important to take into account the needs of people living in poverty, as many problems found their origin in the persistence of poverty, and that the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals was an important goal.

Conseil International pour le soutien à des procès équitables et aux Droits de l’Homme said that it was extremely welcome for the Council to consider that the right to development was necessary to allow peoples to achieve expectations, adding that it was the duty of States to protect human rights.


Concluding Remarks by Moderator and Panellists

AMR RAMADAN, Permanent Representative of Egypt to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Panel Moderator, summed up questions heard during the interactive debate and asked the panellists to provide some final remarks in response to them.

WAYNE McCOOK, Permanent Representative of Jamaica to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Chairman of the Group of 77, said that in the human rights setting, the international community was clearly enabled in taking a development dimension to the human rights discussion. The question was whether the Council could hold a discussion on various aspects using its regular processes.

MIHIR KANADE, Head of the Department of International Law and Human Rights and Director of the Human Rights Centre, United Nations-mandated University for Peace San Jose, Costa Rica, said that the Millennium Development Goals had emanated from the Millennium Declaration, and the 2030 Agenda grounded itself in the Millennium Declaration. International cooperation did not just include financial cooperation, but also technical cooperation and capacity-building. Recipients needed to determine what their priorities were.

FLAVIA PIOVESAN, Secretary for Human Rights at the Ministry of Justice of Brazil, said that there were numerous challenges, including the development of indicators, and that it was imperative to develop guidelines based on methodological foundations. It was essential to overcome the political ideological polarity between States that favoured a legally binding instrument and other States. The ratification of the international protocol was essential for the enforcement of the right to development.

MARTIN KHOR, Executive Director of the South Centre, said that it was important for all businesses to adhere to guidelines on ethical behaviour. If something happened and they did not adhere to guidelines, there should be some action taken. Noting the BP oil spill as an example, he said that the United States was able to get BP to compensate both the authorities and local people who were affected by the spill. But smaller countries would not be as able as the United States to seek redress, and an international human rights mechanism should be set up to enable victims of human rights violations to get redress when they were not able to get redress through national mechanisms.

AMR RAMADAN, Permanent Representative of Egypt to the United Nations Office at Geneva and Panel Moderator, closed the panel after noting that today’s dialogue reminded him of the distinct role and value of the right to development and renewed hope for present and future generations.

__________

1 Joint statement: Associazione Comunita Papa Giovanni XXIII, International Organization for the Right to Education and Freedom of Education (OIDEL); Teresian Association; Company of the Daughters of Charity of St. Vincent de Paul; Dominicans for Justice and Peace - Order of Preachers; Pax Christi International, International Catholic Peace Movement; Edmund Rice International Limited; New Humanity; Mouvement International d'Apostolate des Milieux Sociaux Independants ; Association Points-Cœur ; International Volunteerism Organization for Women, Education and Development – VIDES; and Istituto Internazionale Maria Ausiliatrice delle Salesiane di Don Bosco.

__________________

For use of the information media; not an official record