HOST COUNTRY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS GENERAL ASSEMBLY CONSIDER ISSUE OF DIPLOMATIC PARKING
Press Release
HQ/576
HOST COUNTRY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS GENERAL ASSEMBLY CONSIDER ISSUE OF DIPLOMATIC PARKING
19970410 Vote in Committee Is 10-1-1, with United States Opposed; United States Says Rush To Assembly Debate Will Prompt RidiculeActing without its traditional consensus, the Committee on Relations with the Host Country this afternoon recommended that the General Assembly resume, as a matter of urgency, consideration of the Committee's report in order examine questions relating to the parking of diplomatic vehicles. The Committee was meeting for the fourth time within a month in response to the 1 April implementation of the New York City Diplomatic Parking Programme.
By a vote of 10 in favour to one against (United States), with one abstention (United Kingdom), the Committee took the decision with the understanding that if the host country indicated in the coming week that there had been a deferral of the elements of the city programme which, according to the Legal Counsel of the United Nations, appeared not to be in compliance with international law, the Assembly would in turn defer its consideration of the matter.
The representative of the United States cautioned the Committee that a rush to call a general debate in the Assembly on the matter of the New York City Diplomatic Parking Programme at a time when other more crucial international issues demanded attention would only bring ridicule on the United Nations. He appealed for patience and common sense in the early stages of implementation, stressing that the Committee had been able to reach consensus on more difficult issues in the past. Only a few more days were needed by the host country to present specific proposals to revise legal and practical elements of the programme and satisfy the concerns raised by the Legal Counsel and the diplomatic community. He could not present the specifics until all the discussions with the city and the Legal Counsel had been completed.
Host Country Committee - 1a - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
The United Nations Legal Counsel, Hans Correll, acknowledged the discussions between the Secretary-General and United States Permanent Representative Bill Richardson and his own discussions with the host country on the subject of its obligations to the diplomatic community in New York City. He said he could not discuss the matter in more detail, but he was optimistic that legal concerns could be removed if the revisions to the programme were put in the form that had been discussed.
Following a number of statements this afternoon citing unjust and discriminatory ticketing incidents in the early days of the programme, the representative of the Russian Federation called for immediate action on his country's proposal to refer the issue to the General Assembly, since the host country had not presented any specific revisions to the programme.
The representatives of both the United Kingdom and France welcomed the efforts to revise the programme, but said that specifics of any revisions and a specific timetable for introducing those revisions were needed. The representative of the United Kingdom called for a delay of four more days before the Committee took a decision. Many of the speakers said that in the absence of specific revisions or any deferral in the parking programme, the Committee had no choice but to refer the matter to the Assembly.
The Committee decision today followed several previous meetings in which members and observers raised numerous concerns about the new programme. A decision to delay Committee action for 10 days had been made at the last meeting on 1 April.
Among the terms of the new parking plan was the provision that New York City would provide each mission with up to three parking spaces and a "hot line" to report unauthorized use of those spaces. On the enforcement side, the plan allowed for registration suspension and possible towing of diplomatic vehicles with "scofflaw" status -- one or more outstanding parking violations that had not been properly adjudicated for a period of 12 months or more. The United Nations Legal Counsel had acknowledged the host country's right to establish parking regulations, but questioned the international legality of towing or other forms of fine enforcement for diplomatic personnel.
Statements were made in the debate by the representatives of Costa Rica, China, Cuba, Cote d'Ivoire, Spain, Iraq, Mexico, Egypt, Brazil, Kazakstan, Zaire, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Cyprus, Brazil and Indonesia.
The Committee will meet again at a time to be announced.
Committee Work Programme
The Committee on Relations with the Host Country met this afternoon to resume its consideration of transportation issues, including the use of motor vehicles, parking and related matters.
