On 31 March 2026, during the 54^th meeting at the Human Rights Council, several resolutions were introduced among which was the draft resolution on the “Right of the Palestinian people to self-determination” (A/HRC/61/L.37). The resolution adopted by a vote of 42 in favor, none against and five abstentions.

Egypt voted in favor of the draft resolution and explained its voted by reaffirming that the right to self-determination remains at the very heart of the Palestinian question and is firmly rooted in the principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.

For decades, the Palestinian people have been denied the exercise of this right. This prolonged denial, taking place under occupation and accompanied by systemic violations, has continued to impact not only the rights and dignity of the Palestinian people but also the credibility of the broader international system. 

Egypt emphasized that the right to self-determination is not a matter open to negotiation, nor is it a principle that can be indefinitely postponed. It is an inalienable right that must be fully realized without conditions. Yet, continuing measures continue to obstruct the realization of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination. Egypt stressed that the expansion of settlements, confiscation of land, annexation measures, fragmentation of the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and restrictions imposed on freedom of worship, including at Al-Aqsa Mosque and other holy sites, should not be described merely as challenges but as clear violations of international law. 

Egypt unequivocally condemned the recent legislative measures imposing the death penalty against Palestinians, describing them as a grave and dangerous escalation. Such measures are viewed as violations of international law that further entrench discrimination and strike at the core of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination.

The realization of this right remains indispensable to the achievement of a just and lasting peace. Thus, Egypt stressed that the international community must move beyond merely reaffirming principles and declarations. Concrete steps consistent with international law and relevant United Nations resolutions are required to ensure the realization of the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination. Such efforts must include the rejection of all measures of annexation and demographic alteration, while preserving the unity, continuity, and territorial integrity of the occupied Palestinian territory.

Egypt reiterated the same position following the adoption of the resolutions under Agenda Item Seven, including the resolution on human rights in the occupied Syrian Golan (A/HRC/61/L.8), the resolution on Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem, and in the occupied Syrian Golan (A/HRC/61/L.36), as well as the resolution on the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination (A/HRC/61/L.37). 

Welcoming the adoption of these resolutions, Egypt stressed that such practices cannot be viewed as isolated incidents. Rather, they form part of a broader and enduring context of prolonged occupation. In this regard, Egypt highlighted systemic violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law, the consolidation of control over land and resources, the forced displacement of Palestinians, the denial of their basic rights, and restrictions imposed upon civilians, including restrictions affecting freedom of movement and worship. According to Egypt, these actions must be understood within the wider reality of continued occupation.

Within this context, Egypt emphasized that ending occupation is a legal and moral imperative. This imperative, Egypt noted, applies across all occupied Arab territories, including the occupied Palestinian territory and the occupied Syrian Golan. Reaffirming that the right to self-determination lies at the centre of this question, Egypt reiterated that the right is neither conditional nor subject to negotiation. 

Egypt further expressed regret that a resolution reaffirming such a clearly established right under international law continues to require a vote, emphasizing that a right firmly grounded in international law should not become a subject of division among States.