Fifty-eighth General Assembly

Fifth Committee

29^th Meeting (PM)

INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS, ASSESSMENT SCALES FOR REGULAR, PEACEKEEPING BUDGETS

AMONG ISSUES ADDRESSED, AS FIFTH COMMITTEE APPROVES EIGHT TEXTS

Approving eight draft resolutions this afternoon, the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) made recommendations to the General Assembly on such items as financing the two International Tribunals and the new mission in Côte d’Ivoire, the scale for the apportionment of Member States’ contributions to the United Nations, and revised appropriations for the current biennium.

The Committee recommended that, for 2004-2005, the Assembly appropriate $235.32 million for the International Tribunal for Rwanda and $298.23 million for the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.  The Secretary-General requested $251.4 million and $327.3 million, respectively, but, among other things, the Committee recommended not to increase the current level of funding for consultants and experts and to defer consideration of the resource requirements for the Investigations Division for 2005 to its fifty-ninth session.

At the same time, the Assembly would note with concern the high levels of unpaid dues for both Tribunals and urge Member States to make their payments on time, in full and without conditions.  [According to the October statement on the financial situation of the United Nations by the Under-Secretary-General for Management, unpaid amounts for the Tribunals had reached $117 million at the end of September.

By two other drafts, the Committee addressed the Tribunals’ second performance reports for the current biennium, recommending that the Assembly adjust the amount approved for the Rwanda Tribunal by some $4.52 million for a total amount of $208.48 million gross; and the budget of the former Yugoslavia Tribunal by some $25.67 million for a total amount of some $288.32 million.

Also this afternoon, acting on the Secretary-General’s second performance report for 2002-2003, the Committee revised the 2002-2003 appropriations for the regular budget of the Organization, taking into account fluctuations in rates of exchange, inflation and unforeseen and extraordinary expenditures.

By the terms of the draft resolution on the matter, the Assembly would increase the overall appropriation for the current biennium from $2.89 billion (appropriated in resolutions 57/293 A of December 2002 and 57/311 of June 2003) to a total of $2.96 billion.

Noting that financing of the United Nations Mission in Côte d’Ivoire (MINUCI) up to now has been provided in accordance with the provisions for peacekeeping missions, the Assembly, by the terms of the draft resolution approved by the Committee, would decide as a provisional and exceptional measure, to finance the Mission from the regular budget until its current mandate expires next February.  The issue of the most appropriate funding for the Mission upon renewal of its mandate would be considered during the Assembly’s resumed fifty-eighth session, in the context of established norms and practice.

[The source of financing for the Mission became a subject of discussion in the Committee earlier in the session.  When established last May, its budget for the first six months was presented on an assumption that it would function as a peacekeeping mission, which would be financed in accordance with the peacekeeping scale of assessments.  Subsequently, in an exchange of letters between the Presidents of the Security Council and the General Assembly with the Secretary-General, an opinion was expressed that it should be treated as a special political mission, and its latest mandate was extended as such.  Special political missions are provided for under section 3, Political affairs, of the Organization’s regular budget.]

Also today, the Committee approved the scales under which Member States’ contributions to the regular and peacekeeping budgets of the Organization would be calculated in 2004-2006.  By the draft on the regular scale, the Assembly would reaffirm the fundamental principle that the expenses of the United Nations should be apportioned among Member States broadly, according to their capacity to pay.  While noting that the changes in methodology, which were introduced in 2000, had led to substantial increases in the rate of assessment of some Member States, the Assembly would reaffirm its earlier decision that the methodology would remain fixed until 2006.

[The United Nations scale of assessments was last reviewed in 2000, when the current scale (2001-2003) was adopted in resolution 55.5B.  One of its main features was a reduction of the maximum rates from 25 to 22 per cent.  The new ceiling was then applied to the Organization’s main contributor –- the United States -– and the points arising as a result of the change were distributed pro rata among other States, except for those affected by the “floor” and the least developed country ceiling.]

By a related draft, the Assembly would endorse an updated composition of levels of contribution for peacekeeping operations for the period 2004-to 2006, which are calculated in conjunction with the regular budget scale of assessment.

Also this afternoon, the Director of the Programme Planning and Budget Division, Warren Sach, introduced the reports on the utilization of the provision of the regular budget for special political missions and on the use of the contingency fund.  According to the latter, the total estimated requirements to be applied to the contingency fund amounted to $23.02 million, exceeding the approved $21.6 million level of the fund.  In the report, the Secretary-General proposed adjustments in the amount of some $7.87 million that would bring the overall level of charges within appropriate level.  Those included a suggestion to invite the Economic and Social Council to review its decision on the organization of work of the sixtieth session of the Commission on Human Rights and discontinuing of funding of the Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs.