At its last meeting on 1 April, the Committee decided to reconvene on 10 April to take up a proposal recommending that the General Assembly consider, as a matter of urgency, the parking of diplomatic vehicles in New York City. At that time, the Committee -- unable to reach a consensus decision on the proposal -- had, instead, approved its Chairman's summary of the discussion on the issue (document A/AC.154/310), which called for Committee action on 10 April, unless concerns about the New York City Diplomatic Parking Programme were satisfactorily addressed.
According to the representative of the United States, the support of the host country for the parking programme, which entered into force on 1 April, was based on the City's full and complete implementation of the programme and honouring of its obligations. He proposed that the Committee reconvene in 10 days to take up the issue again and evaluate the implementation of the programme.
During the Committee's previous meetings on the subject, concern was expressed that a number of practical questions about the programme had been put forward and should be examined more thoroughly, including the allocation of parking spaces, the appeals process for parking tickets and the training of ticketing personnel. Some Member States felt that the Committee should draw up proposals to address both the legal and practical aspects of the problem.
The new parking programme is described in a text prepared by the Chairman of the Committee (document A/AC.154/305) and a note verbale attached to a 14 March letter from the representative of the United States (document A/AC.154/306). Among the terms of the new parking plan was the provision that New York City would provide each mission with up to three parking spaces and a "hot line" to report unauthorized use of those spaces. On the enforcement side, the plan allowed for registration suspension and possible towing of diplomatic vehicles with "scofflaw" status -- one or more outstanding parking violations that had not been properly adjudicated for a period of 12 months or more.
In a decision issued on 20 March (document A/AC.154/307), the United Nations Legal Counsel had acknowledged the host country's right to establish parking regulations, but questioned the international legality of towing or other forms of fine enforcement for diplomatic personnel. At the 31 March meeting, the Legal Counsel, speaking as a representative of the Secretary- General, had appealed to the host country to delay the implementation of the programme for a short time.
Host Country Committee - 4 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
In a letter from the representative of the United States (document A/AC.154/309), the host country set forth its own position on the legal aspects of the New York City programme. It reiterated the United States position that driving was not an absolute right, but a privilege that could be withdrawn in case of abuse. The State Department could extend or withhold privileges in a manner to encourage compliance with local law, so long as it did not violate a substantive international law obligation of the host country. The United States, while recognizing its obligation to provide facilities for missions to perform their functions, did not believe that the implementation of the programme would deprive missions of such facilities or interfere with internationally recognized privileges and immunities.
Over three meetings, a great number of speakers addressed the Committee concerning the parking programme. Several delegations described incidents involving specific parking problems and enforcement methods. One such incident, on 20 March, in which a diplomatic vehicle was towed, was reported by the Mission of Côte d'Ivoire. In a letter from the United States Mission dated 27 March and contained as an annex to a 31 March letter to the Committee (document A/AC.154/311), the Mission states that shortly after the incident was reported immediate steps were taken to effect the vehicle's release. The United States also registered a complaint with the appropriate City officials. As a result, the City acknowledged the inappropriateness of its action and made assurances that corrective measures had been taken.
(For further background, see press releases HQ/573 of 27 March, HQ/574 of 31 March and HQ/575 of 1 April.)
Statements
NICOS AGATHOCLEOUS (Cyprus), Chairman of the Committee, said the Secretary-General had met with the Permanent Representative of the United States on 3 April. At the meeting, the Secretary-General had appealed to the United States Government to give positive consideration to the concerns expressed by the diplomatic community.
The Chairman noted that contacts had also taken place between representatives of the host country mission and the United Nations Legal Counsel concerning the legal implications of the New York City Diplomatic Parking Programme.
VICTOR MARRERO (United States) said discussions with the Secretary- General and the United Nations Legal Counsel had indeed taken place. Discussions had also taken place with the City of New York in the hope of revising some aspects of the parking programme to meet some of the concerns expressed by the diplomatic community. The United States Mission had also attempted to assess the effectiveness of the programme and to determine whether the city was fulfilling its obligations. Stressing that it was
Host Country Committee - 5 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
difficult to evaluate the programme fully in the first days of implementation, he called for patience during the early stages.
