Meeting of States Parties

to Law of Sea Convention

74^th & 75^th Meetings (AM & PM)      

MEETING OF STATES PARTIES TO LAW OF SEA CONVENTION ADOPTS 2004 BUDGET

FOR TRIBUNAL; REDUCES CEILING ASSESSMENT RATE

Lengthy Discussion Held on Responsibilities of Meeting of States Parties

The thirteenth Meeting of States Parties to the Convention on the Law of the Sea today adopted the 2004 budget for the Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in the amount of $8,039,000, together with the staffing table for the Registry containing 16 Professional and 21 General Service posts.

The new budget (document SPLOS/L.30) represents a significant reduction in comparison to the proposed amount of $8,614,900, which had been presented at the opening of the session, due to the Meeting’s decision to adopt net budgeting in connection with its disbursement of the staff assessment fund to States parties (see below) and a reduction of the amounts for communications and equipment purchases.  Introducing the document, President of the Meeting, Stanislaw Pawlak (Poland) said that an amount of $1,109,200 was being approved in 2004 as case-related costs of the Tribunal, which would only be used in the event of cases being submitted to the Tribunal.

To align the scales of assessments for the budget of the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea and the regular budget of the United Nations, the Meeting this morning also decided to reduce the ceiling rate of individual States’ contributions from 25 to 22 per cent for 2005-2006. 

Acting without a vote on the proposal put forward by Japan last Monday, the States parties adopted a decision (document SPLOS/L.31) by which contributions for 2004 would be based upon the scale of assessments for the regular budget for 2003, adjusted to take account of participation in the Convention on the Law of the Sea.  Thus, a floor rate of 0.01 per cent and a ceiling rate of 24 per cent would be used in establishing the rate of assessments for States parties for 2004.

[In his statement, Japan’s representative argued that a reduction of the rate would allow the Tribunal to avoid placing an undue burden on any one country.  It was also important from the viewpoint of maintaining an organization’s financial soundness and stability.]

A total of six draft decisions were adopted (all without a vote) in two meetings today on various budgetary and administrative questions, including death and disability benefits for judges of the Tribunal, the court’s expenses in 2004 and its staff assessment fund.

Delegates also discussed the application of article 319 of the Convention, pursuant to which the Meetings of States Parties are convened, and heard a statement by the Director of the Centre for Seafarers' Rights, who requested the Meeting to place on its agenda a thorough review of the Convention’s protections for persons employed at sea, and review how States implemented them. 

States parties will reconvene to hear a report of the Credentials Committee and the President’s summary of the session at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 13 June.

Decisions on Tribunal Staff Assessment Fund, Financial Regulations, Liability, Working Capital Fund

Adopting, as orally amended by a representative of the Russian Federation, a draft decision on the staff assessment fund of the Tribunal (document SPLOS/L.32), the Meeting addressed possible increases in expenditure in connection with national tax imposed by some States on staff earnings from the Tribunal.  It decided that the amount in the current staff assessment fund, which stood at some $2.3 million at the end of 2002, should be deducted from States parties’ dues for 2004 pro rata to their contributions for each financial year concerned.  In 2003 and 2004, staff and members of the Tribunal would be reimbursed from the amount of staff assessment accumulated in 2003.  Thereafter, the remainder of the staff assessment fund would be deducted from the contributions of States parties for 2005-2006. 

Also by the text, bilateral agreements on tax reimbursements would be sought with States, which levy national taxes on remuneration paid by the Tribunal.  If necessary, a budget line would be included in the budget proposals for 2005-2006 to reimburse officials and members of the Tribunal for their national taxes. 

By acting on a draft decision on budgetary matters of the Tribunal (document SPLOS/L.33), the States parties addressed a significant increase, resulting from currency fluctuations and other circumstances beyond the Tribunal’s control.  The Meeting authorized the Registrar of the court to cover shortfalls with respect to budget lines related to established posts, common staff costs and maintenance of premises, as far as possible, through transfers between appropriation sections and, if necessary, by using the savings from 2002.

