ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL RECOMMENDS REVISED IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA FOR LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRY LIST

Press Release
ECOSOC/5880

ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL RECOMMENDS REVISED IDENTIFICATION CRITERIA FOR LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRY LIST

Also Elects New Members to World Food Programme Board, Accounting Standards Expert Group; Considers World Court Advisory Opinion

The Economic and Social Council requested the Committee for Development Policy to recommend revised criteria for the identification of the least developed countries as soon as possible, so that the review and decision on the list of those countries could be completed by the end of next year, according to one of two draft resolutions adopted this morning by the Council.

By further terms of the text, adopted as orally amended without a vote, the Council asked the Secretary-General to facilitate an expert group meeting of members of the Committee for Development Policy in January/February 2000, in order to enable them to carry out the necessary diagnostic testing and simulations of the proposed criteria for the designation of least developed country status, in particular the economic vulnerability index.

According to a draft on the Joint Inspection Unit report on the review of the Administrative Committee on Coordination (ACC), also adopted without a vote, the Council would note the measures under way to enhance the functioning of the ACC and its contribution to greater unity of purpose and programme coherence and impact within the United Nations system. It would welcome, in particular, the recent initiatives of the Committee to strengthen its interactions with intergovernmental bodies, and invite it to consider ways in which its members could maximize their support to the Council in the exercise of its responsibilities for system-wide guidance and coordination.

Also today, the Council elected, by acclamation, five members of the Executive Board of the World Food Programme: Swaziland, Iran, Mexico, France and Japan; and two members of the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting: France and Malta. As Denmark would be unable to complete its term of office on the Board as of January 2000, Norway was elected to complete Denmark’s term of office, which expires on 31 December 2001.

The Council also considered the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the immunity from legal process of a Special Rapporteur of the

Economic and Social Council - 1a - Press Release ECOSOC/5880 51st Meeting (AM) 16 December 1999

Commission on Human Rights. The Opinion, rendered at the Council's request, found that the Special Rapporteur, Dato' Param Cumaraswamy (Malaysia) was entitled to immunity from legal process. The Court concluded that the Malaysian Government was obligated to communicate the Advisory Opinion to the Malaysian courts, in order that Malaysia's international obligations be given effect and Mr. Cumaraswamy's immunity be respected.

In that connection, the Under-Secretary-General and Legal Counsel, Hans Corell, told the Council he wished to "set the record straight", as the matter had involved the fundamental interests of the United Nations in protecting the legal framework of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. The immunity from legal process of special rapporteurs, as experts on United Nations missions, was "neither absolute nor unlimited", but "strictly functional" and granted to experts in the interests of the United Nations and not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves. Such privileges and immunities, pursuant to the Convention, had been reproduced in the Malaysian legislation. Also, in accordance with the Convention, the Advisory Opinion should be accepted as decisive by the parties.

A letter issued yesterday by the Secretary-General on the implementation of the Advisory Opinion appealed to the Malaysian Government to issue a certificate to give effect to Mr. Cumaraswamy's immunity from legal process, in order to avoid further financial burden on the United Nations and, ultimately, the Malaysian Government. The United Nations had submitted a claim for reimbursement to that Government for the legal expenses it has paid on Mr. Cumaraswamy’s behalf -- $110,996.91 -- which would continue to accumulate in light of the ongoing proceedings.

The representative of Malaysia said the case had involved suits between private parties, of which the Government of Malaysia was not a part. His country sought to comply with the Advisory Opinion, but the Government could not direct either the Malaysian courts or the concerned parties to fully accept the Advisory Opinion, as the judicial system was an independent authority under the Malaysian Constitution. Moreover, the matter was particularly sensitive since, as the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Mr. Cumaraswamy's role was to monitor the independence of judges and lawyers. A decision about issuing the certificate requested by the United Nations would be determined by the Malaysian Government "at the appropriate time". The Government had a right to wait and observe what actions were taken by the parties and the Court in each case before the United Nations could be informed about its next steps.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union, the representative of Finland expressed concern over the fact that Malaysia had so far failed to abide by its obligation under the General Convention to accept as decisive the Advisory Opinion of the Court. She called upon the Government of Malaysia to fully cooperate with the Secretary-General and to ensure that the international obligations of Malaysia were met, and that the immunity from legal process of Mr. Cumaraswamy was respected.

