PROPOSAL TO REPLACE JOINT APPEALS BOARD WITH ARBITRATION BOARD NEEDS FURTHER CONSIDERATION, SIXTH COMMITTEE TOLD

1 October 1996

Press Release
GA/L/3006

PROPOSAL TO REPLACE JOINT APPEALS BOARD WITH ARBITRATION BOARD NEEDS FURTHER CONSIDERATION, SIXTH COMMITTEE TOLD

19961001 Committee Concludes Review of Recommendations On Reform of Secretariat's Internal Justice System

Speakers this afternoon stressed the need for further review of the Secretary-General's proposal to replace the Joint Appeals Board with an arbitration board, as the Sixth Committee (Legal) concluded its discussion on the reform of the internal system of justice of the Secretariat.

The representative of India said the United Nations Charter provided no scope for parity among disputing parties, an essential condition for arbitration. The representative of Argentina said the idea of having centralized arbitration boards in New York and Geneva raised practical financial issues, including the cost for travel of board members to the scene of a dispute.

The representative of Ireland, speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, expressed concern about the proposal, since it would mean replacing staff members with outside experts who were unfamiliar with the special situation of United Nations staff. Luis de Posadas Montero (Uruguay), First Vice-President of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, said the proposal to use arbitration aimed at achieving compromise and resolution.

Statements were also made by the representatives of France, Cuba, Mexico, New Zealand and Canada, as well as by Ralph Zacklin, Director and Deputy to the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs.

Also this afternoon, the representative of Cuba spoke on legal aspects of the new international economic order. She called for retention of that item on the Committee's agenda, even if under a modified name.

The Sixth Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. on Thursday, 3 October, to consider a report of the Secretary-General on measures to eliminate international terrorism.

Committee Work Programme

The Sixth Committee (Legal) met this afternoon to conclude its consideration on the reform of the internal justice system of the United Nations Secretariat (for background information see Press Release GA/L/3004 of 30 September). It was also expected to begin considering the progressive development of international law relating to the new international economic order.

Reform of Internal Justice System

FRANCIS MAHON HAYES (Ireland) spoke on behalf of the European Union, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Slovakia, Hungary, Lithuania, Malta and Poland. He said that the proposal to replace existing panels on discrimination with ombudsman panels would improve procedures and produce better results. Staff members should be able to choose between an ombudsman panel or a pre-litigation review procedure.

He expressed doubts, however, about the proposal to replace the Joint Appeals Board by arbitration boards, since that would mean replacing staff members with outside experts, who would be unfamiliar with the special situation of United Nations staff. It was also questionable whether arbitration was an appropriate method for settling disputes between the administration and staff.

HUBERT LEGAL (France) said the explanations given yesterday by Joseph Connor, Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, had neither been sufficient nor clear.

His Government disagreed with many elements of the Secretary-General's report regarding professionalization of the internal justice system of the Secretariat. Nevertheless, it was important to change the system. It could be strengthened by arranging for the election of consultative bodies, organizing training and protecting those who have represented staff members.

Evidence that the excessive delays within the current system were due to a lack of professionalism was insufficient, he said. There were risks entailed in recruiting permanent professionals. Also, it would be difficult to choose them without considering their geographic representation, which could create problems.

SAVITRI KUNADI (India) said the question of whether arbitration was the best method for settling administrative disputes in the international civil service had yet to be examined. The Charter gave no scope for parity among parties to such a dispute. Neither did it grant them autonomy, the capacity to appoint judges, the power to decide on applicable law or venue, or the

Sixth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/L/3006 9th Meeting (PM) 1 October 1996

ability to apportion expenses. All of those factors were essential to arbitration.

Staff members were not equal to the General Assembly or the Secretary- General, she went on to say. There was no choice of law, for it was already laid down under the authority of the General Assembly, and the venue for dispute settlement was predetermined. Furthermore, in all disciplinary matters, the Secretary-General had the final authority to decide. In view of all that, the proposal to use arbitration within the United Nations internal justice system was unacceptable.

