VZCZCXYZ0000
OO RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0253/01 0881952
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
O 291952Z MAR 07
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 1623

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000253 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: UNGA UNSC PREL PTER OFDP
SUBJECT: UNGA LEGAL COMMITTEE DEBATES REFORM OF UN SYSTEM 
OF ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE 
 
REF: A. HACKETT/WILCOX EMAIL-01/09/07 
     ¶B. WILCOX/HACKETT EMAIL-03/13/07 
     ¶C. USUN 242 
     ¶D. STATE 37360 
     ¶E. WILCOX/HACKETT EMAIL-03/29/07 
     ¶F. STATE 36957 
     ¶G. STATE 31831 
 
¶1.   (U) BEGIN SUMMARY:  At a resumed session March 12-23, 
2007, the General Assembly's Sixth (Legal) Committee 
discussed proposals to reform the UN's system of 
administration of justice, as well as a request of the 
Islamic Development Bank Group (IDB) for observer status in 
the General Assembly.  On March 23, the Committee adopted by 
consensus a letter to the President of the General Assembly, 
which attached a list of points of agreement and a decision 
for the General Assembly concerning proposals for reforming 
the UN's system of administration of justice issue, as well 
as a resolution inviting the IDB to participate as an 
observer in the General Assembly and a revised provisional 
program of work adding the administration of justice item to 
the agenda for the Committee's fall 2007 meeting.  On March 
28, the General Assembly adopted by consensus the Sixth 
Committee's draft decision on the administration of justice, 
the revised provisional program of work, and the resolution 
granting observer status to the IDB (refs C-F).  END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2.  (U) During the Committee's plenary meeting on March 12, 
Germany (on behalf of the European Union), Australia (on 
behalf of Canada and New Zealand/CANZ), Egypt, Norway, the 
Philippines, and USUN delivered statements (refs A-B). 
Delegations said reform of the UN internal system of justice 
is necessary, and expressed gratitude for the work and 
recommendations of the Redesign Panel on the UN system of 
justice, which the Secretary-General appointed pursuant to 
General Assembly resolution 59/283.  Per ref B, USUN raised 
concerns about various proposals set out in the July 2006 
report of the Redesign Panel (A/61/205) and the 
Secretary-General's comments on it (A/61/758), including 
 
SIPDIS 
recommendations concerning damages, the establishment of an 
office to provide legal representation to UN staff, the 
ability of staff associations to bring class actions, the 
extension of the system of justice to contractors and others, 
the imposition of individual liability on managers, and 
jurisdiction.  Some delegates cautioned that the Committee, 
during its consideration of the issue in its resumed session, 
should confine itself to legal issues, noting that the Fifth 
Committee in its resumed session would focus on the 
administrative aspects of reform. 
 
¶3.  (SBU) During the Working Group's meetings, delegations 
debated proposals contained in the report of the Redesign 
Panel and the Secretary-General's comments on that report. 
At the Working Group's request, representatives from the 
Office of the Ombudsman, Office of Legal Affairs, Office of 
Human Resources Management, and the Department of Management 
answered delegates' questions on various issues, including 
the present role of the Office of the Ombudsman, the remedies 
currently available to UN contractors and consultants who 
seek to bring claims against the UN, the role of staff 
associations, damage awards, and the role of the proposed 
office to provide legal advice and representation to UN 
personnel seeking to bring claims against the UN. 
 
¶4.  (U) Based on the Working Group's recommendations, the 
Sixth Committee agreed upon certain broad principles, which 
it set forth in a "points of agreement" paper for the Sixth 
Committee Chairman to transmit to the President of the 
General Assembly.  The President will share the letter and 
its annexes with the Fifth Committee Chairman (ref C).  The 
Chairman's transmittal letter highlights that the Sixth 
Committee did not endorse "all" of the recommendations of the 
Redesign Panel or the Secretary-General.  It also notes that, 
although the recommendations of the Panel and the 
Secretary-General generally conform to internationally 
 
SIPDIS 
recognized standards of justice, there might be other 
approaches to aspects of the proposals that also would 
conform to such standards. 
 
¶5.  (U) Among other things, the points of agreement paper 
says the existing system of administration of justice should 
be reformed expeditiously, and the system should be 
independent, transparent, and professionalized, comprising an 
informal and a formal system.  The paper also says that if a 
complaint is brought before the informal system, it should 
not be brought in parallel to the formal system as long as 
parties continue to pursue agreement under the informal 
system.  Once parties have reached an agreement through 
mediation, the paper says they are precluded from litigating 
claims covered by that agreement in the formal system. 
Notably, paper agrees that no exemplary or punitive damages 
should be awarded. 
 
¶6.  (SBU) The Committee and its Working Group did not reach 
consensus on various other issues contained in the reports of 
the Redesign Panel and the Secretary-General.  Among other 
things, the Committee will continue to debate the scope of 
jurisdiction of the proposed informal and informal systems, 
including whether they should cover contractors and 
consultants and whether the appellate body should have 
jurisdiction over questions of material fact; the criteria 
and procedures for appointing judges; the availability of 
specific performance and compensatory damages; whether staff 
associations should be able to file class action suits; 
whether individual managers can be held personally 
accountable for actions that do not rise to the level of 
gross negligence; and whether the reformed system of justice 
should include a new office to provide legal representation 
and advice to persons who want to bring claims. 
 
¶7.  (U) On March 23, the Committee adopted by consensus a 
decision for the General Assembly concerning the issue of 
reforming the UN's system of administration of justice 
(A/C.6/61/L.21).  The decision provides that the Committee 
would continue its consideration of the administration of 
justice agenda item at its fall 2006 meeting.  It also 
requests the Secretary-General, in accordance with further 
decisions that the General Assembly may take on the 
recommendation of the Fifth Committee, to provide more 
details on a proposal to strengthen the functions of the 
Office of Ombudsman and draft elements of statute(s) of the 
first and appellate instances, taking into account the Sixth 
Committee's "points of agreement" paper. 
 
¶8.  (U) On March 23, the Committee also adopted by consensus 
a resolution inviting the IDB to participate as an observer 
in the Assembly's work (ref C). 
 
¶9.   (SBU) COMMENT:  The Sixth Committee's resumed session 
yielded positive results, although significant divisions 
remain on difficult issues.  Our ability to garner support 
for the notion that once parties reach a mediated agreement 
to a dispute they should not be permitted to litigate and 
that parties should not receive exemplary or punitive damages 
represented significant achievements.  The United States will 
need to continue to engage with others in New York and in 
capitals to ensure that the proposed reforms adequately 
address U.S. concerns.  END COMMENT. 
 
¶10.  (SBU) On March 28, the General Assembly adopted by 
consensus the Sixth Committee's decision concerning the 
administration of justice.  It also adopted by consensus the 
resolution inviting the IDB to participate as an observer in 
the Assembly's work.  Israel, which had joined consensus on 
the resolution in the Sixth Committee, announced that it 
would not participate in the decision due to concerns about 
the IDB's relationship with Hamas.  Cyprus, which had not 
participated in the Sixth Committee's decision because of IDB 
projects in Northern Cyprus, was not present.  It is not 
clear whether this was deliberate or inadvertent because 
notice of the meeting had only been circulated the day before. 
WOLFF