FIFTH COMMITTEE TAKES UP 2004-2005 BUDGETS FOR RWANDA, FORMER YUGOSLAVIA TRIBUNALS

Fifty-eighth General Assembly

Fifth Committee

21^st Meeting (AM)

FIFTH COMMITTEE TAKES UP 2004-2005 BUDGETS FOR RWANDA, FORMER YUGOSLAVIA TRIBUNALS

As the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) took up the budget proposals of $327.3 million for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and $251.4 million for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda for 2004-2005, speakers strongly supported the pioneering role of the two courts and expressed concern over their precarious financial situation as a result of the unpredictable nature of the payment of dues by Member States. 

Many delegations stressed that it was unacceptable that, as of the end of September, 122 Member States had failed to contribute anything for either Tribunal in 2003.  Most speakers stressed the need to ensure adequate and predictable financial resources for the Tribunals to complete their respective mandates and supported providing the Rwanda Tribunal with additional resources arising from recent Security Council decisions to appoint a separate Prosecutor and five additional ad litem judges. 

South Africa’s representative, speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that those measures would greatly facilitate the efforts of the Tribunal to meet the targets set by the Security Council.  Originally forecast to complete its mandate by 2011, the Tribunal would now be able to complete its trial activities at the first instance by the end of 2008.  As pointed out by the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), additional capacity could lead to potential savings of more than $300 million to Member States. 

While accepting that there would be necessary resource and personnel increases as a result of the Council’s decisions, several speakers, including Italy, on behalf of the European Union, questioned the reasoning behind some of the proposed increases in professional and support staff.  The increases in the budgets exceeded $100 million per biennium.  Recognizing that the increase was mainly due to currency fluctuations, he remained disappointed that such modest efforts were made to offset those problems with economy measures.

Japan’s representative said his Government was not in a position to accept the budget for the Rwanda Tribunal, as proposed.  It was possible for the Tribunal to avoid budgetary expansion through improvements in transparency and efficiency, as well as shifting its resources to priority areas.  Could the Rwanda Tribunal really justify over 1,000 posts?  Although it had been in existence since 1994, his delegation was not aware of any significant results.  It was high time, therefore, to fundamentally re-examine the Tribunal.

The United States’ representative expressed particular alarm over the ever-increasing costs for the legal aid systems, saying that it was necessary to ensure continued efforts to rationalize the costs of defence counsel and establish indigence.  She noted that the Yugoslavia Tribunal had implemented a lump-sum system to contain and control escalating costs for defence counsel fees and applauded the appointment of a financial investigator to assess the ability of the accused to cover the costs of their defence.  She strongly encouraged the Yugoslavia Tribunal to continue to implement and closely monitor such reforms and expected to receive more specific information in future reports on actual savings attributed to such measures.

Rwanda’s representative welcomed the reforms undertaken to eliminate the abuse of the legal aid programme and to protect the integrity of the judicial process.  He recalled that his country had repeatedly expressed concern about such practices as fee-splitting between defence counsel and suspects and the hiring of relatives and friends of suspects as defence investigators or assistants.  Those events had severely undermined the credibility of the Tribunal among Rwandans.  Genocide survivors had been outraged that genocide suspects and their families were deriving financial gain from the very body that was supposed to bring them to justice for their serious crimes. 

Also this morning, the Committee considered the Organization’s second performance report for the current biennium, the administrative costs of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and the proposal to delegate formal authority in matters of personnel of the United Nations Population Fund to the Executive Director of that body. 

Also participating in the discussion were representatives of the Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Norway, Canada (also on behalf of Australia and New Zealand), Cuba, Syria and Ghana.  Numerous reports before the Committee were introduced by United Nations Controller, Jean-Pierre Halbwachs, Chairman of the ACABQ, Conrad S.M. Mselle, and Secretary of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board, Bernard Cocheme. 

The Committee will continue its work at 10 a.m. Wednesday, 26 November, when it is scheduled to take action on several drafts and take up several reports in connection with the proposed budget for 2004-2005.

Background

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) this morning was expected to take up the financing of the two International Tribunals, the United Nations’ second performance report for the current biennium and administrative expenses of the Organization’s Pension Fund, as well as several items related to recent decisions of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC).  It was also scheduled to continue its consideration of proposed improvements to the current process of planning and budgeting.  For detailed information on the latter, see Press Release GA/AB/3586 of 31 October.

Tribunals’ Financing

On the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the Committee had before it a performance report for the current biennium (document A/58/597); a proposed budget for 2004-2005 (document A/58/269); a comprehensive report on the progress made by the Tribunal in reforming its legal aid system (document A/58/366); supplementary estimates arising in respect of Security Council resolution 1503 (2003) on the creation of a new position of Prosecutor (document A/58/368); and revised estimates arising in respect of Security Council resolution 1512 (2003) on the establishment of five additional ad litem judges in the Tribunal (A/58/550).  The Tribunal’s completion strategy is contained in document A/58/269, and document A/58/367 identifies financial elements relating to the long-term enforcement of sentences imposed by the court.

Information on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is contained in documents A/58/226 (budget proposal for 2004-2005), A/58/593 (performance report) and A/58/288 (legal aid reform).

Half of the courts’ budget is financed according to the scale of assessments applicable to the regular budget and the other half according to the peacekeeping scale.  Both Tribunals now follow the biennial pattern of the regular budget with the same performance report cycles.

According to the Tribunals’ second performance reports for the current budget, the total preliminary additional requirements for 2002-2003 amount to some $28 million.  The ICTR report reflects the additional requirement of some $4.52 million gross ($4.39 million net) over the revised appropriation for 2002-2003.  The increased requirements include changes with respect to the combined effect of exchange rates and inflation (some $7.5 million gross), partially offset by decreases in post-incumbency and other changes (about $2.98 million gross).  For the Rwanda Tribunal, the Assembly is requested to revise the appropriation for 2002-2003 to $208.48 million gross ($187.26 million net).

The second performance report of the ICTY reflects a net additional requirement of $18.8 million, including changes with respect to exchange rates ($20.4 million) owing to the weakening of the United States dollar vis-à-vis the euro and inflation ($3.76 million).  The Assembly is requested to revise the appropriation for the biennium 2002-2003 to $288.32 million gross ($254.6 million net) to the Special Account for the ICTY.