Economic and Social Councill - 1b - Press Release ECOSOC/5880 51ST Meeting (AM) 16 December 1999

Also, the Council decided to postpone its consideration of international cooperation in tax matters until its 2000 substantive session.

The Council President, Francesco Paolo Fulci (Italy), made concluding remarks at the completion of the Council’s work for 1999. The Vice-President of the Council, Alfonso Valdivieso, also spoke.

Statements were made by the representatives of New Zealand, Canada, Bangladesh and Fiji.

The Economic and Social Council will meet again to convene its 2000 substantive session.

Council Work Programme

The Economic and Social Council met this morning to consider two draft resolutions on the Joint Inspection Unit on the Administrative Committee on Coordination (document E/1999/L.61), and the programme of work for the Committee on Development Policy (document E/1999/L.62 ).

For consideration of the drafts, the Council had before it notes of the Secretary-General (documents E/1999/123 and Add.1) transmitting the report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Review of the Administrative Committee on Coordination and its machinery”, and comments of the Secretary-General and the Administrative Committee on Coordination (ACC) on that report.

The Council was also expected to review the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on immunity from legal process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights (document E/1999/121), for which it was scheduled to hear a statement by the Legal Counsel, Hans Corell. In that connection, it had before it two letters from the Secretary-General to the President of the Council (documents E/1999/121 and E/1999/124 ).

Also expected today were the elections of five members of the Executive Board of the World Food Programme (WFP), and two members of the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting.

Summary of Draft Resolutions

According to the draft on the Joint Inspection Unit report on the review of the Administrative Committee on Coordination (document E/1999/L.61), the Council would note the measures under way to enhance the functioning of the ACC and its contribution to greater unity of purpose and programme coherence and impact within the United Nations system, and to reinforce secretarial support to the Committee through the Office for Inter-Agency Affairs. It would invite the Committee to improve its capacity for promoting inter-agency cooperation and complementarities within the United Nations system.

The Council would welcome, in particular, the recent initiatives taken by the Committee to strengthen its interactions with intergovernmental bodies, and invite it to consider ways in which its members could maximize their support to the Council in the exercise of its responsibilities for system-wide guidance and coordination. It would reaffirm, in particular, its appreciation for the efforts of the ACC and its standing machinery to assist the work of the Council and encourage it and the United Nations system to pursue and deepen their efforts in that area.

By further terms of the text, the Committee would be invited to consider ways in which its annual reports could contribute to the above-mentioned effort by bringing to the Council’s attention major developments in United Nations agencies and organizations of system-wide interest, as well as steps taken by the Committee and its subsidiary machinery to enhance system-wide effectiveness, particularly as a follow-up to recommendations and directives of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council.

The Committee would be invited to give special attention, in its annual overview report for 1999, to progress being made towards system-wide coordinated management of information, including the role and contribution of its Information Systems Coordination Committee, pursuant to the recommendation of the Joint Inspection Unit report.

The draft text on the report of the Committee for Development Policy (document E/1999/L.62) would welcome the report of the Committee on its first session, the views contained therein regarding the criteria for the identification of the least developed countries, and the recognition that vulnerability should be explicitly taken into account in the identification criteria for least developed countries.

By further terms of the text, the Council would request the Secretary- General to facilitate an expert group meeting of members of the Committee in January/February 2000, in order to enable them to carry out the necessary diagnostic testing and simulations of the proposed criteria for the designation of least developed country status, in particular the economic vulnerability index as contained in an annex of the report. It would also request the expert group to review and analyse the format and content of the “vulnerability profiles” developed by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD).

The Council would further request the Committee for Development Policy to continue its dialogue with other international organizations working on vulnerability issues, and encourage those organizations to communicate their views on the proposed economic vulnerability index to the Committee. The Committee would also be requested to recommend revised criteria for the identification of the least developed countries for the consideration of the Council as soon as possible, but no later than the substantive session of 2000, so that the review and decision on the list of the least developed countries could be completed by the end of 2000.

