Sixty-third General Assembly

Sixth Committee

1^st Meeting (AM)

LEGAL COMMITTEE MEETS UNDER DEADLINE FOR SETTING UP

 

REVISED SYSTEM OF JUSTICE AT UNITED NATIONS

 

Compromise Urged in Efforts to Finalize Statutes of New Tribunals

As the Sixth Committee (Legal) opened its sixty-third session this morning by taking up the new administration of justice mechanism at the United Nations to be implemented by 1 January, delegations called for compromise in finalizing the statutes of the two tribunals which are to work alongside a strengthened informal Ombudsman’s Office.  Establishment of the new system -- with Dispute and Appeals Tribunals --will take place in coordination with the work of the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).

The representative of Trinidad and Tobago said the existing system of administering justice at the United Nations was plagued with problems and in dire need of reform.  The new decentralized system would provide more access to justice and would facilitate the peaceful resolution of disputes.  Compromise on all pending issues should be exercised, so as to finalize the draft statutes.

Similarly, Iran’s representative said a new, independent, professional and transparent internal justice system should replace the current old, dysfunctional outmoded and broken system, since no true delegation of authority was possible without defined accountability.  A reformed system that protected staff and held managers accountable would strengthen the Organization and was an essential part of the human resources management system.

The representative of the Democratic Republic of the Congo said the rule of law was being promoted the world over, and it would not be proper if the United Nations failed to have an appropriate administration of justice system.  The legal work should be finalized and the transitional mechanism must be implemented in stages.  The link between the formal and informal administration of justice mechanisms should be consolidated by the Ombudsman.

The representative of the United States said he was committed to having the new two-tiered system in place by 1 January.  The priority should be on finalizing the statutes in a manner that made the new system effective and efficient from day one.  Consideration of certain aspects could be deferred until the mechanism was in place and its effectiveness assessed.  The principle to keep in mind was that the new system must be both legally sound and cost-effective.

Norway’s representative said a new administration of justice system that was in full conformity with the universal principles of transparency, impartiality, accessibility and efficiency could not be compromised by arguments based on cost.  The pledge made at the 2005 World Summit should be honoured.  Adequate resources should be provided to fulfil the mandate of creating a well-run internal justice system as a prerequisite for maintaining an effective Secretariat.

The representative of the Russian Federation said timeliness should not lead to any negative consequences in the quality of the reforms.  Finalizing the draft statutes should not hamper other aspects of reform, such as providing legal assistance to staff under the new system.

The Committee will continue its work on the matter in a working-group setting before taking it up in plenary again.

The report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the subject was introduced by its chairman, Ganeson Sivagurunathan, who will also be serving as chairman of the working group.

Also speaking this morning were the representatives of Mexico (on behalf of the Rio Group), Kenya (on behalf of the Africa Group), New Zealand (speaking also for Canada and Australia), Antigua and Barbuda (for the “Group of 77” developing countries and China), and France (for the European Union).  There were also statements from the representatives of Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Nigeria, India, Japan, Egypt, Israel and Qatar.

The Sixth Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, 8 October, when the subject of measures to eliminate international terrorism is expected to be taken up.

Background

The Sixth Committee (Legal) met today, to adopt its organization of work for the sixty-third session of the General Assembly and to take up the question of the administration of justice at the United Nations.

A report on the Committee’s organization of work (document A/C.6/63/L.1) contains a list of the order in which topics will be taken up and the approximate date of consideration, along with the status of documentation for topics.  The report also states that the Committee expects to complete its work by 14 November.  Working groups will be established on the recommendation of ad hoc committees for three topics:  administration of justice at the United Nations; measures to eliminate international terrorism; and criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission.

On the substantive matter of the administration of justice at the United Nations, the Committee has before it a report of the Secretary-General (document A/63/314), which states that a new system of administering justice at the United Nations will be introduced in January 2009.  Informal resolution of employment-related disputes will be emphasized through a strengthening and decentralization of the Ombudsman’s Office.  The formal side of the new system will consist of a “first-instance” Dispute Tribunal and a “second-instance” Appeals Tribunal.

