Fifth Committee Approves $3.3 Billion Programme Budget for 2024, Peacebuilding Fund Financing Mechanism, Permanent Anti-Racism Office, Concluding Main Part of Session
Drafts to Approve Increased Resources for Human Rights Council Mandates, Fund Palestine Refugee Agency, Condemn Killing of Its Staff Sparks Heated Debate
The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) today wrapped up the main part of its seventy-eighth session by sending the General Assembly a 2024 budget of $3.59 billion, about $3 million more than the $3.3 billion budget laid out by the Secretary-General in October.
After days and nights of last-minute negotiations, the Committee approved nearly two dozen resolutions that also established a financing mechanism for the Peacebuilding Fund, strengthened a Secretariat office meant to curb the presence of racism in the Organization and deepened its global communications work in the four official languages of Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish. The Committee also moved to fund crucial construction projects at UN properties from Nairobi to Geneva to Santiago.
The Committee’s approval of nearly $50 million in additional funding for decisions taken by the Human Rights Council sparked criticism again, as did postponing action on the creation of a separate budget to address the financing of special political missions. Several delegates also criticized the trend to politicize the work of a Committee dedicated to human resources and budget matters.
A representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer, criticized the lack of results on numerous items concerning the Organization’s core functioning, whether by deferring them or adopting so-called “skeletal resolutions”. “In a world of increased conflict, safeguarding budgetary constraint for some yet again hampered our ability to provide political guidance to the Secretariat on the implementation of special political missions,” she said, adding the Committee failed to shape an Organization fit for the twenty-first century. She also criticized increased voting called to defund entire mandates of the Human Rights Council. “Our role is to comply with the resolutions defining mandates, and fund them, not renegotiate them,” she said, adding these items are “a reflection of multilateralism at its core.”
Cuba’s representative, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said the Committee faced one of its most complex years and he commended its unity as it approved resolutions to fund creation of a new conference centre in Nairobi and the Development Account. Ethiopia’s delegate, for the African Group, also underscored the importance of funding for the Development Account and regretted the Committee’s inability to achieve consensus on numerous issues, including special political missions for the fifth year in a row.
After two years of discussion, the Committee decided to establish the Peacebuilding Account, a dedicated multi-year special account, as a modality to finance the Peacebuilding Fund. The representative of Australia, also speaking for Canada and New Zealand, said today’s historic investment of $50 million in the Peacebuilding Fund could save the Organization $800 million in crisis response.
As part of the Organization’s efforts to communicate and work effectively in all official languages, the Committee sent the Assembly a resolution that includes provisions to expand its coverage of the Organization’s official intergovernmental meetings. This provision would establish 20 general temporary assistance positions that include editors, press officers and assistants working in Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish.
The conflict in Gaza and the plight of Palestinian refugees sparked discussion as the representative of Cuba, speaking again for the Group of 77 and China, introduced a resolution condemning the killing of United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) staff and the destruction of buildings under the United Nations flags. The resolution was approved by a recorded vote of 101 in favour to 1 against (Israel), with 56 abstentions.
While expressing support for UNRWA’s work and deploring the humanitarian situation in Gaza, many delegates said the Fifth Committee is not the appropriate venue for larger issues that go beyond its purview of human resources and budget matters. For example, the representative of Spain, speaking for the European Union, considered it inappropriate to include paragraphs with a political nature in a Fifth Committee resolution that deals with UN budget issues. She abstained from the vote. The representative of Israel, who voted against that text, said the language and text deliberately ignore that the situation in Gaza resulted from Hamas’s decision to declare a war upon Israel on 7 October. This made the resolution completely one-sided.
As part of an overview resolution that addressed questions relating to the 2024 programme budget, the Committee later decided to reallocate possible 2025 funding for UNRWA into the 2024 budget. This decision was opposed by Israel.
Many delegates dissociated themselves from language in the resolution to provide nearly $50 million in additional funding to support mandates of the Human Rights Council. A resolution proposed by the Russian Federation to reject all funding for revised estimates during the Council’s fifty-second, fifty-third and fifty-fourth regular sessions, and at its thirty-sixth special session, was rejected. The Russian Federation delegation regretted that a compromise could not be reached even as many delegations do not want to see the politicization of the Committee. A move by the Sudanese delegation to remove resources from an 11 October Council decision was rejected by a recorded vote of 72 against to 34 in favour, with 38 abstentions. The Sudanese delegate said human rights in Sudan can be protected through existing mechanisms and the Council’s additional resources were being used to put political pressure on Sudan.
The representative of Syria expressed similar sentiments as he rejected the use of regular budget resources to finance the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Persons Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes under International Law Committed in the Syrian Arab Republic since March 2011. He said the UN’s budget and resources must be used wisely and not wasted in funding illegitimate mechanisms. A draft resolution, introduced by the Russian Federation, to delete all references to the Mechanism was rejected by a recorded vote of 76 against to 22 in favour, with 48 abstentions. In introducing the text, the Russian Federation’s delegate said the Mechanism carries out politically motivated investigations that are outside the framework of international law, and its outcomes have nothing to do with justice. The representative of Spain, speaking again for the European Union, said the Committee’s work is to ensure the mandates of intergovernmental organizations can be carried out and that the Council must have the proper resources.
Chandramouli Ramanathan, United Nations Controller and Assistant Secretary-General for Programme Planning, Finance and Budget in the Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance, thanked the Committee for bringing assessed contributions to finance the Peacebuilding Fund and for completing its work before the Christmas holiday. He said the Committee’s decision to do away with recosting multiple times and complete the process in September will help the Committee finish in the first week of December. He said it is nice to have a good budget, yet the Organization needs cash as soon as possible so it can implement all the measures the Committee has approved.
Opening Remarks
OSAMA MAHMOUD ABDELKHALEK MAHMOUD (Egypt), Chair of the Fifth Committee, opened the meeting and said since most proposals before the Committee were agreed upon within the last 24 hours, the majority of the draft resolutions and decisions are provisional versions and subject to editorial review and quality control. They will be issued in the six official languages as quickly as possible. He recognized the various General Assembly resolutions on multilingualism and thanked all delegations for their flexibility to proceed exceptionally with these documents in English only to facilitate the conclusion of the Committee’s work for the main part of the seventy-seventh session. All provisional documents are available electronically, he said.
