DAILY PRESS BRIEFING BY THE OFFICE OF THE SPOKESMAN FOR THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

AND THE SPOKESMAN FOR THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY PRESIDENT

Following is a near-verbatim transcript of today’s noon briefing by Fred Eckhard, Spokesman for the Secretary-General and Djibril Diallo, Spokesman for the General Assembly President.

Spokesman for Secretary-General

Good afternoon,

**Statement Attributable to Spokesman for Secretary-General

We’ll start with a statement attributable to the Spokesman on the situation in the Philippines:

“The Secretary-General is profoundly saddened by the large-scale loss of life and destruction wrought by the powerful storms that have struck the Philippines in recent days.  He extends his sincere condolences to the families of the deceased and to all those affected by this catastrophe.

“The United Nations has been working closely with Philippine authorities in responding to needs created by the disaster and has made emergency cash grants available for the purchase of relief supplies.  Today, the United Nations is deploying a team of experts to assist the Government of the Philippines in assessing the extent of the damage and coordinating the international response to the disaster.”

**Philippines

A four-member UN Disaster Assessment and Coordination team will arrive in the Philippines tomorrow.  The United Nations will consider that team’s work in deciding whether to launch an appeal for the Philippines next week.

For now, the Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs says that the main requirements are inflatable boats to reach the affected persons, clean water, medicine, body bags and shelter.

The World Health Organization is concentrating its efforts in the country on search and rescue operations.  In the longer term, it will examine the contamination of water sources and structural damage to health institutions.

**Sudan

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights reports that its monitors say that sexual violence and rape continue to be reported in all three of the regions of Darfur, in Sudan, and this was contributing to a tremendous sense of insecurity among internally displaced persons.

Women and young girls were afraid to leave the camps in certain areas.  Ongoing fighting was also continuing to put civilians at risk in a number of locations.  For example, Government forces reacting to an attack from inside the village of Masteri in west Darfur had launched 18 mortars into that locality.

According to the human rights monitors, the internally displaced persons (IDPs) continue to distrust and fear the police.  There was widespread impunity, with reports that police still refuse to record complaints of attacks against displaced persons.

Furthermore, armed members of the Janjaweed militia and the Popular Defence Forces continue to roam throughout Darfur, contributing to the sense of insecurity.  In south Darfur, there was an escalation in the number of forced relocations of internally displaced persons.

Throughout the reporting period, there were no reported arrests or trials of members of the Janjaweed.  There were also reports of cases of abduction of civilians by the rebel Sudan Liberation Army.

**UNMOVIC

The latest report to the Security Council by the UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission for Iraq includes an initial analysis of the findings of the CIA’s Iraq Survey Group, led by Charles Duelfer.

On the issue of Iraq’s chemical, biological and missile weapons programmes, UNMOVIC says that the Duelfer report’s conclusions largely confirm the analysis reached by UN inspectors.  However, UNMOVIC does state that it had been unaware of some of Iraq’s procurement efforts after 1998, which are highlighted in the Duelfer report.

Duelfer and his team shared their findings with UNMOVIC during a meeting in New York on 8 October.

The report also notes that the Governments of Jordan and the Netherlands have destroyed, under UN supervision, the Iraqi missile engines which had been found in scrap yards in those countries.

The UN inspectors also note the deterioration of two weapons sites in Iraq.  And you can find the full report available upstairs.

**DRC-Burundi

The UN mission in Burundi says it remains abreast of the evolving situation in the neighbouring Democratic Republic of the Congo.

Heightened border monitoring continues to be conducted in cooperation with the UN Mission in that country.

**Security Council

There are no meetings or consultations of the Security Council scheduled for today.

**UNMIK/SRSG Parliament Speech

On Kosovo, Søren Jessen-Petersen, the Secretary-General’s Special Representative for Kosovo, today said he’s willing to use every tool at his disposal –- even sanctions –- against officials who block attempts at improvement in key areas such as minority rights and freedom of movement.

Jessen-Petersen’s comments were part of his address to the inaugural session of the Kosovo Assembly -– and we have copies of his speech available upstairs.

