FIFTH COMMITTEE APPROVES TEXT RELATED TO FINANCING OF IRAQ-KUWAIT OBSERVATION MISSION

Press Release
GA/AB/3320

FIFTH COMMITTEE APPROVES TEXT RELATED TO FINANCING OF IRAQ-KUWAIT OBSERVATION MISSION

Committee Discusses Board of Auditors Reports; Concludes Discussion on Oversight Office Reports

The General Assembly would ask the Board of Auditors to undertake a comprehensive audit of the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM), paying particular attention to the payment of mission subsistence allowance, by the terms of a draft resolution approved this morning by the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary). By other terms it would have the Assembly note with deep concern the Administration’s mishandling of the matter of an overpayment of mission subsistence allowance.

By further terms of the draft, which was introduced by the Committee’s Rapporteur, the representative of Poland, without a vote, the Assembly would ask the Secretary-General to submit a comprehensive report on the issue within three months of the adoption of the resolution.

[Mission subsistence allowance is the amount paid, in addition to salary, to meet the special daily expenses incurred by staff on United Nations missions.]

It was important that those who had made errors were punished, and this should be the highest responsibility of the Secretariat, the representative of Kuwait, speaking in explanation of position on the draft, told the Committee.

Accountability without consequences was meaningless, the representative of the United States stated, as the Committee concluded its general discussion of reports of the Office of Oversight Services on financing United Nations peacekeeping missions. Accountability seemed to lack consequences in the United Nations, he added. If mismanagement and abuse of authority were uncovered, the United States expected the Secretary-General to punish those involved.

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees’ (UNHCR) continued slow implementation of the recommendations of the

Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3320 15th Meeting (AM) 26 October 1999

Board of Auditors was cause for concern, the representative of Finland, on behalf of the European Union, said, as the Committee continued its general discussion of the reports of the United Nations Board of Auditors. In the case of the UNHCR, the Union was aware of the difficult operating circumstances under which it operated, but it must carry out the Board’s recommendations promptly, nevertheless.

The representative of Ghana expressed concern at the slow execution and delayed implementation of UNHCR programmes and endorsed the Board’s recommendation that the UNHCR closely monitor the use of available donor contributions to avoid having to return unspent funds.

The representatives of Bangladesh, United States, Ethiopia, Syria, Algeria and Cuba spoke as the Committee concluded its discussion of general reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services. The Chairman of the Joint Inspection Unit, Louis Dominique Ouedraogo, and the Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Services, Karl Paschke, answered Member States’ questions. The United Arab Emirates also spoke on the Oversight Office reports on peacekeeping missions, and the Philippines representative spoke in explanation of position on the UNIKOM draft.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. this afternoon to conclude its general discussion of the reports of the Board of Auditors.

Committee Work Programme

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to continue its general discussion of the reports of the Board of Auditors and of the Office of Internal Oversight Services, and to take action on the matters relating to the financing of United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission (UNIKOM).

It had before it a draft resolution on the financing of UNIKOM (document A/C.5/54/L.12). By the terms of that draft, the Assembly would take note, with deep concern, of the Administration’s mishandling of the matter, and ask the Board of Auditors to undertake a comprehensive audit of UNIKOM, in particular the payment of mission subsistence allowance, as a matter of priority.

It would also ask the Secretary-General to submit a comprehensive report on the issue within three months of the adoption of this resolution, for consideration in the fifty-fourth Assembly’s first resumed session, and decide to continue its consideration at that resumed session. Pending its decision, it would decide that all actions on the issue should be held in abeyance.

[For background on the reports of the Board of Auditors and the reports of the Office of Internal Oversight services, see Press Release GA/AB/3319 of 25 October. For background on the mission subsistence allowance issue at UNIKOM, see Press Release GA/AB/3308 of 4 October.]

Statements

ELIAS LAHDESMAKI (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said the Union noted with concern the continued slow implementation of the recommendations of the Board of Auditors. It was incumbent on management to ensure their timely implementation.

