View/save PDF version of this document - La Strada International

554 Travaux préparatoires: United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and theprinciple of non-refoulement as contained therein.” 1, 2Notes by the Secretariat2. At its eleventh session, the Ad Hoc Committee considered, finalized and approvedarticle 15 bis, as amended with the inclusion of an additional paragraph 2 to bring it inline with the corresponding article 13 (final article 14) of the trafficking in persons protocol.The last amendments are reflected in the final text of the protocol, as included inthe report of the Ad Hoc Committee (A/55/383, sect. IV, draft resolution, annex III), thatwas submitted to the General Assembly for adoption pursuant to resolution 54/126 of 17December 1999.B. Approved text adopted by the General Assembly(see resolution 55/25, annex III)IV. Final provisionsArticle 19Saving clause1. Nothing in this Protocol shall affect the other rights, obligations and responsibilitiesof States and individuals under international law, including internationalhumanitarian law and international human rights law and, in particular, whereapplicable, the 1951 Convention 3 and the 1967 Protocol 4 relating to the Status ofRefugees and the principle of non-refoulement as contained therein.2. The measures set forth in this Protocol shall be interpreted and applied ina way that is not discriminatory to persons on the ground that they are the objectof conduct set forth in article 6 of this Protocol. The interpretation and applicationof those measures shall be consistent with internationally recognized principlesof non-discrimination.1At the eighth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, it was decided to replace the previous text of paragraph 2 of article5 with new text based on the proposal of Belgium and Norway (A/AC.254/L.189) and article 13 of the revised draft traffickingin persons protocol (A/AC.254/4/Add.3/Rev.5), as agreed at the seventh session. It was also decided to place the text herefor greater consistency with the text of the trafficking in persons protocol. The inclusion of the principle of non-refoulementwas proposed in the note submitted during the eighth session of the Ad Hoc Committee by the Office of the United NationsHigh Commissioner for Human Rights, the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, the United NationsChildren’s Fund and the International Organization for Migration contained in document A/AC.254/27 and Corr.1, para. 20;see also the informal note submitted during the fourth session of the Ad Hoc Committee by the United Nations HighCommissioner for Human Rights contained in document A/AC.254/16, para. 8. Some delegations expressed concern aboutthe inclusion of the words “and the principle of non-refoulement as contained therein”. In their view this was redundant visà-visthe international instruments cited in the new article, which also contained principles of non-refoulement. One delegationalso felt that the reference to a specific principle of international law could lead to the interpretation that other establishedprinciples might not apply. One delegation noted that text dealing with “principles of non-discrimination” appeared in theoriginal proposal of Belgium and Norway and in article 13 of the trafficking in persons protocol and wondered whether theyshould be included in this provision as well. The discussions on this provision also considered proposals of Mexico(A/AC.254/L.160) and Morocco (see A/AC.254/5/Add.21). The text of those proposals was not adopted, but might be relevantto other provisions and Mexico and Morocco reserved the right to raise their proposals again at the appropriate time.2At the eighth session of the Ad Hoc Committee, some delegations expressed concerns about the implications of thisprovision for States that were not parties to the instruments referred to. In particular, Saudi Arabia and the United ArabEmirates were concerned that, as a result of this wording, their Governments might be subject to obligations under thoseinstruments, to which they were not parties, should they become parties to the convention and the protocol. It was pointedout that the opening words protected the integrity of existing obligations, but could not be interpreted as creating new ones.Thus, a State that was not already subject to such an obligation would not become subject to it simply by becoming a partyto the protocol. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates asked for this fact to be noted in the travaux préparatoires.3United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, No. 2545.4Ibid., vol. 606, No. 8791.