**Cambodia

The Secretary-General, in an addendum to his report on Cambodia’s Khmer Rouge trials, told the General Assembly that Cambodia’s Government has notified the United Nations that the legal requirements for the Agreement it has with the United Nations to enter into force have been complied with.

The United Nations has yet to provide the Government of Cambodia with its own notification of such compliance, which is needed for the Agreement to enter into force.

That notification, the Secretary-General writes, will depend on whether sufficient money is in place to fund the staffing and operations of the Extraordinary Chambers for the trials for a sustained period of time.  He says that condition will be met once pledges have been made for the Chambers’ three years of operations and once actual contributions for its first year have been received.

**Somalia

The UN Emergency Relief Coordinator Jan Egeland is in Hargeisa, Somalia today, where he met with Somaliland officials to discuss the humanitarian situation in that flood and drought prone area.

The cumulative effect of four years of poor rainfall in the Sool Plateau and surrounding areas in Somaliland and Puntland has caused massive livestock losses among farmers, who make up the economic backbone of the area.

While in Hargeisa, Egeland visited sites where the United Nations is assisting internally displaced persons and recently returned refugees.

**SG Video Message –- Landmines

In the five years since the Mine-Ban Treaty came into force, the number of new victims has decreased each year, trade in such weapons has nearly halted, and millions of stockpiled mines have been destroyed.

Those remarks were part of the Secretary-General’s video message to the Nairobi Summit for a Mine-Free World, on its last day.

He went on to say, however, that much more remains to be done.  The international community needs to persuade more States, including some of the world’s largest, to join the treaty, and to do more to help landmine victims rebuild their lives.  We have the full text of that message available upstairs.

**SG Message –- Disabled Persons

On disabled persons, no society can claim to be based on justice and equality if persons with disabilities are not making decisions as full-fledged members.  Those remarks are part of the Secretary-General’s message for today, the International Day of Disabled Persons.  We have the full text upstairs.

**SG Message –- Volunteer Day

Sunday is International Volunteer Day.  And to mark that occasion, the Secretary-General has issued a message, declaring that volunteerism can help the world move decisively towards achieving the Millennium Development Goals.  We have that text upstairs.

**Week Ahead at United Nations

And we also have upstairs the Week to help you with your coverage of the UN next week.

That’s all I have.  Yes, Adam?

Questions and Answers

Question:  Fred, I have two questions.  First, can you update us on the investigation of Dileep Nair?

Spokesman:  Well, I think I told you that a meeting did take place this week on Wednesday, I believe, between Catherine Bertini, the Under-Secretary-General for Management, and several other Secretariat staff and the leadership of the Staff Council.  In that meeting, the Staff Council members complained that they had not been consulted in Mrs. Bertini’s review of the complaints lodged by the Council against the Office of Internal Oversight Services.  Mrs. Bertini explained that she had not interviewed anyone in that connection.  She had based herself on the resolution adopted by the Staff Council which laid out their complaints.

She did say, though, that if they have additional information to submit to her, she’d be happy to look at that.  And that if she thinks that this additional information warrants re-opening her look at this matter, she would.

Question:  My second question is, the Secretary-General has said that he stayed out of his son’s business.  As CEO of the United Nations, shouldn’t he have known about these payments that lasted through this year?  And isn’t he ultimately responsible for his son’s behaviour in this sense when he deals with the United Nations?

Spokesman:  Well, I am not sure the CEO analogy is correct.  And when you say that he should have had some knowledge of this as a United Nations matter, I think I’ve reported to you repeatedly that in our judgement based, on an internal investigation, there was no link between Kojo Annan’s employment in Cotecna and the awarding of a contract to Cotecna.  But, of course, the final judgement is up to Paul Volcker.  Finally, I guess, -- you say shouldn’t he know what his son is doing? I think Kojo Annan is now 31 years old living a continent away.  He was a full adult when these matters happened.  It was in the second year, I guess, of the Secretary-General’s first term as Secretary-General.  It doesn’t seem to me too surprising that the Secretary-General didn’t have every detail of his son’s employment activities.

