STRENGTHENING SECRETARIAT NGO SECTION AMONG PROPOSALS AIRED, AS COMMITTEE CONCLUDES REVIEW OF WORK METHODS

Press Release
NGO/343

STRENGTHENING SECRETARIAT NGO SECTION AMONG PROPOSALS AIRED, AS COMMITTEE CONCLUDES REVIEW OF WORK METHODS

As the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations concluded consideration of its methods of work this afternoon, it addressed the questions of deferrals of non- governmental organization (NGO) cases; monitoring the consultative relationship; quadrennial reports by NGOs, and strengthening the NGO Section of the Secretariat.

On deferrals of applications for consultative status, the Committee decided to institute a practice of setting a time limit of two years, during which it would send three reminders to the NGOs. Under the terms of resolution 1996/31, no specific rules govern deferrals.

For that reason, Committee Chairman Levent Bilman (Turkey) suggested to the Committee that the time limit should be defined if NGOs did not respond to the Committee's questions. Nothing negative was implied by setting such a time limit, for it would allow the Committee to stop pursuing a particular case only if the NGO in question showed no interest whatsoever. The NGOs could reapply to the Organization if they wished to do so at a later date.

Speakers stressed that such a decision should not have a negative impact on the ability of NGOs to seek status at the United Nations. Several delegates agreed that NGOs should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and that the Committee should not be in a hurry to develop mechanisms that might seem too rigid. The issue should be further researched and the Secretariat should be requested to provide statistics on the matter to the Committee.

On monitoring the consultative relationship following the granting of status, speakers stressed the need to examine NGOs’ contribution to the United Nations system and their compliance with resolution 1996/31. Quadrennial reports were an important tool in that respect, and guidelines should be provided to NGOs on their preparation.

The representative of Cuba asked what the purpose was of examining quadrennial reports of NGOs if no action was taken by the Committee in response to violations. It was necessary to enhance efforts to investigate all situations as they arose. Also, the quadrennial reports were only submitted by NGOs in the "general" and "special" categories. The Committee should also seek ways and means of following up on NGOs with "roster" status.

Speakers pointed out that, with an increasing number of NGOs, the monitoring system was becoming very complicated. The quality of the reports was crucial, stressed the representative of the Russian Federation. Some reports merely enumerated events happening within the United Nations system. Responsibility should be established for those NGOs, whose activities were completely incompatible with the principles of the United Nations. NGOs should be under the constant scrutiny of the Committee. The need to standardize reports, as suggested by the Indian representative, was stressed by a number of speakers. The work of NGOs could not be properly assessed if certain questions were not asked. The Secretariat should also determine which NGOs had not submitted reports at all. Such a list was necessary, added Algeria's representative, since the non-submission of reports was a violation of resolution 1996/31.

Hanifa Mezoui, Chief of the NGO Section, said that, with 2,012 NGOs with consultative status, an average of 400 quadrennial reports were due every year. Her Section was totally overwhelmed by the number of applications, and did not have the human resources required to do the kind of analysis it would like to do. The Section issued two sets of guidelines to NGOs -- the first was on applying for status, and another on how to prepare the quadrennial reports. The capacity of the Committee and the Section was to consider 200 applications per session.

France's representative suggested that it might be useful, in light of the fact that the Committee could only digest a certain number of cases per session, to freeze accreditation at a certain number. Time should then be devoted to the review of organizations which were already accredited.

The representative of Chile, like several other speakers, objected to that proposal and warned that, while freezing accreditation might be practical, it would not send the right message to NGOs. The Committee needed more time during the year and the NGO Section must be strengthened. Perhaps in its June session, the Committee could approve a resolution requesting enhanced resources, personnel and technical means for itself and the NGO Section.

The Chairman, in summarizing the discussion, stated that the Secretariat would provide some statistics on those NGOs which did not submit quadrennial reports. Also, it would remind the NGO community that quadrennials should be concise and timely. In addition, the issue of "taking a break" should be discussed further. Other proposals to deal with the heavy workload included the placing of a cap on the number of new applications accepted each year, and devoting all of the Committee's next session to considering only deferrals and quadrennial reports.

The Committee is a 19-member standing body of the Economic and Social Council. Non-governmental organizations that fulfil requirements set out in Council resolution 1996/31 can be granted consultative status under "general", "special" or "roster" categories. Each category carries distinct privileges and responsibilities. (For further details, see Press Release NGO/339, issued on 15 May.)

Statements were made this afternoon by the representatives of the United States, China, Pakistan, Lebanon and Germany.

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow to consider new applications for consultative status and new requests for reclassification.

* *** *