He said he did not have the specifics of the revisions thus far proposed for the programme, as they had not as yet taken final form. Some of the ideas put forward sought to address some of the legal questions raised by the Legal Counsel. The opinion offered by the Legal Counsel had been given very serious consideration by the host country. While there had been disagreement with some elements of that position, the United States was working to answer some of the concerns raised by the Legal Counsel. More time was needed to complete the evaluation and form the proposals. He hoped that patience and common sense would prevail.
HANS CORELL, United Nations Legal Counsel, said the Secretary-General had discussed the parking situation with United States Permanent Representative Bill Richardson. Subsequent to that meeting, he had personally enjoyed fruitful discussions with the host country on the subject of its obligations to the diplomatic community in New York City. The host country had authority to implement rules regulating parking, and the diplomatic corps was obliged to obey those rules.
The diplomatic community also had obligations to the host country, he said. While he had identified potential problems of diplomatic law as regards the issue, he hoped that, depending on the final outcome of talks, all legal concerns regarding the present situation could be resolved. He could not discuss the matter in more detail, but he was optimistic that legal concerns could be removed.
ALEXANDRE V. ZMEEVSKI (Russian Federation) said that he wished to hear something specific from the host country. Thus far, he had only heard expressions of good intentions. His Government wanted to see something more concrete. What was being proposed and what would be proposed in the future? he asked. The new regulations were in force, and diplomatic missions were trying to do their best to comply with them, he said.
His delegation had been given tickets even in some parking spaces reserved for diplomatic vehicles, he said. Also, cars without diplomatic plates had been parked in those reserved spaces. He wanted to see some clarification from the United States. His Government wanted to know specifically what the host country expected of it. He wondered what corrective measures the host country would undertake.
ELIZABETH WILMSHURST (United Kingdom) welcomed the assurance of the host country, and of the Legal Counsel, that legal concerns over the new programme would be addressed. She also was pleased to see that the new programme would be open to revision and implemented flexibly. While she understood that the host country might not be able to reveal at the present time all details of
Host Country Committee - 6 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
its plans, she asked when it might be ready to do so. It would not be sensible of the Committee to insist upon a decision today, if the host country intended to inform it of its plans in a few days time.
EMILIA CASTRO DE BARISH (Costa Rica) said that she was aware that efforts were under way to make changes in the new parking system. It was not simply a matter of whether or not diplomats had to pay fines; there were profound questions at stake with regard to the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations.
If the new programme would not be enforced rigorously, why put it into force at all? she asked. If the host country was ready to announce that the implementation of the new programme would be deferred, then the General Assembly might defer its response. The Costa Rican Mission had been able to park in spaces reserved for diplomats, but it had only four reserved spaces and, of course, had many more diplomatic vehicles. She, herself, had received two unfair and discriminatory parking citations, including a citation while she had been parked in a parking space reserved for diplomats.
HUBERT LEGAL (France) said the Committee had decided at its last meeting that a decision would be taken on 10 April on the proposal for the General Assembly to examine questions relating to the parking of diplomatic vehicles. The response by the host country was encouraging, but hardly satisfactory. He concurred with the United Kingdom that an actual date should be given for the implementation of any proposed revisions. The specifics of the corrective measures must be given, so the Committee could examine them and respond. It was all very well to call for patience and common sense, but the decision had already been postponed and no specifics had been forthcoming. Specifics of the revisions were necessary to justify any further delay. If those were not forthcoming today, then the Committee, according to its 1 April decision, should act on the proposal to refer the matter to the General Assembly.
Mr. MARRERO (United States) said the host country was dealing with questions that were not fully settled. Multiple parties and multiple issues were involved. The United States was attempting to deal with the three major areas of concern expressed by the Legal Counsel. On the other hand, the City of New York had to be dealt with. Ideas put forward today might have to be revised in light of future discussions with all the parties involved. Specifics were, therefore, not really useful at this time, but more specific proposals could be arrived at in just a few days.