Several delegations, including those of Morocco (on behalf of the “Group

of 77” developing countries and China), Cuba, Costa Rica, Syria and Mexico, addressed specific proposals, insisting on the need to continue financing the Repertory from the regular budget and to avoid interfering with the decisions of the Economic and Social Council.

The Committee will meet again at 3 p.m. Friday, 19 December.

Action on Texts

The Committee first took up a draft resolution on the scale of assessments for the apportionment of expenses of the United Nations (document A/C.5/58/L.44).  By the terms of the text, which was introduced by INGA ERIKSSON FOGH (Sweden), the Assembly would reaffirm its earlier decision in its resolution 55/5B that the methodology for calculating the scale of assessments would remain fixed until 2006.

[The United Nations scale of assessments was last reviewed in 2000, when the current scale (2001-2003) was adopted in resolution 55/5B.  One of its main features was a reduction of the maximum rates (the ceiling) from 25 to 22 per cent.  The new ceiling was then applied to the Organization’s main contributor –- the United States -– and the points arising as a result of the change were distributed pro rata among other States, except for those affected by the “floor” and the least developed country ceiling.  In 2000, it was agreed that the methodology for the scale of assessments would remain in place until 2006.]

By further terms of the text, the Assembly would resolve that notwithstanding the terms of financial regulation 3.9, the Secretary-General shall be empowered to accept, at his discretion and after consultations with the Chairman of the Committee on Contributions, a portion of the contributions of Member States for the calendar years 2004, 2005, 2006 in currencies other than United States dollars.

The Assembly would also resolve that, in accordance with financial regulation 3.8, the Holy See, which is not a Member but participates in the Organization’s activities, shall be called upon to contribute to its expenses for the period 2004-2006 on the basis of a notional assessment rate of 0.001 per cent, which represents the basis for the calculation of the flat annual fees to be charged to the Holy See in accordance with Assembly resolution 44/197B of December 1989.

Also according to the text, the Assembly would note that the application of the current methodology leads to substantial increases in the rate of assessment of some Member States, including developing countries, and emphasize the need for future scales to reflect the principle that the Organization’s expenses should be apportioned according to the capacity to pay. 

Recalling its resolution 54/237 of April 2000, the Assembly would, by other terms, request the Committee on Contributions to continue its consideration of possible systematic criteria for deciding when market exchange rates should be replaced with price-adjusted rates of exchange or other appropriate conversion rates for the purposes of preparing the scale.  The Committee would also be requested to continue to make a thorough analysis of the revised method of calculating price-adjusted rates of exchange.  It would also endorse the Committee’s preliminary observations concerning criteria for ad hoc adjustments of the rates of assessment.

The draft resolution was approved without a vote.

The representative of Argentina reaffirmed his country’s commitment to the United Nations, noting that the backlog in his country’s payments to the Organization was a result of the crisis the country was undergoing.

The representative of Jamaica said her delegation had some serious concerns and reservations with regard to the draft, but had not objected to its adoption by consensus.  Jamaica remained deeply concerned at the extent of the increases, as it was not based on concrete improvements in capacity to pay, but rather on certain methodological applications in the Committee on Contributions.  There was very little in the Committee’s report to suggest that there was any serious concern with regard to the resulting dramatic escalation in Jamaica’s assessment.  In the application of any methodology, careful attention must be given to avoiding the recommendation of exorbitant increases between one scale cycle and another.  That was particularly important in light of the phasing-out of the scheme of limits, which was an important safeguard against excessive volatility in apportionments under the scale.  The reintroduction of a mechanism to address that problem should be considered, she said. 

Libya’s representative said the scale for 2004-2006 had many loopholes and had not taken into account the principle of capacity to pay.  Libya’s share had risen by some 100 per cent, despite the fact that Libya still faced the results of the unilateral economic embargo imposed on it.  When the scale was revised in 2006, capacity to pay should be taken into account. 

The representative of Lebanon said that his delegation had joined the consensus on the draft even though the Committee on Contributions had made serious flaws in preparing the scale, according to which his country’s share would rise by over 260 per cent.  He hoped future consideration of the item would reflect Member States’ actual ability to pay.