Action on Drafts
The Fifth Committee first approved without a vote a draft on the financial reports and audited financial statements of the Board of Auditors (document A/C.5/78/L.10). By its terms, the General Assembly would take note of the audit opinions and findings, endorse the recommendations contained in the Board’s reports and endorse the conclusions and recommendations contained in the report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). The Assembly would also decide to consider further the Board’s report on the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals under the agenda item related to the Mechanism as well as the Board’s report on the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund under the agenda item related to the Pension Fund.
Next, the Committee turned its attention to the draft resolution “Information and communications technology strategy” (document A/C.5/78/L.6).
Before approving it without a vote, the representative of the Russian Federation urged the Secretariat, as it prepares the United Nations updated information and communications technology (ICT) strategy, to consider the terminology for ICT security.
By the text’s terms, the Assembly would ask the Secretary-General to submit a detailed, time-bound implementation road map of the ICT strategy and submit refined elements of the strategy — including its intended objectives and related concrete, key performance indicators and estimated resource requirements, among other elements — by no later than its seventy-ninth session.
Turning to the draft resolution titled “Pattern of conferences” (document A/C.5/78/L.5), the Committee approved it without a vote. The text would have the Assembly approve the draft calendar of 2024 United Nations conferences and meetings, as submitted by the Committee on Conferences, and authorize the Assembly to make any adjustments that may become necessary due to its actions and decisions at its seventy-eighth session.
Next, the Committee turned its attention to draft resolution “Report on the activities of the Ethics Office” (document A/C.5/78/L.14), by which the Assembly would take note of the Office’s report, adopting it without a vote.
It thereafter considered, also adopting without a vote, draft resolution “Report on the activities of the Office of Internal Oversight Services” (OIOS) (document A/C.5/78/L.13), which would have the Assembly take note of the Office’s report for its activities from 1 July 2022 to 30 June 2023 and ask the Secretary-General to ensure that all relevant resolutions pertaining to the Office’s work are brought to the attention of relevant managers and that the Office takes those resolutions into account in the conduct of its activities.
Next, the Committee approved without a vote the draft resolution titled “Administration of justice at the United Nations” (document A/C.5/78/L.26), which would have the Assembly decide to regularize the pilot for access of non-staff personnel to the services of the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services, within existing resources. It would also decide to approve an amendment to the UN Dispute Tribunal, adding a new paragraph 4 to article 9, which would read as follows: “In hearing an application to appeal an administrative decision imposing a disciplinary measure, the Dispute Tribunal shall pass judgment on the application by conducting a judicial review. In conducting a judicial review, the Dispute Tribunal shall consider the record assembled by the Secretary-General and may admit other evidence to make an assessment on whether the facts on which the disciplinary measure was based have been established by evidence; whether the established facts legally amount to misconduct; whether the applicant’s due process rights were observed; and whether the disciplinary measure imposed was proportionate to the offence.”
The Committee also approved without a vote the draft resolution on “Financing of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals” (document A/C.5/78/L.18), by which the Assembly would decide to appropriate to the special account for the International Residual Mechanism $65.46 million gross ($60.13 million net) for 2024. It would further decide that the total assessment for 2024 under the special account amounting to $55.11 million consist of $65.46 million, being the estimated appropriation approved for the period — less $3.37 million, being the credit of the cancellation of prior period obligations/commitments corresponding to the year 2021, and other revenue; and less $6.98 million, being the surplus resulting from the final expenditure for the budget for the year 2022.
Next, it approved without a vote the resolution “Financing of the United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali” (MINUSMA) (document A/C.5/78/L.15), by which the Assembly would decide to appropriate to the special account for MINUSMA $866.87 million for the maintenance of the Mission from 1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024, including $590 million previously authorized for it for 1 July to 31 December 2023 under the terms of resolution 77/312.
Next, it took up a draft decision titled “Programme budget implications relating to the programme budget for 2024” (document A/C.5/78/L.17), which contains implications for 1 draft decision and 12 draft resolutions from the Assembly’s main committees, submitted by the Secretary-General, approving that text without a vote.
That texts with programme budget implications include the draft decision “Open-ended working group on security of and in the use of information and communications technologies 2021-2025 established pursuant to General Assembly resolution 75/240” (document A/C.1/78/L.13) and the following draft resolutions: “Nuclear disarmament verification” (document A/C.1/78/L.31); “Addressing the legacy of nuclear weapons: providing victim assistance and environmental remediation to Member States affected by the use or testing of nuclear weapons” (document A/C.1/78/L.52); “Further practical measures for the prevention of an arms race in outer space” (document A/C.1/78/L.55); “Lethal autonomous weapons systems” (document A/C.1/78/L.56); “Developments in the field of information and telecommunications in the context of international security” (document A/C.1/78/L.11); and “Strengthening and promoting the international treaty framework” (document A/C.6/78/L.4).
It also includes the drafts “A global call for concrete action for the elimination of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance and the comprehensive implementation of and follow-up to the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action” (document A/C.3/78/L.60/Rev.1); “Subregional Centre for Human Rights and Democracy in Central Africa” (document A/C.3/78/L.55); “Promotion of inclusive and effective international tax cooperation at the United Nations” (document A/C.2/78/L.18/Rev.1); “Follow-up to and implementation of the SIDS Accelerated Modalities of Action (SAMOA) Pathway and the Mauritius Strategy for the Further Implementation of the Programme of Action for the Sustainable Development of Small Island Developing States” (document A/C.2/78/L.45); “Follow-up to the Fifth United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries” (document A/C.2/78/L.57); and “Follow-up to and implementation of the outcomes of the International Conferences on Financing for Development” (document A/C.2/78/L.59).
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution “Proposed Programme Budget for 2024”, section 8, Legal affairs (document A/C.5/78/L.7), by which the Assembly would decide to delete all narratives and references regarding the International, Impartial and Independent Mechanism to Assist in the Investigation and Prosecution of Persons Responsible for the Most Serious Crimes under International Law Committed in the Syrian Arab Republic since March 2011 from the proposed programme budget for 2024. Further, taking note of paragraphs III.75, III.77, III.79, III.80, III.82, III.83 and III.84 of the ACABQ report, it would decide not to approve any resources for the Mechanism.