SILVIA A. FERNANDEZ DE GURMENDI (Argentina) stressed the importance of early and rapid resolution of disputes before recourse to formal appeals. The proposal to use outside arbitrators raised serious questions, especially with respect to the adaptability of the proposed system. An inability to agree on joint arbitrators would work against the creation of a transparent system of internal justice.

She said that the proposal to have centralized arbitration boards in New York and Geneva raised practical financial issues, including the cost in time, as well as for travel of board members travelling to the scene of a dispute. The proposals concerning professionalization of the system required deeper review by all Member States.

CARIDAD YAMIRA CUETO MILIAN (Cuba) said the process of reforming the internal justice system was important. Cuba supported the idea of establishing mediation groups to deal with disagreements that might arise between staff members. The proposal to establish an arbitration board to replace the Appeals Board needed careful analysis, however. It must be determined whether the Secretariat was an appropriate environment for arbitration. "This reform process should envisage a gradual approach", she said.

SOCORRO FLORES LIERA (Mexico) said the current system of internal justice at the United Nations was complex, slow and produced unsatisfactory results. It needed to be reformed into an equitable and efficient system. Professionalizing it would increase the confidence of those involved and speed up the system. The proposed new emphasis on the early resolution of disputes prior to a formal appeal was plausible. The staff of the United Nations should be involved in selecting members of boards called upon to settle disputes.

FELICITY JANE WONG (New Zealand) welcomed the Secretary-General's proposal to reform the internal justice system. However, the idea of replacing the Joint Appeals Board by an arbitration board raised some issues. The arbitrators would have the status of officials -- meaning they would have

Sixth Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/L/3006 9th Meeting (PM) 1 October 1996

contracts but would not be staff members. That raised questions with respect to their independence.

Currently, the grounds for appealing a decision or seeking an advisory opinion were so limited that the right of appeal was useless, she said. However, under the Secretary-General's proposals, the same grounds would be employed. A wider process of consultation was needed in efforts to reform the system.

JOHN HOLMES (Canada) said an emphasis on early resolution of disputes prior to making formal appeals would help make the internal system of justice faster and more efficient. Implementation of the proposal to establish arbitration boards should be delayed to allow for further review. The Committee must have an opportunity to address Member States' questions on that proposal.

LUIS DE POSADAS MONTERO (Uruguay), First Vice-President of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, said attention had been drawn to excessive delays within the internal justice system, as well as to lack of professionalism and the difficulty of finding people to be members of the Joint Appeals Board. There was a reason for those delays. They were not exclusively attributable to the system but rather to the attitude of the administration. The Tribunal could not agree with characterizing the system as being unprofessional. The work of the Joint Appeals Board was seriously done in 90 per cent of the cases. Except in very few cases, there was no evidence of things being done incompetently.

The proposal to use arbitration aimed at achieving compromise and resolution, he said. Under the current system, there was no effort to bring the parties together. That represented a new approach. "If you get rid of the joint board, we would not be changing the entire system of justice in the United Nations." Even now, a number of cases came to the Tribunal through other channels.

RALPH ZACKLIN, Director and Deputy to the Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, said five options had been considered and rejected concerning the Administrative Tribunal. The first option -- to leave it as it now stood -- was not seen as meaningful. The second option was a phased process of change which, it was believed, would have a serious impact on functioning. The third option involved the use of staff members, but it presented the difficulty of finding staff to serve and obtaining their release from programme managers. The fourth option -- to introduce binding arbitration in every case -- was turned down in favour of a case-by-case approach. The fifth option had been to replace the Board with outside professionals. That was not pursued because it was felt that peers should play a significant role in disciplinary matters involving staff members.

Sixth Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/L/3006 9th Meeting (PM) 1 October 1996

New International Economic Order

Ms. CUETO MILIAN (Cuba) said her Government would have no problem with changing the label of the "new international economic order". The current international economic scene was one of disarray rather than order. However, consideration of the international economic order should remain on the agenda of the Sixth Committee.

The relationship between peace and development could not be questioned, she said. To maintain a balance between the two was difficult and was one of the challenges facing the United Nations. There was need for a fresh perspective and a new spirit of cooperation. Retaining the item on the Committee's agenda would not involve any serious financial implications.

* *** *