The Committee would further be requested to include, in its report to the Council in 2000, its views on the theme for the high-level segment of the Council in 2000, namely “development and international cooperation in the twenty-first century: the role of information technology in the context of a knowledge-based global economy”. The Committee would also be requested to collaborate in the preparation of a draft text on an international development strategy for the first decade of the new millennium.

Secretary-General's Letters

On the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the difference relating to immunity from legal process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, the Council had before it a letter from the Secretary-General to the President of the Council (document E/1999/121), according to which on 29 April 1999, the Court upheld the Secretary-General's finding that the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, Dato' Param Cumaraswamy, was entitled to immunity from legal process. The Court also concluded that the Government of Malaysia had the obligation to communicate the Advisory Opinion to the Malaysian courts. In that regard, the Solicitor- General of Malaysia had assured the Court that her country fully recognizes the relevant provisions of the General Convention, which accords binding quality to the Advisory Opinion of the Court.

However, proceedings in the four civil suits against Mr. Cumaraswamy have continued in the Malaysian civil courts. Moreover, Malaysian judicial authorities proceeded to dismiss Mr. Cumaraswamy's application to set aside one of the suits and ordered him to file a defence for purposes of a full trial on the merits of the case. Alluding to Mr. Cumaraswamy's case, the Prime Minister of Malaysia said that the United Nations confers upon its special rapporteurs absolute and unlimited immunity, and that the United Nations expects the Government of Malaysia to interfere with the independence of the Malaysian judiciary.

Also, according to the letter, the immunity from legal process of special rapporteurs, as experts on missions of the United Nations, is neither absolute nor unlimited. Accorded to experts on missions, in article VI of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, it is strictly functional in respect of words spoken or written, and acts done by them in the course of the performance of their mission. Malaysia has an obligation to give effect to the terms of the Convention, according to which the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice shall be accepted as decisive by the parties. The International Court of Justice and the Economic and Social Council have called upon the Government of Malaysia to give effect to its international legal obligations in this regard. If the Government of Malaysia intervenes to give effect to Dato' Param Cumaraswamy's immunity from legal process, such an intervention would be in accordance with both Malaysian and international law.

A further letter of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the Advisory Opinion , dated 15 December (document E/1999/124), states that the United Nations has maintained that, as Mr. Cumaraswamy was acting in the course of the performance of his mission when he spoke the words giving rise to the subject proceedings, the United Nations is obliged to indemnify him for any costs, expenses or damages arising out of those proceedings. The United Nations has also maintained the position the Malaysian Government is ultimately responsible for those costs, expenses or damages.

The letter states that the Court’s Advisory Opinion confirmed those positions and upheld the Secretary-General’s assertion that Mr. Cumaraswamy was acting in the course of the performance of his mission for the United Nations. The Court also found that he must be held financially harmless from any costs imposed by the Malaysian courts, in particular taxed costs. It is the Secretary-General’s view that such costs, within the meaning of the Court’s Advisory Opinion, include all legal expenses imposed on Mr. Cumaraswamy by virtue of the Court’s orders and proceedings in the Malaysian courts. The United Nations has therefore submitted a claim for reimbursement to the Malaysian Government for the legal expenses it has paid on Mr. Cumaraswamy’s behalf, which currently total $110,996.91. Those expenses will continue to accumulate in light of ongoing proceedings.

Therefore, the letter states, the Government’s intervention, by issuing a certificate to give effect to Mr. Cumaraswamy’s immunity from legal process, will avoid further financial burden on the United Nations and, ultimately, the Government of Malaysia.

Introduction of Reports

PATRIZIO M. CIVILI, Assistant Secretary-General for Policy Coordination and Inter-Agency Affairs, and Secretary of the Administrative Committee on Coordination, introduced the report of the Joint Inspection Unit on the review of the ACC and its machinery. Addressing the work of the Committee itself and its interactions with the Economic and Social Council, he said the concept of coordination was central to the Council’s mandate, as well as to the Committee. Over the years, that concept had had many interpretations and occasionally misinterpretations. Sometimes, it had been pointed to as an illustration of United Nations centralizing ambitions vis-à-vis the agencies. At other times, it had been used to illustrate the weaknesses of the links that bound the system. Yet what the authors of the United Nations Charter had had in mind by “coordination” was quite unambiguous.