In his report, the Secretary-General sets out options for delegating authority for disciplinary matters, based on State responses to the statutes of the two Tribunals and to proposals for making the transition from the present system to the new.  Also contained in the report, is the Secretary-General’s plan for proceeding in a phased manner with limited delegations of authority, starting with six peacekeeping missions, including prerequisites for making the delegation feasible.  Information on other issues covers the idea of a staff-funded legal assistance scheme for staff, the use of information and communications technology, mechanisms for formal removal of judges, and proposed conditions of service of judges.  Finally, the impact of the new system on Staff Regulations is examined.

Towards the end of strengthening the informal dispute resolution mechanism of the United Nations, the Secretary-General reports on activities of the Ombudsman (document A/63/283) during the one-year period ending 30 July 2008.  Included in the report is general statistical information and information on trends with regard to the Office, along with comments on policies, procedures and practices coming to the Ombudsman’s attention from dealings with staff.  There is an overview of transitional measures being developed with respect to establishing a single integrated and decentralized Office.  The report also makes observations on systemic issues based on cases dealt with by the Office.

In a section on the operations of the Office, the report states that a new Ombudsman was appointed as of 21 April, in line with recommendations put forward by the Redesign Panel, elaborating the basic framework for a new system of administering justice at the United Nations.  As the primary means of informal dispute resolution at the United Nations, the redesign called for a strengthening and decentralization of the Office, that did not carry decision-making powers, but had direct access to the Secretary-General, for making suggestions or recommendations on actions to settle conflicts between the Organization and staff members.

A key component of the new system, the report says in a section on outreach, was to strengthen both the capacity and reach of the Ombudsman’s Office, by creating a single, integrated and geographically decentralized structure.  Restructuring took effect on 1 January 2008 and included the establishment of a new Mediation Division and of regional offices in Geneva, Vienna, Nairobi, Santiago, and Bangkok, the United Nations Organization Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo and the United Nations Mission in the Sudan.  Reorganization also focused on awareness-raising activities related to those developments through outreach, field visits and training.

In a section on statistics, the report states that 670 new cases were opened during the reporting period across the United Nations system, 27 per cent of them generated by Headquarters, where only 19 per cent of the total United Nations staff population of 34,500 was located.  Promotion- or career-related issues were the most commonly raised, accounting for 23 per cent of all cases brought to the Office.  Systemic issues brought to the Office’s attention included unfairness in recruitment, delays in the processing of administrative requests from field personnel and harassment.

Moving on to the new system of justice, the report touches on a description of the interaction between the single, decentralized Office, its Mediation Division and the regional offices.  In a section on future directions, the report states that coherence and excellence across the new, expanded system will be maintained by ensuring consistency in principles and practices.  Maintaining confidentiality, neutrality and independence would remain a priority.  Efforts would also be directed into clarifying for staff what were the options and operating principles of the administration of justice at the United Nations.

Also before the Committee, in relation to the administration of justice, is a report on the outcome of the work of the Joint Appeals Board during 2006 and 2007 and statistics on disposition of cases and work of the Panel of Counsel (document A/63/211).  The report shows an increase in the number of cases filed with the Joint Appeals Board in New York for 2007 over 2006, or 16 more cases filed for an increase of 15 per cent, from 108 to 124 cases.  In Geneva, the increase was 41 per cent, or 11 more appeals in 2007 over 2006, with the number of cases rising from 27 to 38.  In Vienna, the number of appeals dropped by 33 per cent, or by 4 cases, taking the number of appeals from 6 in 2006 to 4 in 2007.  In Nairobi, an increase of 56 per cent, or 6 cases, took the number of appeals from 11 in 2006 to 17 in 2007.

The report also states that in addition to their usual activities, in 2007 the four Joint Appeals Boards were involved in reform of the internal justice system.  Among others, both the Joint Appeals Boards and the Joint Disciplinary Committees were involved in drafting and adopting new roles for themselves.

