SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON CHARTER OPENS TWO-WEEK SESSION AT HEADQUARTERS

Press Release
L/2952

SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON CHARTER OPENS TWO-WEEK SESSION AT HEADQUARTERS

The Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on Strengthening the Role of the Organization needed to examine the difficulties that had prevented it from making progress in recent years, its Chairman said this morning, as the Committee began its annual two-week session.

Saeid Mirzaee-Yengejeh (Iran), who was elected Chairman, said that the Special Committee, equipped with necessary expertise, remained an appropriate forum to further contribute to the strengthening of the role of the United Nations in the maintenance of peace and security and in the peaceful settlement of disputes. The Committee's agenda, however, was overloaded and, as a result, it was not in a position to pay focused attention to items. Noting that in 1998 the Committee had utilized only 65 per cent of its allocated conference resources and, in 1999, only 62 per cent, he added that it was his sincere hope that this session would be marked by an improvement in the use of those resources.

In a resolution last year, the General Assembly requested the Committee to give priority consideration to the question of assistance to third States affected by Security Council sanctions, as well as to a review of its own working methods. The Committee was established in 1974 to examine in detail proposals regarding the Charter, the strengthening of the role of the United Nations in maintaining peace and security, cooperation among nations, and promotion of the rule of international law in relations between States. Its current session will run from 10 to 20 April.

Those two priority issues were the predominant themes in the statements made this morning. The representative of Japan announced that he had submitted a working paper on ways and means of improving the Committee’s working methods and of enhancing its efficiency. The paper calls for delegations submitting proposals to keep in mind the need to avoid duplication and repetition of discussions in other forums. After a comprehensive exchange of views, delegations should ask the Committee whether it intends to continue discussion of the topic, taking into account the usefulness of the discussions and the possibility of reaching a definitive result.

On the issue of sanctions, several delegates called for the Committee to focus on the recommendations of an ad hoc expert group that had been commissioned to devise a methodology for assessing the consequences incurred by third States as a result of sanctions, and to explore innovative and practical measures of international assistance that could be provided to the affected States.

Committee on Charter - 1a - Press Release L/2952 232nd Meeting (AM) 10 April 2000

Speaking in the debate were the representatives of Portugal (on behalf of the European Union and associated countries), Colombia (on behalf of the Rio Group), Russian Federation, Republic of Korea, India, Cuba, China, United Republic of Tanzania, Japan and Ukraine.

In his opening statement, Hans Corell, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel, said that he was sure it was the wish of all present that this year’s session would yield positive results.

Also this morning, the Committee adopted its agenda and elected its officers, as follows: Georg Witschel (Germany), Roberto Lavalle-Valdes (Guatemala), and Juliet Semambo Kalema (Uganda) as Vice-Chairpersons; and Ioanna Gabriela Stancu (Romania) as Rapporteur.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. today to continue its debate.

Committee on Charter - 3 - Press Release L/2952 232nd Meeting (AM) 10 April 2000

Committee Work Programme

The Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on Strengthening the Role of the Organization, which began its annual two-week session this morning, will give priority to an examination of the question of assistance to third States affected by Security Council sanctions, as well as to a review of its own working methods.

The Charter Committee was established in 1974 to examine in detail proposals regarding the Charter, the strengthening of the role of the United Nations in maintaining peace and security, cooperation among nations and promotion of the rule of international law in relations between States.

In accordance with a request from the General Assembly last year (resolution 54/106), the Charter Committee will consider on a priority basis, implementation of the provisions of the Charter related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions under Chapter VII, taking into account the various proposals and Sixth Committee (Legal) discussions on the matter.

The Charter Committee will also continue its consideration of proposals relating to the peaceful settlement of disputes, including the recommendation of the establishment of a dispute prevention and early settlement service, as well as the various proposals aimed at enhancing the role of the International Court of Justice. However, the Assembly cautioned that any proposals on the Court should not imply changes to the Charter or the Court’s statute. Also on the Committee’s agenda is the issue of the future of the Trusteeship Council.