He said the Union was aware of the difficult operating circumstances under which the United Nations High Commission for Refugees (UNHCR) had to operate, but it nevertheless expected the UNHCR to carry out the Board’s recommendations promptly. Effective follow-up was an integral part of any effective organization.

LESLIE K. CHRISTIAN (Ghana) said the Audit Service of Ghana had made his country proud with the high quality of service it had offered the United Nations over the years. He was pleased to note that the UNHCR had generally complied with the recommendations of the Board, but urged the UNHCR to implement the Board’s recommendations to put income recognition for special programmes on an accrual basis, while recognizing contributions to trust funds only when received. This would draw a clear distinction between the two accounts and lead to the exclusion of amounts relating to trust funds being classified as voluntary contributions.

While he understood the reasons the UNHCR had given for failure to secure audit certificates in sufficient time, he shared the Board’s concern that audit reports from implementing partners in respect of $331.5 million were outstanding and would encourage the UNHCR to strengthen efforts to obtain certificates in sufficient time to have assurance that expenditure had been incurred in accord with sub-agreements.

The slow pace of execution and delayed implementation of UNHCR programmes was a cause for concern, he said. He endorsed the Board’s recommendation that the UNHCR closely monitor the use of available donor contributions to avoid having to return unspent funds. The Auditor’s reports gave several instances of deficiencies in the maintenance of accounting records and inadequacies in programme implementation by UNHCR implementing partners; close monitoring of these partners was supported by Ghana.

As a consequence of long delays in financially closing projects, large amounts of cash remained with implementing partners for long periods, resulting in undue benefits to them, he said. The prompt closure of projects was necessary to ensure appropriate budget control and sound financial management; the UNHCR should review completed projects without delay.

RIAZ HAMIDULLAH (Bangladesh) said he had noted with satisfaction the formation of a working group on common services at the country level; he hoped the that the lessons from the field would pave the way for cost streamlining and effective handling of mandated activities. But that must also be matched by sufficient delegation of authority backed up by proper monitoring. Bangladesh also supported suggestions on instituting collaboration with funds and programmes toward the appointment of a unified contractor for various supplies, building a new archival system at all duty stations and undertaking a client satisfaction survey to assess the effects of all those steps.

He said that one way of solving the problem of the use of the regional conference centres in Bangkok and Addis Ababa was the outsourcing of the facilities. But Bangladesh also took note of the Economic and Social Commission in Asia and the Pacific’s (ESCAP) view on the peculiarities prevailing on the ground, and it was incumbent on the Committee to guide the ESCAP secretariat as to how it should best proceed.

THOMAS REPASCH (United States) said the United States appreciated the continued high quality of the Office of Internal Oversight (OIOS) reports. On the report into the Lebanon field office of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), he was pleased to receive such a full report on issues and allegations which had been long simmering. It was also pleasing that the most serious charges were unfounded. He urged managers to take all necessary steps to implement the recommendations in the report.

Regarding the report on allegations of theft of funds by a United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) staff member, the United States had raised this issue under other agenda items, as it was a matter of accountability. Managers should be held accountable for actions they took. He was pleased that the investigation had resulted in action against the individual involved, but was extremely concerned that another responsible party had essentially had no action taken against him. This was a case where the person who supervised the thief reneged on his responsibilities and said he had not supervised that individual because he believed it was against the rules.

That was unacceptable, and the United States would pursue the matter, he said. He understood that the Secretariat was working on actions to purse accountability of managers where there were clear examples of their not carrying out their responsibilities and loss resulted. He would insist on more information about that in the future.

Regarding the report on the problems with an electronic commerce project at UNCTAD, it was a concern to hear serious allegations raised again about UNCTAD’s operations. This raised questions as to whether there were systemic problems with UNCTAD management or staff or both. Perhaps there was a freewheeling policy where people believe that they could do anything they wanted, as there was no threat of action taken against them.

