PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR 2001 SPECIAL SESSION ON CHILDREN"S SUMMIT CONCLUDES DEBATE ON PARTICIPATION OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Press Release
HR/4461

PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR 2001 SPECIAL SESSION ON CHILDREN’S SUMMIT CONCLUDES DEBATE ON PARTICIPATION OF NON-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

As the Preparatory Committee for the 2001 special session of the General Assembly for Follow-up to the World Summit for Children continued its organizational session this morning, it concluded its general debate on the participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and addressed the arrangements for its future sessions.

All the countries were committed to NGO participation both in the preparations for the special session and in that event itself. Stressing that the World Summit for Children was unique and required its own approach to NGO participation, most speakers agreed that it was necessary to take into account the experience of preparatory bodies for other conferences. Speakers also noted the need to consider particular NGOs’ input in the promotion of children’s interests and their active involvement in the implementation of the main documents of the Summit for Children.

Also this morning, Patricia Durrant (Jamaica), Chairperson of the Committee, introduced a draft on the organization of work of the first substantive session of the Preparatory Committee, which is to take place from 30 May to 2 June this year. According to the proposal, the meeting would focus on emerging trends, as well as a review of the achievements and lessons of the past decade.

The speakers participating in the discussion of that document stressed that the focus of attention should be placed on the review of previously negotiated plans of action and not on drawing new “global agendas”. They said that information on the situation of children in different parts of the world should be made available to the countries as soon as possible, and that it was necessary to achieve balance between thematic panels and substantive meetings.

The debate also showed that the delegates favoured addressing the shape of the document to be adopted at the end of the special session at the next substantive sessions. The proposed dates for next year’s substantive sessions of the Preparatory Committee were January and June 2001.

At the end of the meeting, the Preparatory Committee elected Lidija Topic of Bosnia and Herzegovina as its Vice-Chairman from the Group of Eastern European States.

Preparatory Committee - 1a - Press Release HR/4461 3rd Meeting (AM) 8 February 2000

Speaking this morning were the representatives of Nigeria (on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China), Egypt, Algeria, Mexico, Russian Federation, United States, Portugal (on behalf of the European Union and associated States), Cuba, Pakistan, Sweden, Costa-Rica and Canada.

Representatives of UNICEF responded to questions from the floor. The Observer for the International Labour Organization (ILO) also addressed the meeting.

The Preparatory Committee will meet to conclude its organizational session at 3 p.m. today.

Committee Work Programme

When the Preparatory Committee for the 2001 special session of the General Assembly for Follow-up to the World Summit for Children met this morning, it was expected to continue its two-day organizational session. At today’s meeting, the Committee was scheduled to finish its debate on non-governmental organization participation and to begin its consideration of the arrangements for the future sessions of the Preparatory Committee. [For background on the session, see Press Release HR/4458 of 4 February.]

Participation of Non-Governmental Organizations

PATRICIA DURRANT (Jamaica), Chairperson of the Preparatory Committee, said that yesterday the representative of Mexico had asked for the list of non- governmental organizations (NGOs) accredited with the Economic and Social Council. The list was now available. As for participation of NGOs, based on yesterday’s discussions it was clear that all the countries were committed to their participation. When considering that question, it was necessary to take into account the experience of preparatory bodies for other summits and bodies.

She said that in 1998 the Preparatory Committee for the special session of the General Assembly on the implementation of the World Summit for Social Development had decided that its work should be open to the participation of NGOs that were accredited with the Economic and Social Council and participated in the work of major international conferences. It had also been decided that such participation would be based on the relevant existing resolutions. Today, the Bureau would like to consider the widest possible range of views.

NGOSI UKAEJE (Nigeria), speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said that she attached great importance to the participation of NGOs promoting the interests of children. The Group believed that they should participate in the special session; however, an official document on their participation was needed.

YEHIA ODA (Egypt) said he supported that statement. Time was short -- he hoped the Bureau would have a proposal to be discussed. He appreciated the democratic manner followed by the Bureau and was ready to cooperate. Member States believed that any decision would not constitute a precedent. The matter needed cooperation. Regarding the question of previous experience, he said that the background of the Summit for Children was different from other conferences, and he was awaiting suggestions from the Bureau on the matter.