In the case of sanctions, the Committee will consider observations received from the Governments of Bulgaria, Turkey and Yemen (document A/54/383/Add.1) to a 1998 report of an ad hoc expert group convened to develop a methodology for assessing the consequences incurred by third States as a result of sanctions and to explore innovative and practical measures of international assistance that could be provided to the affected States.

The ad hoc expert group (document A/53/312) convened by the Department of Economic and Social Affairs, met in New York from 24 to 26 June 1998. It recommended drawing up a tentative list of potential effects of sanctions and grouping them into three broad categories: economic, trade and financial effects; social and humanitarian effects, with particular reference to the most vulnerable social groups; and secondary effects, usually associated with the problems of sanctions enforcement. The group recommended that the Security Council, when considering the imposition of a sanctions regime, might wish to request the Secretary-General to submit, within a short period, an advance assessment of the potential impact of sanctions, particularly on third States. Following the imposition of sanctions, the Secretariat should be entrusted with the task of monitoring its effects in order to advise the Security Council and its sanctions committee on specific needs and problems of those third States and present possible options.

With regard to States invoking Article 50 of the Charter (which concerns the right of States that have economic problems as the result of sanctions applied to other States to consult with the Security Council), the expert group said the Secretariat should be prepared to provide technical assistance to such States, in preparing their requests for consultations with the Security Council. The group strongly recommended that, in the most severe cases, the Secretary-General should appoint a special representative to undertake, in collaboration with the governments concerned, a full assessment of the consequences actually incurred by the countries and to identify appropriate and adequate measures of assistance to such States.

In terms of organization of work, the Charter Committee was asked by the Assembly, again on a priority basis, to look at ways to improve its working methods and enhance its efficiency with a view to identifying widely acceptable measures for future implementation.

In the Sixth Committee debate last year on the Charter Committee there were complaints of inefficiency and backlog in the Committee, with some saying, for example, that the Committee continued to focus on topics for which broad support clearly did not exist and which had proven not ready for recommendation. Among the solutions offered was a cut-off mechanism or sunset provision for the backlog of items that had been on the Committee’s agenda for a long time. There was also a call to shorten the meeting time of the Charter Committee. However, other representatives opposed any curtailment of the Committee’s work, saying that its mandate remained entirely valid and, to the contrary, the Committee should be strengthened and revitalized.

The Committee held its last session at Headquarters from 12 to 23 April 1999.

Statements

JOAO MADUREIRA (Portugal), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated countries, said the Special Committee must be creative and flexible, guided by the goal of enhancing its efficiency. The European Union was ready to discuss concrete proposals to meet that goal. The Special Committee should devote sufficient time to the matter and give it the priority requested by the General Assembly. It should avoid duplication and repetition of the work of other United Nations bodies mandated to deal with similar subjects, particularly with regard to United Nations reform and peacekeeping issues. Other means to improve the working methods might include the early submission of proposals and the introduction of a cut-off mechanism to prevent the continued discussion of topics for many years without results.

He would welcome the Secretary-General’s views on the detailed suggestion of the ad hoc expert group, in particular on their political, financial and administrative feasibility, he said. The work of the Special Committee would benefit from having the views of States and the Secretary-General before it proceeded to a more substantive discussion.

He said the Secretary-General had put in place Secretariat arrangements to develop capacities and modalities for providing better information and early assessments for the Security Council or its organs about actual or potential effects of sanctions on third States. He welcomed the Council’s efforts to enhance the functions of the sanctions committees, to streamline their working procedures and to facilitate access to them by third States affected by the implementation of sanctions,. He looked forward to the establishment by the Council of an informal working group to consider how to improve the effectiveness of United Nations sanctions. Targeted sanctions could reduce unintended hardship on civilian populations in targeted States and on third States.

