Sixty-third General Assembly

Sixth Committee

14^th & 15^th Meetings (AM & PM)

PUNISHMENT OF ATTACKS ON DIPLOMATIC, CONSULAR MISSIONS ESSENTIAL

 

BUT PREVENTIVE MEASURES REAL ANSWER, LEGAL COMMITTEE TOLD

 

Among Other Issues, Warning Given of Internet Fraud,

Criminal Abuse of Donors in Post-Disaster Appeals for Aid

Responding to assaults was essential, but the protection of diplomatic and consular missions and personnel could only be ensured through concrete preventive measures, China’s delegate said today as the Sixth Committee (Legal) took up the question of the security of diplomatic missions and persons.  The Committee also concluded its consideration of protocols to the 1949 Geneva Conventions, hearing the oral reports of three working groups.  It adopted draft statutes for the United Nations Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Tribunal, within the new Administration of Justice system to be inaugurated 1 January, 2009.

In the discussion on diplomatic missions, China’s representative told the Committee his country’s premises had been set on fire, broken into and damaged, and personnel had been attacked and injured.  Concerned States had dealt with the attacks and had made compensation, he said, but States needed to adopt legislative, administrative and judicial measures to ward off future incidents.  Investigation and prosecution systems also needed improvement.

The representative of Iran reaffirmed the obligation of States to respect the immunity and inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises.  He said violence against such persons and premises in Iraq by foreign forces was of serious concern, asserting that there had been attacks against Iranian diplomatic and consular missions in Iraq throughout 2007.  Urgent action must be taken, he said, to secure the immediate release of Iranian consular officers who were abducted and still held.

Referring to attacks on diplomats as “particularly heinous and senseless”, the representative of Canada, speaking also for New Zealand and Australia, said local populations had to understand and appreciate the positive work being pursued by diplomats and missions.  States should ratify all relevant treaties and criminalize offences.

For the European Union, France’s representative said the norms of international law as codified by the 1961 and 1963 Vienna Conventions laid down the legal basis for diplomatic relations between States.  Privileges and immunities were not for the benefit of individuals but for the purpose of protecting the “sending” State and ensuring the efficient performance of missions as representatives of States.  Diplomatic and consular personnel, in turn, were of course under obligation to respect the laws of receiving States.

Norway’s representative, on behalf of the Nordic Countries, also said the reason for the principle of protecting diplomatic persons was not to protect particular individuals but to protect the channels of communication between States. 

The 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons required criminalization of acts of aggression against diplomatic personnel, with appropriate penalties, said the representative of Turkey, adding that the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations also imposed special obligations on receiving States.

Also speaking on diplomatic protection were the representatives of Venezuela, Cuba and Israel. 

The representative of Cyprus spoke in right of reply.

On the subject of the protocols additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions in relation to victims of armed conflicts, the Observer for the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC) spoke of abuses perpetuated through modern communications technology for the purpose of fraud after major disasters.  He said guidelines were being developed to provide national societies with advice on how to address Internet frauds within their countries; it was essential Governments join forces with national society auxiliary partners to ensure that the generosity of the public in times of disaster was not converted to the benefit of criminals.

The representatives of Colombia and Viet Nam, and the Observer for the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), also spoke on the subject of the additional protocols.

Presenting oral reports on the activity of their working groups were the Chairpersons of those groups:  Maria Telalian ( Greece) on criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission; Rohan Perera ( Sri Lanka) on measures to eliminate international terrorism; and Ganeson Sivagurunathan ( Malaysia) on administration of justice at the United Nations.

Besides the two draft resolutions adopted today, with texts of draft statutes for the United Nations Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Tribunal, the Committee had before it a letter to the President of the General Assembly concerning the consideration of the item on administration of justice at the United Nations by the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).

The Committee will meet again at 10 a.m. on Monday, 27 October, when the report of the International Law Commission will be taken up.

Background

The Sixth Committee (Legal) met this morning to conclude its consideration of the status of protocols additional to the 1949 Geneva Conventions relating to protection of victims of armed conflict, and of effective measures to enhance the security of diplomatic and consular missions and persons.  (For background, see Press Release GA/L/3349 of 23 October.) 

Also today, the Committee was expected to hear oral reports by the Chairpersons of the working groups on criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission, measures to eliminate international terrorism and administration of justice at the United Nations.