AMINA MESDOUA (Algeria) also supported the position of the Group of 77 and China. The Bureau should present a paper on the matter. One of the previous examples was the Social Development Summit, and she wanted to ask for some clarification regarding it. The accreditation for that Summit had been different from that for the special session. She did not know if the Bureau was considering a similar process. Her understanding was that first a decision would be taken on participation in the Preparatory Committee, and then on the modalities of such participation.

MANUEL TELLO (Mexico) thanked the Secretariat for the list of NGOs with consultative status with the Economic and Social Council and the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF). Looking at the list, he saw that the number of NGOs exceeded 200. The list merely gave the names of the organizations, but he assumed they were from different parts of the world. Their interest in the children’s issues was clearly reflected in the fact that they had consultative status either with the Economic and Social Council or UNICEF. If their participation was accepted by the Preparatory Committee, then more than enough NGOs would be represented at the special session.

The Chairperson, responding to questions, said that any decision of the Preparatory Committee could not constitute a precedent. Each decision was separate. In order to inform the delegates, she thought it would be useful to look at the experience gained by other bodies. Against that background, the Bureau was looking at previous decisions.

As for separate decisions on the participation in the preparatory process and in the special session itself, she said that, first of all, it was necessary to address the urgent question of NGO participation in the first substantive session of the Preparatory Committee in May-June. It would also be useful -– if there was time -– to look at the mechanism of participation in the special session. If unable to take that decision, the Committee would defer it to a later date.

VASSILI NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) said other delegations had spoken about a document listing NGOs that had been prepared by UNICEF, and he wondered if that document could be distributed among the delegates. He reiterated his request from yesterday’s meeting that the Secretariat provide all delegations with a comparative table of events -- United Nations summits or international conferences -- that had already taken place in which the issue of NGO participation in special sessions had been discussed. Such a list would be useful in helping delegations make their decision.

The CHAIRPERSON said that the list of NGOs that had been compiled by UNICEF was available for perusal by individual delegations; as it was some 65 pages long, it had not yet been distributed to each delegation. She would consult with the Secretariat as to whether enough copies could be made for circulation. In the meantime, delegations that wished to see the list could take a look at it during the break.

Regarding the comparative table for the other preparatory sessions that had dealt with the issue of NGO participation, she would ask the Secretariat to have it available at the afternoon session. She informed the Russian Federation, however, to keep in mind that the World Summit for Children, which had been an international summit, had had a different background. Therefore, the Committee might need to work with the Bureau to tailor its current methods of work to address the issues more precisely.

RICHARD WILLIAMS (United States) expressed support for the sense of urgency the Bureau placed in getting NGOs involved in the preparatory process. It was a good idea to use information from other conferences as a guide, but it would also be helpful for his delegation, as well as those delegations that had specific questions, to see a draft decision so that the Committee could move forward and make a decision on this issue as quickly as possible.

ROSA BATOREU (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated countries, said that while her delegation had not had a chance to consult the list of NGOs, she was in full support of NGO participation in the preparatory process. Her delegation accepted the idea of using the work already done at other United Nations conferences as a guide. Deciding how to include NGOs was very important, she said. It would also be helpful to see a draft decision on this subject prepared by the Bureau.

MERCEDES DE ARMAS GARCIA (Cuba) said the decision to be taken in the Preparatory Committee regarding NGO participation in the preparatory process was urgent. The question of participation in the special session itself was less urgent. Her delegation was prepared to work on the basis of a concrete text. All the groups needed time to look at the proposal and work out their positions on the matter.

The CHAIRPERSON said that there were two lists available to the delegates. The list of all NGOs in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council was the longer one. As far as the process of work was concerned, she had taken into account the views already expressed, and by the end of the meeting a draft decision on NGO participation in the preparatory process would be circulated. She did not think that their participation in the substantial session would be addressed today, because of lack of time.

