United Nations Security Council Resolution 1604

United Nations Security Council resolution 1604, adopted unanimously on 15 June 2005, after reaffirming all resolutions on the situation in Cyprus, particularly Resolution 1251 (1999), the Council extended the mandate of the United Nations Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP) for an additional period until 15 December 2005.[1]

UN Security Council
Resolution 1604
UNFICYP numberplate
Date15 June 2005
Meeting no.5,202
CodeS/RES/1604 (Document)
SubjectThe situation in Cyprus
Voting summary
  • 15 voted for
  • None voted against
  • None abstained
ResultAdopted
Security Council composition
Permanent members
Non-permanent members

Observations

The Security Council called on both Cyprus and Northern Cyprus to urgently address the humanitarian issue of missing persons. It welcomed the Secretary-General Kofi Annan's review of UNFICYP as requested in Resolution 1568 (2004) and his assessment that violence on the island was unlikely, as well as his intention to keep the operation under review. The Council welcomed the lifting of restrictions on the freedom of movement of UNFICYP by the Turkish side and the good co-operation from both sides, though there was concern at the level of crime across the ceasefire line.[2]

The resolution also welcomed the continued funding of the United Nations operations by the governments of Cyprus and Greece.

Acts

Extending UNFICYP's mandate, the resolution requested the Secretary-General to report to the Council on the implementation of the current resolution, further endorsing UNFICYP's efforts to implement the sexual exploitation policy. It urged the Turkish Cypriot side to restore the military status quo at Strovilia prior to 30 June 2000.

gollark: Is this a *specific* thing or are you merely annoyed about *general* things?
gollark: Consider fMRI?
gollark: Well, if it's particularly bad to not stop/start/amend the thing they are (not) doing, then it's possibly worth the social awkwardness.
gollark: As far as I know you don't have access to enough computational octahedra™ to run your own simulations, so you did not.
gollark: That isn't necessarily true, they might have just forgotten about a thing/not considered it thoroughly/not considered all angles/whatever.

See also

References

This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.