Also formally adopted today were the new financial regulations of the Tribunal (document SPLOS/L.34), which had been agreed upon during the twelfth Meeting of States Parties and approved in their final form yesterday.  Filling in the blanks remaining in the text, the Meeting decided yesterday that the regulations would become effective on 1 January 2004 and would apply to 2005-2006 and subsequent financial periods.

In another decision, the States parties agreed that provision should be made to cover the liability of the Tribunal in the event of death, injury of illness of members of the Tribunal attributable to service with the court.  The Tribunal was authorized to request the Secretary-General to consider extending to them the coverage under the rules governing compensation to members of commissions, committees or similar bodies of the United Nations system.  Pending the decision by the Secretary-General, the Meeting approved an appropriation of $6,000 for 2004 to cover the Tribunal’s liability.

Finally, in response to a concern expressed by the representative of the United Kingdom, the meeting also decided to incorporate in its final report a reference to the need to reduce the Working Capital Fund to 8 per cent of the overall budget of the Tribunal.  In that connection, the Registrar of the Tribunal pointed out, however, that the matter had already been recognized by the Tribunal and incorporated in several documents, including the latest budgetary proposal.

Discussion of Responsibilities of Meeting of States Parties

Divergent views were expressed today on the application of article 319 of the Convention, which spells out responsibilities entrusted to the Secretary-General, including an obligation to report to all States parties, the International Seabed Authority and competent international organizations on issues of a general nature that have arisen concerning the Convention.  While the Meeting of States Parties deals primarily with administrative and budgetary questions of the Tribunal, since 1983, the General Assembly has been carrying out an annual review of ocean affairs and the law of the sea.  In 1999, it was decided to widen and deepen that debate within the framework of the United Nations Open-Ended Consultative Process on Ocean Affairs.

In a lively debate on the matter, numerous delegations, including Argentina, Spain, Mexico, Uruguay, Jamaica, Australia, Tonga, Greece, Brazil, Paraguay, Guatemala and Mozambique, supported the position of Chile that Meeting of States Parties should not be confined to dealing with only budgetary and administrative matters.

Chile’s representative reminded the States parties that at the tenth Meeting, his country had proposed that the Meeting should also consider questions relating to the implementation of the Convention and receive annual reports of the Secretary-General on issues of a general nature that had arisen with respect to that instrument.  Receiving reports on the work of the Commission on the Limits of Continental Shelf and the Seabed Authority in recent years, the Meeting was on the right track.  The open-ended consultative process should not be considered an obstacle to the Meeting taking up substantive issues.  Rather, the two could be complementary to each other in the efforts to promote international governance of the oceans. 

Several speakers agreed that beyond the power of the Assembly, an appropriate forum to address the issues under the Convention was the Meeting of States Parties, which had committed themselves to the implementation of the Convention.  It was also pointed out that article 319 did not contain any provisions that could prevent States parties from taking up substantive issues, and lately there was a trend for States parties of various instruments to assume a decision-making role. 

Addressing a concern about duplication, Jamaica’s representative said that that the discussions within the consultative process had proven it unsubstantiated.  One of the aspects to be aware of was a matter of coordination.  The Meeting should be considered a decision-making body, and the open-ended consultative process had been established to make recommendations.

The representative of Malta said it was important for stakeholders to be able to discuss where the Convention was going.  At the same time, the open-ended consultative process was also playing a positive role.  The process continued to mature, and he believed that some thought had to be given to better and more focused negotiations on deciding on its themes of discussion. 

The representative of Australia said that as a matter of principle, States parties had a right to consider the implementation of the instrument.  As for the other opportunities to discuss ocean matters, including the open-ended consultative process and the general debate, those were open to all member States, and a significant difference was that States parties had certain legal obligations under the Convention.  It was important to use the one forum where the contracting parties met.

On the other hand, Norway, Japan, Iceland and United Kingdom supported by United States as an observer, argued that the Convention provided no legal basis for expanding the role of the Meeting of States Parties to include substantive issues.  Charged with administrative and budgetary matters, which were often quite complex and required States parties’ full attention, the Meeting was not a proper forum for substantive deliberations, Norway’s representative said.  It was the General Assembly that should discuss the matters related to the law of the sea, and the open-ended informal consultative process was a facilitator for its general debate.