NAVID HANIF (Pakistan) supported the statement made for the Group of 77 and said that concrete proposals for a decision should be based on the views expressed in the debate. All relevant NGOs with consultative status with the Council should be allowed to participate. One hundred twenty-three NGOs had consultative status with both UNICEF and the Council. Other NGOs only had consultative status with the Council. Before drafting the decision, the Bureau needed to decide on the criteria for NGO participation. The number of NGOs should not be too high, for that would have an impact on their contribution. It was also necessary to make sure that all those NGOs were working in the field. The process needed to ensure maximum participation, while managing their numbers.

THOMAS HAMMERBERG (Sweden) supported the position of the European Union and said that there was a need for active involvement of NGOs in the preparatory work. In previous informal meetings, a view had been expressed that civil society had played a pivotal role in promoting cause of children. It was important not to send signals to important partners in civil society that could be interpreted by them as meaning that advocacy for children was not important to governments. The number of NGOs should not be too high, but the Bureau should be trusted to handle that problem. The NGOs would be prepared to discuss the “division of labour among themselves”.

Mr. ODA (Egypt) said everyone could probably agree on the important role of civil society. However, his delegation wanted to stress the difference between “an interest in children” and “an active participation”. Non- governmental organization contribution should be as rich and useful as possible -- that criteria was not a matter of numbers. Not all NGO work was relevant to the work of UNICEF.

The CHAIRPERSON pointed out that many of those NGOs that had been accredited and placed on the list presented to the Committee by UNICEF might not wish to participate in the proposed meetings. The Committee must find a way to provide accreditation to those NGOs that might not have accreditation with the Council, but have a close working relation with UNICEF. She suggested that consultations at an informal level might be helpful to find a solution.

NURY VARGAS (Costa Rica) said that while the number of NGOs on the list outnumbered Members States, if the Committee’s chief concern was to help children, civil society must be included in the preparatory process.

KUL GAUTAM, Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF, responding to concerns about the large number of NGOs with Economic and Social Council consultative status, said that within that number -– some 1,700 -- were many NGOs whose focus was on child-oriented issues. These particular NGOs had sought status with UNICEF. He pointed out that UNICEF also had close relationships with many local NGOs in its country and regional offices. Non-governmental organizations at the subnational level and all of those on the list would merely provide the pool from which the Committee would invite participants. While he certainly did not expect that all those NGOs would apply for status to participate in the Conference, he thought that many would at least like the opportunity. That would ensure the necessary participation at the regional and country levels.

The CHAIRPERSON said she would encourage governments to include representatives of civil society in their national and regional discussions on the preparatory process. “We seek to involve civil society at all levels”, she said. She then suspended consideration of the item until members had a chance to look at the draft decision on participation of NGOs in the preparatory process.

Arrangements for Future Sessions of Preparatory Committee

The CHAIRPERSON said that, by the terms of General Assembly resolution 54/93, the Preparatory Committee was requested to convene one substantive session from 30 May to 2 June 2000 and to propose to the General Assembly its requirements for further meetings in 2001. At this stage, it was hard to identify what would be needed next year.

Mr. Gautam, Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF, said UNICEF was working closely with all Member States to review their implementation of the goals of the Summit for Children. It had been supporting countries through a multiple indicator cluster survey, which was expected to be completed in most countries in the near future. Information on many services for children was being collected. All countries would be pursuing a national review. Various regions of the world would hold ministerial consultations on the outcome of the World Summit for Children. Feedback on those meetings would be provided to the Preparatory Committee and to the UNICEF Executive Board. As for the substantive reports of the Secretary-General in 2000, they would be issued for the forthcoming substantive session of the UNICEF Executive Board in May. However, he needed to verify the exact timetable.

The CHAIRPERSON said that the Committee should consider holding one meeting following the winter meeting of UNICEF’s Executive Board in February, and another one in June.

Ms. DE ARMAS GARCIA (Cuba) said she wanted clarifications regarding information to be received from countries. Input from countries was an important part of the preparatory process. She wanted some information regarding the dates of the substantive sessions of the Preparatory Committee.

Mr. GAUTAM, Deputy Executive Director of UNICEF, said that at the moment there were no plans to request countries to provide reports for the May substantive session of the Committee. The review he had referred to dealt with the 10-year review of the outcome of the Summit, after the regional meetings had been completed.

The CHAIRPERSON said the dates of the Preparatory Committee’s meetings should be in concert with other planned meetings.