The representative of the Russian Federation, introducing “L.7”, said this Mechanism lacks a mandate, and Assembly resolution 71/248 is not valid as the Assembly illegally fulfilled the role of the Council, in contravention of the Charter of the United Nations, in particular the principle of non-interference into the internal affairs of States. Syria’s Government did not agree to conduct this kind of experiment. The Mechanism carries out politically motivated investigations that are outside the framework of international law, and its outcomes have nothing to do with justice. Noting that his delegation does not recognize the Mechanism, he called on States to vote in favour of the amendments his delegation has presented.
The representative of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union, expressed regret about the introduction of this draft and requested a recorded vote. The Fifth Committee is entrusted with administrative and budgetary matters; as such, its duty is to ensure that the mandates granted by Member States and other legislative fora can be fully implemented. “The idea is not to relitigate mandates that have already been approved,” she stressed. The Assembly adopted the Mechanism’s mandate in resolution 71/248. In paragraph 35 of resolution 72/191, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to include the necessary funding for the Mechanism for the draft budget for 2020, she recalled, condemning any false narrative that confirms the contrary. If adopted, this draft would deprive the Mechanism of any funding and thus prevent it from carrying out its important mandate. For this reason, her delegation will vote against “L.7”.
The representative of Qatar said the Committee voted to include funding for the Mechanism in its programme planning resolution, and this Mechanism should be financed from the regular budget.
The draft resolution “L.7” was rejected by a recorded vote of 76 against to 22 in favour, with 48 abstentions.
In explanation of vote, the representative of Belarus said his delegation supported the Russian Federation’s amendment as this Mechanism runs counter to principles of sovereignty. The creation of these types of mechanisms belongs to the Security Council. The Mechanism was adopted by the Committee without a consensus, and allocating resources to it is counterproductive.
The representative of Nicaragua said her delegation voted in favour of the Russian Federation’s amendment and opposes having funding for the Mechanism. When creating it, the Assembly went beyond the authority granted to it by the Charter. It runs counter to territorial sovereignty. Her delegation dissociated itself from any mechanism.
The representative of Syria said the UN’s budget and resources must be utilized wisely and not wasted in funding illegitimate mechanisms. Therefore, his delegation rejects funding the Syria Mechanism from the Organization’s regular budget and calls on Member States to disassociate themselves from it.
The representative of Iran said his delegation does not recognize the political foundations of the Mechanism as it violates the norms of the UN Charter. Funding it only aligns to pressure by a few States.
The representative of Cuba, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, introduced the draft resolution “Proposed programme budget for 2024”, section 26, Palestine refugees (document A/C.5/78/L.16), stressing that while the Committee deliberated and discussed goals and UN entities, 136 United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) staff have been killed in two months. Asking if the departed colleagues were less worthy than other staff, he called for similar attention to be paid to them as they deserve to be protected and not killed anymore. For this reason, the Group consistently highlights the relevance of bringing this issue to the fore, which is not the politicization of the Committee but about being fair and honouring the legacies of the departed. Members States should protect these staff and UNRWA, he said, enjoining delegations to support the resolution.
By its terms, the Assembly would express condolences to the Agency for the loss of its staff members, which stands at 136 and growing, representing the highest number of UN fatalities ever recorded in a single conflict. It would condemn in the strongest possible terms the killing of Agency staff and refugees sheltered under the United Nations flag and the destruction of buildings under the UN flag. Further it would call for respect and protection, consistent with international humanitarian law, of all civilian and humanitarian facilities, including hospitals and other medical facilities, as well as their means of transport and equipment, schools, places of worship and UN facilities, as well as all of the humanitarian and medical personnel and journalists, media professionals and associated personnel in armed conflict in the region.
The representative of Israel requested a vote on that text.
The resolution was then approved by a recorded vote of 101 in favour to 1 against (Israel), with 56 abstentions.
Speaking in explanation of vote after the vote, the representative of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that the Member States of her bloc consider it inappropriate to include paragraphs that have a political nature in the context of a Fifth Committee resolution that deals with the budget of the United Nations. Therefore, they abstained from voting on the draft resolution in order to preserve its administrative and budgetary mandate.
The representative of Israel, who voted against that text, said the situation in Gaza is the result of Hamas’s decision to declare a war upon her country on 7 October, but the language and text deliberately ignore this, making the resolution completely one-sided. The Israel Defense Forces warned the citizens of Gaza to temporarily vacate from north to south, she said, adding that Israel enables the passage of humanitarian supplies for the civilian population in the southern Gaza Strip. Which other Member State has ever been condemned in a budget-related resolution in the Fifth Committee? she asked, adding that this is another example of how Israel is singled out.
The representative of New Zealand, sharing sentiments of the Group of 77 and China, said the Fifth Committee mandate is on budgetary and administrative issues, and it is not the appropriate place to reflect on the proposed language. For this reason, her delegation abstained.
The representative of Nigeria said it voted mistakenly and asked the Chair to withdraw its vote.
The representative of the United States said his delegation abstained on the amendment related to the current conflict in Gaza, noting that the Fifth Committee is not the appropriate venue in which to take a position on these larger issues that go beyond its jurisdiction. Further, he expressed support for the efforts of UNRWA to get humanitarian assistance to those in need.
The representative of Iceland said her delegation voted in favour of the draft, despite the procedural issues, namely that the Firth Committee is not the appropriate forum for this draft. Voicing strong support for UNRWA’s work, she called on all parties to the conflict in Gaza to heed the call for respect and protection of all civilians in humanitarian and UN facilitates.
The representative of Argentina voted in favour of “L.16”, though this position might be considered in a new light with the country’s new administration. Statements made against UNRWA should be investigated.
The representative of Australia said her delegation abstained on this vote as it runs counter to the Committee’s work to include political language in budget resolutions. It harms the Committee’s ability to achieve consensus. All parties must respect the neutrality of UNRWA.
The representative of Switzerland said her delegation is deeply concerned by the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip and calls for upholding humanitarian law. She underscored the need for consensus in budgetary discussions. It is not appropriate to include language with political connotations in a budgetary resolution, she said, stressing that consensus is needed.
The representative of the United Kingdom expressed condolences to families of 136 colleagues killed in Gaza, adding that her country supports UNRWA and has boosted aid to the humanitarian cause in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The United Kingdom abstained from the resolution in line with its long-standing position that the Main Committees should focus on their mandates. The Fifth Committee is a technical Committee that focuses on administrative and finance matters, she said.