In response to the Russian Federation, he said there were no actual new parking regulations. The enforcement measures for the existing regulations were the new elements in the programme. The difficulties in that regard would be addressed. Enforcement would not be carried out by the State Department in the case of discriminatory ticketing. He appealed once again for a few more days, to enable the revision process to go forward.
Host Country Committee - 7 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
WANG CHENGJUN (China) said that the Committee had been told that it would today receive satisfactory answers from the host country. But the United States, while expressing encouraging words, had requested more time. Of course, the host country could be given more time, but there were limits. New York City should give time to the diplomatic community. It should suspend implementation of the parking plan until the matter was definitively resolved.
Two days ago, a vehicle of the Chinese Mission had received three tickets and had been towed away all in the space of 20 minutes. The vehicle had not been parked in front of a fire hydrant. If that vehicle had violated parking rules, one ticket would have been enough to make that clear. There had certainly been no reason to tow away the vehicle.
CARIDAD YAMIRA CUETO MILIAN (Cuba) said that all that the Committee had heard from the host country had been assurances of future, possible good intentions. The City of New York's new programme had been in force since 1 April. For the past 10 days, there had been inappropriate ticketing of vehicles and even acts of vandalism. Diplomats were being hindered in the performance of their duties and had been forced to complain to the City and to the Permanent Mission of the United States. The so-called "hot line" established by the City had not proved to be effective.
Since 1 April, the City of New York had strictly and arbitrarily enforced the new parking programme. To what extent had the host country truly complied with requests of the Committee? Had the Committee complied with its obligations? If so, was it time to refer the matter to the General Assembly?
Mr. ZMEEVSKI (Russian Federation) said that he had just been called away from the room for an urgent telephone call. A bus of the Russian Federation, which had been parked in a diplomatic parking space between 66th and 67th Streets, together with its driver and passengers, was now being towed away by the New York Police Department.
He requested that the Committee adopt the draft decision that had been tabled by the Russian Federation at the last meeting. If the Committee could not deal with the matter, perhaps it should be put to the Assembly as a whole.
Mr. LEGAL (France) said the primary concern was to reach a solution consistent with international law. The 1 April decision by the Committee was clear. In the absence of specific information the Committee would act on the proposal recommending that the General Assembly consider the parking issue. The proposal granted a week's delay in Assembly consideration for the host country to report that the programme had been deferred. That should be sufficient in light of the United States' request for a delay of a "few days".
Host Country Committee - 8 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
He said it was normal procedure to report to the Assembly following discussion of an issue, so that the Assembly could act. The Committee was limited in its ability to handle difficult matters in a discreet manner. The time for such discretion had passed. It was now a legal issue, which should be referred to the Assembly. The Committee was not a legal body. It was designed to deal with practical matters. It would be entirely appropriate to refer the matter to the Assembly.
Mr. WANG (China) said that if the parking programme could not be suspended, then the Committee must act on the proposal.
Mr. ZMEEVSKI (Russian Federation), addressing the representatives of the city present at the meeting, said he had heard that the Mayor of New York, Rudolph Giuliani, had allegedly announced that the United Nations could leave or more accurately "get out" of New York. He asked the city representatives to corroborate the report.
Mr. MARRERO (United States) said the incident with the Mayor had just been reported to him, so he had no comment. Regarding the specifics of the proposed revisions, he said the legal matters were being dealt with directly with the Legal Counsel. Once the Legal Counsel had been satisfied as to the legal validity of the revisions, then the revisions would be presented to the Committee for a response.
The Committee had in the past dealt with many difficult issues, some more difficult than parking, he said. There had in the past always been a policy to allow time for a consensus to be reached and for the matter to be resolved. Because the issue at hand was considered political, there was now a rush to judgement to refer the matter to the Assembly. It was necessary to answer completely the legal problems, not the political problems.