LANDON PEARSON (Canada) supported the proposal to reserve certain dates for practical reasons. It made sense to book the time in advance.

AMINA MESDOUA (Algeria) said that her delegation would like to hear more about the content of the report the Secretary-General would present to the Committee at its May session. On the issue of regional meetings, she said that, as President of the Organization of African Unity (OAU), her delegation had heard no mention of the participation of African counties. Were meetings to be held in Africa? If no meetings had been planned, her delegation would see to it that some were organized as quickly as possible.

Mr. GAUTAM said that the contents of the report of the Secretary-General had been prepared with the support of UNICEF to provide substantive input to the preparatory session. It would be based on and inspired by a global initiative for the welfare of children that had been provided by the UNICEF Board.

Regarding regional meetings, he said that UNICEF and the Bureau were consulting with the regional officers in all regions in an attempt to come up with the time, nature and subject matter of these meetings. He said that after the Bureau had received specific information from the regional officers, it would report the findings to the Committee.

Ms. UKAEJE (Nigeria), for the Group of 77 and China, regarding the provisional organization of work, said that the “Global Agenda” needed to be clarified. There was no need for a new agenda, just clarification of the one that was already before the Committee. Her delegation was also concerned with the number and titles of the proposed panel discussions. She said that her delegation would suggest that there be only two panels –- addressing developed and undeveloped countries -- and that their titles be simpler and more specific. She then proposed two tiles: “Globalization and Its Impact on the Goals of the World Summit for Children”, and “Constraints of the Developing Countries to Achieve the Goals of the World Summit for Children”.

The CHAIRPERSON introduced a draft on the provisional organization of work of the first substantive session of the Preparatory Committee, which was based on General Assembly resolution A/54/93. The session would be held from 30 May through 2 June. During that time, several panel discussion would be held. The first one should focus on the emerging trends, and the proposed title was “New Millennium: Global Trends and Their Impact on Children”. The second panel was to review the achievements. It would be devoted to the lessons of the decade. The third panel discussion would be entitled “New Vision/New Challenges”. The intention was to stick as closely as possible to the requirements of the resolution. At the end of the first substantive session, a report would be prepared on the work accomplished. She hoped that there would be active participation in the panel discussions.

NURY VARGAS (Costa Rica) wondered if some advance information would be available in time for the May meeting on the situation of children in Latin America.

Mr. NEBENZIA (Russian Federation) said time should be reserved for subsequent sessions of the Preparatory Committee. The dates proposed were February and June 2001. It would make sense to take that decision at the May- June session this year, for then it would be possible to assess future needs. For reference, he wanted to see the timetable of work of other similar bodies. Yesterday, the delegations had referred to the fact that much would depend on what kind of document would be prepared at the end of the session. As for the agenda of the first substantive session, the draft indicated that half of the event was devoted to so-called “side events’, including panel discussions. Those promised to be extremely interesting, but, as a rule, panels were held on the margins of actual meetings. He thought official meetings should be devoted to substantive work. Regarding the organization of work, he thought that some items overlapped in several proposed meetings.

NORA GALER, Office of United Nations Affairs and External Relations, UNICEF, said the participation of NGOs, the introduction of draft proposals and organizational arrangements should be discussed at the 1 June meeting. Although it might seem that some items overlapped, they addressed different aspects of such issues as NGO participation.

Ms. MESDOUA (Algeria) said that the objective of the special session was to consider progress made on the Programme of Action and the Declaration. However, the plan of work “put the cart before the horse”. It was essential to build on some achievements before moving on to the new issues. It was necessary to analyse the progress already achieved. It was also necessary to agree on the subjects to be discussed by panellists. It was crucial to have consensus in the Committee regarding those topics, which should not be imprecise -- otherwise, the panels would not be useful. As for the programme itself, it produced an impression that the substantive session would just be a continuation of the organizational session. It was necessary to start negotiating the final document of the special session. Ms. PEARSON (Canada) supported the Chairman’s proposal in general. However, she strongly supported the need for interactive dialogue in the panels. It would be helpful if the delegations had a chance to look at the content of the work with children. Looking at emerging issues, it was important not to forget about a whole body of United Nations activities in the past.

