SECRETARY-GENERAL REQUESTS $228.6 MILLION FOR BOSNIA, EASTERN SLAVONIA, AS FIFTH COMMITTEE CONSIDERS PEACE-KEEPING, INTERNAL OVERSIGHT
Press Release
GA/AB/3121
SECRETARY-GENERAL REQUESTS $228.6 MILLION FOR BOSNIA, EASTERN SLAVONIA, AS FIFTH COMMITTEE CONSIDERS PEACE-KEEPING, INTERNAL OVERSIGHT
19961202 The Secretary-General is requesting that the General Assembly appropriate $228.6 million gross for the period July 1996 to June 1997 for two peace-keeping operations in the former Yugoslavia, the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) was told this morning, as it considered the financing of a number of peace-keeping operations and the reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services.The Secretary-General's reports on the financing of the operations, introduced today by the United Nations Controller, Yukio Takasu, request $85.3 million gross for the United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH), and $143.3 million for the United Nations Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES). Mr. Takasu told the Committee that the appropriation for the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP) would be revised, because the Security Council on 27 November extended the mission's mandate, but reduced its strength by 300.
In three other reports introduced by the Controller, the Secretary- General requests that the Assembly credit Member States their shares in unencumbered balances for the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM), the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
The representatives of Kuwait and the United States asked for more information about the amounts and efforts to collect overpayment of mission subsistence allowance paid to staff in UNIKOM.
As the Committee concluded its discussion on the reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, the Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services, Karl-Theodore Paschke, responded to questions that had been asked by several representatives during the Committee's general discussion.
Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
Commenting on the expressions of disappointment with the outcome of investigations into the United Nations access control system, Mr. Paschke said, "I was disappointed with the result myself, but I would never force my investigators to produce a result which looks good, but cannot, beyond any doubt, establish evidence about the individual responsibility of somebody."
On the question of the seminars organized by the Special Committee of 24 on decolonization, he said that his Office had tried to avoid impinging on the political prerogatives of legislative bodies. The report had advised the Special Committee of 24 to better explain its work to the outside world. On another issue, he denied naming any individual in his general statements to The New York Times about an ongoing investigation at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Further questions on the Office were asked by the representatives of Cuba and Uganda. A Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) Inspector, Andrzej Abraszewski, also spoke on the reports of the Internal Oversight Office.
The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 4 December, to take up the report of the Economic and Social Council and continue discussing the United Nations common and pension systems.
Committee Work Programme
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to continue discussing the Office of Internal Oversight Services. It was also expected to begin consideration of the financing of the following peace- keeping operations: United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH); United Nations Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium (UNTAES); United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP); United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM); United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF); and United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL).
(For background on the reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, see Press Release GA/AB/3112 of 11 November. For background on UNMIBH, UNTAES, UNPREDEP and UNIKOM, see Press Release GA/AB/3119 of 29 November.)
Financing of UNDOF and UNIFIL
In his financial performance report on UNDOF for the period from 1 December 1994 to 30 November 1995 (document A/51/405), the Secretary-General asks the General Assembly to credit to Member States their shares of an unencumbered balance of about $1.2 million gross ($973,100 net) for that period.
The balance resulted after the mission spent $30.9 million gross ($30.2 million net) of the $32.1 million gross and net made available to it, says the Secretary-General. The savings were mainly from favourable rates for hiring aircraft used for rotating military personnel; the receipt of additional vehicles, equipment and supplies from other missions; the cancellation and deferment of some maintenance projects; and the reduced prices offered by the Syrian Government for petrol, oil and other lubricants.
The Secretary-General's financial performance report on UNIFIL for the period 1 February 1995 to 31 January 1996 (document A/51/535) asks the Assembly to credit Member States their respective share in an unencumbered balance of almost $10.6 million gross for that period. The balance emerged after UNIFIL spent some $124.3 million gross of the $134.8 million gross it was provided.
The Secretary-General states that the lower spending was realized mainly from lower than anticipated rotation costs in respect of military personnel, a high vacancy rate for civilian staff and the receipt of additional vehicles, equipment, generators and supplies from other missions.
Fifth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
After studying the Secretary-General's documents on the two missions, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) recommends, in its related report on UNDOF and UNIFIL (document A/51/684), that the unencumbered balances in both missions' accounts be credited to Member States.