Further, the Committee was expected to take up two draft resolutions, one containing the text of the draft statute of the United Nations dispute tribunal (document A/C.6/63/L.7) and another containing the text of the draft statute of the United Nations Appeals Tribunal (document A/C.6/63/L.8).  Both are texts proposed by the working group on the administration of justice at the United Nations.  A draft decision on the administration of justice at the United Nations (document A/C.6/63/L.9) was also before the Committee.

Statements on Protocols

CLAUDIA BLUM (Colombia) said the Secretary-General’s report on the additional protocols had contributed significantly to the analysis and evaluation of humanitarian standards in the area of armed conflict and served to support the promotion of respect for these standards, as well as the implementation of other relevant international instruments.  She stressed the importance of strengthening international humanitarian law through the universal acceptance of relevant treaties and the signing of the additional protocols.  She noted that Colombia was a signatory to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its two additional protocols, and was in the process of adopting the third additional protocol (on an additional emblem).  Colombia had also ratified the statute on the International Criminal Court; had become a party to the Optional Protocol on the Convention on the Rights of the Child; and implemented mechanisms to protect victims of armed conflict through State institutions and national instruments.  In particular, its justice and peace law provided for the punishment of perpetrators of gross human rights violations.

She said training armed forces in matters relating to international humanitarian law and the adoption of legislation to punish war crimes were equally tangible achievements in Colombia.  This training was supported by publishing manuals and the holding of seminars.  This year, the policy of “Integral International Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law” was adopted by the Ministry of Defence.

This, in addition to rules of engagement adopted by the general command of the armed forces, was to ensure that operations were carried out in observance of human rights and humanitarian law.  Cooperation between national government and citizens was an important aspect of Colombian policy; as evidence of its deep commitment to the matter, Colombia had decided to volunteer a universal periodic review on human rights.

NGUYEN THI TUONG VAN ( Viet Nam) said that, in full understanding of the devastating effects of war on a country and its population, Viet Nam had always upheld the principles of international law.  It was party to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and its first additional protocol; acceding to the second additional protocol was under consideration.  Under its national defence law, the fundamental principle was to ensure the protection of civilians in times of peace and in armed conflicts.  Viet Nam had also disseminated knowledge of international humanitarian law nationwide.  The texts of the Geneva Conventions and the two additional protocols had been translated and published in Vietnamese.  Representatives of Viet Nam People’s Army had also participated in various training courses organized by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

She said Viet Nam had hosted a workshop in 2006, jointly with the International Committee of the Red Cross, on international humanitarian law.  This workshop recommended, among other things, early accession to international humanitarian law instruments, including the 1977 Additional Protocols.  She spoke of the importance of a conflict prevention strategy on a long-term basis that addressed the root causes of armed conflict in a comprehensive manner.  While it was the primary responsibility of each Government to protect its citizens from atrocities of wars, international cooperation in preventing armed conflicts was also significant.

ROBERT YOUNG (International Committee of the Red Cross), noting that 2007 marked the thirtieth anniversary of the adoption of Protocols I and II to the Geneva Conventions, said those international instruments formed part of the foundation of international humanitarian law and represented a milestone in the regulation of armed conflict.  Such conflicts continued, inexorably, to cause death, injury, destruction, suffering and loss; civilian victims were being denied the protection to which they were entitled under international humanitarian law.  In addition, detainees connected with armed conflicts continued to be deprived of their basic rights, and humanitarian organizations were prevented from doing their work in this regard or were hampered in their efforts.

He said this grim picture was of utmost concern to ICRC and at odds with the comprehensive legal regimes.  However, he added, there was today a growing commitment to international humanitarian law and a heightened awareness of its basic tenets.  While welcoming the increased participation of States in international humanitarian law treaties, he said that the major problem -- achieving greater compliance with these norms by all parties to armed conflict -- remained.

Humanitarian law was constantly being adapted and refined, he said.  The ICRC, for example, was working to clarify key legal concepts such as that of “direct participation in hostilities” and to devise more detailed rules governing internment.  The ICRC also recently worked with Switzerland on an initiative regarding private military and security companies operating in armed conflict, which resulted in the Montreux Document.  Welcoming the adoption of the Dublin convention outlawing cluster munitions, he said any attempt to review the appropriateness of international humanitarian law could occur only after it was determined that it was the law itself that was inadequate, and not the political will to apply it.