Question:  But shouldn’t he..., my question is shouldn’t he have known, though?  Wasn’t it his responsibility to know about this?

Spokesman:  As a father?  I don’t… (Interrupted).

Question:  As, again, I like the CEO.  He is the head of this Organization.

Spokesman:  No.  I can only repeat what I said.  When there was a press allegation of conflict of interest because of Kojo Annan’s connection to this company, the Secretary-General did what I would consider a responsible thing by asking his Under-Secretary-General for Management to look into it.  He did look into it.  He interviewed everyone involved in the contract awarding process.  And he said none of these people were even aware that Kojo Annan had any link to Cotecna.  And in fact, some of them weren’t even aware that there was such a person as Kojo Annan.

So, from our point of view, we saw no link.  So, I think as the Chief Administrative Officer of this Organization, I think he reacted responsibly.  As these allegations… (Interrupted).

Question:  What’s the date that he asked his Under-Secretary to look into this?

Spokesman:  I believe the date of the internal memorandum from the Under-Secretary-General for Management at that time, Joseph Connor, was late
January 1999.

Question:  Fred, how come that document and that investigation failed to reveal the no-compete agreement?  There was an investigation of Kojo Annan’s links to Cotecna at that point and with all the dates about when he was a consultant and when he wasn’t a consultant.  So, who failed to provide the information to Joe Connor about the no-compete agreement?

Spokesman:  If this were January 1999, -- I don’t even know what the date of that no-compete agreement was.  As far as...(Interrupted).

Question:  According to the UN, the agreement for him to leave the company was December 1998.  So, presumably, the non-compete agreement was part of the agreement to leave the company.

Spokesman:  I don’t have the details of who in Cotecna Joseph Connor might have contacted.  But, if there is any suspicion of wrong-doing in this case in connection with “oil-for-food”, then it’s for Mr. Volcker to investigate.  So, this is a question that perhaps Mr. Volcker is looking into.  But, I don’t know the answer.

Question:  I have another question relating to Kojo Annan.  You say, at the time, the father said he didn’t know what the son was doing, but Kofi told us the other day that he had spoken to his son -- now.  So presumably now he knows what he’s doing, because he’s had time to ask him in the middle of all these allegations.  Are you aware, or is Mr. Annan aware, of Kojo Annan making any money at all from oil trading as opposed to his Cotecna link?  From oil trading under the oil-for-food programme?

Spokesman:  I’m not aware of that matter having ever coming up in conversations between them.  I mean, why do you raise it?  There’s been no allegation.

Question:  Because Kojo Annan has a business relationship with somebody who did –- one of his companies -- did have oil-for-food business.  So the question is, was Kojo Annan paid anything, did he have any kind of business relationship in relation to the oil-for-food that his business partner was doing?

Spokesman:  If this is linked to oil-for-food, then let Mr. Volker look into it.  I don’t think what the Secretary-General might have said, or not said, to his son on this matter is relevant.  What’s relevant is what is the evidence and what is Mr. Volker’s evaluation of that evidence.

Question:  But we’re assuming that Kojo would tell his father the truth.  We’ve already had a problem of what does the father know and when did he know it in relation to Cotecna.  So I’m asking you now…

Spokesman:  Who knew what, when, is for Mr. Volker to look into and make judgements on.  I don’t want to pre-empt what he is going to say or find.  Yes, Jonathan?

Question:  Fred, I beg to differ on that position and that’s fine, but I think for the sake of transparency, I think that James’ question is perfectly valid.  Can we get a sense of what Kofi knows about his son’s potential or possible involvement with oil purchasing under the oil-for-food programme.  Why does that have to be a question that we have to pose for Volker?  Kofi Annan is the leader of this Organization and he’s our Secretary-General.

Spokesman:  No, you’re trying to pin your Secretary-General to oil-for-food and the scandal, and if that’s what you’re trying to do, then I’m afraid I’m going to have to defer to Mr. Volker’s investigation.

Question:  Another question here -- the Dileep Nair issue.  You’ve mentioned before what you think the Secretary-General’s position is.  Can you clarify what his position is now in terms of Dileep Nair…(Inaudible)?