The representative of the Russian Federation said agreements had been reached on two draft resolutions titled “Administrative expenses of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund” (documents A/C.5/78/L.11 and A/C.5/78/L.12), with amendments to be introduced later with different drafting and compromising language. His delegation therefore withdrew both resolutions.
The Committee Chairman then noted that no action would be taken on them, thanking the Russian delegation for the withdrawal.
Next, the representative of the Russian Federation, also on behalf of Belarus, Iran, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Nicaragua, Syria and Eritrea, presented the draft resolution “Revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council at its fifty-second, fifty-third and fifty-fourth regular sessions, and at its thirty-sixth special session, in 2023” (document A/C.5/78/L.8).
By the text’s terms, the Assembly, having considered the report of the Secretary-General and the related ACABQ report, would decide not to approve any resources for the implementation of resolutions 52/29, 52/28, 53/2, 52/27, 52/2, 52/32, 54/23 and 52/30 adopted by the Human Rights Council.
He regretted that a compromise could not be reached as many delegations wish to not see the politicization of the Committee, even though they were doing the very same thing. He berated Member States for their inconsistency and double standards. He further rejected financing for all these resolutions — including 52/32 and 54/23 — and called on other delegations to follow suit.
The representative of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union, requested a vote on “L.8” and called on delegations to vote against it. The Fifth Committee has a responsibility to ensure that the legislative organs of the United Nations have sufficient resources to be fully implemented. Therefore, it should adhere to the resolutions and decisions based on which mandates are established instead of renegotiating them. The current resolution proposes cutting funding for an entire series of country-specific mandates, she said, noting that this is a violation of the decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council and a violation of the role of the Fifth Committee.
The resolution was then defeated by a recorded vote of 73 against to 17 in favour, with 52 abstentions.
Speaking in explanation of position after vote, the representative of Qatar, who voted against the text, expressed his country’s commitment to the resolutions and mechanisms of the Human Rights Council, including providing them with the needed funding.
The representative of Belarus said that his country is a participant in most international human rights instruments and acknowledges the priority of general principles of international law. It will remain committed to discharging its international obligations beyond the Council’s politicized decisions.
The representative of Syria, underscoring that all human rights are universal and indivisible, recalled that, since the establishment of the Human Rights Council, it has engaged in practices of double standards and politicization. In this regard, he drew attention to that body’s previous resolutions against his country, which are an example of the politicization of its mandate. The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic does not have a balanced approach in Syria, he stressed, noting that his country’s sovereignty and independence must be respected. His delegation is against the resolution, he added.
The representative of Iran stressed the need to ensure that available resources from Member States are used in a more effective and transparent manner, not to satisfy the agendas of a few.
The representative of Nicaragua rejected politicized double standards introduced to the Human Right Council by Western countries, attacking and violating sovereignty of developing countries that do not submit to their agendas. Reiterating her Government’s non-recognition and absolute rejection of that body, she said it is partial and politicized and obeys instructions of imperialist countries. Nicaragua implements public policies to protect the human rights despite the imposition of illegal and inhumane coercive measures, she said, noting that her delegation voted in favour of draft “L.8”.
The Committee then considered the draft resolution “Revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council at its fifty-second, fifty-third and fifty-fourth regular sessions, and at its thirty-sixth special session, in 2023” (document A/C.5/78/L.9).
By the text, the Assembly, having considered the reports of the Secretary-General and ACABQ, would decide not to approve any resources under revised estimates resulting from Human Rights Council resolution 54/2 of 11 October 2023, entitled “Responding to the human rights and humanitarian crisis caused by the ongoing armed conflict in the Sudan”.
The representative of Sudan said his delegation introduced this resolution in order not to approve any resources resulting from Human Rights Council resolution 54/2, adopted on 11 October 2023. The protection of human rights in Sudan is the Sudanese national agenda’s main objective and national priority. His delegation did not want to approve any resources for this mechanism as it is useless, and its objectives can be achieved through existing mechanisms. No State can care more about human rights than Sudan. This Committee is only being formed to put political pressure on Sudan, he said, and called upon States to vote in favour of this resolution.
The representative of Spain, speaking on behalf of the European Union, requested a recorded vote. The duty of the Fifth Committee is to ensure the mandates of intergovernmental organizations can be carried out. The Council and its mandates must have the proper resources. The draft resolution proposes to remove financing from the mandate established in Human Rights Council resolution 54/2. If it were to be approved, it would be a direct violation of the Council’s decisions.
The Committee then rejected “L.9” by a recorded vote of 72 against to 34 in favour, with 38 abstentions.
The representative of Sudan thanked States voting in favour of the resolution in support of his country’s sovereignty, noting that resolutions without country support failed.
The Committee then turned its attention to its draft report on the proposed programme budget for 2024 (document A/C.5/78/L.24), which is divided into two parts: Part I contains the narrative of the action taken by the Fifth Committee; part II contains the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee then proceeded to take action on those recommendations.
First, taking up draft resolution I, on “Questions relating to the proposed programme budget for 2024” (document A/C.5/78/L.19), the representative of Spain, speaking for the European Union, presented an oral amendment to that draft concerning funding for the Syria Mechanism, by which the Assembly would “take note of paragraphs III.79 of the related ACABQ report” and “decide that regular budget resources for the Syria Mechanism, under section 8, legal affairs for 2024 amount to $17.17 million before re-costing.” With these resources, the Mechanism will be able to fulfil its mandates accordingly, she said.
The representative of the Russian Federation opposed the amendment and requested a recorded vote.
The representative of Syria supported the call for a recorded vote on the oral amendment and reaffirmed his country’s rejection of the mentioning of the Mechanism in 2024 as his delegation considers it an illegal entity.
By 81 votes in favour to 16 against, with 48 abstentions, the Committee approved the oral amendment, to be inserted in draft resolution I as operative paragraphs 42 bis and ter.
In explanation of vote after the vote, the representative of Syria, dissociating himself from the text, said that his country will fulfil its financial obligations towards the United Nations in 2024 on this basis.
Next, the representative of Israel proposed an oral amendment to draft resolution I in “L.19”, which would include text in operative paragraph 58 by which the Assembly would also decide not to exceed the level originally proposed by the Secretary-General for 2024-2025.
The representative of Cuba, speaking for the Group of 77 and China, thanked those delegates that voted in favour of the text affirming support for UNRWA because it is a matter of justice for those colleagues that have died in service.