He noted that the creation of international mechanisms to prosecute individual perpetrators of the worst international crimes came in the wake of serious violations of humanitarian law occurring in the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda and elsewhere.  The entry into operation of the International Criminal Court was another remarkable achievement.

He called on States to continue to adapt their domestic legal orders and practice to ensure adherence to humanitarian law, including the enactment of comprehensive legislation, drawing up military manuals, and proper training and command supervision within the armed and security forces.

MICHAEL SCHULZ, Observer, International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, said he associated himself with the statement for the “sister institution”, the International Committee of the Red Cross.  He said the resolution on the Geneva Convention protocols this year contained a welcome reference to the role of the national societies of his organization as “auxiliaries” to public authorities in the humanitarian field in their countries, particularly in respect of promoting international humanitarian law.  The results of an exhaustive study on the matter had been presented at the 2007 ICRC Conference.  There was consensus on a resolution, which laid down the foundation for the auxiliary partnering of governments at all levels and national societies.  Adoption of the same language by the General Assembly, as reflected in the Committee’s resolution on the matter, would be a solid contribution to partnering for an address of humanitarian challenges.

It was a concern of the Federation, he said, that Governments should act to prevent abuses of the kind that today were perpetuated through modern communications technology for the purpose of fraud after major disasters.  The Federation and its members were not the only members of the international humanitarian community to experience the “scams”, but guidelines were being developed to provide national societies with advice on how the address Internet frauds within their countries.  Governments must join forces with national society auxiliary partners on the matter to ensure that the generosity of the public in times of disaster was not converted to the benefit of criminals.  The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) was also addressing the matter.  The Legal Committee should be aware of the point, which was relevant to the draft resolution and the emblem protection issue. 

Statements on Security of Missions

BENJAMIN CABOUAT (France), speaking for the European Union, said the norms of international law as codified by the 1961 and 1963 Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations laid down the legal basis for such relations between States.  Privileges and immunities under those conventions were not for the benefit of individuals but for the purpose of protecting the “sending” States and ensuring the efficient performance and functions of missions as representatives of States.  Diplomatic and consular personnel, in turn, were of course under obligation to respect the laws of receiving States.

The European Union, he said, condemned in the strongest possible terms attacks that were deliberately directed against diplomatic and consular missions.  Such attacks were unacceptable and totally without justification.  States must honour obligations under international law to provide protection to foreign missions, and must do their utmost to prevent such attacks, which must be fully investigated and prosecuted.  States should also engage in dialogue with diplomatic missions to find the most effective ways to ensure protection.

He said breaches of State obligations under the Vienna Conventions clearly involved international responsibility.  There was an obligation to make reparation; in some cases, it could also entail an obligation to take remedial action.  Finally, States should comply with the reporting procedures established in the resolution.  That was particularly important in preventing future attacks.

ÅSMUND ERIKSEN (Norway), speaking for the Nordic countries, said States were obliged to ensure the protection of diplomatic and consular representatives and premises, as well as those of international organizations, according to universally accepted principles and the rules of international law.  The reason for the principles of protecting such persons was not to protect particular individuals but to protect the channels of communication between States.  In that context, the laws and regulations of receiving States must be observed by the diplomatic and consular representatives.

Condemning acts of violence against diplomatic and consular missions and persons, and against officials of international organizations, he said those acts were never justified and should never go unpunished.  Close cooperation and information-sharing should be promoted so as to prevent violations.  If receiving States failed to provide the required protection in accordance with obligations, the injured State was entitled to claim prompt compensation for losses or injuries suffered as a result of the failure to protect.

He said all States must become parties to the relevant instruments; the 19 new States parties to instruments related to such protection were welcome.  The reporting procedures were important in raising awareness in the world community about violations.  They also promoted efforts to enhance protections.

KEITH MORRILL (Canada), speaking also for Australia and New Zealand, said a Canadian Embassy was the object of a serious attack in 2007, and just over two years ago Canada lost a senior diplomat in an attack by a suicide bomber in Afghanistan.  These incidents highlighted the importance of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.  Attacks against persons dedicated to improving the lives of the population of the country in which they were serving seemed particularly heinous and senseless.  Diplomats were frequently in the front line of the struggle to help the most vulnerable and dispossessed people on the planet, and often worked in dangerous conditions in conflict zones. 