Speaking on behalf of the European Union, Italy’s representative said that he was pleased that agreement had been reached on the draft and a solution had been found.  It was important for the European Union that the agreed methodology continued to be applied until its review in 2006 by the Fifth Committee.

Cuba’s representative said that she shared the concerns expressed by Jamaica, Libya and Lebanon.  The application of the current methodology revealed certain inherent problems, which needed to be resolved.  She also took note of the negative impact of the reduction of the ceiling on the apportionment of Member States.  That needed to be kept under consideration in terms of the pattern of payments by the main contributor, and it was important to follow up on the topic in the future negotiations on the scale.

In conjunction with the regular budget scale of assessments for 2004-2006, the Committee also had before it a text on the scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of United Nations peacekeeping operations (document A/C.5/58/L.45), by which the Assembly would endorse the updated composition of levels of contribution for peacekeeping operations for the period 2004-2006, as contained in the Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of resolutions 55/235 and 55/236 contained in document A/58/157/Add.1.  [Annexed to that report are the effective rates of assessment for peacekeeping for 1 January 2004 to

31 December 2006 based on the scale for the regular budget and the peacekeeping scale.]

The Assembly, by further terms of the draft, requests the Secretary-General to report to it at its sixty-first session on the updating of the composition of levels of contribution for peacekeeping operations for the period 2007 to 2009.

Prior to action on the text, MARK GILPIN, the Chief of the Contribution Section, introduced document A/58/157/Add.1 saying the annex to the document provided updated information on the effective rates for peacekeeping for 2004-2006 based on informal agreements.

The text, which was introduced by Ms. FOGH (Sweden), was then approved without a vote. 

By four other draft resolutions, the Committee addressed the second performance reports for the current biennium of the two International Tribunals and their budgets for 2004-2005.  First, it approved without a vote draft resolutions A/C.5/58/L.27 and A/C.5/58/L.38 on the Rwanda Tribunal, and then draft resolutions A/C.5/58/L.28 and A/C.5/58/L.39 for the former Yugoslavia court.

Recommending that the Assembly take note of the performance reports of both Tribunals, and endorsing the conclusions and recommendations of the Advisory Committee on the matter, by draft resolution A/C.5/58/L.27, the Committee recommended that the Assembly adjust the amount approved in its resolution 57/289 for the budget of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda for 2002-2003 by some $4.52 million, for a total amount of $208.48 million gross.

By draft resolution A/C.5/58/L.28, the Assembly would resolve that, also for the current biennium, the amount approved in resolution 57/288 for the budget of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia be adjusted by some $25.67 million gross, for a total amount of some $288.32 million.

Turning to the requirements for the next biennium (2004-2005), the Assembly would note with concern the high levels of unpaid assessed contributions for both Tribunals, and urge Member States to make their payments on time, in full and without conditions.

By the second text on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (document A/C.5/58/L.38), the Assembly would welcome the appointment of a Prosecutor and the authorization for the use of up to nine ad litem judges, as approved by the Security Council in its resolutions 1503 (2003) and 1512 (2003), and stress the importance of ensuring that the Tribunal receives adequate financial and human resources to support its strengthened judicial capacity and to enable it to meet the targets set out in its completion strategy.  It would also concur with the view of the Advisory Committee that continued close collaboration between the two Tribunals is essential, and urges the Secretary-General to take all necessary measures to ensure such collaboration.

Further by the draft resolution, the Assembly would appropriate an amount of $235.32 million for the functioning of the Tribunal in 2004-2005.  In so doing, it would maintain the current level of funding for consultants and experts; approve the proposed post and non-post resources for the Investigations Division for 2004 and defer consideration of the resource requirements for the Investigations Division for 2005 to its fifty-ninth session.  The Secretary-General would be requested to resubmit those resource requirements in the first performance report, ensuring that the proposals are adequate for the effective implementation of the completion strategy.

By the second draft resolution on the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (document A/C.5/58/L.39), the Assembly would appropriate the total amount of $298.23 million for the biennium 2004-2005.  It would decidenot to approve the proposed increase in resources for consultants and experts; approve the proposed post and non-post resources for the Investigations Division in 2004; and to defer consideration of the resource requirements for the Division for 2005 to its fifty-ninth session.  As with the Rwanda Tribunal, the Secretary-General would be requested to resubmit his proposal for the resource requirements for the Investigations Division for 2005 in the first performance report. 

Among other provisions contained in the draft are the Fifth Committee’s recommendations to reduce the appropriation for contractual services to the level proposed in the second performance report for 2002-2003 and reduce the proposed resources for travel of Registry staff by $200,000.