Defined by the Charter, “coordination” was not only one of the main responsibilities of the Council, but also the basic way in which the United Nations was intended to go about meeting its own objectives in respect of economic and social cooperation. The Charter encompassed the requirement to respect the competencies and prerogatives of specialized agencies; and, at the same time, the capacity of the United Nations to point to certain common directions for the work of the agencies.

In terms of the organs and bodies responsible for inter-agency, coordination, “coordination” could and should be a win-win proposition, he continued. His observations were that the Committee and the Economic and Social Council had always drawn strength from each other. The Council, in the exercise of its coordination role, could only benefit from a strong and effective Committee. The capacity of the Committee to advance system-wide coordination was, in many ways, a function of the intergovernmental environment within which it operated, and the Council had a central role in shaping that environment. Successful coordination could not simply be achieved in a policy vacuum. It required the development of a coherent common framework that would guide the system in converging directions. The framework, in its turn, should be based on the policies and actions of the agencies themselves, although it must of course transcend them.

The most telling demonstration of those points was the impact of the global United Nations conferences of the 1990s on coordination matters, he said. In many ways, they constituted a turning point in the process of strengthening both the Economic and Social Council and the Administrative Committee on Coordination. The policy consensus that those conferences represented provided a solid framework of objectives on which the Council could base its coordination recommendations on overarching goals -– chief among them poverty eradication. In terms of process, perhaps the main distinguishing feature of those conferences and their follow-up, particularly in the Council, had been their inclusive, participatory character.

The reforms of both Committee and Council were already under way, he said. The process of reform was helping to reinvent coordination, not in terms of the rather sterile debate on centralization versus decentralization, but back to the original –- comprehensive and balanced -– meaning of the Charter. A more continuous dialogue with the Committee was crucial. A new commitment on the part of the Committee members towards elaboration and development of a common framework was needed. New challenges arising from globalization should be met. The Committee appreciated the recognition in the report of the progress made. There was no sense of complacency. It was embarking on a new review of its work, and the report would make an important contribution to that review.

The Council then adopted the draft on the report of the Joint Inspection Unit without a vote.

Turning to the item on international cooperation on tax matters, the Council President, FRANCESCO PAOLO FULCI (Italy), commented on the report of the ninth meeting of the Ad Hoc Group of Experts on International Cooperation in Tax Matters, held in New York from 3 to 7 May.

He said that during its substantive session, the report of the Secretary- General (document E/1999/84) had been submitted to the Economic and Social Council for consideration, and some experts submitted further substantive comments under the review of the Secretariat. In light of the ongoing consultations on those comments within the Ad Hoc Group of Experts, and after agreement in formal and informal consultations, he proposed that the Council postpone further that agenda item to the 2000 substantive session.

Concerning the draft resolution on the report of the Committee for Development Policy (document E/1999/L.62), the representative of New Zealand said the last line of operative paragraph 5 had been negotiated very carefully in informal consultations. As such, the line should read as follows: “… the least developed countries could be completed by the end of 2000”.

Mr. Fulci then postponed consideration of the draft, pending its circulation in all languages.

He then introduced the United Nations Legal Counsel, Hans Corell, to address the question of the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on the difference relating to immunity from legal process of a Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights (document E/1999/121).

HANS CORELL, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and Legal Counsel, said the matter of the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on legal immunity of a Special Rapporteur of the Human Rights Commission had involved the fundamental interests of the United Nations in protecting the legal framework of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. The Advisory Opinion of 29 April had upheld the Secretary-General's finding that Dato' Param Cumaraswamy was entitled to immunity from legal process, and concluded that the Malaysian Government was obligated to communicate the Advisory Opinion to the Malaysian courts in order that the country's international obligations be given effect and Mr. Cumaraswamy's immunity be respected. The Council, in its resolution 1999/64, had unanimously stressed Malaysia's obligation to make further efforts in that regard.

