900 Economic and social Questions Economic and Social Council decision 1985/140 Sub-Commission action. The Sub- 30 May 1985 Meeting 25 52-1 (roll-call vote) Commission’s Working Group on Slavery, at its (18) Approved by Second Committee (E/1985/95 & Corr.1) by vote (51-1),24 May (meeting August 1985 session (see p. 871), also dealt 15); draft by Commission on Human Rights (E/1985/22); agenda item 16. Financial implications: S.G. A/C.5/40/13 & Corr.1. with apartheid and colonialism, practices it con- Roll-call vote in Council as follows: sidered to be similar to slavery. ‘The Working In favour: Algeria, Argentina, Bangladesh. Botswana. Brazil. Bulgaria. Canada, Group recommended that the Chairman of the China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Djibouti, Ecuador, Finland, France, Ger- Commission on Human Rights be authorized to man Democratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Guinea, Haiti, Iceland. bring pressure on the South African Government India, Indonesia. Japan, Lebanon, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand. Nigeria, Papua New Guinea, Poland, Romania, to order the unconditional release from gaol of Rwanda, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka. Nelson Mandela, leader of the African National Suriname, Sweden. Thailand, Turkey. Uganda, USSR, United Kingdom, Venezuela. Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zimbabwe. Congress, and Zephania Mothopeng, leader of the Against: United States. Pan Africanist Congress of Azania, as well as other political prisoners, and to engage in a meaningful While it shared the international community’s dialogue with the black majority leaders. revulsion at the abhorrent system of apartheid, the On 30 August,(19) the Sub-Commission reaf- United States said, it voted against the text because firmed that apartheid was an international crime of its position on the underlying Commission on and that the apartheid régime was illegitimate and (12) Human Rights resolution and because of its contrary to the Universal Declaration of Human concern about the excessive financial implications Rights.(20) It strongly condemned South Africa of more than $1 million. for acts of terrorism against the black majority and Follow-up action by the Working Group. The against the front-line and other neighbouring Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on southern States, as well as for its refusal to implement the Africa met on 14 June 1985 at Geneva for an United Nations plan for Namibia’s independence. emergency meeting, the first since its establish- It demanded the lifting of the state of emergency, ment. The Group examined a number of recent the cessation of all acts of brutality by South incidents involving human rights violations in African police and military forces, and the im- South Africa and discussed various possibilities for mediate release of all political prisoners, and called further action. It concluded that the events, on the international community to continue its ef- because of their seriousness and cruelty, should be forts towards total isolation of South Africa. (21) investigated thoroughly within its mandate, and On 8 August, the Sub-Commission expressed the expectation that the international authorized its Chairman to send an urgent com- community would take bold and decisive measures munication to the Commission Chairman re- to eliminate apartheid. questing him to cable South Africa urging that The special report(15) of the meeting was Messrs. Mandela and Mothopeng, in particular, transmitted on 18 July to the Presidents of the be released and be allowed to come to Geneva to General Assembly and the Security Council and participate in the current Sub-Commission session. to the Secretary-General, as well as to the South (22) African Government. In October,(16) the Secretary- On 29 August, the Sub-Commission General drew the Assembly’s attention to that report decided to observe at the beginning of its future as well as the Group’s earlier report.(7) annual sessions a minute of silence in honour of In a progress report(17) to be submitted to the the victims of the apartheid system. Commission in 1986, the Working Group said that, in August 1985, it became highly concerned 1973 Convention against apartheid at the avalanche of reported cases of serious viola- As at 31 December 1985, there were 82 parties tions, particularly in the wake of the declaration to the International Convention on the Suppres- of the state of emergency in South Africa. Since sion and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, the cases revealed, in the Working Group’s view, which was adopted by the General Assembly in a flagrant contempt for the right to life, it decided, 1973(23) and entered into force in 1976.(24) In in consultation with the Special Rapporteur on 1985, Argentina ratified, and Bangladesh and Iran summary or arbitrary executions, to send a joint acceded to, the Convention. mission to Lusaka, Zambia, to determine the ex- In his annual report(25) to the General tent of the alleged violations. The Chairman of the Assembly on the status of the Convention, the Group and the Special Rapporteur visited Lusaka Secretary-General annexed a list of the 35 States from 13 to 19 November, gathering evidence from that had signed, 29 that had ratified and 52 that 19 witnesses, covering violations of the right to life, had acceded to it and the date thereof, as of 1 effects of the implementation of the constitutional September. reforms and harsher bantustan policy, torture, vic- Activities of the Group of Three. The Group timization, harassment, destruction of property, of Three-established under article IX of the Con- detention and ill-treatment. vention to consider reports by States parties on.