On the work of the Panel of Counsel, the report states that 339 new cases were brought to the Panel in 2007, an increase of 15.31 per cent over the 294 cases brought to it in 2006.  Of those 339 cases, 240 went through formal appeals processes and 99 were handled informally.  Of the cases handled in 2006, 194 cases were handled formally and 100 informally, reflecting an increase of 23.71 per cent in formal handling and a decrease of 1 per cent in informal handling of cases.  Of the 339 cases brought before the Panel in 2007, 76 concerned disciplinary matters, the largest single category.  The others concerned non-renewals or terminations of fixed-term contracts, suspensions of actions and miscellaneous cases such as performance and promotion.

Finally, before the Sixth Committee is a Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Administration of Justice at the United Nations (document A/63/55), which reports on the proceedings of the Ad Hoc Committee’s first session (New York, 10‑18, and 21 and 24 April) to deal with legal aspects of creating a new system of administration of justice at the United Nations.  The Ad Hoc Committee held two plenary meetings at that session.  Acting as a working group of the whole, it then considered such aspects of the new system as scope, legal assistance for staff, jurisdiction and the powers of the two-tiered formal system consisting of the Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Tribunal.  Independence, transparency, efficiency, professionalism and accountability were the guiding principles and the new system was to be consistent with relevant principles of international law, including those relating to the rule of law and due process.

The report also states that the Ad Hoc Committee recommended that a working group be established at the Assembly’s sixty-third session to finalize the draft statutes of the Tribunals and to continue work on additional legal aspects of administering justice at the United Nations.  Those included the appointment of judges to the Tribunals; the jurisdiction of the Tribunals; questions relating to the power of judges; compensation; and the relationship between the formal and informal systems of justice.

The Ad Hoc Committee reconvened ( New York, 5 August) to take note of an oral report by the Committee’s coordinator on informal intersessional consultations (document A/63/55/Add.1).  Preliminary observations on draft statutes for the two Tribunals are appended to the report as annexes.

Statement by Chairman of Ad Hoc Committee on Administration of Justice

GANESON SIVAGURUNATHAN (Malaysia) introduced the most recent report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Administration of Justice (document A/63/55), noting that the document covered the work of the Ad Hoc Committee in April 2008.  An addendum to the report covered the work of the Ad Hoc Committee during its third plenary meeting, on 5 August 2008, at which the Committee took note of the oral report of the coordinator on the three rounds of intersessional informal consultations on the draft statutes of the United Nations Dispute and Appeals Tribunals.  These informal consultations were conducted from 12 to 16 May, from 9 to 12 June and from 30 June to 3 July 2008.

He said the working group of the whole of the Ad Hoc Committee focused its discussions on the scope of the new system of administration of justice; legal assistance to staff; and jurisdiction and powers of the Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Tribunal; as well as the draft statutes of the two tribunals.  Substantial progress had been made in consideration of the draft statutes, but agreement had yet to be reached on a number of issues.  Finally, the Ad Hoc Committee recommended that, as a priority, the Sixth Committee “establish a working group with a view to finalizing its deliberations on the draft statutes” of the aforementioned tribunals during its current session.  The Ad Hoc Committee also requested that the Sixth Committee continue to discuss other legal aspects of the administration of justice, at the United Nations.

Statements

ALEJANDRO ALDAY ( Mexico), speaking for the Rio Group, said the Group valued the staff of the United Nations as the Organization’s vital asset.  The Group had been consistent in supporting measures to protect staff members’ basic rights in accordance with internationally agreed standards.  To that end, he urged delegations to reach an agreement on the draft statutes of the two tribunals as soon as possible.  By meeting the 1 January 2009 deadline for the new system to be fully operative, he said a message would be sent that reforming the internal system of administration of justice was a priority.  Although the General Assembly set this deadline last year, work on the matter had actually started with resolution 59/283, when it was acknowledged that the current system was slow, cumbersome and costly.  Management and staff relied on the Sixth Committee’s legal expertise to conclude the draft statutes since, without them, the system could not start running, transitional measures could not be taken and candidates for the two tribunals could not be hired. 

However, he said, work on finalizing the draft statutes should not take up the whole time.  Only the first two weeks of the session should go to that work; the rest of the time should be devoted to non-statute issues.  Taking note of a letter dated 18 July 2008, from the President of the Administrative Tribunal to the President of the General Assembly, contained in document A/63/253, he said the Sixth Committee needed to coordinate closely with the Fifth Committee in order to meet the designated deadline for reform of the administration of justice system.  Regarding work on non-statute issues, he pointed out that the tribunals not only dealt with employment-related matters, but disciplinary issues as well.  These disciplinary matters were not limited to delegation of authority, but also related to the Secretary-General’s proposals, set out in his report 62/294, for a new investigation process.