Continuing, he said all elements of information, such as the ad hoc working group and expert seminars, were important for an adequate consideration of the implementation of the provisions of the Charter related to the assistance to third States affected by sanctions. He looked forward to discussion of that matter. On another matter, he commended the Secretary-General for his efforts to reduce the backlog in the publication of Repertoire, a publication which gathered the most important information on the implementation of the Charter and on the work of its organs. He urged all Members to contribute to a trust fund for updating the Repertoire.

MIRZA GNECCO (Colombia), speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, said it had to be recognized that the Committee's capacity to comply with its mandate had been affected by the proliferation of different organs that fought for the same goals and whose mandates overlapped with the Committee's and, moreover, who acted more dynamically on those issues. She was aware of the need to strengthen the Committee and hoped that during the current session the Committee could adopt the necessary concrete measures to improve its working methods.

She proposed that the Committee identify the priorities on its agenda and concentrate its efforts on issues that had the greatest likelihood of consensus. The Committee should avoid discussions on topics that extended indefinitely. In terms of future initiatives, the Committee should elaborate different guidelines for delegations that wished to present new proposals. Delegations should have the chance to study the proposals before meetings and the proposals should be presented in an action-oriented text format.

On assistance to third States, she said the frequent use of sanctions and their indiscriminate effects suggested that the Committee should insist on the adoption of effective measures for the full implementation of Article 50 of the Charter. The Committee should concentrate on the recommendations of the expert group, including the suggestion of entrusting the Secretariat with the task of monitoring and mitigating the adverse effects of sanctions, as well as the role of the international financial institutions in the evaluation of the economic consequences and financial assistance.

In the context of the working paper submitted by the Russian Federation on criteria for sanctions, she said, once imposed, sanctions should be monitored and revised continually, if necessary. The humanitarian impact of sanctions was of special concern to the Rio Group. The Committee should study the possibility of an evaluation mechanism that would allow the Security Council to achieve its objectives and with minimal adverse humanitarian effects

The Rio Group hoped to see concrete results during the session on the revised United Kingdom proposal on a dispute prevention and early settlement service. She noted with concern that the resources available to the International Court of Justice were not proportional to its increased workload and called for it to be provided with sufficient resources to carry out its activities.

VLADIMIR TARABIN (Russian Federation) said no one was justified in bypassing the Charter and using armed forces. The United Nations might resort to enforcement measures, but it must be done under the Charter and with the approval of the Security Council. There must be a careful and cautious approach to the use of coercive measures. Collective efforts by the Russian Federation and others to ensure a concept of peace for the twenty-first century had resulted in a working document that confirmed the immutability of the Charter with regard to the use of force. It also discussed the role of the International Court of Justice on the settlement of issues regarding the right of States to use force. The Special Committee was the most appropriate Committee for the discussion of the issue in non- confrontational and legal terms.

He said the priority item of the Committee must be the use of sanctions and its effects on third States. There must be an overall consideration of the humanitarian consequences. Agreement by all nations on the principled use of sanctions would be of great help to the Security Council. He stressed the importance of continued work on assistance to third States suffering from sanctions. While not denying the role of international financial bodies in assessing the effects of sanctions, the Special Committee must be involved in developing methods to deal with the issue.

Another important question, he said, related to the development of legal foundations for peacekeeping operations. The Russian Federation was prepared to continue work on defining the legal parameters of peacekeeping operations. The Russian draft document on that subject was devoted to the legal dimension of peacekeeping. It did not preclude the possibility of working with other bodies. Turning to the Trusteeship Council, he said its functions were frozen and its resources were being used by other bodies. That issue required additional, comprehensive study and work. Any change in its mandate would entail reviewing the Charter. He commended the Secretary-General’s efforts to reduce the lag in the publication of the Repertoire. The mandate of the Special Committee enabled it to play a substantial role and he favoured keeping its current format. It would be useful to maintain contacts with other bodies, to help provide mutual complementarity and to reduce duplication.