He said measures traditionally used to protect them were no longer sufficient; ratification of all relevant treaties and the criminalization of offences against diplomatic and consular personnel were necessary for their protection.  Prosecution of offenders, as well as those aiding and abetting them, was absolutely essential.  In order for diplomats to carry out their work effectively, it was vital to ensure that the local population understood and appreciated the positive goals and outcomes being pursued.  He emphasized that diplomatic and consular premises must not be made into “convenient lightning rods for political dissatisfaction”.  All host States must be vigilant and active in their defence, as well as rigorous in their prosecution of offenders. 

ZHOU YONG ( China) said diplomatic and consular missions shouldered the important responsibility of promoting friendly intercourse among countries and had a special role to play in international relations.  Only when the normal functioning of diplomatic and consular missions was guaranteed would there be orderly diplomatic activities among States and the effective maintenance of the world order.  It was, therefore, in the common interests of States to enhance the protection of these personnel in accordance with the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations, as well as other relevant instruments of international law.   According to these Conventions, the receiving States had a special duty to protect these personnel. 

He said it had been noted that different States had different focuses on fulfilling their obligations.  Many, including China, focused on taking vigorous preventive measures; other States focused on dealing with the aftermath, including sending officials to the scene of the attack, punishing attackers and providing compensation to victims.  While post-attack response was necessary, it was only when greater attention was given to concrete preventive measures that the safety and security of diplomatic and consular missions would be protected effectively.  In particular, he went on, the receiving State should adopt legislative, administrative and judicial measures to develop and improve their investigation and prosecution systems. 

He said that in March and April of this year, Chinese diplomatic and consular missions in some countries were attacked; in some cases, mission premises were set on fire, broken into or damaged.  Some personnel were attacked and injured.  Although, in the aftermath, concerned States sent officials to the scene to deal with the attacks, and provided compensation to the Chinese government, the need remained for the effective protection of these missions and personnel in the form of preventive measures. 

ÇAĞLA TANSU SEÇKIN (Turkey), supporting the statement on behalf of the European Union, noted that Turkish diplomatic and consular missions and representatives had been the targets of terrorism and many had died as a result. Protection of these missions and personnel should be a high priority for Member States; the Conventions on Diplomatic and Consular Relations imposed special obligations on receiving States, in this regard.  Likewise, she said, the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons required criminalization of these acts, with appropriate penalties.  As a party to these treaties, she welcomed the 19 other States that had also become party to them since the previous report of the Secretary-General on the matter was issued.

Noting that the reporting mechanism established pursuant to General Assembly resolution 35/168 was functional in terms of bringing serious violations involving these missions and representatives to the attention of States, and of informing them about actions taken against offenders, she also encouraged States where incidents occurred to submit these reports and to communicate directly, and in a timely manner, with the “sending” State.

Turning to the Cyprus question, as relayed in the Secretary-General’s report (A/63/121), she said there was a functioning Turkish authority in the northern part of Cyprus with competent law enforcement agencies with which the Greek Cypriot police could collaborate.  However, the Greek Cypriot side had, for decades, been pursuing a policy of non-cooperation with the Turkish Cypriot side, especially in combating crime.  The incident reflected in the aforementioned report was an example of this uncooperative approach; instead of “shying away from its real-world responsibilities and depicting each and every matter as a cause of the so-called ‘invasion’”, the Greek Cypriot side should choose to work with Turkish Cypriot authorities.

ALEJANDRO MORENO ( Venezuela) said all acts of violence against diplomatic and consular missions and persons must be investigated, and the perpetrators of such actions must be prosecuted and brought to justice.  Security conditions must be strengthened after such incidents to protect against a repetition of attacks.  Furthermore, the commitment to protecting diplomatic and consular missions and persons must be reflected in national legislation, just as was the case in his country.  In the event of harm or injury, his Government took steps to reinforce security and ensure that the attack could not happen again.

ESHAGH AL-HABIB ( Iran) said that, as a party to all conventions related to diplomatic and consular protection, his country was committed to taking every measure to enhance the protection of representatives of foreign Governments in the country, with a specialized police force bearing the responsibility.  Recently, a national coordinating committee in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs had also been set up to prevent and monitor violations of the safety and security of diplomatic missions and representatives.