Having considered the performance of the two Tribunals, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ), in its report (document A/58/605), recommends approving the revised appropriations presented by the Secretary-General.  However, it states that while the changes related to rates of exchange and inflation could not have been anticipated, some of other items, such as the judicial database project or the furniture and equipment needs, could have been better planned or foreseen, and thus better budgeted for.  In addition, expenditures should be more closely monitored.

The estimates for the two courts for 2004-2005 can be summarized as follows, after recosting:

	ICTR	ICTY
Proposed budget	$235.2 M	$329.6 M
Supplementary estimates for the ICTR Prosecutor	$  4.0 M	$ -2.3 M
Total	$239.2 M	$327.3 M

Following the Council’s most recent decision related to the ICTR -- resolution 1512 (2003) of 27 October 2003, which increased the number of ad litem judges for the court from four to nine -- additional requirements towards that end increase the ICTR estimate for 2004-2005 by an amount of some $12.24 million to a total of $251.39 million gross at 2004-2005 rates.

Prior to the Council’s October decision, the ICTR budget for the next biennium reflected real growth of 2.4 per cent, largely due to provisions for the delayed impact of the establishment of 90 new posts and ad litem judges approved for 2002-2003.  The ICTY budget reflected a decrease in real terms (-0.4 per cent) due to reorganization and initial downsizing of the staffing table to implement the approved completion strategy.  Supplementary estimates arising from Security Council resolution 1503 (2003) on the establishment of a separate prosecutor for the ICTR come to a net increase of $1.7 million.

According to the Rwanda Tribunal’s completion strategy, with four ad litem judges supplementing the trial chambers from September onward, it is expected that the trials of detainees could be completed by 2007.  Trials of the indictees still at large, 17 at most, could be completed by 2009, and trials of the suspects not yet indicted, a maximum of 26, could be completed by 2011.  However, the number of persons brought to trial will most probably be fewer than 43, so the trials could be completed earlier.  The completion of the ICTR’s mandate is expected to be expedited even further with the Council’s decision to increase the number of the court’s ad litem judges from four to nine.

The ICTY’s completion strategy sets 31 December 2008 as the date for completion of first-instance trials and 31 December 2010 as the date for completion of appeals.  Documents related to the ICTY also describe the measures to rationalize the costs and improve the effectiveness of the legal aid system, in particular through the appointment of a financial investigator in March 2003 to assess the ability of the accused to cover the cost of defence.  As indicated in the Secretary-General’s report, based on the evidence gathered during field missions, full legal aid has already been cut back to partial legal aid for six accused.

The Advisory Committee, in its reports on the ICTY (document A/58/449) and ICTR (document A/58/554) notes with satisfaction that the proposed budgets for the Tribunals have for the first time been presented in a results-based format.  The ACABQ reiterates the need for close coordination between the two Tribunals and, with the appointment of a separate prosecutor for the ICTR, trusts that steps will be taken to ensure the continuation of this collaboration in all areas of the work of the courts.

The reports contain a number of observations and recommendations with regard to the resource requirements of the Tribunals.  The Advisory Committee recommends that the estimated requirements for the ICTY be reduced by some $20 million, bringing the total to some $219.6 million.  Inasmuch as the ACABQ does not want to impede the completion strategy of the YugoslaviaTribunal, it is not recommending specific reductions under any particular item, although significant economies should be achieved.  For the ICTR, it recommends approval of the total requested amount of $251.39 million gross.

Regarding the vacancies in the Yugoslavia Tribunal, the ACABQ points out that it will be increasingly difficult to recruit and retain staff as the date for completion of the work of the Tribunal draws nearer.  For this reason, it is unlikely that vacancy statistics will improve significantly, if at all, even with the reduction in the overall number of posts under the proposed staffing table.

The Advisory Committee also notes that the process of determining the number of posts to be abolished, redeployed or retained in the ICTY does not appear to be transparent from the budget document, nor is it supported by a thorough analysis of workload indicators.  In this connection, it requests that the volume of work and the pace of completion of related activities, especially in the Office of the Prosecutor, be continuously monitored in order to determine the need to abolish or transfer posts.

The Advisory Committee points out that at the stage when an important element of the ICTY’s functions, investigations, is expected to be substantially curtailed in the coming biennium, any increase in resource requirements for 2004-2005 should have been explained and justified more thoroughly.  The ACABQ believes that further reductions are possible in the requirements proposed for investigative and prosecution-related travel in the Office of the Prosecutor.

In view of currency fluctuations, it is not necessary, in the opinion of the ACABQ, to appropriate and assess the full recosting provision for the next two years at this stage.  Instead, the Assembly may wish to request the Secretary-General to report on additional requirements, if any, at a time when a more complete exchange rate picture has emerged (December 2004).

2002-2003 Budget

The Committee had before it the second performance report in relation to the current regular budget biennium (documents A/58/558 and Add. 1), which provides updated expenditure data, taking into account currency and inflation changes and unforeseen and extraordinary expenditures.  According to the document, the main feature of the current situation is the weakening of the United States dollar against the euro and Swiss frank, the impact of which amounts to some $59.1 million in additional expenses.  Inflation changes amount to $7.7 million.

Overall appropriation for the biennium is likely to rise from $2.89 billion to some $2.95 billion –- a net increase of $49.6 million compared with the revised appropriations for 2002-2003.  Unforeseen and extraordinary expenditures, as well as conference and support servicing of the Counter-Terrorism Committee, total some $19.7 million.  Those expenditures include expenses covering the work of an ad hoc planning group on Iraq; Special Envoy to the Inter-Congolese Dialogue; an assessment mission to Côte d’Ivoire and operations of the International Court of Justice.

In a related report, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) (document A/58/604) comments on various aspects of the budget.  In particular, it notes with concern that, under section 16, Economic Commission for Africa, the vacancy rates for the Professional category continue to be exceptionally high.  The Advisory Committee is of the view that special measures should be taken on an urgent basis to address the problem of the persistent high vacancy rates at the Economic Commission for Africa.

