Sommaire: November 24, 2003: Statement on behalf of the European Union by H.E. Ambassador Gian Luigi Valenza, Permanent Mission of Italy to the U.N. Financing of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda (ICTR) and the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY): item 131 - item 132. Fifty-Eighth Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations - Fifth Committee (New York)
Mr. Chairman,
I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union. The acceding countries Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia, the associated countries Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey and the EFTA countries, members of the European Economic Area (Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway) declare that they align themselves with this statement.
We thank the Controller Mr. Jean-Pierre Halbwachs for introducing the reports under discussion. We also thank the ACABQ for its reports on the ICTY, which identify the key issues and give some guidance. The EU cannot endorse a reduction of 20 million USD as proposed by the ACABQ but is willing to make economies in the budgets of ICTY and ICTR. The EU is also of the opinion that the recosting of the proposed ICTY budget should not be postponed. For ICTR, we note that the reports on the budget,
the reform of the legal system and the additional requirements related to the Prosecutor and ad-litem judges have been only very recently issued and that the associated ACABQ report is, by necessity, general.
Mr. Chairman,
The EU reaffirms its strong support for the role of the international criminal tribunals which they are playing in putting an end to impunity for those guilty of the most serious violations of international humanitarian law. The international community expects to see the application of fair and impartial justice in the trials of those accused.
This abiding principle, however, cannot be separated from the need for efficient and effective management of the tribunals. We need to see the necessary resources provided to them to fulfil their mandates as a shared expense of the membership of the United Nations. We also wish to see indictees brought to trial within an acceptable timeframe, effective conduct of trials and efficient application of those resources supplied. The EU has made clear on a number of occasions in the past that the
tribunals have not fully lived up to these requirements. The EU will take its customary approach to these budget proposals this session: we will support a level of resources which allows the Tribunals to implement their proposed work programme but seek to impose suitable budgetary discipline.
In the documents before us, there have been some very positive developments. The EU considers the presentation of both budgets in this session a major improvement on previous years and the ACABQ report commends the Tribunals for this also. Not only have the tribunals presented their budgets in an RBB format for the first time, but they also have surpassed many departments in the UN Secretariat in the quality of this presentation and the relevance of their proposed indicators.
The ICTY report on its reform of the legal aid system also contains encouraging information on the new system of remunerating defence counsel and establishing indigence. The lump-sum formula now being applied to defence costs as opposed to the previous hourly remuneration, will not only bring budget savings, but more importantly, will encourage all parties to co-operate towards a more efficient and transparent conduct of proceedings. We consider this report to be a positive contribution. We
should, however, have appreciated more information on the impact of these reforms on the anticipated defence costs for ICTY in the biennium 2004-05, which contains no specific breakdown of this. This is also a point picked up by the ACABQ, which commented that, despite these reforms, savings had not been realised due to a number of other factors. We should appreciate a further discussion of this in the informal sessions.
For ICTR, the position on defence costs is less clear-cut. We note with great interest many of the measures proposed in A/58/366 and commend the Registrar for having taken steps to implement some of the recommendations contained in the consultancy report earlier this year. We are uneasy, however, that the conclusion of the considerable analysis does not provide a clear-cut plan of action or targets for future defence costs. We urge that the Tribunal conclude and implement new procedures for
remuneration of defence counsel, which allow "equality of arms" for indictees but maintains reasonable and enforceable limits on these expenses. The membership has made its views clear on this subject in previous resolutions and the time has now come for concrete action.
Mr. Chairman, since this Committee last discussed the budgets of the tribunals, there have been some significant institutional developments in ICTR. The EU supports these, which we trust will spur the Tribunal on to greater achievement. We welcome the appointment of a separate Prosecutor and the Security Council agreement to allow up to nine ad-litem judges to sit in order to speed up proceedings, and emphasise that it is crucial for there to be continued, regular co-operation between the two
tribunals. However, we shall consider the resource implications of these measures very carefully. We accept that there will necessarily be resource and personnel increases as a result of these steps, but have to question the reasoning behind some of the proposed increases in professional and support staff. In particular, justification for their creation should be provided.
We note also that the Security Council in its Presidential Statement of 27 October, affirmed that it is within the lawful powers for ICTR to fund the upgrading of prison facilities through agreements with third countries. We welcome this move, but wish to stress that this should be limited to absolutely essential work and would appreciate some clarification on how oversight of these funds is proceeding.
Mr. Chairman,
This leads me to comment on the levels of the budgets themselves, which are of concern to the EU. The increases in the budgets alone in dollar terms for the membership exceed $100 million per biennium. We recognise that this is mainly due to recosting but remain disappointed that such modest efforts were made to offset these currency problems with economy measures. Among others, we acknowledge the efforts made to redeploy staff in ICTY from the investigation function to registry functions, but
we observe that the budget effects of the outward redeployment from the Office of the Prosecutor seem to be offset to a great extent by the full cost of staff approved two years ago, while the registry's requirements for inward redeployment of these staff members have increased markedly. It is unclear why the registry needs these extra staff considering the fact that just two years ago we approved an extra 57 positions to bring the total level up to 1058 staff.
We have similar concerns regarding ICTR, even if in Resolution A/57/655, the General Assembly made clear that it considered the budgetary requirements approved two years ago, and revised at the 57th session, to constitute a peak in expenditure and staffing.
Mr. Chairman,
We note furthermore that the General Assembly is due to review the biennial nature of these budgets, since they were established on a trial basis for 2002-03. Despite the many advantages of a biennial process, the EU has concluded that, given the rapidly shifting nature of the Tribunals' resource requirements, the uncertainties in the currency markets, and the expectation of a lowering of costs as the Tribunals implement their exit strategies, we are open to evaluate the possible return to
annual Tribunals' budgets.
Finally, we note that just last month, the USG for Management, Ms Catherine Bertini, alerted this Committee to the deplorable situation regarding payments of assessed contributions to the Tribunals' budgets. As of the end of September, no fewer than 122 members had failed to contribute anything for either Tribunal in 2003. It is unacceptable in our opinion for Member States to neglect their obligations to these institutions and we echo the USG's call on all members to pay contributions in
full.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
| Haut |
Etats Membres de l'Union Européenne
Alertes par e-mail
Envoyer par e-mail
Imprimer cette page