Spokesman:  You weren’t here, but I’ve nothing to add, to what I said, at the beginning.  I already took a question on that.

Question:  You did say at the beginning Fred that Catherine Bertini was willing to reopen the inquiry if the Staff Committee submitted evidence that she felt warranted a new inquiry.  So that is new, we haven’t heard that before.

Spokesman:  But I’ve already said that.

Question:  But you just said you said nothing new at the beginning.

Spokesman:  I have nothing to add to what I said at the beginning.  And it’s up to you to judge if there’s anything newsworthy in what I say.  I don’t prejudge that.  Yes?

Question:  Another angle of the Kojo story.  Did the Secretary-General know that his son was lobbying in the United Nations for Cotecna or the United Nations meetings and summits, both here and in Africa?

Spokesman:  I don’t know.  He may well have had a general sense of what kinds of things that his son was doing at that time, particularly if it intercepted with the Secretary-General’s own attendance at an international meeting.  But I can’t say specifically he knew about any particular activity that Kojo Annan…(Interrupted).

Question:  His son was here lobbying -- working -- for another company.  Wouldn’t that be something that you would look into?  Is it thoroughly appropriate to think or believe that his son was lobbying for whatever firm?

Spokesman:  Well, I’m not sure that lobbying is a correct characterization of what his son was doing.  But whatever Kojo Annan’s relationship to Cotecna was, if it had a link to the United Nations and oil-for-food, then it’s for Volker to investigate.  If it did not have a link, then it’s not a United Nations matter, and I have nothing to say about it.

Question:  The leader of this Organization having his son lobbying -– or I don’t know how you want to describe it -- or the company he was working for using his name and his father’s name to pursue his own business.  That has nothing to do with oil-for-food?

Spokesman:  You’re making allegations now.

Question:  I’d just like to know whether the Secretary-General believes it is thoroughly appropriate for him to have his son in the building making contacts, using his name for business that’s for a private European company.

Spokesman:  As far as we know, nothing Kojo Annan did for Cotecna was illegal.  I think I can make it as simple as that.

Question:  My question is whether the Secretary-General believed or knew that his son was working here, using his name.

Spokesman:  First of all, I don’t know that the things that you’re saying, that have been reported in the media, are accurate.

Question:  Then why don’t you find out?  There are published memoranda in which (inaudible), about lobbying efforts by Kofi Annan’s son in the margin of the meetings that Kofi was attending.

Spokesman:  We have no reason to believe that anything he was doing was wrong.

There are three of you trying to talk.  Who wants to go first?

Question:  I just want to emphasize Ricardo’s wasn’t the legality of it.  The question was whether the father was aware of the lobbying that was being undertaken by his son in the margins of meetings.

Spokesman:  Well, first of all, he’s alleging lobbying.  I don’t know if that’s true.  He’s alleging activities in this building.  I don’t know that that’s true.   From what we know --

Question:  I’m just basing my comment or question on what’s been published.  How would you characterize Kojo Annan’s job?

Spokesman:  I’ve already characterized it.  We’re not aware that anything Kojo Annan did for Cotecna was illegal or improper.  That’s our perception.

Question:  It’s a totally different issue.

Spokesman:  Then I don’t understand the point of your question.

Question:  Are there any United Nations staff rules that prevent close relatives of United Nations officials from taking jobs such as lobbying for, lobbying on behalf of United Nations contractors?  Are there any staff rules that would prevent your son or brother taking a job like that to lobby other people?

Spokesman:  I will look into that and get right back to you after the briefing.

Question:  Is any of what we’re discussing here, of Kojo having done some lobbying or however we’re going to phrase this, did that enter into the internal memorandum, was that something looked into when Mr. Connor was investigating the possible connection between Kojo and the Cotecna company?

Spokesman:  No, no.  The allegation at that time was that there was a conflict of interest in connection specifically with the Cotecna contract.  That was the allegation of the time, and that’s what we looked into at the time.