The document also notes that, in response to the Advisory Committee’s previous recommendation, the performance report indicates the amount of unliquidated obligations included in estimated expenditures for the biennium.  The Advisory Committee welcomes the fact that unliquidated obligations for 2002-2003 of $99.7 million are significantly lower, compared with the amount reported at the end of September 2001 ($161.7 million).

In connection with schedule 3 of the performance report, which provides a summary of projected expenditures for each budget section by object of expenditure and main determining factor, including travel estimates, the Advisory Committee notes that the document does not separately indicate variances in travel expenses relating to travel of representatives and travel of staff.  The Advisory Committee requests that the Secretariat provide this information to the Fifth Committee.

A report of the Standing Committee of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Board on the administrative expenses of the Organization’s Pension Fund (document A/58/214) contains that body’s budget estimates for 2004-2005, which amount to some $95.07 million, as compared with a total of $85.39 million for the current biennium (2002-2003).  The budget proposal reflects the need to align the Board’s resources to fast-growing activities; strengthen the structure of the Fund; complete the information technology re-engineering project; and rent new premises.  Also included in the document is the performance report for 2002-2003.

According to the document, the number of participants in the Pension Fund increased from 68,935 to 80,082 during the biennium ended on 31 December 2001, while the number of benefits in award increased from 46,199 to 49,416.  By the end of 2002, the active participant population increased to 82,715 and the number of beneficiaries in award increased to 51,028.  In the course of 2002, the number of lump-sum withdrawals and other settlements amounted to 6,425.

The market value of the assets of the Fund stood at $20.74 billion against $21.78 billion a year earlier –- a decline of 5.1 per cent.  However, the total investment return, which takes into account the timing of cash flow for the same period, was negative 3.8 per cent, representing a “real”, or inflation-adjusted return of negative 6.6 per cent.

ECOSOC Decisions

In connection with the report of ECOSOC (document A/58/3), which contains information about this year’s elaborations and decisions of that body, the Committee was going to address the issue of delegation of authority in matters of personnel of the United Nations Population Fund.  The Committee had before it a note by the Secretariat (document A/C.5/58/2), which explains that in its decision 2003/224, the Council recommended that formal authority in that regard be delegated by the Secretary-General to the Executive Director of the Fund.  Such a course of action had initially been proposed by the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the United Nations Population Fund (document DP/FPA/2003/5).

Introduction of Documents

JEAN-PIERRE HALBWACHS, United Nations Controller, introduced the Secretary-General’s reports on the Tribunals.

Chairman of the ACABQ, CONRAD S.M. MSELLE, introduced related reports of the Advisory Committee.

Statements

YOSHIYUKI MOTOMURA (Japan) said that while the speeding up of the trial process at both the ICTY and the ICTR was important, the current budget levels should be considered as the upper limit.  The proposed budget for the ICTR for 2004/2005 was expanding significantly compared to the current biennium budget and the Japanese Government was not in a position to accept the budget as proposed.  There was a strong necessity to discuss a priority agenda for the United Nations in order for the Organization to function more efficiently.  Without such a discussion, was it really appropriate to allow a budget expansion of the ICTR, an expansion over which the Organization had already lost control?

His Government did not wish to deny the importance of promoting the reconciliation process in the Great Lakes region, he continued, but believed it was possible for the ICTR to avoid budgetary expansion, while adhering to its completion strategy and promoting the acceleration of the judicial process.  It could avoid expansion through improvements in transparency and efficiency, as well as shifting its resources to priority areas according to its strategy.  Could the ICTR really justify over 1,000 posts, he asked.  Although the ICTR had been in existence since 1994, his delegation was not aware of any significant results.  It was high time, therefore, to fundamentally re-examine the Tribunal.

Such an examination must be accompanied by a fully accountable explanation to the international community, he stressed.  The Japanese delegation had mentioned on previous occasions the need to establish a dialogue mechanism between the Security Council and the major contributing countries on peacekeeping budgets.  It would be appropriate to include in this mechanism the Tribunal budgets.  Enhanced transparency and accountability would be extremely important for the major contributing countries to continue their contributions based on the understanding of their taxpayers.

Regarding five ad litem judges and 45 temporary posts based on Security Council resolution 1512, the Secretary-General was requesting additional requirements of $12,239,600 in his report A/58/550, he continued.  His delegation would like to be provided with an explanation of the basis of such a request.  The amount was much greater than the $4,657,600 approved by General Assembly resolution 57/289, based on the recommendation by the ACABQ for four ad litem judges and 42 temporary posts.  The Japanese delegation could not accept such a large request.  With regard to the budget increase arising from the establishment of the Prosecutor, based on Security Council resolution 1503, his delegation would like to be provided with an explanation from the Secretariat.

There was logic in the Secretary-General’s notion that the introduction of five additional ad litem judges would enhance the judicial process.  However, his delegation could not agree with the rapid increase in Member States’ burdens.  With regard to resource allocation, the increase in posts should not be looked upon as a given.  Efforts to curb the budget though flexible redeployment of existing resources should come first.  Japan’s delegation proposed that an evaluation team be dispatched to the ICTR, consisting of representatives of Member States to re-examine its mandate, and to explore ways in which the budget could be rationalized and the efficacy of budget implementation could be pursued.  Without accountability, he concluded, the activities of the United Nations would not gain the support of taxpayers.

KAREN LOCK (South Africa), speaking on behalf of the African Group, supported the groundbreaking and valuable work done by the Rwanda Tribunal, saying that it would continue to play a vital role in the efforts of the United Nations and the international community to contribute to the process of national reconciliation in Rwanda.  She was encouraged by the progress that the Tribunal had made over the past few years, as illustrated by the 15 judgements involving 21 accused that it had rendered since the first trial had started in 1997.  She noted that 41 detainees were either engaged in or awaiting trial at the detention facilities in Arusha.  The number of appeal cases was also on the increase in the Tribunal.  It was, thus, evident that the court would have a heavy workload in 2004-2005, and it was imperative to ensure that the Tribunal received all the financial and human resources that it required at the current critical juncture of its mandate.