The issue of the setting up of the foundation, described in the report, could have profound effects as the United Nations pursued partnerships with the private sector, he said. He asked how the Secretariat was making sure safeguards were in place to ensure that such things did not happen in future.

The report on the conference centres at the ECA and ESCAP, was troubling, he said. It confirmed the United States’ worst fears that facilities costing some $162 million had not been economically viable. He noted the high vacancy rates reported for the five major meeting rooms, and urged the expeditious implementation of the recommendations of the Oversight Office. However, he would also like to hear more from the Secretariat on what was being done to address this. The United States would like to hear what the Secretariat had in mind to correct the problems and to ensure that they did not continue.

Commenting on the report reviewing the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), he said the United States was pleased to see that the Humanitarian Office had responded well to its challenges. The further recommendations of the Oversight Office should be expeditiously implemented. The United States also appreciated the appropriate comments by the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) on the report on the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs.

Regarding the Oversight Office review of common services, he again urged the expeditious implementation of the recommendations. However, the United States also wished to make a point about the need to ensure that the Organization was in pursuit of the correct goals. There were many opportunities for common services in the United Nations system, but common services were not a goal in themselves. If common services contributed to the effective and efficient operation of the United Nations, they should be pursued. As they were not an end in themselves, any suggestion about common services needed to be subject to considerable analysis.

TAYE TESFAYE (Ethiopia) said the OIOS had pointed out that the capacity of the conference centres at the Economic Commission for Africa (ECA)and ESCAP had exceeded the level of substantive operations they were originally designed to service. He asked why was this so. Both conference centres offered state of the art facilities and were the newest centres in the United Nations system for large scale meetings. The irony was that the Department of Assembly Affairs and Conference Services did not normally consider them as venues for United Nations regional conferences or Secretariat meetings. This was because of General Assembly resolution 40/243 of 1985 which directed United Nations offices and agencies to meet at their respective headquarters in New York and Geneva.

On the question of the technical capabilities of the Addis Ababa centre, he said instructions had been issued for the installation of PBAX telephone lines and an Internet service. Now it was only the establishment of ECA satellite links that was under discussion.

TAMMAM SULAIMAN (Syria) said that the Secretariat did not hold enough conferences at the centres in Bangkok and Addis Ababa. The United Nations must use all its centres all over the world, he stressed. The Secretariat was hesitant about using the Nairobi Centre and supporting it with a full range of facilities. Regarding the accountability of managers, he stressed the code of conduct for United Nations personnel adopted a couple of years ago had stated that accountability was very important to managers. The OIOS could build on that.

He stressed that the Oversight Office’s conclusions had to be made public after investigations and not during them; there was a case of double standards here. In the case of the investigation into the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force (UNDOF), if the people investigated had been found to be innocent, then it should have been stated very clearly that this was the case, and the Committee should know what the conclusion of the investigation was. There had to be a common strategy in connection with any issue under investigation.

DJAMEL MOKTEFI (Algeria) said that in the case of a report on procurement for Angola, there had been certain inconsistencies in the application of disciplinary measures. But in the case of follow-up, perhaps a more consistent policy could be applied in terms of following up the recommendations the OIOS.

In the case of a long-term electronic commerce project, Algeria shared the recommendations of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) in saying that it was for Member States themselves to establish a direction for such a project. The risks for the United Nations of interacting with the private sector must be carefully considered.

On the review of common services, Algeria shared the views of the chairman of the JIU, he said. Studies by the various bodies should be used by all other bodies. Algeria was also concerned about some important outstanding problems with the management of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

DULCE BUERGO RODRIGUEZ (Cuba) noted almost half of the Oversight Office reports introduced yesterday had been published very late, just prior to their introduction for discussion. Adequate time for consideration of matters under the Fifth Committee’s competence was of great importance, and delays in issuance made careful study of reports difficult.

She raised the question of difficulties arising from inaccurate or conflicting information in Oversight Office complaints, she said. Regarding the audit at the United Nations Angola Verification Mission (UNAVEM), she asked what procedure was used to verify information used in preparing Oversight Office recommendations. Particular attention should be given to ensuring that information was fully verified and accurate in Oversight Office reports.