Question:  Did Kojo’s lobbying or discussion with officials at the United Nations back in the late 1990s, was that something that was looked into as part of that internal investigation?

Spokesman:  Do you know for a fact that he was here lobbying officials in this building or --

Question:  -- (inaudible) to a Senate Committee that says he was.

Spokesman:  That’s the document I have not seen.  I’m sorry.

Question:  Perhaps you or the Secretary-General ought to ask his son what exactly was going on because you’re the Spokesman, you could find out from the Secretary-General whether that’s true.  In fact, could you please find out whether it was true that the son was here in those meetings in the published memo?  It would be good for us to know, from the UN’s point of view,…(Interrupted by another correspondent).

Another Correspondent:  Maybe Cotecna is lying again.  It would probably be in the Secretary-General’s interest to set the record straight.

Spokesman:  I will ask him your question for you James.

Question:  Fred, the African Group has sent a letter to the Secretary-General expressing supporting; calling these reports bias, lack of objectivity, and calling them propaganda.  What is the Secretary-General’s position on these recent reports regarding his son and the question of his connection to bids and deals here at the United Nations?

Spokesman:  For him there’s only one relevant question, whether there is any improper link to the Cotecna contract and he’s awaiting Volker’s reaction on that.

Question:  But doesn’t he have a view?  He’s been all over the media.  What is his view of these reports?  Is he upset about them?

Spokesman:  First of all, he’s focused on the business before him, which is not his son or oil-for-food; right now it’s the High-level Panel’s report.  Second, his relations to his son are a private matter, and we would like, at least, to try to reserve as much of that privacy as we can.  Third, to the extent that there might be any link to United Nations business of the son’s activities, we’re going to leave that to Mr. Volker to decide.

Question:  Fred, when you say that the Secretary-General’s relationship with his son is a private matter, it is a matter of public concern whether he received any money from his son.  Could you ask him to clarify that he doesn’t receive any money from his son.  That would be helpful for us.

Spokesman:  That the Secretary-General receives money from his son? 

Question:  Do you know that he doesn’t?

Spokesman:  Any question in this room is legitimate.  I’ll ask for you and see how much of an allowance the Secretary-General might have gotten from his son.

Question:  Can you share any information from the meeting with Danforth this morning, what the Secretary-General and Ambassador Danforth discussed?  Do you have any comment on Danforth’s resignation?

Spokesman:  My understanding was that it was a private meeting.  I don’t think there will be any readout of that meeting.  I don’t have a reaction [to his resignation] just yet.  We most likely will have a formal reaction to his resignation.

Question:  Aren’t a lot of these allegations that we’re hearing the responsibility of Joe Connor, who was supposed to have carried out the investigation for the Secretary-General and the United Nations?

Spokesman:  Well, the Connor investigation was merely to look into one specific allegation that came out of one newspaper.  And I’ve reported to you what the result was.  But now that there is an ongoing question about this, it’s been turned over to Volker.  Everybody wants to know what Volker’s conclusions are in this matter.  I can’t prejudge, and we can’t hurry him.  He’s going to take his time to come to his conclusions.  We’re just going to have to be patient.

Question:  (inaudible) [Has the Secretary-General been interviewed by Volcker?]

Spokesman:  Let me answer you quickly, but someone behind you has been trying to ask me a question for some time.  They have met on several occasions.  I’m not sure I would describe that as an interview, but they have met on a number of occasions and have had in-depth discussions.

Question:  When is the Dileep Nair investigation being reopened?  It was supposed to be very thorough and absolutely 100 per cent.  But it obviously wasn’t very thorough therefore -- (inaudible) -- cast a shadow over any of these internal investigations including the Connor one that we’ve just been talking about which perhaps wasn’t thorough at all, because that’s gone over to Volker?

Spokesman:  Please, don’t start blowing things out of proportion.  In this case, the Staff Union adopted, or the Staff Council adopted, a resolution alleging certain things about the Office of Internal Oversight Services.  The management arm of the United Nations, because the specific allegations had to do with hiring practices, the managing department, which includes the personnel department, took a look at a number of cases of hiring by OIOS, including the one specific case mentioned in the Staff Council resolution.  And they found that the hiring rules had been followed in every case.