PARK HEE-KWON (Republic of Korea) said that, last year’s General Assembly resolution had requested the Committee to consider ways to improve its working methods. The Committee had a vital role in discussing the various legal aspects of the Organization’s work, including the issue of reform. The Committee could continue to play that vital role, but it could also enhance its efficiency by improving its working methods.

In recent years, there had been various proposals aimed at making the Committee leaner and more efficient, he said. Yet, there had been no tangible results. Citing the underutilization of the conferences services allocated to the Committee, he said there was an urgent need to streamline and refocus the Committee’s work. Proposals should be submitted as early as possible to allow for their in-depth study. The Committee should also concentrate on a few selected topics to avoid duplication or overlapping with other United Nations forums. He also supported the proposal that the Committee should decide whether it will continue discussion on a topic after a fixed time. Such a decision would prevent discussions from lingering on without producing any tangible results.

On the question of assistance to third States affected by sanctions, he said he shared the hope that progress would continue to be made on the concept of “smart sanctions”, which were supposed to be more effective and humane. While he was aware of the difficulties, he believed every effort should be made to exhaust other options before deciding to impose sanctions. The initial reaction of delegations to the report of the expert group commissioned to devise a methodology to examine the effects of sanctions on third States had been favourable. He expressed the hope that further discussions might build upon that report. Turning to the matter of the Trusteeship Council, he said it had outlived its usefulness, and he, therefore, supported the proposal that it be abolished.

NARINDER SINGH (India) said he supported the report of the ad hoc expert group commissioned to develop a methodology for assessing the adverse consequences of sanctions and the recommendations contained therein. The cost of carrying out preventive measures such as sanctions should be borne by the international community on a more equitable basis.

He said the Security Council had the responsibility for finding solutions to the difficulties encountered by third States when sanctions were imposed. He urged all delegations to work together to find practical solutions to those problems. He went on to say that the revised proposal of the Russian Federation on the basic conditions and criteria for the introduction of sanctions and other coercive measures and their implementation should form a useful basis for discussion.. It was neither fair nor equitable to continue indefinitely without the scope for impartial review.

RAFAEL DAUSA CESPEDES (Cuba) said that, despite the growing importance and significance of the Committee’s work over the past years, its practical output had been rather modest. Every year various delegations insisted on the need to streamline its work by, among other proposals, either shortening its session or arranging biennial sessions. It would be interesting to study the motivations for those proposals. The Committee’s output and effectiveness did not hinge exclusively upon the manner in which proposals were submitted nor upon the Committee’s working methods and, even less so, alleged obsolescence of its mandate.

That did not mean, however, that Cuba did not share some of the concerns about the need to revitalize the Committee, he continued. A revitalization process, though, should be carried out within the mandate and scope of the resolution establishing the Committee. Over the last years, some had exhibited an alarming and clear tendency to ignore the mainstay principles of the international legal order and the moral foundations of the United Nations endorsed in the Charter. The adoption of unilateral measures, contrary to the Charter and international law, explained the reluctance of some delegations to support the Committee. It would be helpful if the Committee could count on the political will of all its members in a revitalization of its work.

Concerning the Cuban proposal –- which concerned the Organization’s democratization being carried out in a balanced way and including the Security Council in the process –- he said he understood that the proposal touched some “raw nerves” and that some delegations would be reluctant to discuss them. The proposal, though, retained its full validity and a discussion on the need to maintain the balance of the functions of the United Nations principal organs would have to take place sooner or later. The international community was witnessing the ever- increasing marginalization of the General Assembly, which was being pushed aside by the Security Council and prevented from dealing with issues within its competence. The Council had arrogated to itself many responsibilities and ignored the separation of competences set out in the Charter. That lack of balance must be addressed in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.