Mrs. BATOREU (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated countries, said that her delegation was of the view that the first Preparatory Committee session should be primarily for brainstorming. The idea of setting the panels during this session and not during a side event was welcome. Regarding the proposed panel discussions, the participation of a broad range of actors -– including Member States, United Nations agencies, civil society and the research community -- would be beneficial. She asked if was possible for the Secretariat to provide guidance as to the subject matter of those panels. She also said that it would be important to see a report on the end-of-decade review before the Committee’s May-June session.

AL BARTLETT (United States), regarding the provisional organization of work, said that the structure of the process developed in the current session would be most helpful in informing the Committee’s May-June session. It was clear that panel discussions would be central to the process of the first substantive meeting, so the relevant subject matter and participants must be decided on quickly. It was most important that the panellists be key experts in the areas of child protection and development.

Mr. GAUTAM, responding to questions about panel discussions, said that the Secretariat would have no difficulty in rearranging the sequence in which they were to be held, or in determining their titles.

Ms. GALER said that idea of panel discussions arose from the fact that, since the World Summit for Children 10 years ago, there had been no substantive discussion of the issues. So with the view of informing the review process for the special session, the idea behind the proposal for panel discussions was to have a debate on the Global Agenda and the advanced outline on the goals of the summit, and to have the opinions of experts that could help inform the process.

Ms. DE ARMAS GARCIA (Cuba) said that, while studying the proposed organization of work, she had noticed that little time was devoted to consultations. Generally speaking, preparatory committees provided an opportunity for an exchange of views. That did not seem to be the case; the panels seemed to get the lion’s share of time and space. A better balance for panels, as well as substantive debate, was needed. As to the agenda items, everything seemed to be addressing “new” issues, she said. “But what about the old problems? There must be a balance.” The Committee should look at what has been done in the past, as well as what solutions are lacking. There were still serious problems which had yet to be resolved. As to the panel discussion, she said that the whole idea should be reconceptualized. She expressed concern about the manner in which the panellists themselves were to be selected. At previous sessions, Member States had been given the opportunity to provide input. Mr. HANIF (Pakistan) said that the deadline for the presentation of Member States’ reports would be September. They should be made available to the delegations in their preliminary form before the January 2001 session. The problem of the “new global agenda” should be addressed. Renewed commitment to the same plan of action should be considered –- not a new plan or agenda. It was necessary to identify the emerging issues, as stipulated by General Assembly resolution A/54/93.

Three panel discussions were too many, he said. One meeting should be devoted to the discussion of the elements of the outcome of the special session. One of the panel discussions should be dropped for that purpose. Member States should have a chance to contribute to the planning efforts.

Mr. HAMMARBERG (Sweden) agreed with the previous speaker, saying that it was necessary to take stock of the achievements. The last decade had demonstrated some problems. For example, the problem of HIV/AIDS had become more acute for children. Another point that had emerged was the importance of birth registration all over the world. It should be highlighted in the future. Improving the situation of the children within the already adopted framework should be addressed. The emerging issues did not necessarily need to be called “a global agenda”. The Committee was talking about the process -– not just a meeting. There should be some kind of a signal to governments and regional organizations that their input was welcome. Reports from their meetings would be useful. The UNICEF would be in the midst of the preparation process, as the only structure dealing with children.

Ms. LUBIN, the Observer from the International Labour Organization (ILO), said her organization was very active in defending the rights of children. Last year, a convention had been drawn on the elimination of child labour, and it was necessary to draw the attention of the international community to that instrument. Perhaps it could be highlighted in the work of the special session, for that could lead to an increased number of ratifications.

The CHAIRPERSON said there was clear agreement that it was necessary to achieve balance between the panels and substantive meetings. The shape of the document should be addressed at the next substantive session. The Bureau would prepare another paper to be considered this afternoon. She hoped it would be possible to agree on a general framework. Particular details could be addressed later. Recommendations made in the debate would be taken into consideration. The dates of future substantive sessions should also be addressed.

Elections

At the end of the meeting, the Preparatory Committee elected Lidija Topic of Bosnia and Herzegovina as its Vice-Chairman from the Group of Eastern European States.

* *** *