GA/AB/3086

SECRETARY-GENERAL WOULD BE REQUESTED TO DEFER INVOLUNTARY STAFF SEPARATION, ACCORDING TO FIFTH COMMITTEE DECISION, AS SESSION CONCLUDES

The General Assembly would request the Secretary-General to defer any action on the involuntary separation of staff in his efforts to save $154 million from the 1996-1997 budget, if it adopts a draft decision approved this afternoon by the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary), in a recorded vote of 55 in favour to 31 against, with 2 abstentions (Brunei Darussalem and Turkey) (see Annex). He would defer such action until the Assembly has considered his report on how he would make the budget savings.

The draft decision, approved before the Committee concluded its work for the fiftieth session, was submitted by the representative of Costa Rica, on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, who said that the draft text did not impinge upon the Secretary-General's authority. However, the Committee needed time to consider the matter of involuntary separations.

The developing countries would be most affected by the proposed involuntary separations, Morocco's representative said before the vote. The Group of 77 had fears in relation to, among other things, the principle of equitable geographical representation, a principle which should be protected.

The representative of the United States described the text as overly broad and subject to interpretation that could bar the Secretary-General from separating staff who were subject to disciplinary measures.

Speaking in explanation of vote on behalf of the European Union, the representative of Ireland said there was no basis for the action, since there had been no report on the matter from the Secretary-General or the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). He expressed regret that the Committee's consensus procedure, requested by Assembly resolution 41/213, had been breached.

Also in explanation of vote, the representative of Mexico said a consensus should have been reached, but after two days of informal consultations, it was obvious that positions were not easily reconcilable.

Fifth Committee - 1a - Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

While recognizing the Secretary-General's role as the Organization's head, it was important to ensure that the Assembly's role was not infringed upon.

Japan's representative said that the Committee should support actions taken to achieve savings from the budget.

Before the vote, Maxime Tortel, Director, Operational Services Division of the Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM), told the Committee that 37 staff (22 Professionals and 15 General Services) had not as yet been placed in new positions as part of the United Nations redeployment exercise.

Addressing the Committee before the vote, the Deputy Legal Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs, Ralph Zachlin, said that the draft would impinge on the Secretary-General's authority, under Article 97 of the Charter. The Secretary-General would be advised that it was a request forwarded to him from the Assembly, but he would remain the ultimate authority as to whether to respond to the decision.

Committee Work Programme

The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) met this morning to continue its consideration of aspects of the implementation of the 1996-1997 regular budget.

The Committee had before it a draft decision on the programme budget for 1996-1997 (document A/C.5/50/L.76), submitted by Costa Rica, which would have the General Assembly reaffirm its resolutions 50/214, 50/230 and 50/231 related to the budget and request the Secretary-General to defer action regarding involuntary separation of staff in the context of the budget before the Assembly has considered his report on how he would make the savings the Assembly had mandated. The draft was submitted on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China.

By its resolution 50/214, of December 1995 -- on questions relating to the budget -- the Assembly set $2.61 billion as the total level of the budget, decided that the savings from the budget should not affect the full implementation of mandates and they should ensure fair, equitable and non- selective treatment of all budget sections, and set the vacancy rate at 6.4 per cent for Professional and General Service staff. It also requested the Secretary-General to submit a report on how the mandated savings would be achieved.

By resolution 50/230, of 7 June -- on progress on the programme budget for the biennium 1996-1997 -- the Assembly requested the Secretary-General to ensure that, until he submitted his proposals for achieving those budget savings to the Assembly, all mandated programmes and activities are fully implemented. He was also asked to ensure that productivity gains would not hamper his Charter obligation to recruit staff on the widest geographical basis possible, even on a temporary basis.

By resolution 50/231, of 7 June -- on how to absorb the cost of new mandates within the budget -- the Assembly, among other things, reiterated that the Secretary-General's authority to implement any proposal to change mandated programmes was subject to its prior approval. It asked him to submit a report no later than 1 September with proposals on how to absorb those costs within the budget, including in part II on political affairs, and in the area of the staff cost savings that might arise from the implementation of the early separation programme.

Statements on 1996-1997 Budget

NAZARETH INCERA (Costa Rica), speaking on behalf of the "Group of 77" developing countries and China, said that the situation was the same so far, with neither a change in positions nor a narrowing of differences to accommodate a consensus in the Committee.