He stressed that it was not in the interest of the Committee or the United Nations to send such an issue to the Assembly for general debate. It would only bring ridicule on the Organization at a time when there were much greater issues to occupy the attention of the Assembly. Crises in such places as Zaire and the Great Lakes region of Africa were far more deserving of attention than a discussion of diplomatic privileges.
ERIC N'DRY (Côte d'Ivoire) said that the Committee had demonstrated good will. It was now time for the host country to show a little good will, both in words and in deeds. If the City of New York agreed to postpone the imposition of its new rules, the Committee might also postpone action. Otherwise, his Government would endorse the proposal of the Russian Federation.
Host Country Committee - 9 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
CARLOS PEREZ-DESOY (Spain) said that the Committee was not discussing parking. It was discussing compliance with international law and with diplomatic conventions. The host country had repeatedly asked for the Committee's patience. He agreed with other speakers that the Committee should be ready to defer action, should the host country decide to defer imposition of the programme. Otherwise, the Committee should take action.
MOWAFAK MAHMOUD AYOUB (Iraq) expressed support for the proposal of the Russian Federation. The matter should be referred for settlement to a higher body.
Ms. WILMSHURST (United Kingdom) said that if the host country was asking for perhaps four more days, her Government believed that moving the issue to the General Assembly would be an overreaction. She would prefer to keep the matter in the Committee. She asked whether the host country would agree not to implement those areas under discussion which the Legal Counsel had determined to be a question of international law.
Mr. ZMEEVSKI (Russian Federation) said that the draft before the Committee would allow a deferral of action of seven days.
ROBERT MOLLER (United States) said that his Government intended to demonstrate flexibility and expected that the City of New York would do likewise. The best place to debate the problem was in the Committee. If legal impediments could be removed in a matter of days, it would be "foolhardy" to take the matter to the Assembly.
Mr. LEGAL (France) said that if the proposal before the Committee was adopted, and if agreement was reached in the next week as regards those matters that the Legal Counsel had determined to be at variance with international law, there would be no grounds to take the matter to the General Assembly. The real question was whether or not, in today's world, it was appropriate to bring into question the principle of diplomatic immunity.
SOCORRO FLORES LIERA (Mexico) said she hoped the talks being carried out by the host country would produce positive results. Her mission still had not been told of the exact location of the parking spaces assigned to it. The atmosphere of hostility towards the diplomatic community that had developed around the new programme had led to acts of vandalism against diplomatic vehicles. Other concerns about ticketing before 1 April needed to be addressed. The programme should be suspended until it could be properly revised.
Host Country Committee - 10 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
LAMIA MEKHEMAR (Egypt) said the programme was an issue of international law. The United States had asked for a 10-day delay at the last meeting in order to monitor the implementation of the programme. The Committee had agreed to the delay. During those 10 days the city had not honoured its obligations. She cited a negative experience her mission had with the parking authorities. It was time to act on the Russian proposal.
CHOE MYONG NAM (Democratic People's Republic of Korea) said in the past 10 days the concerns expressed by the diplomatic community about the implementation of the new programme had been vindicated. Since its introduction, arbitrary and discriminatory acts by the enforcement officials had increased. In response to the 10-day delay granted, the only response from the city had been the issuance of the parking violations. He cited an example of unjust ticketing by the police. Were such arbitrary acts to be used by the police to do away with the United Nations? The diplomatic community was not a plaything for the police. Unless the host country gave assurances of suspending the programme, the Committee must make a decision.
JOSE EDUARDO MARTINS FELICIO (Brazil) said a debate in the Assembly would be more democratic. The representative of the United States avoided answering most of the questions. The parking programme had tarnished the diplomatic community. The Committee had exhausted its possibilities and it should be referred to the Assembly.