STELLA KERUBO ORINA (Kenya), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said the Secretary-General’s report on the new system provided additional information that should give impetus to deliberations on the draft statutes for both the Dispute and Appeals Tribunal, so that the new system would be in place by 1 January.  The scales of justice must weigh all equally, a standard that should be applicable to the United Nations so that impartiality was ensured for all, and equity achieved for all staff.

Continuing, he said the new system must be made accessible to all United Nations personnel, irrespective of category or duty station.  Granting access to the information system for non-staff personnel was a noble objective, but granting them access to the formal system called for careful consideration.  Those who would not be granted access to the new system should be provided with adequate procedures for dispute settlement and effective alternative remedies, regardless of contractual relationship to the Organization.  Mediation was an effective means of dispute settlement and should be included in the proposed new system.  The Ombudsman should speed up delivery of justice within the Organization.

Further, he said the appointment and removal of judges for both tribunals should be reserved for the General Assembly, to ensure transparency and, at the same time, preserve the independence of the judges.  And since justice was universal and could not be subject to any ideology or confined to one area, the single most important principle to uphold was fairness and an even playing field for all.  A spirit of compromise should be brought to the work of finalizing the statutes.

SCOTT SHEERAN (New Zealand), speaking also for Canada and Australia, emphasized that United Nations staff members and the Organization deserved a fair and efficient system of internal justice, consistent with international law and the principles of the rule of law and due process.  Noting their past commitment to reform the United Nations administration of justice system, he was pleased that the General Assembly, drawing on recommendations by the Redesign Panel, had decided to establish a new, independent, transparent and professionalized system, in that regard.  He acknowledged the important work of the Ad Hoc Committee, over the last year, on the draft statutes for the United Nations Disputes and Appeals Tribunals.

Continuing, he said that, while the Committee worked to expand the scope of the administration of justice system, particular attention should be paid to properly assessing the implementation and operation of the new system, and more closely examining the needs of those currently outside the system.  Although he recognized that a period of ineligibility for judges was necessary to maintain impartiality, to keep a qualified pool of judicial applicants, that period should be limited to three years.  As the implementation deadline of January 2009 was fast approaching, it was important to reflect on the various legal-related aspects of the statutes and new system, and to provide close-to-finalized statutes to the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) as it considered an adequate funding and staffing base, and also transitional measures for the new system.

TUMASIE BLAIR (Antigua and Barbuda), speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 developing countries and China, welcomed the developments achieved during the intersessional information consultations, and said he looked forward to finalizing the statutes for both the Dispute and Appeals Tribunals in the shortest time possible, so as to meet the 1 January deadline for start of the new system.  The Group was committed to ensuring that justice, impartiality and fairness prevailed at the United Nations and to the speedy implementation of the new system.

He said it was important to reform the administration of justice system so that both justice and adequate remedy was ensured for all those affected.  The weaknesses of the current system had been known for years.  The work of implementing the new internal justice system that was effective and efficient must be carried out in good faith and with transparency.  All pending issues needed to be finalized in the next two weeks, so that the draft statutes could be sent to the Fifth Committee for finalization.  That included scope of application, jurisdiction and transitional measures.  Consensus should be reached on remaining issues as soon as possible, to enable all United Nations personnel to have recourse to an effective and just dispute settlement mechanism.

HUBERT RENIÉ ( France), speaking for the European Union and associated States, said the United Nations was responsible for decisive initiatives in drafting, promoting and developing international standards in the field of human rights and rule of law.  Its judicial system should be worthy of the name.  The new system must enable quick, effective and fair administration of justice.  It must be independent, transparent, professional, decentralized and adequately funded.  It must comply with international law and with the principles of rule of law and fair trial, including the right to effective remedy, equal access to justice and the right to be heard.  The Ad Hoc Committee’s report should form the basis for discussions, going forward.