Reaffirming the obligations of all States under international law to respect the immunity and inviolability of diplomatic and consular premises, he said he condemned such attacks.  In that context, the systematic and continuing violence against the safety and security of such persons and premises in Iraq by foreign forces was of serious concern.

He spoke of attacks that had been reported and documented during 2007 against Iranian diplomatic and consulate missions in Iraq.  He cited incidents, which he said involved United States and British military forces.  There was no justification for those unlawful and violent acts, which were a grave violation of conventional and customary international law governing diplomatic and consular relations and activities;  they had not only violated the sovereignty of the receiving State but had endangered the institution of diplomatic and consular immunity.  The United States and British Governments were primarily responsible.  Urgent action must be taken to secure the immediate release of three Iranian consular officers abducted in Erbil in January last year and still being held, and to obtain compensation for damages.  Likewise, the Iraqi Government must take measures to ensure that the safety and security of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives in the country were not endangered by foreign forces or by terrorists. 

JUANA ELENA RAMOS RODRÍGUEZ ( Cuba) said she unequivocally condemned attacks against diplomatic and consular persons and premises.  States must adopt internal measures to prohibit organizations and persons who would inflict abuse against such premises.  Her country had adopted measures to ensure diplomatic and consular safety, providing security services not only at the missions and site of diplomatic events, but also at residences.  Harsh prison sentences were handed down for crimes against diplomatic and consular missions and persons. 

ADY SCHONMANN ( Israel) noted that there had been some positive international developments, as well as a growing awareness of the need to address the issue of the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.  She was hopeful that international resolve and cooperation would assist in deterring States which provided cover and facilitation of terrorist activities.  Israel reiterated its own commitment to respect the provisions of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and of Consular Relations of 1963, in particular.  In that connection, the Sixth Committee should emphasize the obligations arising out of Article 29 of the diplomatic convention which required receiving States to take appropriate steps to prevent attacks on these diplomats.

There still were severe violent attacks and terrorist threats.  The international community must take all necessary measures to protect missions and representatives, and all States should examine and implement preventive methods.  In that regard, she said, Israel supported the aim of General Assembly resolution 61/31 on the subject.

Right of reply

POLLY IOANNOU ( Cyprus) said it was regrettable that the Turkish delegation felt the need to politicize the issue of providing adequate protection for diplomatic missions.  The report referred to by Turkey was clearly an attempt by Cyprus to respond to a submission by the Holy See on an incident that took place in Cypriot territory.

Turkey claimed there was a Turkish authority operating in Cyprus.  However, it was clear which Government represented Cyprus.  Since 1974, Cyprus could not exercise rights over part of the territory because of the occupation of it by another member of the United Nations.  Only one country failed to recognize the legitimacy of the Cypriot government.  Although there was a remark that no invasion took place in 1974 against Cyprus, several Security Council resolutions said otherwise and recognized that Turkey still had military forces in Cyprus, a sovereign State.

Report on Criminal Accountability

MARIA TELALIAN ( Greece), Chairperson of the working group on criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission, said that following the recommendations of the Ad Hoc Committee on the matter, the Sixth Committee, at its first meeting, decided to establish a working group to consider the report of the Group of Legal Experts. 

The working group had before it the report of the Ad Hoc Committee (A/63/54), the report of the Group of Legal Experts (A/60/980), the Note of the Secretariat (A/62/329) and the report of the Secretary-General (A/63/260 and Add.1) on the matter.  The working group focused its discussions on the informal working paper on international cooperation.  In her informal summary on the deliberations of the working group, she said the purpose of considering the informal working paper was to identify relevant principles of international cooperation which could usefully supplement the elements adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 62/63.

A revised informal working paper was then produced, she said, taking into account comments from delegations.  These papers were tailored to be read together with resolution 62/63.  Accordingly, some of the provisions of the earlier draft, dealing with issues that were the subject of previous discussion and adequately addressed in resolution 62/63, such as issues concerning the privileges and immunities of the Organization, were deleted from the revised paper.  Nevertheless, some delegations expressed preference for the initial informal working paper, considering it a compromise and basis for elements on cooperation in a draft resolution on criminal accountability.