PEDRO NUNEZ MOSQUERA (Cuba) said that the programme clearly contained some elements at variance with international law. It also prevented diplomats from doing their jobs and denied them legitimate rights and privileges. It had been said that the programme was not in force, but it had in fact been in place since 1 April. It had been said that there was no "new" programme, but the 14 March 1997 letter of Mr. Marrero of the United States to the Committee had in fact referred to the "new programme". Diplomats had been told to come to work in taxis and buses. "What else can we expect to hear?" he asked.
The Committee was a subsidiary body of the Assembly in which the veto did not apply, he said. It had explored the possibility of consensus for one month. The proposal of the Russian Federation should be put to a vote.
JOULDYZ L. AKICHEVA (Kazakstan) said that the vast number of difficulties and contradictions faced by diplomats were evidence that mutually acceptable decisions concerning the programme had not been reached. If the situation persisted, Kazakstan would agree with those who had called for the matter to be resolved in the Assembly.
KHABOUJI N'ZAJI LUKABU (Zaire) said that both Mayor Giuliani and Mr. Marrero had stated that the United Nations should pay more attention to Zaire than to parking. He had been at the United Nations for 10 years and during that time had learned that the United States observed international law only
Host Country Committee - 11 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
as it saw fit. Remarks by Mr. Marrero had made clear that he considered the matter under discussion to be a political matter. He wondered why Zaire was being discussed in a meeting on New York City parking. Diplomatic parking spaces were usually limited to the hours between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. But many diplomats worked late at night and on weekends.
DICKY FABRIAN (Indonesia) endorsed the proposal that the matter be brought to the General Assembly.
KINGMANO PHOMMAHAXAY (Lao People's Democratic Republic) said that he could not find anything specific in the remarks of the United States regarding postponement of the new parking programme. Only this morning the cars of his mission had been ticketed while legally parked in diplomatic spaces. One had been ticketed because one wheel was five inches from the sign. Diplomatic parking spaces should have borders painted on them so as to avoid future misunderstandings.
Mr. MOLLER (United States) said the city was being informed of missing signs for parking spaces for each mission. If any illegal summonses had been given to a vehicle before 1 April, the United States Mission was involved in the process and would act accordingly. The United States Government would now oversee the whole matter of improper summonses and the education of enforcement officers. He acknowledged the concerns expressed. There was a good possibility that the legal reservations could be removed in the discussions with the Legal Counsel and the proposed revisions. If the Committee rushed to debate in the Assembly before the Legal Counsel finished examining the proposed revisions, it could be detrimental to the Organization. It was only a matter of a few days before the legal concerns could be resolved.
CONSTANTINE MOUSHOUTAS (Cyprus) said deferral was the only issue to be considered. The Committee had indeed dealt with many more difficult questions. The issue before the Committee was a matter of self-respect. A simple act of deferral could resolve the impasse. In the absence of such deferral, he supported the proposal of the Russian Federation.
Mr. MARRERO (United States) said that if an understanding could be reached with the Legal Counsel on the elements of the programme that had raised legal objections, then those elements would not be carried out. There was no need for the Committee to take action, in light of the potential resolution of the legal concerns.
Mr. CORELL, United Nations Legal Counsel, said his discussions with the United States had aimed at removing the elements that had caused legal objection. He had not yet received an official revised programme. If a revised programme were presented by the host country along the lines discussed, then the legal impediments would be removed. He reiterated that
Host Country Committee - 12 - Press Release HQ/576 185th Meeting (PM) 10 April 1997
the tickets must be justifiable and non-discriminatory and not undermine the credibility of the programme. It was sad to see a message going out that diplomats were not abiding by the law.
Mr. MARRERO (United States) said that in the next few days the host country would present new elements to remove the Legal Counsel's objections and to retain the fundamental objectives of the programme that the City of New York wanted to carry out.
Mr. ZMEEVSKY (Russian Federation) requested that the Committee take a decision on the draft proposal.
Action on Draft
Mr. MARRERO (United States) said that his Government could not join in a consensus decision on the matter.
The Committee adopted the decision by a vote of 10 in favour to one against (United States), with one abstention (United Kingdom).
* *** *