Commenting on UNDOF, the ACABQ refers to the findings of the Office of Internal Oversight Services which highlighted allegations about the interference with the decision-making process of the local committee on contracts in order to favour a local contractor. That contractor had not only been supplying rations for 12 years at prices above those of other bidders, but was also providing poor-quality products and allegedly using United Nations trucks to smuggle goods into Syria. The ACABQ expects the Secretariat to provide more information on the issue in the context of the Assembly's discussions on the report of the Oversight Office. However, the Secretary- General's representatives had assured the ACABQ that the mission had taken steps to provide for more stringent requirements from bidders. The ACABQ reiterated its view that procurement reform should be given top priority by the United Nations.
Drawing attention to something common to UNDOF and UNIFIL, the ACABQ states that, since their inception, both of them have received military observers from the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization (UNTSO). While the observers reported to the UNDOF and UNIFIL Force Commanders, their administrative expenses are charged to UNTSO. The $19.2 million cost of maintaining 81 observers in UNDOF in 1996-1997 was neither reflected in the UNDOF budget nor in its performance report. Similarly, the $12.6 million cost of 57 observers in UNIFIL is found neither in the mission's budget nor performance report. The ACABQ, therefore, states that the UNDOF and UNIFIL budgets are understated by those amounts, which are charged to the United Nations regular budget allocation for UNTSO. It asks the Secretary-General to propose how to deal with the situation.
Statements on Internal Oversight Office
KARL-THEODORE PASCHKE, Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services, responded to questions and comments by Member States during discussion of his Office's annual report. He recalled a question from the representative of Costa Rica, on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, who had asked about the relationship between the Office of Internal Oversight Services and the Efficiency Board. He said that, to ensure the independence of the Office, it had made sure that it did not take part in management decision-making. Therefore, he had not been asked to join the Board and had stayed clear of setting policy for the Board's efficiency reviews, which enabled the Office to critically assess the results of the exercise.
Fifth Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
In response to the question by the representative of Bangladesh as to whether the framework for the working arrangements for the Office, the Board of Auditors and the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) might be reviewed, he said those bodies did not have any more significant coordination problems. Their work resulted in synergy effects, rather than duplication. The implementation of recommended recovery actions was being monitored and, in addition to the almost $4 million saved or recovered as of last year, a further $1 million had been realized from the cost savings and recoveries identified earlier.
As to the Russian Federation representative's expression of disappointment over the result of the investigations into the United Nations access control system, he said, "I was disappointed with the result myself, but I would never force my investigators to produce a result which looks good, but cannot, beyond any doubt, establish evidence about the individual responsibility of somebody." He added that general mismanagement rather than individual wrongdoing would be examined on various occasions. However, the review into the access system had produced important recommendations that awaited implementation.
Mr. Paschke then responded to several questions from the Cuban delegation. He said that the $15.8 million of savings and recoveries identified in the reporting period was conservative and had been based on data the Office kept on the budget volumes involved in its reviews. With regard to how the Office selected which complaints to investigate, he said that the Office responsibly exercised its managerial discretion to choose investigations, based on professional expertise and the best interests of the Organization.
When the Office looked at the seminars organized by the Special Committee of 24 on decolonization [Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples], he went on, it had been careful not to impinge on the political prerogatives of a legislative body. But, since it had been mandated to review the effective use of resources, it was within its authority to call attention to the way funds had been used on those aspects that affected infrastructure. The report of the Office had been very carefully phrased and had advised the Special Committee of 24 to better explain its work to the outside world.
Turning to the questions by the representative of Uganda, who had asked about the functions of investigations and audit, he said that the functions were different, even though they sometimes fed upon each other. Audits were conducted regularly, on a routine basis and did not involve suspicions of wrongdoing. Investigations, in the generic sense, were conducted when specific complaints or allegations of wrongdoing were received. The purpose of an investigation was to substantiate whether such wrongdoing had taken place.
Fifth Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
On recruitment to and promotion in the Office, he said that the foremost yardstick was professionalism, taking account of the principle of equitable geographical representation. The Office only recruited qualified staff and did not discriminate against anyone who uncovered fraud. On the issue raised by the representative of Uganda on the investigation of problems in Arusha and Geneva, he said that he had not made any substantive information public about either investigation because they had not yet been completed.
Referring to the comments by New Zealand's representative on the seminars of the Special Committee of 24, he said that the Office's report had not passed judgement on the issue of decolonization, but had recommended better public explanation of that Committee's work.