The audit carried of the conference centres at the ECA and ESCAP should have been discussed under the Committee’s agenda item on the pattern of conferences. The General Assembly had reiterated its request that greater use be made of facilities in Africa, and regional commissions were not exempt from this. Due attention should be give to the matter by the Fifth Committee.

Under-Secretary-General for Internal Oversight Service, KARL PASCHKE, then responded to Member States questions. He first addressed the Bangladesh representative’s request -- regarding the inspection of the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs -- for an explanation of the perceived over reliance on the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and how the Oversight Office believed this could be avoided in future.

In the course of interviews used to prepare the report, the Oversight Office had touched base with all the relevant humanitarian agencies, he said. Some agencies felt they had been left out in the early stages of planning of humanitarian missions. He believed it was a valid recommendation by the Oversight Office to ask that greater effort be made by the OCHA to immediately bring together all the agencies that could be relevant. That was the meaning of the recommendation.

Further clarification of the role of the UNDP Resident Representative in the field was required, he said. The Secretary-General intended that all agencies should engage in the best possible coordination in the field. Further improvement and streamlining of the coordination function was needed.

Regarding matters raised by the representative of the United States, most must be addressed by staff from the operative areas of the Secretariat, he said. However, he wished to state that he had recently held intensive discussion with the head of UNCTAD, in which they had analyzed and assessed the two cases investigated by the Oversight Office related to that organization and lessons to be learned. The UNCTAD Secretary-General, Rubens Ricupero, had pledged that he would focus his personal attention on administrative and managerial matters, as he realized how important they were. He was confident that the UNCTAD would vigorously deal with the lessons that could be drawn from those two cases, he added.

Regarding the representative of Ethiopia’s comments on conference facilities at the regional commissions, he said he was pleased with progress made at the ECA since 1995, and believed it had become one of the most effective and vibrant economic commissions.

He had first observed in 1995 -- and this had been confirmed last week -- that the structure of the economic commissions did not really prepare them to effectively manage and aggressively market conference centres. It was beyond the resources and expertise of such a commission to manage a centre that could only become self-sustaining if its facilities were marketed in a very energetic way. The Oversight Office recommendations made on the ECA and ESCAP centres were predicated on this observation. The way the conference centres needed to be marketed could only be provided by commercial managerial experience.

The Executive Secretaries of both commissions were fully aware of the need to do more marketing of conference centres, but it was a duty of the Organization in general, he said. The Oversight Office would continue to monitor the situation and push for relevant action.

Responding to comments by the representative of Syria, he said that in the investigations referred to the Oversight Office reports were only submitted when its work was completed, and the Office had meticulously avoided even identifying the mission in which one investigation occurred to ensure that due process and protection of individual rights were secure. Additionally, the Office had not reported any identifying details during its investigations.

The representative of Syria had suggested that Oversight Office information should be used to correct mass media stories that tended to blow issues out of proportion or spread false information, he said. He was mindful of the problems caused by mass media coverage of allegations of irregularities, but it would be expecting too much of the Oversight Office to see it taking an active role in correcting inconsistencies in mass media stories. The Office made a point of not discussing particular cases with the media and had not cooperated with the media on investigation stories, he said. The Office had not informed the media of investigations, because it was against its terms of reference and the procedures of the Office, as well as the philosophy it observed in work.

Regarding the representative of Algeria’s questions on the UNCTAD trade point project, he agreed that the relationship between the United Nations and the private sector was a sensitive subject that needed thought before initiatives were taken. This was the philosophy of the Oversight Office.

Regarding the Oversight Office report on the common services report, he was apologetic about the absence of more express references to the JIU report on the same subject, but wished to assure Member States that the Inspection Unit report had been extensively used in the preparation of the Oversight Office report. He had never been fearful of redundancy in addressing important subjects that had already been dealt with by the JIU, as the two entities had different mandates. The Inspection Unit mandate was much wider and covered the specialized agencies. Sometimes the Oversight Office looked at issues in tandem with the Inspection Unit.