Speaking after action on the texts, Japan’s representative said it was important for Member States to be informed of discussions in the Security Council on the two Tribunals with important budget implications.  He was concerned about insufficient explanations in the case of the two Tribunals, which should be further rationalizing their budgets while implementing their completion strategies.  Those two strategies should be compatible.  The transfer of cases to national courts should be seriously considered to speed up the Tribunals’ processes and avoid budgetary increases.  His Government would be in a difficult position in the future, if greater efforts were not made to provide the necessary explanations.  If Japan’s Government were requested to sign off without much explanation, it would be similar to signing a blank check.

Noting that the financing of the United Nations Mission in Côte d’Ivoire up to now has been provided in accordance with the provisions for peacekeeping missions, the Assembly, by the terms of a draft resolution on the matter (document A/C.5/58/L.37), would decide as a provisional and exceptional measure, to finance the Mission from the regular budget until its current mandate expires next February. 

[When the Mission was first established last May, its budget for the first six months was presented on an assumption that it would function as a peacekeeping mission and, as such, would be financed in accordance with the peacekeeping scale of assessments.  Subsequently, after an exchange of letters between the President of the Security Council and the Secretary-General, it was extended as a Special Political Mission.  Such missions are provided for under section 3, Political affairs, of the Organization’s regular budget.]

The Assembly would further decide that the issue of the most appropriate funding for the Mission upon renewal of its mandate should be considered at the first part of the Assembly’s resumed fifty-eighth session, in the context of established norms and practice.  

Speaking before action on the text, WARREN SACH, the Director of the Programme Planning and Budget Division, said the Secretariat had been asked to clarify its understanding of the implications of operative paragraphs 3 and 4.  By operative paragraph 3, the United Nations Mission in Côte d’Ivoire (MINUCI) would be financed through the expiration of its current mandate in February 2004 from regular budget resources.  An additional amount of some $13.86 million was required within the financial appropriations for 2002-2003.  That was over and above resources sought in the second performance report for 2002-2003 and, accordingly, the final appropriation for the regular budget for 2002-2003 would amount to some $2.967 billion.  Regarding financing the balance of the mandate in 2004, an amount of some $2.17 million net would be required, and would be treated as a charge against the provision in section 3 of the 2004-2005 proposed programme budget for the financing of special political missions.

Regarding operative paragraph 4, he said the relevant mode of financing for any new mandate would be responsive to particulars included in the mandate extension for the Mission.  Bearing in mind that the Council was expected to act in January or early February to mandate further activities for MINUCI, prior to the first part of the resumed fifty-eighth session, financing procedures would follow established norms and practice.  Should the Council decide to grant a new mandate effective February 2004 as a peacekeeping mission, the initial financing would be charged to the Peacekeeping Reserve Fund.  However, if a temporary rollover were to be approved for one or two months, the concurrence of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ) would be sought to use unassigned balance for appropriation under special political missions.  If the Council was unclear on the matter, the procedures for unforeseen and extraordinary expenses would be used.  Irrespective of the mode of financing for any mandate expansion approved by the Council prior to the first part of the resumed fifty-eight session, the matter would be brought before the Fifth Committee when it resumed its work in early 2004.

The text was then approved without a vote.

Speaking after approval, Botswana’s representative said the African Group had serious reservations on the proposed mode of funding for MINUCI.  To facilitate the process, however, the Group had joined consensus to have MINUCI on an exceptional basis financed as a special political mission.  The Council must give the issue serious consideration.  When the issue came to the Fifth Committee, discussion must take place on the future mode of financing for that important mission.

Japan’s representative said when the Security Council decided to establish MINUCI in 2003, the Japanese Government had understood it to be a peacekeeping operation.  The Secretary-General’s report mentioned that the budget for the mission was under preparation.  The budget document in September 2003 was presented in a peacekeeping operation budget format.  In document A/58/535, the Secretary-General informed the Assembly that the mission was not a peacekeeping operation, to the surprise of his Government.  The Security Council in November 2003 had adopted resolution 1514, which clearly stated that MINUCI was a special political mission.  The sequence of events was not helpful for his Government’s efforts to find the necessary funding.  The Japanese Government, which bore one-fifth of the United Nations budget, might be in a position where it was not able to approve such an increase.  Being asked to sign a blank check in effect was not acceptable in the parliamentary governmental process. 

The Committee also approved, without a vote, a draft resolution on the final budget appropriations for the 2002-2003 biennium. 