He said that the statement made by the Prime Minister of Malaysia for the current General Assembly session indicated that the Malaysian Government had considered the efforts of the United Nations to give effect to the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, to which Malaysia was a party, as an extension of absolute immunity to the Special Rapporteur, and as a requirement that the Government interfere with the independence of the Malaysian judiciary in contravention of its own laws and of international law. Remarkably, however, the Prime Minister had failed to make any reference to the Court's Advisory Opinion.

He said he wished to "set the record straight". The immunity from legal process of special rapporteurs, as experts on United Nations missions, was "neither absolute nor unlimited". The immunity from legal process accorded experts on missions was "strictly functional" in respect of words, spoken or written, and acts undertaken by them in the course of the performance of their mission. Moreover, such privileges and immunities were granted to experts in the interests of the United Nations, not for the personal benefit of the individuals themselves. Further, the privileges and immunities accorded experts on missions pursuant to the Convention had been reproduced in the Malaysian legislation, giving effect to that country's ratification of the Convention. Also pursuant to the Convention, the Court's Advisory Opinion should be accepted as decisive by the parties.

When an executive intervened in the national courts in order to give effect to its government's international treaty obligations, such intervention did not constitute interference with the independence of the judiciary, he went on. Malaysian law recognized and codified that principle, insofar as it stipulated that the Minister for Foreign Affairs might certify in writing any fact relating to a question concerning the entitlement of privileges and immunities. Malaysian law further provided that a certificate given under that section of the law was evidence of the facts asserted. The Government's intervention to give effect to the Special Rapporteur's immunity from legal process, therefore, neither interfered with the independence of the Malaysian judiciary nor violated Malaysian or international law.

Based on the foregoing, he said the Secretary-General maintained that the Malaysian Government should take the necessary steps to implement the Advisory Opinion by issuing a written certificate confirming that the Court had upheld the Secretary-General's finding that Mr. Cumaraswamy was entitled to immunity from legal process, and that Malaysia had an obligation to give effect to that immunity. In that connection, the Court had also found that Mr. Cumaraswamy must be held financially harmless from any costs imposed by the Malaysian courts, in particular taxed costs. The Secretary-General had held that the costs imposed by the Malaysian courts within the meaning of the Court's Opinion had included all legal expenses imposed on the Special Rapporteur by virtue of the Court order and proceedings in the Malaysian courts.

Continuing, he said that according to the Advisory Opinion, those costs were ultimately the responsibility of the Malaysian Government. As such, the United Nations had submitted a claim for reimbursement to the Malaysian Government for the legal expenses it had paid thus far on behalf of Mr. Cumaraswamy in connection with the proceedings in the four lawsuits. Those expenses, which had been accumulating since January 1997, currently amounted to more than $110,000. As proceedings continued, the legal expenses would continue to accumulate, and in the event the Malaysian courts ruled against Mr. Cumaraswamy, substantial damages might be awarded.

He said it should be recalled that the plaintiffs in those lawsuits had sought damages approximating $24 million from which the United Nations must indemnify Mr. Cumaraswamy, and for which the Organization would seek reimbursement from the Malaysian Government. The Government's issuance of a certificate to give effect to the immunity from legal process, therefore, would avoid further financial burden on the United Nations and, ultimately, the Government of Malaysia.

Once the Malaysian Government implemented the Advisory Opinion and the competent courts dismissed the four lawsuits, the plaintiffs would not be left without recourse with respect to their grievances, he explained. In accordance with the Convention, the United Nations must make provisions for appropriate modes of settlement of such disputes. Unless it was agreed by the parties to have recourse to another mode of settlement, it had been the established practice of the Organization to submit disputes with third parties to arbitration.

He noted that Malaysia had, time and time again, demonstrated its commitment to the United Nations; it was an active member of the Security Council and an important contributor to current peacekeeping efforts. In view of that country's "impeccable" record, he said the Secretary-General would again appeal to the Government to make the necessary efforts to give effect to the Convention, the Advisory Opinion and the Council resolution. The Secretary- General was concerned that the Advisory Opinion of the Court, the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, was "promptly implemented", and he hoped that Member States shared his concerns in that regard. If Member States required further clarification, the Legal Counsel would remain at their disposal.