Fifth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

LINDA SHENWICK (United States) said she was not in a position to support the text. She asked whether the draft decision was not overly broad and subject to an interpretation which could stop the Secretary-General from involuntarily separating staff for whatever reason. If, for instance, the Secretary-General wanted to dismiss staff who had failed to perform their duties or for some other disciplinary reasons, the text could prohibit that action. The legal office should advise the Committee. The United States read the language to mean that the text would stop involuntary separations regardless of the reasons. That would strengthen the hands of staff who had been dismissed, for discrimination or harassment, for example, to go before the United Nations Administrative Tribunal and heed to unfortunate consequences.

EL HASANE ZAHID (Morocco) said he agreed with the representative of the Group of 77. He understood that the text could be interpreted as being aimed at stopping dismissals of staff who were under disciplinary constraints. However, the text as worded would not restrict the power of the Secretary- General, but only request some time to think about the consequences of any action taken by the Secretary-General. The current text could be rephrased to have the Assembly "request the Secretary-General to defer, in the context of the programme budget for the biennium, any action regarding involuntary separation of staff, until the General Assembly has considered the report of the Secretary-General as requested in resolution 50/214".

The change in the sequence of phrases in the draft should enable the Committee to reach a consensus decision, he continued. There should not, therefore, be any negative interpretation of the Secretary-General's authority. He said he understood the interpretation given by the United States, but did not think that the text would ban action by the Secretary- General entirely. It would just be a request for more time to think. The change should allow the text to be adopted to protect the interests of all groups and to maintain the procedure of consensus.

PATRICK KELLY (Ireland), noting that there was still no consensus on the draft decision, said that during the informal discussions this morning, he had put forward similar language to that proposed by Morocco, but it was not acceptable to Committee members. The United States had raised a valid point. The language Ireland had suggested earlier would refer to action related to achieving the $154 million savings mandated in the 1996-1997 programme budget. Morocco's proposal would not take account of the United States concerns. Reiterating a point he had made in the informal discussions, he said he wanted the comments of the Office of Legal Affairs and the representative of the Office of Human Resources Management, Maxime Tortel, repeated in the formal meetings. If that were not possible, their comments should be written into the reports of the formal meeting and, if that were not possible, those comments should be written into the records to be presented to the Committee in future meetings.

Fifth Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

Ms. INCERA (Costa Rica), speaking for the Group of 77 and China, said the Group had always defended the Secretary-General's authority and competence. The draft text did not run counter to that authority. However, the Committee needed time to consider the matter of involuntary separations. In that context, therefore, it was hoped that the decision would be taken without a vote.

RALPH ZACHLIN, Deputy Legal Counsel, Office of Legal Affairs, said that when the Legal Counsel was requested to give advice, it was of a legal nature and not of a political nature. However, often, such advice was requested when the real substance was political and not legal. The remarks he had made earlier today, in his capacity as Deputy Legal Counsel and on behalf of the Legal Counsel, had addressed the issue of the language of the draft text.

Assuming that the draft text was intended to instruct the Secretary- General to defer any action regarding involuntary separations, his position was that such an instruction would impinge on the Secretary-General's authority, under Article 97 of the Charter, he said. If the text were adopted, the Secretary-General would be advised that it was a request forwarded to him, but he remained the ultimate authority as to whether to respond.

The comments by the United States, Morocco and Ireland were all helpful in narrowing the interpretation of the draft decision, he said. They clarified that the decision, if adopted, would not be a general restriction of the Secretary-General's authority, and would be helpful to the Secretary- General.

MAXIME TORTEL, Director, Operational Services Division of the Office of Human Resources Management (OHRM), explained how the staff who could be redeployed were selected. There had been review by such bodies as the joint advisory panel, which was made up of representatives of staff and of the administration. The recommendations of that panel were further reviewed and all those who were to be redeployed were advised in writing about the vacancies available and then asked to apply for them. The joint advisory panel again reviewed the applications and made recommendations on the best candidates for positions available to various heads of departments. The departmental heads, in turn, made recommendations to appointment and promotion bodies which considered the candidates and made proposals to the Secretary- General.

He said that, while eight Professional and 13 General Service staff had been placed in positions, 37 others (22 Professional and 15 General Service) had not been redeployed. The placement process was continuing, and all possibilities of finding, for instance, temporary assignments for those staff were being pursued. The Secretariat expected to place them in positions and find established posts for those on permanent contracts.

Fifth Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

Ms. SHENWICK (United States) asked whether the draft text, if adopted, would preclude the Secretary-General from dismissing staff for disciplinary reasons.

Mr. ZACHLIN, Deputy Legal Counsel, said the text would not preclude such interpretations.