In response to a question from the representative of Liberia, who asked him to comment on the 30 October media reports on the problems of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the insinuation that some information had come from the Office, he asked the representative to carefully read that article in The New York Times. The article had cited various sources for its information. "I am quoted with general statements about an ongoing investigation at the Tribunal", he said. "Neither to The New York Times reporter nor to any other media representative have I mentioned the name of any individual who might be involved in this investigation."
Mr. Paschke recalled that he had told a press conference on 30 October that his Office was reviewing the situation in Kigali and Arusha. When the review was completed, it would be assessed in order to make future recommendations. His Office had a policy of not discussing the nature of information it had received before work had been completed. The Oversight work in Kigali and Arusha was still being drafted. It would be discussed internally with management, which would be expected to comment on the findings and recommendations. Only after that phase would the results be submitted to the Secretary-General and to the General Assembly.
ANDRZEJ ABRASZEWSKI, JIU Inspector, also speaking on the reports of the Internal Oversight Office, said he would analyse the views of Member States and take them into account in the Unit's future comments on Internal Oversight reports. Many of the views expressed coincided with the Unit's comments on the individual reports. Regarding cases in which disappointment had been expressed with the Unit's comments, he said he was in touch with two delegates to discuss ways in which those comments would better meet their expectations.
The steps taken to improve cooperation and coordination between the Unit and the Internal Oversight Office had resulted in a welcome synergy, he said. Many delegations had stressed the need for improved cooperation and coordination of external and internal oversight bodies and the Unit was determined to improve such coordination and cooperation. The Unit had prepared the report on coordination and harmonization of the work of oversight bodies and comments on the matter from Member States would be welcomed.
Fifth Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
ANA SILVIA RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) asked a number of follow-up questions. Regarding the recommendations of the Unit and the Board of Auditors, she asked when such follow-up action was taken by the Office. Also, had the $15.8 million of savings and recoveries realized for the reporting period been taken into account in the revised estimates for the 1996-1997 budget? It was a significant amount and should be reflected in the budget, she said.
In another question, why had the preface of the Secretary-General's report on the Office been signed by Mr. Paschke? Was it not the norm for the Secretary-General's report to be signed by programme managers? She noted that during the fiftieth session a General Assembly resolution had asked that the thematic reports of the Office be circulated under the relevant agenda items of the Assembly's work programme. Had that provision been carried out?
Regarding the Special Committee of 24, she said she did not agree with the argument presented by the Office. She believed that the Office should focus its investigations on the Secretariat, not on Member States and their representatives. Attempts to interpret the efficiency and effectiveness of working groups of the Assembly and the Security Council would lead to confusion. It was important to make a clear distinction between the Secretariat and the decisions taken by Member States.
NESTER ODAGA JALOMAYO (Uganda) assured Mr. Paschke of his high respect for the Internal Oversight Office and his concern that it be strengthened and achieve its objectives. His remarks should be taken in that light. Without proper skills, the Office's mandate could not be discharged efficiently and that was why he had raised the question of the Office's mandate for investigations.
Citing specific paragraphs of the resolution that established the Office, he said he had the impression that the mandate was to investigate fraud, waste, abuse of office and other such violations. All those areas were primarily audit functions. Therefore, he had raised a question regarding the advertisement for one D-1 and one P-5 post in the Office, both of which had stated that law enforcement experience was vital for those functions. That requirement was at variance with the Office's mandate. Criminal investigations followed audit investigations. Mr. Paschke had not responded to the concern his delegation had expressed on that matter.
He reiterated another question -- was Mr. Paschke aware of cases of auditors being victimized after identifying cases of fraud or waste? He again asked how many of the auditors on the Office's staff were certified auditors. Regarding Mr. Paschke's response to the representative of Liberia, he said The New York Times article on the concerns about the Arusha office had given the impression that the Inspector felt that the staff member had done something wrong and that disciplinary action might be taken. Hence, the article had triggered the question.
Fifth Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
Mr. PASCHKE, Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services, responding to Cuba, said that in some cases his Office would not follow up on prior recommendations of the JIU or the Board of Auditors because of his limited staff. His Office could not cover all the areas that had been previously audited or inspected by the two bodies. The primary responsibility for follow-up rested with the unit that made the recommendations. However, his Office would follow up as it could.