The representative of Canada said he appreciated the efforts of the Legal Counsel to keep the Council informed. The information announced today had not called for any particular action just now by the Council, but his country shared the concern of the Secretary-General regarding the lack of progress in ensuring compliance with the Advisory Opinion. He said the Council was duty-bound to do everything in its authority to encourage compliance by the Malaysian Government. He strongly supported any and all efforts undertaken towards that goal. Until the matter was resolved to everyone’s satisfaction, the Secretary-General would, hopefully, keep the Council informed of developments in a timely manner.

Mr. FULCI said the Council would remain seized of the matter.

MARIANNE MAKINEN (Finland), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said it should be noted that the Solicitor-General of Malaysia had explicitly assured the International Court of Justice on 10 December “that Malaysia fully recognized the provisions of Section 30 of the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, which accords binding quality to the Advisory Opinion of this Court”. Following the Advisory Opinion by the International Court of Justice in April 1999, the Economic and Social Council adopted resolution 1999/64, in which it took note of the stated commitment of the Government of Malaysia to abide by the Advisory Opinion.

According to the letter dated 19 October 1999, she continued, despite the earlier announcements by the Government of Malaysia that it fully recognized the binding character of the Advisory Opinion of the Court, four civil suits against Param Cumaraswamy were still ongoing in the Malaysian courts. The European Union remained concerned that Malaysia had so far failed to abide by its obligation under the General Convention to accept the Advisory Opinion of the Court as decisive. It called upon the Government of Malaysia to fully cooperate with the Secretary-General, and to ensure that the international obligations of Malaysia were met and that the immunity from legal process of Mr. Cumaraswamy was respected. Malaysia had not yet made full use of its national legal framework for giving effect to his immunity.

The European Union was fully supportive of the efforts of the Legal Counsel to resolve the matter, she said. The Council had a responsibility to continue to follow the matter closely until it was resolved. The Union looked forward to receiving further information on the outcome of contacts with the Government of Malaysia. In conclusion she requested some additional information on the case from the Legal Counsel, and asked about financial implications of the case for the United Nations.

MOHAMMAD KAMA (Malaysia) said that his country was a responsible member of the international community and of the United Nations. It had consistently upheld the principles of the Charter and fulfilled its obligations in that respect. The suits in question were suits between private parties, to which the Government of Malaysia was not a party. Malaysia sought to comply with the Court’s Advisory Opinion.

Continuing, he said that the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Malaysia had conveyed the Opinion to the Chief Registrar of the Federal court of the country, and filed a certificate with the trial court attesting to Dato’ Param’s immunity. The Attorney-General of the country had also conveyed the Advisory Opinion to the Chief Justice of Malaysia. The necessity of issuing a new certificate would be determined at the appropriate time upon the advice of the Attorney-General, as the proceedings were still evolving.

The judicial arm of each government was expected to enjoy independence, he said. That was provided for in the Constitution of Malaysia, and for that reason, the Malaysian Government could not direct either the Malaysian court or the concerned parties to accept the Court’s Advisory Opinion. The matter was particularly sensitive, given the fact that Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy was the Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights, charged with monitoring the independence of judges and lawyers.

The Government of Malaysia had a right to wait and observe what actions were taken by the parties and the court in each case before the United Nations could be informed about the next steps to be taken by the Government, he said. In expressing Malaysia’s unhappiness over the issue, the Prime Minister of Malaysia had stated that “the United Nations had conferred upon its Special Rapporteurs absolute and unlimited immunity". He had referred to the effect of the Court’s decision with reference to the authority supposedly conferred on the Secretary-General to make a determination that the words by the Special Rapporteur had been spoken in the course of the performance of his mission.

Although Malaysia was a party to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, that document had been elaborated long before the development of the role of the special rapporteurs and before the evolution of social and human rights matters. The determination by the Secretary-General raised the question of facts and law in respect of which Malaysia had argued, and which the World Court had refused to deal with directly. It instead emphasized the importance of the role of the Secretary-General to make a determination to protect the so-called human rights mechanism. It was therefore understandable why the Prime Minister had made his remarks.