Continuing, he said the new system involved substantive reform of the administrative structure of the United Nations and had a significant budgetary impact, so the committees concerned should work together.  Transitional measures would need to be taken to ensure the continuity of the legal work during the transition from the current Administrative Tribunal to the two new ones.  The Legal Committee could issue an opinion on options, but the Assembly’s decision would depend on the Administrative Committee’s stance, on the Secretary-General’s report and on recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ).  The Legal Committee should promptly give clear recommendations to the Administrative Committee on the tribunals’ statuary provisions.  The work of both Committees was complementary, and tangible results had to be achieved.

The scope of the tribunals and the collegiality of trial benches should be determined by consensus, he said.  The European Union had proposed a two-step approach towards the determination of the scope.  First, priority should be given to establishing a system that would cover those who had access to the current system.  Then, steps should be taken to ensure that the United Nations was an exemplary employer, by complying with its duty to ensure that effective remedies were available to all other categories of United Nations personnel.  The types of recourse could be given consideration.  Finally, key points beyond the formal system should be addressed, including the strengthening of legal assistance for staff and improving informal procedures, to dispense with needless litigation and to settle disputes by mutual agreement.

STEFAN BARRIGA ( Liechtenstein), noting that only a few weeks remained before the new system of administration of justice would enter into force, said much preparatory work remained to be done to achieve that goal.  Thanks to the energy devoted to the topic, by the Fifth and Sixth Committees, meeting the 1 January 2009 deadline was a realistic target.  In that regard, the Sixth Committee had no other option but to finalize the work on the statutes swiftly, in order to allow the Fifth Committee to take up all remaining issues before the closing of the General Assembly’s main session in December.

Accordingly, he called all partners at the negotiating table to keep in mind the deadline for a new independent, transparent, professional, adequately resourced and decentralized system.  Internal justice reform would improve staff morale and accountability which, in turn, would enhance the effectiveness and efficiency of the Organization as a whole.  On the scope of the new system, he said he supported a solution which did not ultimately lead to discrimination among United Nations personnel with similar tasks and responsibilities, on the basis of the nature of their contract.

EMMANUEL BICHET ( Switzerland) said the current administration of justice system needed to be replaced as soon as possible.  The mechanism for settling disputes between the Organization and its employees must conform to the principles of the rule of law.  Notable progress had been made in developing the two statutes, which constituted the cornerstone of the new formal system.  Priority must be given to completing the drafting to provide a legal basis for amending the rules of procedure and the Staff Regulations.  In view of the short time period for completing the work, the Administrative Committee should begin dealing with those points of the statutes that had important budgetary implications, such as the question of the scope of the new system, and the transitional measures to be taken.

BUKUN-OLU ONEMOLA ( Nigeria), associating himself with the statement made on behalf of the African Group, said the idea of a staff-funded scheme for legal assistance to staff deserved further consideration.  Commending the willingness of staff unions to support staff mentors who volunteered professional legal counselling and to cooperate in enabling staff to continue their work with the Office of Staff Legal Assistance, he said he was certain that, with sufficient consideration, any doubts currently expressed by staff would be assuaged.  However, although Nigeria was not opposed to the Secretary-General’s recommendations on implementation of the first phase of the limited delegation of authority for disciplinary measures to heads of missions or offices away from Headquarters, he felt adequate measures and safeguards should be put in place to avoid abuse and ensure efficiency.  Noting that the suggested training programmes and information campaigns were important, he urged the speedy conclusion of negotiations, between the United Nations and other participating entities, on cost-sharing arrangements and options for programme support.

He called for jurisdiction over the removal and appointment of judges to the two dispute tribunals to be left to the General Assembly.  This would instil transparency and ensure the independence of the judges.  On the role of a panel of specialists to consider the removal of judges, he said it might be more appropriate if those specialists submitted their reports to an independent body, rather than to the concerned tribunal itself.  Calling for the establishment of a new administration of justice system by 1 January 2009, he said attention should first be focused on a new system covering those individuals who already had access to the system.  Provision of remedies to all other categories of personnel should then follow.

