UNCLASSIFIED   UNESCOPARI   05260695 
VZCZCXYZ0001
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHFR #0695/01 1461631
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 261631Z MAY 09
FM UNESCO PARIS FR
TO SECSTATE WASHDC

UNCLAS PARIS FR 000695 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STEPHEN MORRIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SCUL UNESCO
SUBJECT:  KONDO WORKING GROUP - FINAL MEETING ON WORLD HERITAGE 
COMMITTEE ELECTION PROCEDURES 
 
¶1.  Summary:  The open-ended Working Group on the Reflection on the 
Procedures for the Election of the Members of the World Heritage 
(WH) Committee, chaired by former Japanese Ambassador to UNESCO 
Seichi Kondo, met for its final session on 19 May 2009.  Kondo won 
agreement to a three-tiered election system whereby the first ballot 
for membership on the WH Committee would be by simple majority. 
Remaining unfilled seats would be filled in a second ballot in which 
seats would be assigned to those winning the largest number of 
votes.  In the event of a tie in the second ballot, lots would be 
drawn to decide the winner.  End summary. 
 
¶2.  Ambassador Kondo's Working Group met in Paris May 19 to finalize 
its work.  It began by turning aside an effort by Afghanistan to 
reopen the issues decided at the working group's earlier meetings. 
(The Afghans wanted to reserve a seat for a state that had never 
previously served on the World Heritage Committee.  They also 
pressed again to reserve seats for members of each regional group.) 
Most member states, however, considered these issues settled and 
refused to support the Afghans.  Instead, they approved the report 
of their previous session on February 10, noting five main 
elements: 
 
-- i) The introduction of a voluntary four year gap between 
mandates, to achieve greater rotation among the 186 States Parties 
on the 21-member WH Committee.  (Note:  The WH Convention text 
allows for 6 year terms.  End note.) 
 
-- ii) To report to the WH Committee that no consensus had been 
reached on the proposal to have Member States refrain from 
presenting nominations to the WH List during their mandates. (Note: 
The U.S. had campaigned for its seat on the WH Committee with this 
promise.  End note.) 
 
-- iii) Ensuring at least one seat per geographic electoral group by 
ensuring a special ballot for a seat for any electoral group that 
risked not being represented on the committee.  (Note:  In practice, 
this means, there would be a ballot for a seat for any group not 
currently represented on the committee.  As long as it is clear that 
all groups will be represented on the committee, there will be no 
need to have a special ballot.  End note.) 
 
--iv) Faster voting mechanism.  (Note:  Previously each vote 
required several rounds due to the requirement to be elected by 
absolute majority.  End note.)  The Working Group determined that 
for elections, a three-tiered procedure would be put into effect in 
the future.  (See para. 5 below). 
 
--v) Capacity building and the role of Observers.  (Note:  Although 
this was not specified as part of the Working Group's mandate, there 
was consensus that these elements are strongly tied to the States 
Parties decision to stand for election to the WH Committee.  End 
note.) 
 
¶3.  The main debate at this final meeting centered on the method of 
election to be used to fill the various seats.  It was decided that 
the same method should be used for all elections, with several 
delegates making the point that we must not create a lesser category 
of WH Committee member by electing Members through different methods 
of voting. 
 
¶4.  The Working Group reached consensus on a three-tiered method of 
balloting:  In the first round, winners would have to receive a 
majority (half of those present and voting, plus one).  In the 
second round, a seat or seats would be determined by greatest number 
of votes received.  If, in the event a third round would be required 
due to a tie vote, lots would be drawn to determine the winner. 
 
¶5.  India raised the question of giving a greater role to observers 
at World Heritage Committee meetings.  The U.S. supported the idea. 
Working Group members, however, feared that they would be going 
beyond the Working Group's mandate if they discussed this issue in 
detail.  It was agreed that this point should receive more 
discussion in an effort to encourage more "active" observers. 
 
¶6.  While there was a general sense of moving forward to resolve 
certain problems, there were also some who felt that we should be 
cautious in making too many changes to the operational guidelines 
and rules of procedure of the Convention.  France, in particular, 
noted that the WH Convention has given good results to States 
Parties and to UNESCO since 1972, and that we should not "unravel a 
system that works".  It did allow, however, that "if we find small 
improvements which could better the system, we should examine such 
recommendations together."  The WH Secretariat was charged with 
finalizing the language for a draft recommendation to be approved by 
the WH Committee and ultimately adopted by the WH General Assembly. 
 
¶7.  Just before closing the meeting, the Brazilian delegate, Antonio 
Ricarte, raised an objection to the Working Group presenting any 
language to the WH General Assembly, saying that its role was simply 
to report to the WH Committee.  The Dutch delegate initially 
supported the Brazilian, but relented when she saw that the other 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR NATIONAL PARK SERVICE STEPHEN MORRIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: SCUL UNESCO
SUBJECT:  KONDO WORKING GROUP - FINAL MEETING ON WORLD HERITAGE 
COMMITTEE ELECTION PROCEDURES 
 
delegates preferred to move the project forward with language ready 
for consideration, rather than delay for another year.  Kondo 
gaveled the point down quickly, and the draft language (yet to be 
finalized by the Secretariat), was accepted in principle. 
 
¶8.  At the end of the Working Group, Ambassador Kondo announced that 
the WH Director, Mr. Bandarin, would send a letter to States Parties 
alerting them of the Working Group's recommendations regarding 
electoral procedures, noting specifically that it is intended to 
have these proposals, if accepted, be put into effect immediately 
for the WH elections to be held during the WH General Assembly this 
October. 
 
¶9.  Kondo also announced that his introductory letter forwarding the 
Working Group's report and draft recommendations will reflect the 
context of the debate.  He said that he will also relay separate 
comments regarding the linkage between the modified electoral 
procedures and the issues of capacity building and increasing the 
role of observers to prepare States Parties for WH Committee 
participation, which fall outside of the Working Group's formal 
mandate. 
ENGELKEN