Responding to questions, Mr. CORELL said that the four certificates of the Secretary-General had been dispatched long before the Advisory Opinion had been rendered. Those had to be distinguished from the certificates that could be issued under Malaysian law. The cost issue was prominent before the Court. It had also been touched upon by the Economic and Social Council in its decision on the matter. The financial implications depended on how long the proceedings would last. The claims in the four suits against the Special Rapporteur amounted to approximately $24 million. The Legal Counsel had an obligation to defend Mr. Cumaraswamy.

The PRESIDENT of the Council then said that the Council would continue to be seized of the matter, but additional consultations would be necessary.

ANWARUL KARIM CHOWDHURY (Bangladesh) said he wished to make a point concerning the draft on the report of the Committee for Development Policy (document E/1999/L.62) that would have been made by the representative of Guyana (on behalf of the Group of 77 countries and China) had he been present. The Group, and Bangladesh, as the coordinator of the least developed countries, felt it would have been appropriate for the Committee's work programme to be adjusted to allow for the question of criteria for least developed countries to be considered, at the earliest in 2002, by the Committee. In view of the interests of other countries, however, as well as the draft's sponsors, the draft could be acted upon today, with that proviso in mind.

GRANT ROBERTSON (New Zealand) said that, as one of the initial group of sponsors of the draft, his delegation would certainly take on board the proviso suggested by the representative of Bangladesh. The resolution could allow such a decision.

SAKIUSA RABUKA (Fiji) thanked the representatives of New Zealand, Australia, the European Union and the United States for facilitating a consensus on the draft. That was a good sign, but much remained to be done to implement operative paragraph 5, in particular, to revise the criteria for the identification of the least developed countries so that a list could be completed by the end of 2000. Whatever future criteria were agreed should be transparent and able to withstand the test of time.

The draft resolution on the report of the Committee for Development Policy, was adopted, as orally amended, without a vote.

Elections Postponed from Previous Sessions

The PRESIDENT of the Council announced that elections to the Executive Board of the World Food Programme had been postponed until that organization had taken action on General Assembly resolution 53/223, which provided for a new distribution of seats on the Board. The necessary action had been taken in November, and the Council had subsequently elected Hungary to the new seat, which had been allocated to the Eastern European group for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 2000.

Turning to the election of another five members, the President said that Swaziland, Iran and Mexico had been endorsed respectively by the groups of the African States, the Asian States and the Latin American and Caribbean States. France and Japan were the candidates from the group of Western European and other States.

Since the number of candidates from each group was equal to the number of vacancies, the Council elected the proposed candidates by acclamation.

As Denmark would be unable to complete its term of office on the Board as of January 2000, Norway had put forward its candidature to complete Denmark’s term of office, which expires on 31 December 2001.

The Council then elected Norway to complete Denmark’s term of office.

Taking action on the two remaining vacancies in the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting, the Council elected, by acclamation, France and Malta from Western European and other States for a three-year term, beginning on 1 January 2000.

Other Business

ALFONSO VALDIVIESO (Colombia), Vice-President of the Council, addressed the need to continue to improve the instruments of coordination in terms of carrying out the functions of the Economic and Social Council itself. As a person entrusted with pursuing relations between the Bureau and functional Committees, as well as other bodies, he was aware of the improvements in the field of coordination. Resolutions developed in the Council in that regard were complete, but he was concerned that regardless of the degree of goodwill among Members, it was necessary to take another look at coordination mechanisms, so that the Council could better fulfil its mandate under the Charter. It was very important that the new Bureau continued the work next year without pause.

In his concluding remarks, Mr. FULCI said that the Council had reached many of its goals relating to coordination. Next year, a small advisory group on coordination should begin its work on the matter, because it was necessary that efforts remain consistent. It should not be forgotten that 70 per cent of financial and human resources should be placed under the authority of the Economic and Social Council, and it should not be expropriated by anybody. In January, the new membership would take their seats, and the new Bureau would be elected. The overarching goal of poverty eradication should be further pursued, and the Council was fully committed to it. The purposes of social and economic development of Member States should remain at the centre of the Council’s attention.

* *** *