He then proposed a recorded vote on the oral amendment just introduced and called on delegates to vote against it because it denies support to the Agency at a time when UNRWA is enduring the most difficulties in the UN system. It also goes against the spirit of the Committee, he said, adding that the Group of 77 and China’s proposal to allocate additional funding to the Agency in the next programme budget received immediate support of delegations such as the United States and Norway, and later from the United Kingdom, Japan and the European Union.
The Committee rejected the oral amendment by a recorded vote of 143 against to 3 in favour (Brunei Darussalam, Israel, Papua New Guinea), with 10 abstentions (Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Georgia, Guatemala, Hungary, Paraguay, Republic of Korea, South Sudan, Togo, Zambia).
Speaking in explanation of vote after the vote, the representative of Israel emphasized that the usual practice of the Fifth Committee is to work on proposals from the Secretariat, not Member States.
The representative of the United States said his delegation carefully considered the proposal of additional funds for UNRWA and concluded that the stated purpose of the funds — which is limited to executive and administrative management functions — is reasonable. Including the combined amount of $30 million in regular budget funding for 2024 is appropriate under the circumstances, he added.
The representative of Argentina said its position may change with the change in the country’s national administration.
The representative of Brunei Darussalam changed his delegation’s vote to vote against the oral amendment.
The representative of Spain, on behalf of the European Union, said the bloc is one of the top contributors to UNRWA, giving more than 40 per cent. The request for resources in 2024 was prepared more than a year ago, and the crisis could not have been foreseen. The Committee reached an agreement to meet the growing needs of the Agency, respecting the authority of the Secretary-General and the experience of ACABQ. Her delegation supported the compromise resolution and did not support the amendment.
The representative of the Russian Federation said that mandates that have ceased or become inactive cannot receive funding from the regular budget.
The Committee then approved draft resolution I, as orally amended, contained in “L.19”, which includes nine parts. By its terms, the Assembly, among other things, would, under Human rights and humanitarian affairs, section 26, Palestine refugees, take note of paragraph VI.82 of the ACABQ report and agree to the reclassification of the Director of the Department of Human Resources from D1 to D2 level. It would also decide to reallocate the remaining 50 per cent, related to the executive and administrative management functions envisaged to be proposed in the 2025 Secretary-General’s budget, into the 2024 budget.
The Assembly would also, under Global communications, section 28, Global communications, approve the redeployment of one Public Information Officer (P3) from New York to Geneva. It would also, recalling paragraph VII.10 of the ACABQ report, decide to establish only 20 general temporary assistance positions: 4 Editors (P-4) (1 each for Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish), 8 Press Officers (P-3) (2 each for Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish), 4 Editorial Assistants (GS (OL)) (1 each for Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish) and 4 Public Information Assistants (GS (OL)) (1 each for Arabic, Chinese, Russian and Spanish).
Speaking after the vote, the representative of Israel disassociated from the resolution, adding that her delegation will introduce an amendment in the General Assembly.
The representative of the Russian Federation disassociated himself from funding for the Syria Mechanism.
The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea also rejected funding the Mechanism from the UN budget and dissociated his country from it.
The representative of Bolivia said her country cannot support allocating resources to the Mechanism. Therefore, her delegation disassociates itself from all provisions referring to it in the resolution.
The representatives of Nicaragua and Iran and Belarus also dissociated from funding for the Syria Mechanism.
The Committee then took up draft resolution II, “Special subjects relating to the proposed programme budget for 2024” (document A/C.5/78/L.20), which contains 26 sections, as orally revised.
By its terms, the Assembly would, under section VII, Administrative expenses of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund, approve the estimates of $139.79 million for the administration of the Fund for 2024; expenses, chargeable directly to the Fund, totalling $131.37 million net, for 2024; and $8.42 million as the cost of the services provided by the Fund to the secretariat of the United Nations Staff Pension Committee for 2024.
Further, under section XI, Revised estimates resulting from resolutions and decisions adopted by the Human Rights Council at its fifty-second, fifty-third and fifty-fourth regular sessions, and at its thirty-sixth special sessions, in 2023, the Assembly would appropriate an additional $47.71 million, comprising $2.78 million under section 2, General Assembly and Economic and Social Council affairs and conference management, and $44.93 million under section 24, Human rights, of the proposed programme budget for 2024.
Also, under section XVII, Estimates in respect of special political missions, good offices and other political initiatives authorized by the General Assembly and/or the Security Council, the Assembly would approve $717.73 million for the 37 continuing special political missions authorized by the General Assembly and/or the Security Council, and $2.13 million for the share of special political missions in the budget of the Regional Service Centre in Entebbe, Uganda, for 2024, under section 3, Political affairs, of the proposed programme budget for 2024. Further, it would authorize the Secretary-General to enter into commitments in an amount not exceeding $21.5 million for the United Nations Integrated Transition Assistance Mission in the Sudan for the period from 1 January to 30 April 2024.
The representative of Switzerland introduced an oral revision to section VII of the text. She noted that, after negotiations, it was possible to achieve consensus on two additional matters, and proposed a revision to the text to be inserted as paragraphs 3 bis, “Acknowledges that some members of the Board were unable to attend the Seventy-Fifth session of the Pension Board due to challenges beyond their control and looks forward to future efforts of hosting governments and Board’s secretariat in facilitating participation of the members of the Board at its sessions, as needed and appropriate;” and 3 ter, “Recalls paragraph 158 of the report of the Pension Board and requests the Board to examine any other circumstances where the guidelines could be extended in the context of changes in national law and marital status;”.
The representative of Israel underscored that her country faces a wall of systemic bias built by the Human Rights Council, noting that the database mandated by that body lacks any solid foundation in international law. The obligation for ensuring compliance by business enterprises lies with the respective State. Businesses are not considered subjects of international law, and the categories set forth by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) for including a business do not constitute a violation of international law. Hence, the aim is to fund a discriminatory database that has no basis in international law and extends far beyond the mandate of OHCHR and the Human Rights Council. She recalled brutal police violence in Iran to crush protests, adding that the Iranian regime was nominated as the Chair of the Social Forum of the Human Rights Council. This is an example of how paradoxical and distorted that body is, she asserted, opposing double standards and systemic bias to which Israel is held.
She then introduced an oral amendment to section XI of “L.20” which would have the Assembly “decide not to approve any resources stemming from the adoption of resolution 53/25 by the Human Rights Council”. Israel will vote in favour, she said.