To another question, he said the title of his introductory remarks to the Secretary-General's annual report on the Office should be revised. He would like to take the opportunity in that report to make some general remarks about the situation in the Organization. He would think of a better title for that part of the report. Regarding the thematic reports, he said the secretariats of the various legislative bodies should ensure that the reports were circulated under the relevant agenda items. He had taken the remarks on the Special Committee of 24 seriously and he would reflect on the comments made by the delegate of Cuba on that issue.
Responding to the representative of Uganda, he said he disagreed to some extent with the suggestion that the mandate outlined in the resolution primarily demanded auditors' skills. Internal oversight was a totally new area of work for the Organization and he had established investigation as an integral part of the oversight work. In order to carry out specific investigations it was imperative to fill the post in the investigation section. He added that he was not aware of any cases of auditors being victimized.
Mr. ODAGA JALOMAYO (Uganda) asked how many auditors in the Internal Oversight Office were certified.
Mr. PASCHKE said that the question was hard to answer. If that question were asked of United Nations staff at large, a mixed response would be received. For his part, he had done everything in his power to ensure that auditors worked in a professional, well-organized and trustful environment and with job satisfaction. The degree to which he had succeeded in that regard would be answered best by the auditors working for the Office.
Regarding certification, he said that it was not a job requirement, even though it was desirable. The issue was whether staff members were qualified. They were. He could provide further details later.
Statements on Peace-Keeping Missions in Former Yugoslavia
YUKIO TAKASU, United Nations Controller, introduced and reviewed the Secretary-General's reports on the financing of the three missions: the United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina (UNMIBH); the United Nations Transitional Administration for Eastern Slavonia, Baranja and Western Sirmium
Fifth Committee - 8 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
(UNTAES); and the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force (UNPREDEP). For the UNMIBH, he asked, on behalf of the Secretary-General, for the appropriation and assessment of $85.3 million gross for the 12-month period from 1 July 1996 to 30 June 1997.
Turning to UNTAES, he said that its mandate had been extended to 15 June 1997. He asked for the appropriation of $143.3 million gross for the same 12-month period. The sum should be assessed at a monthly rate of $23.9 million gross.
As for UNPREDEP, he informed the Committee that the mission's mandate had been extended to 31 May 1997 by the Security Council, which also ordered a 300-person reduction of the military component. In the light of that Council decision, the Secretariat would revise its figures and submit updated estimates.
The recommendation by the ACABQ on the mission stood.
Statements on Iraq-Kuwait Mission
Mr. TAKASU, United Nations Controller, introduced the report on the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM). He said the mission would be maintained and the issue of its termination or review would be considered next April by the Security Council. The unencumbered balance in the mission's account should be distributed to Member States.
ZIYAD MONAYAIR (Kuwait) said that no mention had been made about the excess amounts paid to some staff for subsistence allowance. In response to the question posed by his delegation, Mr. Paschke had said that the appropriate authorities should be consulted on the allowances. How much in excessive mission subsistence allowance had been paid to staff members and how much of the overpayment had been recovered? he asked.
WILLIAM GRANT (United States) said he would be interested in a status report on the overpayment of mission subsistence allowance to the operation's civilian and military personnel. He also wanted to know when the issue would be resolved.
Mr. TAKASU, United Nations Controller, said that there had been several consultations between the mission, the Department of Peace-keeping Operations (DPKO) and other relevant offices on the overpayment of mission subsistence allowances. The DPKO had decided, only in the middle of 1996, to go along with the findings of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the mission subsistence allowance. It had since issued a notification of recovery action. Some staff members had paid up their excessive allowances, while others were still challenging the facts of the matter. An administrative review group had been set up to propose actions that could be taken to recover the overpayment.
Fifth Committee - 9 - Press Release GA/AB/3121 35th Meeting (AM) 2 December 1996
Mr. GRANT (United States) asked if the procedures explained by the Controller applied equally to both the civilian and military staff of the mission.
Statements on UNDOF and UNIFIL
Mr. TAKASU, United Nations Controller, introduced the reports on the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF) and the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL). He said the unencumbered balances in the missions' accounts should be distributed to Member States.
Mr. GRANT (United States) welcomed the savings referred to in the report. During the informal consultations, appropriate representatives of the Secretary-General should tell the Committee about the troubling information raised in the annual report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on abuses of the procurement system for UNDOF and on actions to intimidate staff who reported such abuses. The representatives should inform the Committee on the safeguards that had been introduced to prevent a recurrence of the abuses highlighted in the Oversight report.
* *** *