SU WEI (China) said that, although the cold war was over, the world had not become a place of peace. The international order, on the contrary, faced even more grave challenges. Any military actions against a sovereign State violated the Charter and its provisions. Since 1992, assistance to third countries affected by sanctions had been taken up many times by the Special Committee. Sanctions were a means of solving international disputes. Their application should be minimized and repercussions should be carefully weighed in advance. The relevant Charter provisions regarding sanctions and assistance to third States were of equal importance and should receive equal attention. When assistance to third States was not realized, the United Nations should set up channels to alleviate the impact of sanctions.

He welcomed progress on the draft working document of the Russian Federation to adopt legal parameters and said the guidelines proposed by the Russian Federation should be recognized. The Committee should work towards establishing a set of guidelines for peacekeeping operations. To consolidate and provide guidance, it would be beneficial to work out a declaration. It was important that peacekeeping troops strictly abide by United Nations guidelines for peacekeeping operations. Troop contributors should be responsible for resulting damages.

The status quo on the future of the Trusteeship Council had been on the Special Committee’s agenda for four years, he said. Although the Trusteeship Council had completed its historical mandate, it was not necessary to abolish or reconstitute it. The resolution of the issue should be handled under the overall mandate of the agenda for reform. United Nations reform should be added to the Special Committee’s agenda.

TUVAKO MANONGI (United Republic of Tanzania) said there had been a unanimous proposal to urgently address the working methods of the Committee. He did not see any reason why that proposal should not be examined. He noted that among the suggestions was the adoption of a sunset or cut-off provision for agenda items where there had been a lack of agreement as to how those items might be resolved or implemented. There would be legitimate demands, however, that the Committee continue to discuss certain items. Citing in particular the question of assistance to third States affected by sanctions, he said he could support the cut-off proposal only in the context of its relation to specific topics: that is, if it were applicable on a selective basis.

HIROSHI KAWAMURA (Japan) announced that he had submitted a working paper on ways and means of improving the Committee’s working methods and of enhancing its efficiency, which he would make available to the other delegations.

OLEH HERASYMENKO (Ukraine) said the Special Committee was the most appropriate forum for considering legal aspects of the issues related to the reform and revitalization of the Organization. It could also successfully follow up on a number of issues raised in the Sixth Committee regarding the Decade of International Law. He supported the move towards taking practical steps to streamline the Charter Committee to make it more effective. He commended the step of moving the session to April and approved setting a time limit for the submission of new documents. Coordination and avoidance of the duplication of work with other United Nations bodies were relevant to streamlining the actions of the Committee. He reiterated his Government’s proposal that frequent and informal contacts with secretariats of the most active delegations should be supplemented by inviting representatives of such bodies and units of the Secretariat to inform the Special Committee on their progress.

He said there had been no consensus in the Special Committee to discontinue the inclusion of old issues on its agenda. He suggested that such items be deferred for two or three sessions to give delegations time to reconsider their

positions in light of new developments, or to come up with new proposals that might revive a debate on them. That would give the Committee more time for the consideration of other items during the session. Moreover, there was hardly a consensus or general support for a reduction of the duration of the Charter Committee, or placing its sessions on hiatus. He did not support such proposals. Caution should also be observed with regard to suggestions of introducing a cut-off mechanism for consideration of topics. Before such a mechanism was introduced, there must be agreement on the principles on which such a mechanism would rest.

Assistance to third States affected by sanctions remained a priority item, he said. He looked forward to the Secretary-General’s report on the input of States, international financial institutions and other relevant international organizations. The outcome of the expert group meeting was instrumental to minimizing the negative effects of sanctions on third countries. The report of the expert group, along with views and proposals submitted by States and relevant international organizations, constituted a basis for agreement on the practical implementation of Article 50 and other provisions of the Charter pertaining to the questions of assistance in the implementation of sanctions. The time was right for a new phase in the formulation of guidelines for action. The mandate of the Special Committee was clear. He proposed that the Committee and its relevant working group concentrate on a thorough review of the conclusions and proposals of the ad hoc working group, as contained in paragraphs 49 to 57 of the report, and formulate relevant recommendations to the Assembly regarding those proposals.

* *** *