Now, the Staff Council said you didn’t consult us.  We have more to tell you.  So, we’re saying okay.  Give us the additional information you have.  We’ll take a look at it.  And if we think that requires a further look into this matter, we will.

Question:  (inaudible) something that’s called thorough doesn’t even ask during the investigation for further evidence or complete evidence or complete allegations.  I don’t understand how the conclusion can be that it was thorough.

Spokesman:  A Staff Union resolution laid out certain things.  We looked into those things.  I don’t see why we should go beyond that.

Question:  You said it was a thorough investigation.  But what sort of investigation --

Spokesman:  I didn’t -- He said it wasn’t a thorough investigation.

Question:  We were all under the impression, and certainly maybe we misinterpreted what had transpired, but I recall, actually I think, hearing from you at one of the briefings that there had been a thorough investigation into Dileep Nair and then the findings came out the way that they came out.  Was there in fact a through investigation done?  What sort of investigation really was done?

Spokesman:  I already described to you what it was, Jonathan.  On the matter of hiring practices, we looked into not only the case that they specified in their resolution, we looked at a number of cases.  Was there any pattern or any single incidence of hiring by OIOS that was not according to staff rules and regulations?  And the answer was that there was none.

There was in addition an unsigned letter alleging sexual misconduct.  But on the basis of an unsigned letter, with no named witness, there was nothing to investigate.  So in that case, the Department of Management placed that aside and said there was nothing to investigate in this case.

Question: So if I can understand right, the people named in that unsigned letter were interviewed in the internal investigation.  Because there were several people named in that unsigned letter, wasn’t there?

Spokesman: I did not see that letter myself, so I’d have to ask the Department of Management that question.

Question: I have a question on another subject.  It’s an in-house question really.  But it’s a question of how the e-mail system works.  When you send out -- this petition on behalf of the Secretary-General went as a broadcast I believe to all the United Nations staff.  Who has permission to send e-mails?  Can anybody send an e-mail to all United Nations staff, or do you have to be at a certain level to do that?

Spokesman:  I was told, because someone asked us that question yesterday, that the people who control that web site, or that facility, say that with signatures of 70 or more they would consider putting a message on the web site.  I don’t know how they arrived at the number 70, but that’s the policy they followed.

Question:  Is that what happened in this case?

Spokesman:  That’s what I was told happened, but I’ll double check that for you, but that’s what I was told happened.

Question:  Fred, has the UN set up or planning to do any communication strategy to deal with these series of crises of public relations?  Issues it’s been facing in the past months?  It seems to me that the UN does a very poor job in terms of defending itself.  Do you know of any strategy to deal with this?

Spokesman:  We do have a Communications Director, who is also the Speechwriter on the Secretary-General’s staff.  And the head of the Information Department has “communications” in his title.  So, he is now the [Under-Secretary-General for] Communications and Information.  Those two elements of the Secretariat do try to work together to get out our message.  It’s not quite as sophisticated as you might have in the PR arm of a political campaign.  So maybe we’re not very good at fighting back.  I guess we hope that eventually the facts will speak for themselves.

So, we’re going through a rough patch.  We hope that in the case of oil-for-food, once the facts are established by Volcker, it will be easier to have a reasoned discussion of these issues and possibly a lessons learned exercise.

Question:  Does the Secretary-General still have confidence in Mr. Shashi Tharoor and Mr. Mortimer?

Spokesman:  Yes.  I think he has full confidence in both.  Yes, Jonathan?

Question:  I have a totally different question, not oil-for-food related.  How receptive have people been -- officials and people who Kofi Annan has been talking to about the reform, the Panel’s findings and the proposals of reforming the UN?

Spokesman:  I think it’s a little too early to say.  We’ve basically seen press reports indicating positive response, both in terms of the kinds of specialized journalists who follow this issue and some reported comments by some government officials.  We’ll get a better sense when the Secretary-General starts meeting with regional groups here to get their reactions to the report and to discuss his framework for getting it implemented.