ZENON MUKONGO NGAY ( Democratic Republic of the Congo) said the rule of law was being promoted throughout the world.  It would not be proper for the United Nations not to have an appropriate administration of justice system.  The legal status of the two tribunals must be formulated as soon as possible.  The transitional mechanism must be implemented by stages and must include a mechanism for the settlement of disputes.  The link between the formal and informal administration of justice mechanisms should be consolidated through a process led by the Ombudsman, again with an avenue for the settlement of disputes being made a priority, as the Secretary-General had made clear.  Including a clause into the statutes about the bases for inadmissibility would clarify the issues concerned.  For example, cases should be completed within six months of a request for mediation.  The two-tier formal approach to the administration of justice mechanism would ensure fairness and equality of treatment, including through appropriate compensation, where warranted.  Judges must be elected by the Assembly.

MARK SIMONOFF ( United States) said he was committed to having the new two-tiered system in place by 1 January.  Transparency was of the essence.  A number of issues remained to be resolved, but approaches should be with a view to solutions that would stand the test of time.  The priority should be to finalize the statutes for both the administrative and appeals tribunals, in a manner that made the new system effective and efficient from day one.  Therefore, consideration of certain aspects could be deferred until the mechanism was in place and effectiveness could be assessed.  The principle to keep in mind was that the new system must be both legally sound and, since it was up to the Fifth Committee to consider, cost-effective.  Some further thought had been given to the matter of the scope of the tribunals; the United States would offer those views in detail.  In essence, it considered that those who were not staff should not, at present, be under consideration.

NEERU CHADHA ( India), noting that the staff members of any organization were its most important resource, said that, given the inadequacies of the present system, expeditious work towards reforming the United Nations administration of justice system was pertinent.  She pointed out that General Assembly resolution 61/26 recommended setting up the new two-tiered tribunal system, while Assembly resolution 62/228 approved the framework of the new system to be introduced 1 January 2009.

She said she welcomed the establishment of the Internal Justice Council and a single, decentralized Office of the Ombudsman.  The new Mediation Division would bring about an alternate route for seeking justice.  To ensure optimal utilization of these new mechanisms, it was essential that the alternate avenues for dispute resolution be publicized.  While progress had been made on reforming the Organization’s internal justice system, agreement was still needed on transitional measures towards its implementation and the scope of a new system.  In conclusion, she said all staff members should have access to justice so that no one was left without a remedy.

TOMOHIRO MIKANAGI ( Japan) said the administration of justice was one of the most important issues being discussed by the Sixth Committee during this session.  Accordingly, issues of reform could be addressed by the 1 January 2009 deadline, only in the spirit of compromise.  It was important to ensure the Fifth Committee could discuss the work of the Sixth Committee on this matter, without delay.  Meeting the deadline for establishing a new administration of justice at the United Nations, would require exercise of maximum flexibility to achieve the common goal.

EDEN CHARLES ( Trinidad and Tobago) said the existing system of administering justice at the United Nations was plagued with problems and was in dire need of reform.  The new decentralized system would provide more access to justice and would facilitate the peaceful resolution of disputes.  Failure to agree on the new system would adversely affect the ability of United Nations employees to avail themselves of an improved system of justice aimed at settling disputes that arose in the course of employment.  Compromise on all pending issues should be exercised, so as to finalize the draft statutes to be sent to the Administrative Committee for adoption.

NAMIRA NABIL NEGM (Egypt), reaffirming the importance of the speedy conclusion of drafting the statutes for the two tribunals, said she trusted that Member States and the Sixth Committee would ensure justice and that the rule of law prevailed, so that all staff members could enjoy a new system of justice as soon as possible.  She also affirmed Egypt’s commitment towards cooperating to establish a new administration of justice system, based on securing the rights of all staff members of the Organization.

ASMUND ERIKSEN ( Norway) called for a new administration of justice system, in full conformity with the principles of transparency, impartiality, accessibility and efficiency.  These universal principles could not be compromised by arguments based on cost.  In that regard, it was vital to stand by the pledge made at the 2005 World Summit to provide the Organization with adequate resources to fulfil its mandate.  A well-run internal justice system was a prerequisite for maintaining an efficient and effective Secretariat.