At the same time, several delegations supported a position of compromise.  The representative of the Sudan, for example, said that it would be in the interest of the objectives of the Convention to adopt a flexible and constructive approach.  France also joined those who advocated the medium, “wait-and-see” position.  Its representative said that along with a strictly legal approach to the interpretation of article 319, there was also a practical side.  Emphasizing the need for coordination and information, he added that it was important for the Meeting to be involved –- informally or formally -– in the consultative process. 

Portugal’s representative said he found himself “on the middle ground”.  He certainly understood the concerns of some countries regarding giving the Meeting the far-reaching review power.  He would, indeed, hesitate to re-open the debate on the Convention itself.  He also felt that it would be somewhat awkward for the Meeting to completely shut the door on substantive discussions in the future.  For that reason, it was important not to be dogmatic.  In some cases, the Meeting should have an opportunity to address substantive issues.

The Meeting decided to retain the item related to article 319 of the Convention on the provisional agenda for consideration at the next meeting.

Statement by Director of Centre for Seafarers’ Rights

Also this afternoon, Douglas Stevenson, Director of the Centre for Seafarers’ Rights, requested the Meeting of the States Parties to respond to assaults on the Convention on the Law of the Sea by placing on its agenda a thorough review of the Convention’s protections for persons employed at sea, and review how States implemented them.

He then described some unprecedented assaults on the Convention’s protections for merchant mariners that had occurred over the past year.  Those included an increase in acts of piracy; the defiance by coastal States of the Convention’s right of innocent passage through their territorial waters; and the creation by coastal States of disincentives for rescuing persons in distress at sea.  In addition, mariners were increasingly being subjected to criminal prosecutions in pollution cases; ships were regularly being abandoned by insolvent owners, leaving their crews without pay, food, water, fuel or the means to go home; and increased shore-leave restrictions were being placed on ship’s crews due to post-11 September security measures.

He stressed that economies, marine resources, the marine environmental and security depended on merchant mariners, and merchant mariners depended on the rule of law created by the Convention.  By encouraging adherence to the its rule of law, the Meeting could rise to the challenge of assuring that the promise of the 21-year-old Convention was fulfilled.

The representative of Sierra Leone said that Mr. Stevenson had raised pertinent matters falling within the purview of the Convention, one of which was the safety and human rights of international seafarers.  His country’s seafarers were afforded no protection, and several had disappeared at sea with no explanation given.  Others had been abused, had not been paid, or were dumped in countries where they were viewed as illegal immigrants and refused refugee status.

Another concern was illegal smuggling on ships, he added.  For example, the conflict in Liberia was fuelled by illegal weapons, some of which were transported by sea.  He requested that the Meeting of States Parties discuss matters falling within the spirit of the Convention, even though they were also discussed by other international bodies.

Norway’s representative agreed that Mr. Stevenson had raised important issues, particularly that of rescue at sea, which his country had brought to the attention of the International Labour Organization (ILO).  However, delegations were divided on whether substantive issues should be discussed at the Meeting.  He suggested that the States parties note the request, but stated that the Meeting was not the proper forum for discussion of such issues.

In that connection, the President said that the Meeting would take note of the request to discuss such issues.

Other Business

In other business, the representative of Trinidad and Tobago requested that information on regional and country distribution of staff and posts, as well as the recipients of internships, be included in the annual report of the Tribunal as an annex.  Greater participation should be encouraged from developing countries.  That position was supported by Guyana’s representative, who added that a diverse organization should have diverse employees.  Fiji’s representative said that General Service posts needed to be widely advertised.  It was also important to encourage wide participation in internships.

The Tribunal’s Registrar, Philippe Gautier (Belgium) said that note would be taken of the comments from the floor.  All the information requested was easily available and all requests would be satisfied.  It was gratifying to see such interest in internship programmes as the Tribunal wanted to see as broad participation as possible, and last year Missions had been requested to provide candidates for the programme.  As for a vacant post of archivist, it had not yet been made public but it would be in the next few days.  The United Nations Web site did not publish vacancies in General Service category for the Tribunal, but they were published on the Tribunal’s site.

The Meeting agreed to include the information requested in the annual report of the Tribunal in the future.

* *** *