Report on Measures against Terrorism

ROHAN PERERA (Sri Lanka), Chairman of the working group on measures to eliminate international terrorism, said bilateral contacts and informal meetings had aimed to provide delegations with an opportunity to remain engaged in the process and to help advance the negotiations on the draft comprehensive convention on international terrorism and on the convening of a high-level conference, as indicated by a report from the contacts and meetings coordinator.

During discussions, he said, some delegations had found general agreement on some basic principles, including the proposition that civilians could in no circumstances constitute a legitimate target of the use of force during armed conflict, or in peacetime, and that international law, as applicable in a specific situation, could not and should not be prejudiced by the draft convention.  The delegations continued to raise the issue of “State terrorism”, with some inroads made in addressing questions of general impunity in the various instruments elaborated.  Citing the report, he said there had also been an effort to include specific obligations for States.

The draft convention should not be seen in isolation for other rules of international law, but as “a building block to an already existing edifice of law that governed the conduct of relations among States”, he said.  Negotiations had come a long way, and more and more delegations had indicated a readiness to continue in a more open and transparent manner to resolve outstanding issues.

On the convening of a high-level conference, he said there was a need to study the phenomenon of terrorism in all its aspects, as mentioned by the representative of Egypt when she had proposed the conference, saying that the conference should not be an end in itself but a way to strengthen cooperation among States.  Some delegations had supported the proposal, countering that a high-level conference would, among other things, resolve outstanding issues such as the definition of terrorism.  It could also provide the necessary impetus to conclude the draft comprehensive convention.  Other delegations, while not opposed in principle, recalled that priority should remain focused on the conclusion of a comprehensive convention.

Delegations should take advantage of the intersessional period to seriously reflect on these suggestions, he concluded.  They should earnestly consider whether they could overcome the “last few hurdles” to reach the shared goal of a speedy conclusion of the draft comprehensive convention.

Report on Administration of Justice at United Nations

When the Committee met again this afternoon, GANESON SIVAGURUNATHAN (Malaysia), Chairman of the working group on the Administration of Justice at the United Nations, said the group was established with a view to finalizing Sixth Committee deliberations on the draft statutes of the United Nations Dispute and Appeals Tribunals, and to continuing the discussion on other legal aspects of the administration of justice.  This item was also allocated to the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).

He said the working group had before it the reports of the Ad Hoc Committee and the Secretary-General on the administration of justice, as well as the Secretary-General’s report on “the outcome of the work of the Joint Appeals Board during 2006 and 2007 and statistics on the disposition of cases and work of the Panel of Counsel”.  It also had before it the Secretary-General’s reports on the activities of the Ombudsman and “Administration of justice: further information requested by the General Assembly”.

During its four meetings, he said, the working group negotiated and agreed to the text of the United Nations Dispute and Appeals Tribunals (A/C.6/63/L.7 and A/C.6/63/L.8), as well as to two oral amendments.  The first amendment referred to “striking a balance” between the legal considerations of the Sixth Committee and the administrative and budgetary concerns of the Fifth Committee.  The second amendment related to the statute on the United Nations Dispute Tribunal designating that cases referred to a panel of three judges be decided by a majority vote. 

Furthermore, he added, the group recommended that a letter be sent by the Chairman of the Sixth Committee to the General Assembly President, transmitting the text of the draft statutes -- “as adopted by the Sixth Committee with bracketed unagreed text” -- to be brought to the attention of the Fifth Committee and circulated to the General Assembly.  The letter contained another recommendation by the Sixth Committee, on language to be included in the resolution by which the General Assembly would adopt the text of the statutes of the two tribunals.  In addition, the group recommended that the Sixth Committee adopt the draft decision to refer work on any outstanding legal aspects on the matter to the Ad Hoc Committee on the Administration of Justice. 

Introduction and Action on Drafts

The Committee took up and adopted draft resolutions prepared by the working group on Administration of Justice at the United Nations (with bracketed “non-agreed” text).  One resolution contained the recommended text of a draft statute for the United Nations Dispute Tribunal (document A/C.6/63/L.7), and the other for the Appeals Tribunal (document A/C.6/63/L.8). 

The Committee then authorized the Committee Chair to sign and forward a letter to the President of the General Assembly with regard to consideration of the item by the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).

* *** *

For information media • not an official record