Ms. INCERA (Costa Rica) said that the view of the Group of 77 and China related only to the budget savings measures required in Assembly resolution 50/214 of December 1995. The information from the legal office and other recently requested information should be presented in writing by the Secretariat

Mr. ZAHID (Morocco) thanked the legal office for its opinion. The draft from the Group of 77 would not contradict the Charter, and the authority of the Secretary-General would remain intact. Secondly, the Secretary-General should take into account the appeal of the Assembly to defer any action. Regarding the placement of staff and other possibilities, the fear of the Group of 77 was related to the Assembly's mandates and to the principle of equitable geographical representation. The latter principle should be protected. The developing countries were those most affected by the involuntary separations, so the Secretary-General should abide by the principle which was written in the Charter and various Assembly resolutions. He expressed hope that the text would be adopted without a vote, with the European Union joining in a consensus.

ERICH VILCHEZ ASHER (Nicaragua), Chairman of the Committee, said he understood that, while some delegations were ready for a consensus, as had been mentioned by Costa Rica and Morocco, there were obvious difficulties in achieving that. He, therefore, proposed that the draft decision should be put to the vote, in accordance with the Assembly's rules of procedures. He said that a recorded vote had been requested.

The draft text was adopted in a recorded vote by 55 in favour to 31 against, with 2 abstentions (Brunei Darussalam, Turkey). (See Annex.)

Explanation of Vote

Mr. KELLY (Ireland) regretted the fact that the Committee had had to vote on the text. There was no basis for the action taken as there had been no report on the matter from either the Secretary-General or the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (ACABQ). The best way to have dealt with the issue would have been in the context of the Secretary- General's report on the mandated savings. The matter should have been taken up early in the fifty-first session to allow time for negotiations and consensus. Had the European Union voted for the text, it would have undermined the authority of the Secretary-General as the United Nations chief

Fifth Committee - 6 - Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

administrative officer. He regretted the fact that the consensus procedures requested by relevant Assembly resolution 41/213 had been breached.

FUMIAKI TOYA (Japan) said he regretted that the Committee did not reach a consensus on the matter. It should support action taken to achieve savings. However, he was ready to participate actively in the discussions on savings within the context of the programme budget.

MARTHA PE�A (Mexico) said she was in favour of a consensus decision in the Committee. Although she recognized the role of the Secretary-General as head of the Organization, it was important to ensure that the Assembly's role was not infringed upon. A different approach should have been taken to arrive at the decision but after two days of informal consultations on the matter, it was obvious that positions were not easily reconcilable. Mexico had voted in favour of the decision.

The Committee CHAIRMAN then said there was still time to reach a consensus on the matter before the Assembly's final meeting this afternoon.

Mr. ZAHID (Morocco) said he had voted in favour of the decision. However, consensus was still not out of the question. The decision did not harm the Secretary-General's competence. It was a request to the Secretary- General who remained the Chief Executive Officer, but which would, at the same time, avoid prejudging the decisions taken on the savings in the context of the 1996-1997 budget. It was a regrettable vote. Consensus was preferable. He expressed the hope that the decision would not set a precedent.

The CHAIRMAN then declared the Fifth Committee's fiftieth session closed. He thanked Committee members for their support and for their hard work. He also thanked Secretariat staff for their support of the Committee's work.

(annex follows)

Fifth Committee - 7 - Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

Fifth Committee Press Release GA/AB/3086 69th Meeting (AM) 16 September 1996

ANNEX

Vote on Reaffirmation of Assembly Resolutions 50/214, 50/230 and 50/231

The draft decision on reaffirmation of Assembly resolutions 50/214, 50/230 and 50/231 on 1996-1997 budget (document A/C.5/50/L.76) was approved by a recorded vote of 55 in favour to 31 against, with 2 abstentions as follows:

In favour: Algeria, Argentina, Bahrain, Barbados, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, C�te d'Ivoire, Cuba, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Fiji, Ghana, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, India, Indonesia, Iran, Jamaica, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Malaysia, Mexico, Morocco, Namibia, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Senegal, Singapore, Solomon Islands, South Africa, Syria, Tunisia, Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Zimbabwe.

Against: Australia, Austria, Belarus, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakstan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

Abstain: Brunei Darussalam, Turkey.

Absent: Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Comoros, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Djibouti, Dominica, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Federated States of Micronesia, Gabon, Greece, Grenada, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Honduras, Kenya, Kyrgyz Republic, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Madagascar, Malawi, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mauritania, Mauritius, Monaco, Mongolia, Mozambique, Myanmar, Nepal, Oman, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Tajikistan, Thailand, The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uzbekistan, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Zaire, Zambia.

* *** *

8

United Nations