He said he was encouraged by the progress made on the topic thus far, and it was now time to increase focus on outstanding questions.  With regard to personal scope of the system, it was important to get the system “up and running”, and then to ensure associated non-staff personnel had access to an effective remedy for their complaints.  He recommended that a judge, when appropriate, be able to refer parties in a dispute to a mediation mechanism to reach an agreement.  In certain cases, such as complex cases of alleged discrimination largely based on the trustworthiness of the applicant, a panel of three judges might be appropriate to hear the case.  However, it was less necessary for a panel of judges to hear a case in the Dispute Tribunal if the Appeals Tribunal were given the powers to conduct a full review of the case.

GIL LIMON ( Israel) said significant progress had been made in establishing a new, independent, transparent, professionalized, adequately resourced and decentralized system.  The fundamental issues still to be resolved included the most important ones of scope of jurisdiction, number of judges and the grounds of appeal to the Appeals Tribunal.  Some interdependent issues should be addressed in an integrated manner to foster agreement.  Some issues that could not be resolved in the current round of negotiations should be deferred to future discussion once the system was up and running.  Goodwill, creativity and flexibility were all crucial for getting the new system implemented by 1 January 2009.

ALI AL-BAKER ( Qatar) said it was important to create a system that was fair and effective, and enabled every individual to exercise rights.  In the report on the work of the Ombudsman, it was to be noted that 18 per cent of cases coming to the Office were related to interpersonal matters, and 11 per cent to separation and termination.  The system of administration of justice at the United Nations should be fair and transparent.  The Ombudsman’s Office should include qualified staff with experience in mediation, so that justice and fairness could be assured through an administrative system that was fair.

He said the President of the Administrative Tribunal had raised questions that involved serious issues that should be considered before any mechanisms were adopted.  In the current system on administration of justice, the effects of injustices were being dealt with rather than the causes.  The creation of two tribunals as the formal mechanism, along with the Ombudsman’s Office as the informal mechanism, would help build a comprehensive administration of justice system built on staff who were educated in ensuring the guardianship of staff rights.  A section should be created in the Ombudsman’s Office to enlighten staff about the Office, including its mediation capacity.

GENNADY KUZMIN ( Russian Federation), said he supported efforts to improve the internal justice system at the United Nations, noting that reform of this system would be important to enhancing and strengthening the rule of law.  Welcoming General Assembly resolution 62/228, he said that, within the context of reform, there was an intention to broaden the informal settlement of disputes through a new two-tiered system.  However, reform based solely on this transformation would not be a complete one.  A qualitative approach to employment-related disputes could not be accomplished without broadening the jurisdiction of the tribunals, as well as the scope of the internal justice system, as a whole.  All staff members should have access to the new system.

Expressing gratitude for the work the coordinator and corresponding groups put into the intersessional informal consultations, he said those consultations had helped to clearly identify the essence and scope of draft statutes and had assisted with the Sixth Committee’s ability to move ahead with finding mutually acceptable resolutions.  However, many issues of reform were still pending.  Much difficult work needed to be done by 1 January 2009, when the tribunals were to be established.  While acknowledging the importance of adhering to the deadline, he stressed that timeliness should not lead to any negative consequence in the quality of work done.  Accordingly, work put into finalizing the draft statutes should not hamper other aspects of reform, such as legal assistance in the context of the new system.  He emphasized that the Sixth Committee’s work on reforming the internal justice system should correspond with the work of the Fifth committee.

ESMAEIL BAGHAEI HAMANEH(Iran), aligning himself with the statements on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said that for more than four decades attempts were made to improve the administration of justice system, but to no avail.  It was time a new, independent, professional and transparent internal justice system was established to replace the current old, dysfunctional, outmoded and broken system.  Noting that every attempt had been made in the past year to finalize the structure of the new system, especially in respect to draft statutes of the two tribunals, he stressed that there could not be any true delegation of authority without defined accountability to officials.  He said the reformed system must be transparent and workable, to protect all staff members and to hold managers accountable.  A reformed system of justice would contribute to strengthening the role of the Organization, especially through increasing its productivity, and was an essential part of the human resources management system.

* *** *

__________

*     Reissued to include correct background information.

For information media • not an official record