United Kingdom, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, said that its requests had been simple and clear, and listed some requests made. They had also asked to delete an incorrect reference to the 2030 Agenda. The family as a unit was not a rights-holder under international law; rights were held by individuals. The United Kingdom was therefore calling for a vote and would urge Council members to vote against this resolution.
Mexico, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, reaffirmed its commitment to development and to the organization of the family. Mexico also recognized the rights of each Member State of the Council to present draft resolutions. Initiatives with restrictive issues negatively affected the impression of the quality of work undertaken by the Human Rights Council. For Mexico, it was important that the Human Rights Council protected different types of families and their members. In Mexico there were numerous types of family structures, including single parent households, civil law and same-sex marriages. Mexico was concerned that the resolution treated persons with disabilities in a partial manner, not recognizing their autonomy as recognized in the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. L.35 did draw from that Convention, but quoted that instrument only partially. Mexico was concerned about the precedent that could be set. Mexico lamented that constructive amendments had been rejected.
Panama, speaking in an explanation of the vote before the vote, expressed concern about the fact that the text had a restrictive focus and did not adequately address the rights and equality of women and children. Members of the family were individual rights-holders, said Panama, adding that the language on different forms of families had already been agreed by this Council. Panama would vote against this draft resolution.
The Council adopted draft resolution L.35 by a vote of 32 in favour, 12 against and 3 abstentions.