By the terms of the text (document A/C.5/58/L.41), the Assembly would take note of the Secretary-General’s second performance report on the 2002-2003 programme budget and the related report of the ACABQ.  It would resolve that, for the 2002-2003 biennium, the amount of some $2.89 billion (appropriated by it in resolutions 57/293 A of December 2002 and 57/311 of June 2003) shall be increased by $76.66 million for a grand total of $2.96 billion.

Also by the text, the Secretary-General would be authorized to transfer credits between sections of the budget, with the concurrence of the Advisory Committee.  In addition to the appropriations approved above, an amount of some $125,000 is appropriated for each year of the 2002-2003 biennium from the accumulated income of the Library Endowment Fund for the purchase of books, periodicals, maps and library equipment and for other such expenses of the Library at the Palais des Nations as are in accordance with the objects and provisions of the endowment.

By the terms of the text on final income estimates for the 2002-2003 biennium, the Assembly would resolve that for the 2002-2003 biennium, the estimates of income of $414.43 million (approved by it in resolution 57/293 B of 20 December 2002) shall be increased by $13.66 million for a grand total of $428.1 million.  The income from staff assessment shall be credited to the Tax Equalization Fund.  Direct expenses of the United Nations Postal Administration, services to visitors, catering and related services, garage operations, television services and the sale of publications not provided for under the budget appropriations shall be charged against the income derived from those activities.

Introduction of Documents

WARREN SACH, Director of Programme Planning and Budget Division, introduced a note by the Secretary-General on the utilization of the provision for special political missions under section 3, Political affairs, of the regular budget (document A/C.5/58/33).  According to this report, an amount of some $163.18 million has been sought for special political missions for the biennium 2004-2005, which is equivalent to $169.43 million after recosting.

During the current session, the Assembly is expected to approve a number of charges in the context of statements of programme budget implications and estimates pertaining to mandates authorized by the General Assembly and/or the Security Council, which total some $142.48 million.  The Fifth Committee may wish to note that, after that amount is charged against the regular budget provision of $169.43 million, unallocated resources for special political missions amount to about $26.95 million.

The estimated amounts to be appropriated at current 2004-2005 rates include $245,900 for continued good offices of the Secretary-General in Myanmar; $218,000 for good offices and political guidance in Central America; $6.72 million for the final extension of the mandate of the United Nations Verification Mission in Guatemala (MINUGUA); and $133.12 million for 20 other political offices, peace-building missions and sanctions panels authorized by the Security Council and the General Assembly, including the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) and the United Nations Assistance Mission for Iraq (UNAMI).

The Committee’s attention was then drawn to a related ACABQ report (document A/58/7/Add.28), which recommended that the General Assembly take note of the report of the Secretary-General.

Mr. Sach then introduced the Secretary-General’s consolidated statement of programme budget implications and revised estimates (document A/C.5/58/34), according to which the total estimated requirements to be applied to the contingency fund amounted to $23.02 million, exceeding by $1.42 million the approved $21.6 million level of the fund.  According to the procedures for the use of the contingency fund, the Secretary-General had proposed adjustments in the amount of some $7.87 million that would bring the overall level of charges within appropriate level.

According to the document, the Advisory Committee had already made recommendations for reductions in the amount of $3.23 million in respect of the provision of more predictable and adequate conference servicing to meetings of regional and other major groups.  It had also recommended a reduction of $85,400 in respect of the report of the Standing Committee of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund.  It was suggested that the Fifth Committee adopt those recommendations as part of its consideration of charges to be made against the contingency fund.

It was also estimated that careful management of resources allocated for interpretation and judicious scheduling of conferences and meetings would allow for absorption of over $1.5 million in interpretation costs.

Among the recommendations on the revised estimates arising from decisions adopted by the Economic and Social Council, is a suggestion that, if the Assembly invited the Council to review its decision 2003/269 on organization of work of the sixtieth session of the Commission on Human Rights with a view to foregoing additional meetings, a reduction in requirements of $193,800 could be realized.  It was also suggested that the Assembly should invite the Economic and Social Council to arrange for the Social Forum to meet concurrently with the Subcommission, which would result in a reduction of anticipated requirements by $326,200.

Also according to the report, given the specific wording of draft resolution A/C.6/58/L.18, which neither requires nor requests the continuation of the Repertory of Practice of United Nations Organs, it was possible to consider whether an appropriation would be needed for the continuation of that activity.  Other possible adjustments include the use of an amount of $107,000 as a source of financing for the construction of additional conference facilities in Nairobi.  That money was available as a result of interest newly credited to the construction-in-progress account.