The representative of Cuba, speaking on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, requested a vote on the oral amendment proposed by Israel. He stressed that Israel’s request undermines a mandate that is intended to scrutinize the activities that have occurred in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, violating the rights of the Palestinian people. Noting that the Fifth Committee should not undermine resources and funding for certain mandates, especially related to the Human Rights Council, he called on all Member States to vote against the amendment.
The representative of Iran said it is regrettable to witness Israel abusing this Chamber once again to make false claims against his country. Fabrications and lies are tools used recurrently by Israel to divert attention from the urgent matter at hand, namely the crimes perpetrated by its apartheid regime against the Palestinian people.
The Committee then rejected the oral amendment to section XI by a recorded vote of 140 against to 3 in favour, with 12 abstentions.
Speaking after the vote, the representative of Spain said the Committee is in charge of administrative and budgetary duties and must ensure intergovernmental agencies have the proper resources to carry out their mandates. The amendment to cut funding for a Human Rights Council resolution is a violation of the mandates of that Council. Her delegation could not support the amendment.
The representative of Argentina said his country’s position may shift with the change in the country’s national administration.
Speaking in his national capacity, the representative of Cuba then proposed an oral amendment to section XVII. He said his delegation has been concerned with this issue for more than a decade. He referred to references in the proposed 2024 budget, especially regarding the inclusion of resources and narratives on the Office of the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect, included as part of the Secretary-General’s initiative for special envoys. He noted that since the 2005 Assembly resolution 60/1 was adopted, including paragraphs 138 and 139, there has not been a mandate to justify expanding an Office which would expand the implications of the notion of responsibility to protect. The idea that the purpose of an office in the Secretariat is to contribute to expanding a concept that could have ramifications in terms of interfering in other States’ affairs is sensitive, he said.
He proposed the following oral amendment: “Recalling that the General Assembly has not decided on the concept of Responsibility to Protect, its scope of application, its implications or its possible forms of implementation; Noting that the Estimates of Thematic Cluster I comprise narratives, functions, strategy and external factors, results, performance measures, deliverables and other information related to the Special Adviser to the Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect; Decides to eliminate the narratives, functions, strategy and external factors, results, performance measures, deliverables and other information related to the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect, as contained in the strategic framework and related narratives of the Office of the Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Prevention of Genocide (A/78/6/(Sect. 3)/Add.2)”. Further, the amendment requests the Secretary-General to issue a corrigendum to this report. He called on delegates to vote in favour of these oral amendments.
The representative of Spain, speaking on behalf of European Union, regretted the introduction of the amendment by Cuba and requested a recorded vote. Noting that the Fifth Committee’s mandate is to ensure the funding of mandates approved by the General Assembly, she pointed out that the mandate of the Office of the Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide was approved in 2001. Hence, it is the Committee’s responsibility to ensure it fulfils its mandate. The additional paragraphs will reduce the Office’s capacity and present obstacles in carrying out its assignment in cooperation with other UN entities, including the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect. Therefore, the bloc will vote against the amendment.
The representative of Canada, aligning with the European Union, rejected characterization of the mandate of the Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect and called on colleagues to vote against the amendment.
The representative of Nicaragua supported the amendment by Cuba, noting that the true danger of the responsibility to protect is that it can be manipulated and used to interfere in the affairs of Member States and to destabilize legitimate Governments.
The representative of Syria supported the amendment because this concept does not enjoy consensus among Member States. To date, the General Assembly has not passed a resolution defining the concept in its scope or repercussions; hence, it does not have a legal concept. He said countries use it to interfere in Member States’ internal affairs, violating their sovereignty and the UN Charter.
Likewise, the representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea supported the amendment, saying that the concept of the responsibility to protect has not obtained consensus among Member States. Therefore, no legal basis exists for its activities. The budget allocated to the Special Adviser should be considered once the Assembly has decided on the concept.
The representative of Belarus voiced support for the amendment, adding that the concept is questionable. He also said there are many questions about its practical implementation since it does not have a legal foundation.
The representative of Iran also said the concept remains controversial, and voiced support for the amendment.
The amendment was then defeated by a recorded vote of 76 against to 20 in favour, with 48 abstentions.
The Committee then approved “L.20” as orally revised, as a whole.
Speaking in explanation of vote after the vote, the representative of the Russian Federation disassociated from funding of a number of provisions. They included resources related to the Aarhus Convention; funding of the Human Right Council resolutions which his delegation put to a vote; and funding reflected in the form of budget implementation for 2022 as regards the resources of anti-Moscow resolutions from the Human Rights Council.
The representative of Israel disassociated from all resources included in special subject resolutions that stem from the mandate of the Human Rights Council approving the resources to maintain the database of businesses without any basis in international law.
The representative of Belarus disassociated from resources related to the Human Rights Council resolution on his country. It is not justified to give funds from the regular budget to the Aarhus Convention, he said, disassociating from any resources for this Convention.
The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea disassociated from the programme budget related to the Human Rights Council resolutions which are targeting individual countries, including his own.
The representative of Nicaragua disassociated her delegation from references to Nicaragua.
The representative of Eritrea disassociated his delegation from all allocations pertaining to Eritrea.
The representative of Syria said his delegation completely disassociates itself from the resolution on Syria as it is politicized.
The representative of Iran disassociated his delegation from discriminatory resources.
The representative of Sudan disassociated his delegation from any Human Rights Council resources pertaining to Sudan.
Next, the Committee turned its attention to draft resolution III “proposed programme budget for 2024” (document A/C.5/78/L.21), which comprises three sections: Section A on budget appropriations for 2024; Section B pertains to revised income estimates for 2024; and Section C concerns the financing of appropriations for 2024.
CHANDRAMOULI RAMANATHAN, United Nations Controller and Assistant Secretary-General for Programme Planning, Finance and Budget in the Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance, took the floor to inform the committee that the adoption of “L.19”, as amended, resulted in an increase of $151,500 under section 8 for the proposed programme budget for 2024. Therefore, the total appropriation for 2024 will amount to $3.588 billion. Parts A, B and C of “L.21” will be technically adjusted to reflect these changes, he said.
By the terms of “L.21”, the Assembly would resolve that for 2024 appropriations totalling $3.588 billion would be approved, as would income estimates of $345.4 million.
The Committee then approved “L.21”, as technically updated, without a vote.
