VZCZCXYZ0026
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUCNDT #0034 0211553
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 211553Z JAN 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 5662

UNCLAS USUN NEW YORK 000034 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: AORC PREL UNGA
SUBJECT: UN - GA NEGATES AUDITORS RECOMMENDATION ON USE OF 
WORKING LANGUAGES 
 
¶1. Summary: Following extensive negotiations in the Fifth 
Committee on the report of the UN Board of Auditors 
(BOA)during the main part of the 63rd GA, the General 
Assembly rejected the recommendation in the BOA report on 
"language proficiency."  Adoption of the recommendation would 
have made fluency in both English and French a requirement 
for new staff members at the professional level and above. 
End Summary. 
 
¶2. The BOA, chaired in 2007-2008 by French national Philippe 
Seguin, argued in paragraphs 259 and 260 of its report on the 
financial report and audited financial statements for the 
biennium ended 31 December 2007 - Vol. I United Nations 
(A/63/5 (Vol.I)) that: 
 
-- the Assembly, in GA resolution 2 (I) of 1 February 1946, 
decided that the two working languages of the Secretariat - 
French and English - must be "treated equally", 
 
-- since proficiency in English is considered 
"indispensable", whereas proficiency in French appears only 
to be "desirable", recruitment leads to almost all of the 
staff having a mastery of English with only a minority 
speaking French, and that consequently work is carried out 
largely in English "in violation of the General Assembly 
resolution" and that 
 
-- the Secretariat should "require fluency in both languages" 
for the candidates it recruits. 
 
¶3. In paragraphs 261 and 262, the BOA recommended that the GA 
should decide to make it a requirement for new staff members 
at the professional level and above who are not fluent in 
both working languages of the Secretariat to undergo language 
tutoring upon joining the Organization and that the 
Secretariat should test the fluency in both working languages 
of all new entrants at the professional level and above after 
a period of time following their 
entry on duty. The Secretariat estimated that implementing 
the recommendations would have cost approximately $3 million 
per biennium. 
 
¶4. USDel argued that: 
 
-- use of the working languages is a matter of practicality, 
 
-- the rules and regulations, derived from article 101 of the 
Charter and all relevant GA resolutions, do not require 
"equal" or "balanced" use of English and French in the 
day-to-day work of the Secretariat, 
 
-- adoption of the BOA's recommendation would have the effect 
of discriminating against candidates whose mother tongue is 
not English or French, and that 
 
-- consideration of recommendations possibly changing the 
Organization's human resources rules and regulations should 
be considered under the HR item in the Fifth Committee so 
that all possible implications could be considered. 
 
¶5. After extensive and sometimes contentious discussions with 
the French delegation, the following three paragraphs were 
included in the draft resolution adopted by the GA - 
A/C.5/63/L.8 (to be issued as resolution 63/246).  Their 
inclusion has the effect of neutralizing the recommendations 
in the BOA report by placing the issue in its proper HR 
context: 
 
"Recalling further all its resolutions related to the 
languages of the United Nations as well as on human resources 
management," 
 
"Emphasizing the need to ensure the full implementation of 
the staff regulations and rules of the United Nations," 
 
"Stresses that the employment of staff shall continue to be 
carried out in strict accordance with article 101 of the 
Charter of the United Nations and in line with the relevant 
provisions of the General Assembly resolutions;" 
Wolff