text: sian Soviet Socialist Republic, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Djibouti, Egypt, Gabon, German Demo­ cratic Republic, Guinea, Guyana, Haiti, India, In­ donesia, Iraq, Jamaica, Morocco, Mozambique, Ni­ geria, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Romania, Rwanda, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Syrian Arab Re­ public, Turkey, Uganda, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Venezuela, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zimbabwe. Against: Belgium, France, Germany, Federal Re­ public of, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America. Abstaining: Australia, Canada, Finland, Iceland, Spain, Sweden. Draft decision XIII was adopted by 41 votes to 7, with 6 abstentions (decision 1986/ 145). DRAFT DECISION XIV 42. The PRESIDENT said that draft decision XIV had been adopted by the Second (Social) Committee by 39 votes to 6, with 3 abstentions. 43. Mr. BUI XUAN NHAT (Observer for Viet Nam) said that the draft decision before the Council had no bearing on the actual situation in the People's Republic of Kampuchea. Rather, it presented a stark picture by grossly distorting facts for political rea­ sons. If adopted, the draft decision would only subject the Kampuchean people once again to the same violations of human rights they had suffered under the genocidal regime. 44. The draft decision failed to take the views of all the parties concerned into account and constituted a stumbling-block to the incipient dialogue in South­ East Asia and to a negotiated settlement of the problems of the region. Adoption of the draft deci­ sion would thus constitute interference in the inter­ nal affairs of a sovereign State and be contrary to the aims of the United Nations in the field of human 19th meeting-23 May 1986 97 rights. His delegation considered the draft decision to be devoid of any validity whatsoever and urged the Council to vote against it. 
analysis: The text appears to be related to a United Nations Council meeting, discussing a draft decision regarding a country, Kampuchea. The debate revolves around human rights violations, the internal affairs of a sovereign state, and the potential consequences of adopting the decision. This suggests that the category is likely to be related to human rights, international relations, and governance.