In a statement following the adoption, the representative of Israel disassociated herself from all resources stemming from all anti-Israeli Human Rights Council resolutions including the “antisemitic Commission of Inquiry” in section 24 and the resources include in section 26.
She then requested additional time to grant a comment. She noted that on 1 December, after 57 days of silence and in response to heavy criticism and pressure, the United Nations Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women (UN-Women) delivered a statement condemning the brutal 7 October attacks by Hamas. The statement called for the investigation of the event by the biased, antisemitic Commission of Inquiry which has no credibility investigating those crimes. Women’s organizations including UN- Women chose to ignore these war crimes, she said, abandoning the women and victims of Israel with moral hypocrisy. She reminded these organization of their mandates to protect the rights of all women and girls and eliminate all forms of violence against them. These organizations, she continued, in their reluctance to recognize the sexual and gender-based violence by Hamas in its entirety, have failed to uphold the most fundamental principles of their mandate.
The Committee then turned to draft resolution “Unforeseen and extraordinary expenses for 2024” (document A/C.5/78/L.22) and adopted it without a vote.
By its terms, the Assembly would authorize the Secretary-General, with the prior concurrence of the ACABQ and subject to the Organization’s regulations and other provisions, to enter into commitments in the year 2024 to meet unforeseen and extraordinary expenses, arising either during or subsequent to the year. The Assembly would also decide that, for 2024, if a decision of the Security Council results in the need for the Secretary-General to enter into commitments relating to the maintenance of peace and security in an amount exceeding $10 million, that matter shall be brought to the General Assembly, or, if the Assembly is suspended or not in session, a resumed or special session of the Assembly shall be convened by the Secretary-General to consider the matter.
The Committee then approved without a vote draft resolution V, entitled “Working Capital Fund for 2024” (document A/C.5/78/L.23).
By its terms, the Assembly would decide that the Fund shall be established for 2024 in the amount of $250 million, and Member States shall make advances to it in accordance with the 2024 scale of assessments adopted by the General Assembly. Further terms would have the Assembly decide that credits to Member States resulting from transfers made in 1959 and 1960 from the surplus account to the Fund in an adjusted amount of $1.03 million and cash advances paid by Member States to the Fund for 2023 in accordance with Assembly resolution 77/266 of 30 December 2022 shall be set off against this allocation of advances.
Also without a vote, the Committee approved the draft report of the Fifth Committee on the proposed programme budget for 2024, as technically updated (document A/C.5/78/L.24, parts I and II).
Turning to the review of the efficiency and the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations, the Committee took up the draft resolution on “Investing in prevention and peacebuilding” (document A/C.5/78/L.25), approving it without a vote.
By its terms, the Assembly would decide to establish a dedicated multi-year special account, entitled Peacebuilding Account, as a modality of financing the Peacebuilding Fund and approve $50 million of assessed contributions per annum, under grants and contributions, to fund the Peacebuilding Account, starting 1 January 2025. Further, on an exceptional basis and without setting a precedent, it would decide that the assessment rates applicable to the regular budget are applied to half of the grant to the Peacebuilding Account, while the assessment rates applicable to the financing of United Nations peacekeeping operations are applied to the other half.
Speaking in explanation of position after action, the representative of Australia, also speaking for Canada and New Zealand, said that today’s historic investment of $50 million in the Peacebuilding Fund could save the Organization $800 million in crisis response. Citing the United Nations-World Bank study “Pathways for Peace”, she said that for every dollar invested in prevention, 16 could be saved in crisis response. This consensus resolution underscores that “no matter what the scale of crises we face today, we are wise to be investing in the prevention of crises tomorrow”, she said. Calling for predictable and sustainable contributions from everyone, she praised Member States for boosting the Peacebuilding Fund to support peace processes, thereby strengthening national capacities and revitalizing economies. Looking forward to witnessing the impact that such funding will have, she pointed out that $50 million is a supplement and not a substitute for voluntary contributions, urging all Member States to increase them.
The Committee then turned to the draft resolution entitled “Questions deferred for future consideration” (document A/C.5/78/L.27), adopting it without a vote. By the text, by General Assembly decided to defer until the main part of its seventy-ninth session consideration, under the proposed 2024 programme budget, reports on estimates in respect of the special political missions. This includes the Secretary-General’s report on the review of arrangements for funding and backstopping the missions and ACABQ’s related report.
Closing Remarks
The representative of Cuba, on behalf of the Group of 77 and China, said it has been the most complex year ever faced, and commended countries’ dedication, put in the interest of achieving great things. The unity that the Group showed during the year was tremendous, he said, noting that it was able to materialize achievements such as the approval of the conference facilities capital project in Nairobi, the establishment of the Anti-Racism Office to eliminate the scourge of racism in the Organization, and securing more funds for the Development Account. The Global South deserves more, he stressed, expressing dissatisfaction about putting minimum resources to development.
The representative of Ethiopia, speaking on behalf of the African Group and aligning herself with the Group of 77 and China, noted the adoption of the 2024 programme budget and underscored the importance of the additional resources allocated for the Development Account, calling for a more sustainable funding mechanism in that regard. Welcoming the adoption by consensus of the resolution establishing the Anti-Terrorism Office, she voiced regret about the Committee’s failure to reach consensus on resolutions for several agenda items, including the special political missions — one of the main items considered during the session. She regretted that, for the fifth year in a row, the Committee is unable to adopt a substantive resolution on this item.
The representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer, welcomed outcomes of the session, including the 2024 budget which reflected a balance across the UN pillars, the resolution on the Peacebuilding Fund and the adoption of the ICT strategy and its Capital Investment Plan. She decried, however, a lack of results on numerous items concerning the Organization’s core functioning, highlighting the concerning trend of either deferring items or adoption of “skeletal resolutions”. “In a world of increased conflict, safeguarding budgetary constraint for some yet again hampered our ability to provide political guidance to the Secretariat on the implementation of special political missions,” she said, adding that the Committee failed to shape an Organization fit for the twenty-first century.
More alarming, the number of votes reached an unprecedented number this year, some of which were called to defund entire mandates in the human rights field. “Our role is to comply with the resolutions defining mandates, and fund them, not renegotiate them”, she said, underscoring that “while technical in nature, these items are a reflection of multilateralism at its core.” Root causes of this dysfunction include a lack of timely documentation. Moreover, the Committee cannot wait until December to start its substantive engagement. Instead of repeating “well-rehearsed statements” and “posturing”, it must reach negotiations sooner. Some proposals are dismissed without consideration of their content, she lamented, calling on Committee members to actively listen to one another, in good faith, to escape a “lose-lose” situation.