The African Group welcomed the strengthening of the Tribunal’s judicial capacity from four to nine ad litem judges, which, coupled with the recent appointment of its own Prosecutor and the establishment of an independent Appeals Unit, would greatly facilitate the efforts of the Tribunal to meet the targets set by the Security Council.  In that regard, she recalled that the Tribunal had been originally forecasted to complete its mandate by 2011, but would now be in a better position to complete its trial activities at the first instance by the end of 2008.  She agreed with the ACABQ that additional capacity could lead to potential savings of more than $300 million to Member States.  It was hence essential that the Assembly provide the Tribunal with the additional resource requirements arising from recent Security Council decisions.

While encouraged by the reduction of the vacancy rate for Professional staff from 26 per cent in 2001 to 20 per cent in 2003, the African Group maintained the view that the vacancy rate still remained too high, she said.  The Group urged the Tribunal to take further measures to increase recruitment and improve the vacancy situation as a matter of priority.  She was pleased to note that pivotal management positions, which had previously remained vacant for almost two years, had been filled.

Continuing, she stressed the importance of earmarking sufficient funds for outreach programmes that would complement the reconciliation efforts undertaken by the Government of Rwanda.  She also noted that, as part of the completion strategy, the Prosecutor had identified almost 40 cases that could be tried under national jurisdiction, once relevant rules of procedure had been established for the ICTR.  The proposed budget for the next biennium should provide for the costs of transferring the trials to Rwanda and other Member States.  She was also encouraged to note that the budget proposal included provisions for upgrading of prison facilities, with a view to ensure that they met minimum international standards.

She went on to commend the preparation of the budget in a results-based format and welcome the measures taken by the Tribunal to exercise greater judicial control over proceedings and expedite trials and appeals, while remaining scrupulous in the observance of international norms for fair trial and respect for the rights of the accused.  The implementation of the recommendations contained in document A/58/366 could lead to improvements in the management, monitoring and control of the legal aid system.

In conclusion, she expressed the Group’s concern over the precarious financial situation of the two Tribunals and noted the observation of the ACABQ that allotments to the Tribunals were issued in a piecemeal manner, covering only two months at a time and that the Tribunals had had to resort to cross-borrowing from closed peacekeeping operations.  It was imperative to ensure adequate and predictable financial resources for the Tribunals to complete their respective mandates.

GIAN LUIGI VALENZA (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union, reaffirmed the Union’s firm support for the role of the international criminal Tribunals and hoped to see the application of fair and impartial justice in the trials of those accused.  That abiding principle, however, could not be separated from the need for efficient and effective management of the Tribunals.  Necessary resources should be provided in order that they fulfil their mandates as a shared expense of the United Nations.  The Union also wanted to see indictees brought to trial within an acceptable time frame, the effective conduct of trials and the efficient application of the resources supplied.  The Union had made it clear on a number of occasions in that past that the Tribunals had not fully lived up to those requirements.

There had been some positive developments, however.  Not only had the Tribunals presented their budgets in a results-based format for the first time, but they had also surpassed many departments in the United Nations Secretariat in the quality of their presentation and the relevance of their proposed indicators.  The ICTY report on the reform of the legal aid system also contained encouraging information on the new system of remunerating defence counsel and establishing indigence.  However, the European Union would have liked to receive further information on the impact of these reforms.

For the ICTR, the position of defence costs was unclear, he continued.  The conclusion of considerable analysis had not provided a clear-cut plan of action or targets for future defence costs.  He urged that the Tribunal implement new procedures for remuneration of defence counsel, which allowed “equality of arms” for indictees, but maintained reasonable and enforceable limits on these expenses.  The Union welcomed the appointment of a separate Prosecutor for the ICTR and the Security Council agreement to allow up to nine ad litem judges in order to speed up the proceedings.  The Union accepted that there would be necessary resource and personnel increases as a result of those steps, but had to question the reasoning behind some of the proposed increases in professional and support staff.

The levels of the Tribunals budgets were of concern to the European Union, he said.  The increases in the budgets alone in dollar terms exceeded $100 million per biennium.  The Union recognized that it was mainly due to recosting, but remained disappointed that such modest efforts were made to offset those currency problems with economy measures.  The Union noted, furthermore, that the General Assembly was due to review the biennial nature of those budgets, since they had been established on a trial basis for 2002-2003.  Despite the many advantages of a biennial process, the Union had concluded that, given the rapidly shifting nature of the Tribunal’s resource requirements and the uncertainties in currency markets, it would be a wise idea to discuss a possible return to annual budgets.

Finally, he noted the deplorable situation regarding the payment of assessed contributions.  As of the end of September, no fewer than 122 members had failed to contribute anything for either Tribunal in 2003.  It was unacceptable for Member States to neglect their obligations to those institutions and the Union called on all Member States to pay their contributions in full.

YOON SEONG-MEE (Republic of Korea) said that as a strong supporter of the Tribunals, her delegation was interested in the efficient and effective management of their work.  Towards that end, the presentation of the budgets for the Tribunals in a results-based format represented a meaningful step forward.  Now that the completion strategies for the courts had been put forward, the new format could be fully utilized to ensure those strategies’ implementation.  Regarding the ICTR’s completion strategy, she shared the view of the ACABQ that it might need to be revised to account for recent organizational reinforcement measures.

The reform of the legal aid system was critical for the sound management of the Tribunals, she continued.  In that regard, she noted the comment from the report before the Committee that “the legal aid systems of both the Rwanda and Yugoslavia Tribunals were flawed and were open to abuse”.  While the Tribunals had made continuous efforts to rationalize the system, as the ACABQ had pointed out the effects of those efforts had not been clear.  There seemed to be more room for improvement.

Her delegation remained concerned about the continued high vacancy rate in the Tribunals.  For the ICTR, in particular, the vacancy rate reached a level of 20 per cent for Professional staff and 12 per cent for General Service staff as of 31 August 2003.  That precarious situation hampered the sound planning of the work of the Tribunal, while putting an extra burden on the existing staff.  She encouraged the Secretariat to make further strenuous efforts to address that problem.