Responding to Algeria’s question about the use of the phrase “shared political goals”, he explained that this referred to policies in the field of humanitarian action and to the importance of different agencies ensuring that their policy goals were in sync and congruous.

Regarding the Oversight Office report about a procurement matter in Angola, he explained that the Office had recommended disciplinary measures based on its findings, but could not implement or comment on such measures, as the Office was still in discussion with management on the matter. However, the Oversight Office was making sure its recommendations were taken seriously. He hoped further developments would be forthcoming.

Responding to the representative of Cuba’s comments about the lateness of publication of some Oversight Office reports, he said that sometimes it was very difficult to meet the deadlines because of a factor that was in the interest of delegations –- the intensive dialogue that the Office undertook with its clients and other parties. He tried to avoid delays, but sometimes it was more important to capture all opinions and comments to ensure a report was factually correct and that clients supported the recommendations that it made.

With some issues, this took longer than it did with others, he said, with the result that publication was delayed. He apologized for this, but stressed lateness was due to the complexity of the work.

The representative of Cuba had also commented on the UNAVEM report, he said. The information contained in that report had been gathered in the most professional way, by observing all procedures, and the findings had been fully verified. He must, however, relate a reality of the relationship between oversight and management. Sometimes auditors and management had different views. Where this was the case, clarification must be sought. Efforts to resolve the differences, did not always lead to both parties seeing eye to eye on facts.

He emphasized that the Oversight Office was fully committed to observing standards and operation procedures to ensure it submitted reliable and accurate reports. The Chairman of the JIU, LOUIS DOMINIQUE OUEDRAOGO, said the representative of Algeria had asked what the point was of coordinating meetings between oversight bodies. Such coordination meetings were useful and the approach followed by both bodies was different. But the cooperation should take into account the need to provide greater complementarity in preparing programmes of work.

Mr. SULAIMAN (Syria) said that such coordination meetings between the JIU and the OIOS had been welcomed in the past by his country, and it was fully understandable that there was a complete separation of work between the two units. His delegation had full confidence in the JIU because it was an entity elected by the Member States.

He said Mr. Paschke’s answers were not definite; he had not concentrated on the main Syrian question, which was that the employees of the UNDOF had been exonerated and that should have been mentioned in a report by the OIOS. From a legal point of view, a charge was the beginning of a case and not the end of a case; the charges had been made and then the issue had not been discussed in any report of the OIOS. It was important for findings to be published in a subsequent report. His delegation had raised the issue for three consecutive years. Mr. Paschke had promised the Fifth Committee that the findings would be presented to it. The investigation was over now, he thought, but what was the finding? He just wanted to know if the investigation was over and if the staff had been exonerated, and felt that this should be published in an OIOS report. The matter needed to be closed, but the Committee was still waiting for a result. He reserved the right to raise the issue every time OIOS reports were discussed. The OIOS had not taken into consideration the need to protect the rights of staff. As the representative of Cuba had said, information received by OIOS, once verified, should be published in a United Nations document and not left pending.

Mr. PASCHKE said he was at a loss to add to his earlier comments on the issue. The last paragraph of the report had clearly given information about the disciplinary action taken by management upon the findings of the OIOS. He said that if Syria was talking about the case that had to do with the falsification of documents, one staff member had been dismissed on the basis of the OIOS investigation and another had been demoted. But those reports had not been on the agenda, so he could not give any more details for the moment. He had noted with some regret that Syria had expressed full confidence in the work of the JIU but not the OIOS; that was unfortunate because the OIOS had been trying to do its work in the interests of all Member States.

Mr. SULAIMAN (Syria) said it was true that Syria had expressed confidence in the work of the JIU but not the OIOS. There had been many comments in past meetings which showed that his delegation was not satisfied with the work of the OIOS. An example concerned reduction of staff in a particular agency; that was not within the mandate of OIOS. Another had to do with the way OIOS had judged seminars on decolonization; the seminars had been as part of the decade of decolonization.