Finished?  Djibril, would like to come up?

Spokesman for General Assembly President

Good afternoon.

The General Assembly, yesterday afternoon, deferred a decision on the most controversial question before the Sixth Committee, the elaboration of a convention on human reproductive cloning.  The decision to establish a working group to meet in February to finalize the text of a United Nations Declaration on Human Cloning would be taken once the Fifth Committee -- the Fifth Committee being the Committee dealing with Administrative and Financial matters -- once that Committee considered the programme budget implications.

The basis for discussions in the working group would be a proposal by Italy to have the Assembly declare that States should prohibit any attempts to create human life through cloning.

As you so know, a draft decision in the report on an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings in document A/59/516 was approved without a vote on 19 November when Italy introduced a draft resolution containing a proposal for a UN declaration on human cloning rather than continuing work on opposite approaches to elaborating a convention on the matter.  Based on the Committee Chairman’s proposal, the decision was approved to establish a working group, which will use the Italian proposal to finalize the text of a declaration and present it to the Committee during the current session.

By the decision in the report, the Assembly would take note of the decision for the working group to meet on 14, 15 and 18 February, with the Committee meeting on the afternoon of the final day to consider and take action on the Working Group’s report.  The Working Group would be open to all States, as well as pertinent others, with the Committee Chairman chairing the Working Group and the Bureau serving as Friends of the Chairman.  This decision, as I mentioned earlier, will wait for a review of the financial implications by the Fifth Committee.

The decision was the only one to be deferred; otherwise, 24 resolutions were adopted without a vote, including texts on two new legal instruments.  The General Assembly also acted on four of its own agenda items.

Regarding the items on its own agenda, the Assembly acted on resolutions concerning the Andean Zone of Peace; public administration and development; assistance to the Palestinian people; and a report of the World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization –- “A fair Globalization:  Creating Opportunities for All”.  All were adopted without a vote.

The resolutions in the Legal Committee’s 19 reports covered a range of topics.  Among those topics widely debated was a resolution on the International Criminal Court.  The Assembly decided to consider directly in its plenary any report submitted by the International Criminal Court under its Relationship Agreement with the United Nations in the same manner that the plenary considers reports by the International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

Back to this morning, the General Assembly discussed and took action on the report of the First Committee –- again, as a reminder, the First Committee deals with Disarmament and International Security.  All the resolutions put forth in the report were adopted.  For those where the Member States voted you will find the voting sheets in the rack upstairs.

Coming back to the High-Level Panel, the President will organize a briefing on the High Panel for Member States next week on 8 December.  And again, this is an indication of the Presidency of the General Assembly working closely with the Secretariat, because the Secretariat will be invited to come and make a presentation to the Member States.  The level of that presentation is still to be determined.  The meeting will be in the afternoon of the 8th and will be open to all Member States, but it is a closed meeting to the media.

The day after, I mentioned this to you earlier, we will bring the President of the General Assembly to brief correspondents accredited to the United Nations at 12:30 in room 226.

Again, on the radar screen of the General Assembly is the draft resolution on Modalities, Format and Organization of the High-Level plenary meeting of the sixtieth session of the General Assembly.  And the President will seek feedback from Member States on 9 December on that drat resolution with the idea being that if all goes well, the resolution should be adopted by mid-December.

The Second Committee this afternoon will discuss poverty eradication and other development issues, strengthening the coordination of UN humanitarian and disaster relief assistance, sustainable development and globalization and interdependence.

That’s all I have for you.  Any questions?

Yes, go ahead please.

Questions and Answers

Question:  Since the 8 December meeting in the afternoon is going to be closed to the press, can we get just basically a schedule for the meeting?  A list of all the speakers and kind of like a detailed description of how the meeting will be undertaken?

Spokesman for General Assembly President:  Oh, no, it’s an informal consultation among Member States.  So, there is no pre-determined list of speakers, per se.  It’s a closed meeting, but again, just to stay on the news, immediately after, we will have the President come and talk to you here on the early perspectives of the General Assembly on the High-Level Panel.

Okay?  Thank you.

* *** *