Regarding the measures recently taken to strengthen the ICTR, she said that a separate prosecutor had now been appointed, the number of ad litem judges had increased from four to nine and a new unit had been proposed to handle the anticipated increase in appeals cases.  Such reinforcement measures should lead to further progress in the work of the Tribunal.  With regard to the ICTY, she was pleased that the implementation of the Tribunal’s completion strategy would be the main focus of its work during the coming biennium.  She hoped to see that court’s efficiency increased through flexible organizational adjustments based on the potential decrease in the Tribunal’s workload. 

VLADIMIR IOSIFOV (Russian Federation) said that there had been several mistakes and problems in the work of the international criminal tribunals over the years.  For example, there had been a low level of productivity and high costs regarding the organization of their work.  The ICTY budget for 2004-2005 called for a reduction, he said, and the recosting of resources was leading further increases.  Nevertheless, he was pleased to note that for the first time the proposed budget had been submitted on a results-based budgeting basis and has useful guidelines for the eventual phasing out of the Tribunal.  With regard to posts in the Office of the Prosecutor at the ICTY, however, he questioned the advisability of redeployment, rather than the elimination, of posts. 

He supported the ACABQ recommendation on delaying proposals for an upward reclassification of a number of posts.  Furthermore, the estimates for travel costs were too high, considering the reduction in investigative work that was to come.  Although a significant increase in the needs of the Tribunals had been occasioned by external economic factors, the total amount of the revised estimates could be lower, he said.  It was, therefore, important that the administrations of the Tribunals carry out an ongoing evaluation of all expenditures. 

ARNE B. HONNINGSTAD (Norway) said that the Tribunals represented historic first steps towards ending the tradition of impunity for mass atrocities by establishing effective systems of international criminal law.  However, the work of the Tribunals was dependent on the allocation of adequate financial resources, and he stressed the importance of ensuring the flow of funds in order to allow both courts to carry out their activities and complete their mandates. 

The documents before the Committee provided proof of positive developments, he continued.  He commended the Tribunals for presenting their budgets in a results-based format.  The ICTY report on its reform of the legal aid system contained encouraging information, and he welcomed the Tribunal’s efforts to rationalize the cost of defence counsel and establish indigence.  He was confident that the measures already implemented by the Tribunal, as well as planned future reforms, would in no way compromise the principles of justice the legal aid system must serve.  He also noted with great interest many of the measures to improve the legal aid programme at the ICTR and efforts to refine the system should continue. 

Regarding the completion strategy, he said that recent developments held promise for the future.  The pace of the activities of both Tribunals had now reached an all-time high.  It was the responsibility of every Member State to help the Tribunals continue that progress.  He believed that recent reforms, including the appointment of a separate Prosecutor for the ICTR and increase in the number of ad litem judges, would double the trial capacity of the Tribunal and as a result, its resources and personnel must increase. 

His delegation deplored the unsatisfactory situation regarding payments of assessed contributions to the Tribunals’ budgets, he said.  The fact that no fewer than 122 Member States had failed to contribute to either Tribunal in 2003 was clearly unacceptable.  The ACABQ had recommended reducing the requirements for the ICTY by $20 million, but he was not convinced that the proposed budget reductions were justified.  As the Assembly was due to review the biennial nature of the Tribunals’ budgets, it was necessary to seriously consider whether it would be preferable to return to an annual budget cycle beginning in 2006.  An annual budget cycle might give Member States a better opportunity to adjust budget estimates to rapidly shifting resource requirements, uncertainties in the currency markets and the lowering of costs as the Tribunals proceeded with their exit strategies. 

PETER HAMMERSCHMIDT (Canada), speaking on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand (CANZ), said that the CANZ delegations were among the strongest supporters of the international criminal Tribunals.  Regrettably, that could not be said for the vast majority of the membership.  The list of those in arrears was unprecedented, as were the amounts outstanding.  The worsening pattern of underpayment was exacerbating an already untenable financial situation, and put into serious question the continued viability of those institutions.  Indeed, it put into serious doubt the membership’s desire to make international justice work.  The CANZ delegations would like to receive the Secretariat’s view about the long-term financial implications for the Tribunals if membership continued not to pay.

The Tribunals had achieved a number of positive milestones over the past year, he continued.  Key vacancies had been filled, the budgets had been presented for the first time in a results-base budgeting format and the ICTR had established a strategic-level management council to coordinate the administration of the Tribunal.  However, the optimism generated by those improvements was tempered by continued frustration with the overall lack of budgetary disciple at the Tribunals.  For many years, delegations had called for tighter budgetary controls, a proactive approach to budgeting and the maximization of existing resources.  They had been told that internal measures would be taken to streamline and improve the work of the Tribunals.  Yet, today there was little evidence that a new approach had taken hold.

Incremental budgeting appeared to remain the underlying philosophy, he said.  New costs were simply added to the already large baselines, and there were few attempts to find resources for such needs from within existing budget envelopes.  There was little indication in the budgets and the budget levels that any of the internal measures taken to improve efficiency were having an impact.  Furthermore, greater emphasis was needed on focusing internal resources on those areas most important to the effective functioning of the Tribunals and the completion of their work.  Both budgets made it clear that streamlining and rationalizing the work of the Tribunals would be a priority for the biennium.  The CANZ delegations would be interested in learning just how they planned to achieve those aims.

Defence costs for both Tribunals had run well over budget in the past, due to general weakness in managing, monitoring and controlling legal aid spending, he said.  CANZ was thus encouraged by the initiatives taken to date in reforming that critical aspect of the Tribunals’ operations.  One factor overlooked in the discussion of legal aid was the role of the defence in the overall work of the Tribunals.  Given that the defence was indispensable in trial work, it needed to be sufficiently represented in discussions with the principal organizations of the Tribunals.  The legal profession at the ICTR could also play a proactive role in the investigation of cases of alleged professional misconduct.  No such mechanism existed at present, resulting in delayed or slowed trial work and high defence costs.

The planned reprioritization of resources upon completion of investigative activities at both Tribunals was not synchronized with the timelines established in their completion strategies, he continued.  The management of those resources was not transparent and CANZ required justification for maintaining so many investigative posts longer than was necessary.  Maintaining other resources to support investigation, such as evidence and information, also required further explanation.