Mr. Paschke had not answered his question about the UNDOF case, he said. The OIOS had not revealed whether the staff concerned had been exonerated; he again asked whether or not the UNDOF staff had been exonerated. In an official meeting, he hoped that the management would mention its findings, and Syria would raise the issue again and again until and unless the OIOS responded.

Statements on Administrative and Budgetary Aspects of peacekeeping operations

JUMA KHAMEES BIN HUKAIM (United Arab Emirates) said peacekeeping operations were highly important. Staff of missions faced increasing difficulties as a result of non-payment of assessed peacekeeping contribution and cross-borrowing, which impacted on the United Nations role in peacekeeping. The level of unpaid assessments was high despite a decrease in peacekeeping assessments. Member States must reaffirm their commitment to peacekeeping and to the means of financing it.

He said the United Arab Emirates paid its peacekeeping assessments in full because it believed they were a responsibility, and it also contributed troops, equipment and humanitarian teams to missions. Its latest contribution was to the Kosovo mission.

He called for a renewal of Member States commitment to peacekeeping, for a strengthened role for peacekeeping, and for improvements in the processes of budgeting, accountability and transparency.

THOMAS REPASCH (United States), speaking on the Oversight Office audit report on ration contracts, said he appreciated the findings and believed the Secretariat should implement the recommendations. The recommendations were long overdue and implementing them without delay would be very helpful. He agreed that standard operating procedures and appropriate training were needed and that effective contract management was increasingly important.

However, the United States was concerned by the Department of Peacekeeping Operations' response, he said. It had stated that such improvements would only be possible when resources were made available. That suggested that the Organization did not have the resources to deal with mismanagement. Good management should have been an intrinsic part of the United Nations from the beginning, and there could be no excuse for not taking preventive action against mismanagement. There could be no foot dragging when it came to addressing such problems.

Regarding the report on the liquidation of peacekeeping operations, he agreed that liquidation was as important a stage of missions as the startup and operations phases, he said, notably because it exposed the United Nations to potential loss. The United States was glad to see improvements had been made, and wished to encourage the pursuit of improvements in other areas where progress was still needed, in part by developing provisional guidelines. Lessons learned from past liquidations should be included in the procedures. Local officials should be delegated to recover monies owed by mission personnel to the United Nations. The Department of Peacekeeping Operations must ensure adequate training of mission personnel.

The United States was pleased that the Secretary-General had stated that measures had already been initiated to address problems identified in the review.

Regarding the report on the reward of a fresh ration contract in peacekeeping mission, the Oversight Office had said there had been mismanagement and abuse of authority, and that United Nations funds were thus wasted, he said. Disciplinary actions had resulted from the findings. He realized that the decision was being appealed, but believed such action would function as a deterrent. If more cases of mismanagement and abuse were uncovered, the United States expected the Secretary- General to punish those involved. This was an issue of accountability. Accountability without consequences was meaningless, he said, and the United States believed that this was what appeared to happen in the United Nations.

Action on Financing of UNIKOM

JAN JAREMCZUK (Poland), the Committee’s Rapporteur, introduced the draft resolution (document A/L.5/54/L.12).

The representative of Kuwait said a small editorial correction was required in a preambular paragraph in the printed Arabic text of the resolution.

The draft was then approved without a vote.

Speaking in explanation of position, the representative of Kuwait said this was an interim resolution pending the issue being discussed again in the resumed session. However, it was important that those who had made the errors be punished and this should be the highest responsibility of the Secretariat. The matters related to malpractice; therefore, the Auditors had been requested to audit the mission as a matter of priority. The comprehensive report from the Secretary-General called for in the draft resolution should be more detailed and more objective than previous reports, he added.

The representative of the Philippines shared the concern of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) on misadministration, and urged the Administration to ensure that due process was followed.

* *** *