Also before the Committee was a related ACABQ report (document A/58/7/Add.29), according to which, should the General Assembly accept the assumptions and suggestions contained in the report of the Secretary-General, the balance of funds available from the initial $21.6 million in the contingency fund would amount to some $6.45 million.

With regard to the reference to the initial recommendations of the Advisory Committee, the Advisory Committee’s recommendation for a reduction in the amount of $3.2 million in respect of the estimate for more predictable and adequate conference services to the meetings of regional and other major groupings of Member States had been made on the understanding that it was up to the General Assembly to formulate a policy decision whether to change the existing mandate for the provision of conference services to regional and other major groupings of Member States.

The Advisory Committee also noted that the Fifth Committee had yet to take formal action with regard to the approval of the specific programme budget implications and revised estimates that were currently before it.  Accordingly, the consolidated statement took as its starting point the total value of the relevant items before the Fifth Committee for decision.

Mr. MEDINA (Morocco), speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said that the Group fully shared the views of the Secretary-General concerning the need to ensure prudent use of the contingency fund, which should not be exhausted before the end of the biennium.  He believed it was necessary to review the use and the level of the fund.

Regarding the proposed elimination of the Repertory, he emphasized that the Group believed that the publication should be funded not against the contingency fund, but from the regular budget.  It was a mandated activity, and the Assembly had not taken a decision to discontinue it.

NORMA LUCIA GOICOCHEA (Cuba) agreed with the basic position of the Group of 77 and added that she deplored the fact that the documents on the important topics before the Committee had been distributed only after the beginning of the meeting.  While she understood that there were time constraints, measures must be taken in the future to allow the delegates to examine the reports at least one day in advance.

The proposal regarding the revised estimates in connection with Economic and Social Council decisions seemed to take into account the views of only one group of delegations in informal consultations.  She rejected the proposal related to the meetings of the Social Forum, because if the two bodies met at the same time, the members of the Subcommission would not have a chance to attend the Forum.  Meetings of the Forum should take place immediately prior to the session of the Subcommission.

Regarding the proposal in paragraph 9 of document A/C.5/58/34, by which the Assembly would invite the Economic and Social Council to amend its decision, she said that she could not agree with it.  A proposal to that effect had been made by a single delegation in informal consultations.  Several delegations, on the other hand, had pointed out that there was an express decision of the Council and that,

by making such a request, the Assembly would be interfering with the work of that body.

She also believed that the recommendation to discontinue funding of the Repertory was not appropriate and supported the proposal by the Group of 77 to restore funding to the publication.

ANTONIO ALARCON (Costa Rica) agreed with the position of the Group of 77 and China and Cuba.  He asked the Secretariat to provide an explanation on how the proposal regarding the Repertory had been arrived at.

NAJIB ELJY (Syria) also supported the position of the Group of 77 and Cuba regarding the Repertory, which, he believed, should be financed from the programme budget.  He also shared concerns regarding the decisions of the Economic and Social Council.

Responding to questions, Mr. SACH said that the document on the contingency fund had been written to assist the Committee in its work.  If choices were not made, the level of the fund would be exceeded.  It was inevitable that, with more potential charges than the resources available, some delegations would be disappointed.  While some amounts could be absorbed, other reductions were also needed to stay within the level of the fund.  If the choices presented by the Secretariat were not acceptable, the Committee could make decisions it found appropriate.

Regarding Economic and Social Council decisions, he pointed out that the options in connection with the Social Forum had been initially presented in the Secretary-General’s report on the matter.  The Secretariat’s role was not an easy one, but it was doing the best it could.  The approach to the Repertory was consistent with the Secretary-General’s earlier recommendation on the discontinuation of that activity in the proposed programme budget.

Mr. ALARCON (Costa Rica) noted that suggestions made by the Secretariat were no longer valid when there was a mandate by the Member States.  He appealed to the Committee to be aware of the fact that any endorsement of a change to a mandate arising from a General Assembly Committee would create a precedent.

Ms. GOICOCHEA (Cuba) supported the statement by the delegate of Costa Rica.  Regarding the Social Forum issue, the proposal would make it difficult for the Forum to function.  It was not relevant to make proposals that would interrupt the deliberative process.  Her delegation would revert back to the topic at a later date.

ERNESTO HERRERA (Mexico) supported Costa Rica’s statement, agreeing that Member States set the Organization’s priorities.

* *** *

gaab3602.p2