Regarding the creation of a separate Prosecutor at the ICTR, given that the office already existed on a part-time basis, the shift to full-time prosecutorial duties would seem to necessitate only a very slight increase in resources.  That could easily be met by redeployment.  Moreover, the rationale for establishing a separate appeals unit required further exploration.  CANZ would also like a basic justification of the resources requested for five additional ad litem judges for the ICTR.  Furthermore, the budgets and each additional resource request must be considered in the context of the Tribunals’ expenditure patterns for the current biennium.  CANZ found the repeated late issuance of the second performance reports unacceptable and would, therefore, appreciate an update in the Tribunals’ expenditure patterns for the current biennium.

NICHOLAS SHALITA (Rwanda) recalled that the Rwanda Tribunal had been established in November 1994 upon his country’s request.  Rwanda attached the highest importance to bringing to justice the perpetrators of the genocide in which it lost 1 million of its people.  Within its national courts, Rwanda had completed over 3,000 trials for various crimes related to the genocide.  For lower-level crimes, the Government had introduced Gacaca community courts, which tried cases in the presence of members of the community and whose sentences ranged from community service to short periods of imprisonment.

Continuing, he welcomed recent efforts to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Tribunal, including the appointment of a separate Prosecutor and an increase in the number of ad litem judges and trial chambers.  It was, therefore, his delegation’s expectation that the achievements of the Tribunal during the next few years, as it implemented its completion strategy, would be significantly more pronounced than before.  Delayed or piecemeal payments of assessed dues by Member States could affect successful implementation of the completion strategy, however.

Welcoming plans to transfer 40 suspects to Rwanda for trial, he expressed pleasure over the fact that the Office of the Prosecutor was going to start transferring them by the beginning of 2006.  However, the question about how the transfer would be financed had not been addressed.  The cost of transferring the trials to Rwanda would include salaries and allowances for defence counsel, interpretation costs, construction of detention facilities and modernization of existing court offices.  Rwanda did not have the financial resources at its disposal to meet those costs.  Arrangements should be made as early as possible in 2004, in order to leave ample time for completion of construction work, relocation of suspects and counsel and other necessary preparations before the end of 2005.

Regarding the legal aid programme, he said that over the last several years Rwanda had repeatedly expressed concern about systematic abuse of the legal aid systems, particularly the practice of fee-splitting between defence counsel and genocide suspects and the hiring of relatives and friends of suspects as defence investigators or assistants.  Those events had severely undermined the credibility of the Tribunal among Rwandans.  Genocide survivors had been outraged that genocide suspects and their families were deriving financial gain from the very body that was supposed to bring them to justice for their serious crimes.  Rwanda welcomed the reforms undertaken to eliminate abuse of the legal aid programme and to protect the integrity of the judicial process, although he still found it difficult to understand why those very simple measures had not been put in place from the very beginning.

On billing by defence counsel, he said that the present system was open to abuse and that he would like to see a much tighter assessment of hours billed by defence teams.  He also supported the recommendations that the assessment of claims by all members of a defence team be conducted by one person at the same time and that the assessment of claims of all defence teams, where more than one suspect was being tried at the same time, also be conducted by one person.  That would avoid confusion and control duplication.  Rwanda did not support the proposal to restrict the list of counsel to persons who resided in Africa as a cost-cutting measure.  Given the Tribunal’s international character and the principle of equal treatment of persons assigned the same mandate, he agreed with the Tribunal that such a measure would be seen as discriminatory and would raise strong objections.

In conclusion, he drew the Committee’s attention to the critical outreach responsibilities of the ICTR, which had regrettably had no impact in Rwanda, so far.  As the Tribunal focused on its completion strategy, he would like to see more effective and targeted utilization of resources earmarked for communications and outreach in order to achieve that important aspect of its mandate.  The Tribunal must adopt a more proactive strategy.  Holding a series of “town hall” public awareness meetings on the work of the Tribunal and more aggressive use of radio would give much better value-for-money than the outreach activities that the ICTR was engaged in at present.

ELIZABETH NAKIAN (United States) said that her delegation continued to place great importance on the Tribunals’ effective and efficient functioning.  Recent changes with regard to the Tribunals, including the appointment of a new post of Prosecutor and five additional ad litem judges for the ICTR and presentation of the budgets in a results-based format, necessitated even closer attention than in past years.  With the new emphasis on keeping the work of the Tribunals on track and looking ahead to their eventual closure, there was a continuing need to ensure that their activities were conducted within existing budget and staffing levels through enhanced efficiency and redeployment of staff.  However, she was concerned by the failure of both Tribunals to make greater efforts to identify savings.  As a result, the Committee was now faced with considerable increases in the overall budget levels. 

For both Tribunals, her delegation was particularly alarmed by the ever-increasing costs for the legal aid systems, she said.  It was necessary to ensure that the Tribunals continued to reform their systems, chiefly with regard to rationalizing the costs of defence counsel and establishing indigence.  She noted that the ICTY had implemented a lump-sum system to contain and control escalating costs for defence counsel fees and applauded the appointment of a financial investigator to assess the ability of the accused to cover the costs of their defence.  She strongly encouraged the ICTY to continue to implement and closely monitor such reforms and expected to receive more specific information in future reports on actual savings attributed to such measures.

As for the ICTR, she welcomed the steps taken to reduce the occurrence of interruptions to trials and the establishment of the New Trial Committee composed of representatives from the Chambers, Prosecution and Registry, as a means of encouraging greater transparency and cooperation among the Court’s branches and facilitating the trial-readiness of several new cases.  Those were just a few of the reforms needed to ensure that the Tribunal’s work was on track and that its prior management problems were rectified.  More could and should be done, however.  For example, she was outraged by the finding by the Office of Internal Oversight Services that a staff member from the finance section had repeatedly requested and received large monetary kickbacks from some members of the defence teams.  It was unacceptable that the staff member was still employed by the Tribunal.