The representative of Japan expressed gratitude to the Fifth Committee Chair, the Bureau and the Secretariat. Recalling his statement last year, he voiced hope that the Committee will celebrate its work, but also integrate lessons learned, moving forward with renewed commitment to negotiating constructively, in good faith, to achieve consensus.
The representative of the United States said that the $3.6 billion budget passed today will enable the United Nations to advance peace and security, address humanitarian crises, and importantly, is fiscally responsible. Hailing the $50 million in assessed funding for the Peacebuilding Fund, he said “it is long-past time to invest in preventing conflicts, instead of expending more resources after conflicts have broken out”. He cited other important funding approved, including: 37 special political missions, for the liquidation of the Transition Assistance Mission in Sudan, the Black Sea Grain Initiative, the first-ever UN data protection and privacy office and the historic creation of a permanent Anti-Racism Office. Yet he decried the working methods of the Fifth Committee, which, when failing to find consensus, defers to ACABQ. In doing so, Member States abdicate their responsibility to watch over the Organization. Moreover, falling back on ACABQ’s decisions means the Committee has spent three months’ work of negotiations it could have reached the first day of the session. “If our final decisions are simply going to mirror the ACABQ’s recommendation, let’s come together to take a hard look at the selection and expertise of its members, as well as the organization and functioning of the Committee,” he said.
JAMES STAPLES (United Kingdom) said the Committee had been able to agree on the programme budget for 2024 after much hard work and compromise for everyone. This will let the Organization serve those in need. The Committee was able to uplift funding for UNRWA and finally passed a resolution, after nearly two years, on financing the Peacebuilding Fund through assessed contributions. The Committee provided funding on human rights, one of the Organization’s core pillars. It also provided funding for construction projects, though there is much work to be done. He said the Committee can do better as it continues to act in a dysfunctional manner “putting in thousands of hours” while many resolutions were not completed. In addition, many reports arrived late, and the Secretariat had to field many questions. Politics has taken over the Committee’s primary role as a technical committee. He implored the Chair to continue his efforts to move the Committee forward. He is satisfied the budget was approved in time.
The representative of Indonesia, aligning himself with the Group of 77 and China, said the UN budget discussion this year was held against the backdrop of concerning global challenges, including geopolitical tensions. The Fifth Committee must thus direct its efforts and resources to preserve lives and uphold peace and security through its core mandates. Condemning the killing of 136 UNRWA staff — the highest number of UN fatalities in a single conflict — and destruction of buildings under the UN flag, he welcomed the Committee’s decision to approve UNRWA’s budget allocation. The adoption of the resolutions of the Peacebuilding Fund after 18 months of negotiation “marks a significant advancement towards enhancing global peacebuilding efforts and supports the commendable work of the peace building commission”, he said. He hoped agreements made during the main session will enable the UN to uphold its principles and urged the Organization to align itself with history’s moral compass, prioritizing humanity and unequivocally opposing all forms of atrocity.
The representative of China, thanking delegates for their overwhelming support for the inclusion of the Lunar New Year as a floating holiday at the Organization, highlighted the need for true multilateralism in resolving the liquidity crisis. All countries, especially those with the capacity to pay their assessed contributions in full, must take concrete steps to fulfil their financial obligations. Further, the United Nations budget should fully reflect the aspirations of its Member States, she said, welcoming the decision to replenish development accounts in 2024. Noting that more than 2 million innocent civilians in Gaza are faced with an unprecedented humanitarian disaster, she expressed appreciation for the concrete actions taken by the Committee to respond to the current crisis. On peacebuilding, she added, while traditional donors should fulfil their historical responsibility, the Organization should be innovative and expand new financing channels. She also underscored the right of oversight by Member States in the use of the Peacebuilding Fund.
The representative of Viet Nam, describing this year’s session as “remarkable”, said it is the first time in five years that the Committee was able to close the session before Christmas. Further, it delivered numerous positive outcomes, including on the scourge of racism. Welcoming the recognition of the Lunar New Year as the UN floating holiday, he expressed hope that this development will be reflected in the 2024 calendar.
Mr. RAMANATHAN, United Nations Controller and Assistant Secretary-General for Programme Planning, Finance and Budget in the Department of Management Strategy, Policy and Compliance, thanked the Committee for bringing assessed contributions to finance the Peacebuilding Fund and for completing its work before the Christmas holiday. He said the Committee’s decision to do away with recosting multiple times and complete the process in September will help the Committee finish in the first week of December. He said it is nice to have a good budget, yet the Organization needs cash as soon as possible so it can implement all the measures the Committee has approved.
The representative of Egypt, speaking on behalf of the Fifth Committee Chair, appreciated delegations and facilitators for their unwavering commitment and constructive engagement. “Your dedication to finding common ground has laid the foundation for the success we face today,” he said, commending the diversity of perspectives and the spirit of collaboration, which was instrumental in achieving objectives for the session, especially on matters that seemed difficult to agree on. He commended the Bureau for its tireless effort in steering the Committee with wisdom and diplomacy, providing an environment conducive to meaningful dialogue and consensus building. The UN Controller, Secretariat, and the Fifth Committee secretariat, in their professionalism, are the Committee’s unsung heroes, he said, as they were critical to the smooth functioning of its work. He highlighted the approval of the UN budget and the financing of the Peacebuilding Fund from assessed contributions — a remarkable triumph for the United Nations and for peacebuilding worldwide — as very significant achievements.
However, more needs to be done to revise the Peacebuilding Fund’s terms of reference to allow assessments to commence in 2025. The funding of UNRWA, which is timely and significant in the light of the ongoing horrific tragedy in Gaza, and other actions including on the Ethics Office, ICT strategy and capital investment plan from past sessions, MINUSMA financing through June 2024, and discussion on working methods, among others, represent agreements reached that will contribute to advancing the UN’s work and fulfilment of its mandate. “The spirit of collaboration demonstrated here serves as a testament to our shared commitment to a stronger, more effective United Nations,” he said. He recalled his earlier promise of members having holidays this year, a feat achieved by the collective will and success of all delegates, and wished everyone happy holidays.