Continuing, she welcomed the measures to reform the ICTR’s legal aid system and supported the recommendation to reduce the maximum monthly hours for which defence teams could claim legal fees from 175 to 100.  She encouraged the Tribunal to apply that reduction not only to the pre-trial activities, but to the trial and appeals stages, as well.  Urging the ICTR to conclude its analysis of all reform recommendations and implement them, she also encouraged the Rwanda Tribunal to consult closely with the ICTY to benefit from that Tribunal’s experiences and lessons learned in implementing similar reforms.  The time had come for both Tribunals to enact concrete reforms that had reasonable and enforceable limits on remuneration of defence counsel. 

As for the proposed budgets of the two courts, she endorsed many of the recommendations and findings in the ACABQ’s report on the ICTY, including the proposed reductions in travel, overtime and consultant costs.  She also welcomed the planned redeployments and abolishment of posts and insisted that those changes be implemented immediately.  The volume of work and the pace of completion for the ICTY should be continuously monitored to determine how posts, especially investigative positions, could be transferred to other areas or abolished by the end of 2004. 

Recent changes should accelerate the work of the ICTR and allow it to carry out its newly proposed completion strategy, she said.  Nevertheless, her delegation did question the need for 45 additional staff to support the ad litem judges, given the sizeable increase in posts approved the last biennium and the perpetually high vacancy rate.  She had similar concerns with regard to the Appeals Unit.  Putting aside specific new functions and associated revised estimates, she was disappointed that the Advisory Committee had not identified any savings to the original proposed biennium budget, particularly given the magnitude of the $235 million budget proposal. 

On top of the needed resources to support the new functions, the budget proposal for 2004-2005 also envisioned resource growth of 2.4 per cent.  The ICTR had failed to identify any potential offsets to absorb the cost of the 109 new posts approved during the last biennium.  Furthermore, while the ICTR did include a completion strategy for the first time, it had not identified the redeployment or abolition of posts and resources to reflect new stages in its work programme.

Mr. HALBWACHS, replying to issues raised during the debate said that the budget increases being sought were due to inflation and currency fluctuations, or to new mandates that the Security Council had passed since the preparation of the budget, such as a new Prosecutor and new ad litem judges.

In response to a question from Norway’s representative concerning the ACABQ’s proposal for a reduction of $20 million in the budget of the ICTY, he said that it was not apparent whether the recommendation was limited to recosting, or referred to a cut in real resources.  If it referred to a reduction in real resources, it would have a detrimental effect and the ITCY would not be able to stick to its time schedule.  It could result in long-term additional costs, as the Tribunal would have to remain in operation for a longer period.

Replying to a question from Canada’s representative, he said that the failure of the membership to pay their contributions to the Tribunals had led to cross-borrowing, and those loans needed to be repaid.  Should the current pattern of non-payment continue, the Tribunals would receive less resources than were budgeted and the Tribunals might not be able to meet their mandates.

Responding to Canada’s query about late performance reports, he said that the two reports had been issued in November and were not in fact late.  They had been issued as early as possible in order to reflect the expenditures pattern of the last 20 months.

Introductions

Mr. HALBWACHS introduced the Secretary-General’s second performance report, as contained in documents A/58/558 and Add.1.

Mr. MSELLE introduced the related report of the ACABQ, contained in document A/58/604.

Statements

ROBERTO MARTINI (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the late issuance of the performance reports had caused the information contained within them to decrease in usefulness.  The late issuance of documentation was becoming commonplace throughout the United Nations and Member States did not have enough time to analyze the reports and draw their conclusions.

With regard to the Counter-Terrorism Committee, he said that further work was necessary to put its expenses on a sounder footing.  Turning to conference services, he said that the last budget had reported a significant amount of overspending.  However, by using meeting time more effectively and not resorting to night meetings, the Department of General Assembly Affairs had been able to keep more on track with its forecasts.  It was disappointing, however, that those economies had not been reported in the second performance report.

The European Union supported the initiatives by the Secretariat to streamline the activities of the postal service.  That could generate efficiency gains, he said.  He looked forward to the development of one integrated Web site for all United Nations Postal Administration offices.  The initial results achieved by the Postal Administration in its reform were very positive, he said.

THOMAS A. REPASCH (United States) said that he wanted to focus on the comments of the Advisory Committee, which had covered the issues of the greatest importance.  He agreed with the ACABQ regarding the need for a single report to be issued for both programme and financial performance for the same period.  He also took note of the comments that the next performance report would support the results-based budgeting format and asked whether the final budget figure included the cost of the special political mission in Côte d’Ivoire.  From paragraph 11 of the ACABQ report, he also noted continued high vacancy rates at the Economic Commission for Africa and expressed concern over that matter.  Urgent measures were needed to address that problem, but Member States had been talking about that for a long time and he wanted to know what else could be done.

Turning to the United Nations Postal Administration, he said that his delegation had expressed concern in the past over a continued downward spiral in its performance.  While noting the stabilization in the its activities, reduction of expenditures and a small surplus for the current biennium, he said that he was concerned over a hidden but serious threat in connection with the fact that, in the past, only a small percentage of United Nations stamps sold had been redeemed for postage.  It would be valuable to get a comment from the Board of Auditors on that serious postage liability.  He wondered why recommendations had not been made in the past to create a reserve to cover those anticipated costs.  As for the current proposal to set aside a surplus for that purpose, at this point, too many unknowns were involved, and he believed that the current arrangement for accounting for stamps should be continued.

NORMA GOICOCHEA ESTONEZ (Cuba) said that her delegation appreciated the fact that in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the ACABQ report it referred to the reform of the budget presentation on programme implementation.  Her delegation also took note of the recommendation in paragraph 9 of the ACABQ report on the amount of resources planned for the International Court of Justice.  The amount that was planned seemed insufficient, she said, and it was important to have more predictable resources for this type of function.

Her delegation asked for further information regarding the additional requirements of the Economic and Social Council contained in paragraph 13 of the Secretary-General’s report and asked how those costs were able to be absorbed.  Her delegation also wished to know why the provision of new equipment promised for the Department of Public Information had been postponed.

SHINICHI YAMANAKA (Japan) noted with concern the increase in the final appropriation for 2002-2003 -- similar to the situation two years ago.  Sufficient justification had not been provided for some items.  He intended to request the Secretariat to provide Member States with detailed clarification on changes in exchange rates, inflation, travel and other items.

NAJIB ELJY (Syria) called attention to the late presentation of the documents and noted special statements on the United Nations Postal Administration, recording a slight improvement in its performance.  However, the improvements were not sufficient, particularly taking into account the situation in the 1980s and 1990s.  He also expressed concern over the information regarding the planned introduction of personalized stamps, and financing that project through an international bidding process.  He questioned if that was suitable to the character of the Organization.  As for the exchange rates, he wanted to get the most recent data regarding the position of the dollar versus the euro and Swiss frank.

Mr. HALBWACHS, responding to questions from the floor, said that the performance report by its nature had to wait to the end of the General Assembly to be issued.  It had been produced based on 20 months of expenditure and it could not be issued before the General Assembly session started.  Such an action would lead to a meaningless and inaccurate report, as it was necessary to wait for the latest exchange rate and inflation information.

Responding to a question about the combination of reports on programme performance and financial performance, he said that at this time of year the Secretariat was not thinking of having a combined report.  What was being discussed was the expansion of the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) to include financial performance information.

Replying to a question raised about the Economic and Social Council resources, he said that additional requirements arising in 2003 were minimal and, therefore, could be absorbed without requesting additional resources.

In response to an issue raised concerning the deferment of Public Information equipment, he said that if a Capital Master Plan was to be launched over the next few years, it would not be prudent to procure new equipment now, as it would have to be renewed when the Capital Master Plan was implemented.

Introductions

BERNARD COCHEME, Secretary of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund and Chief Executive Officer of the Fund, introduced the report of the Standing Committee, contained in document A/58/241 and Corr.1.

Mr. MSELLE introduced the related report of the ACABQ, document A/58/7/Add.9.

Mr. COCHEME, explaining the proposals relating to internal audit costs, said that the members of the Standing Committee had expressed their concern with respect to the past performance of the OIOS as the internal audit body for the Fund.  The difficulties encountered with the performance of the OIOS related to the selection of the areas subject to internal auditing; the manner in which internal audits were conducted; and reporting arrangements of such audits.  Repetitive failure on behalf of the OIOS to provide internal audit service to the administrative and investment activities of the Fund had led the Standing Committee to recommend that an internal audit unit be established within the Pension Fund.

Introducing a related ACABQ report (document A/58/7/Add.9), Mr. MSELLE said that the ACABQ agreed with the Fund’s revised appropriations for 2002-2003, which now amounted to $80.3 million.  Regarding the expenses for 2004-2005, he said that the Advisory Committee “more or less” agreed with most of the posts proposed for the Fund.  However, the ACABQ had expressed concern regarding increasing travel costs.

Regarding internal audit costs, the ACABQ had recommended that the current arrangements and the role of the OIOS should not be changed, but in the meantime, a discussion should be held between the OIOS and the Fund to resolve some of the issues involved, pending receipt of the Board of Auditors report.  Frankly, he got an impression of “a family feud”.  The issues were not insurmountable.  In the past, there had been a good collaboration between the Fund and the Secretariat.  He trusted that, with good will, the matter could be resolved.  The role of the OIOS should not be changed until a report of the Board of Auditors was received.

For the coming biennium, the Advisory Committee recommended that the proposed budget for the administrative expenses of the Pension Fund be approved in the amount of $94.69 million.  This figure represented a decrease of $394,100, reflecting the reduction of one P-4 post and one General Service post.  The ACABQ had no objection to the proposal by the Standing Committee to supplement the voluntary contributions to the Emergency Fund by an amount not exceeding $200,000 for 2004-2005.

Mr. REPASCH (United States), while supporting the Pension Fund operations and endorsing the general thrust of the ACABQ report, noted that the current budget period would end with a substantial amount of unspent funds and asked for an update on the specific amounts and their proposed disposition.  As the budget contained a number of proposals for additional posts and upward reclassification, his delegation would be curious to learn about management’s efforts to scrutinize current allocations with an aim to redeploy posts and other resources to higher priority areas.  Similarly, his delegation would also be interested in learning about past instances where posts had been abolished or downgraded to meet the changing needs of the Fund.

His delegation would like to receive an update on the status of the Fund’s move to a nearby office building, including the latest cost estimates and a timetable for accomplishing the move.  Like the ACABQ, the United States’ delegation was also concerned about the 30 per cent increase in travel requirements and would like to receive additional justification for that.  While his delegation understood the need to provide training and workshops at United Nations duty stations, it also expected that training and information sharing would increasingly be encouraged by electronic means.

Effective oversight of the Pension Fund was a critical component of its overall operations, not only to provide confidence to participants that their funds were used wisely, but also to provide management with a continuous assessment of operational effectiveness and internal controls.  That was why his delegation had been shocked to read that the Standing Committee had recommended firing the OIOS and replacing the United Nations auditors with a new internal audit office.  Both the OIOS and the Fund’s management had committed themselves to resolving their disputes.  The ACABQ’s recommendation for a Board of Auditors assessment of OIOS capabilities on Fund matters had also been endorsed by consensus.  Even before the study had been issued, however, the Standing Committee had decided what should be done.

The United States’ delegation would like to receive a full explanation of the Standing Committee’s actions, he said, and needed to state clearly its opposition to the Committee’s recommendations.  By mandate, the OIOS had the authority to provide oversight of the “staff and resources” of the Organization.  Since a substantial amount of the Fund’s resources were derived from the United Nations, it went without saying that the OIOS would continue to provide internal oversight of the Fund.  If the Fund’s management believed that additional oversight services were needed, his delegation would be interested in hearing its proposals.

The Committee’s Acting Chairman, ASDRUBAL PULIDO LEON (Venezuela) then drew attention to the documents before the Committee on the delegation of formal authority in matters of personnel of the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

HAROLD ADLAI AGYEMAN (Ghana) expressed support for the transfer of formal authority to the Executive Director of the UNFPA, as proposed by the Executive Board of the United Nations Development Programme and the UNFPA and recommended by the Economic and Social Council.  Such a transfer would ensure efficiency and accountability.  One of the means to achieve that goal was to define clearly the lines of authority and responsibility of each organization.

Mr. REPASCH (United States) proposed preparing a text on the matter for action at the Committee’s next meeting.

* *** *