Press Release
ECOSOC/5934
Also Takes Action on Consultative Status Of Non-Governmental Organizations and Other Matters
As it resumed its session this afternoon, the Economic and Social Council established an intergovernmental body called the United Nations Forum on Forests, which would promote internationally agreed actions on forests at the national, regional and global levels.
The Council took that action by adopting, without a vote, a draft resolution submitted by its President. The Forum would be established as a subsidiary body of the Council, and its objectives would be the promotion of management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and the strengthening of political commitment to that end. The text was introduced by Bagher Asadi (Iran).
According to the text, the principal functions of the new body would include promotion of international cooperation on forest-related issues; implementation of proposals from the Intergovernmental Panel/Intergovernmental Forum on Forests; mobilization of financial, technical and scientific resources to that end; and monitoring and assessment of progress at all levels. The new arrangement would also strengthen political commitment to the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests through ministerial engagement, liaison with international and regional organizations and instruments, and promotion of dialogue and policy.
The Council decided that, within five years, the United Nations Forum would consider the prospects of a legal framework on all types of forests. That process could develop financial provisions to implement any future legal framework and consider recommendations made by expert groups on the establishment of mechanisms on finance, technology transfer and trade. The Forum should draw on elements from the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Forest Principles, Agenda 21, and proposals from the Intergovernmental Panel and the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests.
By the terms of a draft decision adopted without a vote, the Council granted consultative status to 37 non-governmental organizations (NGOs); reclassified one organization from special to general consultative status; declined to grant consultative status to five NGOs; closed consideration of the application from one NGO; decided that the applications of two NGOs must be resubmitted; and decided that one NGO must reapply as a new legal entity.
In other action this afternoon, the Council decided to suspend, for a period of three years, the special consultative status of the International Council of the Associations for Peace in the Continents (ASOPAZCO) as of 28 July 2000. That decision was taken by a vote of 25 in favour to 18 against, with 9 abstentions (Benin, Brazil, Costa Rica, Fiji, India, Mauritius, Morocco, New Zealand, Sierra Leone) (see Annex I).
By a vote of 20 in favour to 23 against, with 9 abstentions (Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Fiji, Mauritius, Morocco, Pakistan, Rwanda, Suriname), it rejected a draft which would have suspended the general consultative status of the Transnational Radical Party for a period of three years (see Annex II).
In the debate on that issue, several speakers questioned the procedure followed in the Committee on NGOs when considering the case of the Transnational Radical Party, saying that the organization had not been given a chance to respond to all allegations made against it and that no conclusive evidence had been presented to confirm allegations of terrorism, drug trafficking and paedophilia.
However, the representative of the Russian Federation said that the Committee had taken its decision after careful and comprehensive consideration of the case, including responses from the Party and its representatives. The Transnational Radical Party was not an NGO in the true sense of that word, but a political party promoting efforts against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of his State, and encouraging separatism. It was also conducting a campaign for liberalization of unlawful drugs and fighting against prohibition of child pornography on the Internet.
Also this afternoon, the Council decided, on an exceptional basis and as an interim measure, to invite NGOs accredited to either the twenty-third or twenty- fourth special sessions of the Assembly to attend the forty-fifth session of the Commission on the Status of Women and the thirty-ninth session of the Commission on Social Development, provided that they had started the process of applying for consultative status. That action was taken without a vote.
The Council also decided that the resumed session of the Committee on NGOs would take place from 15 to 26 January 2001.
By the terms of a draft decision taken without a vote, the Council took note of the report of the Committee on NGOs and approved its provisional agenda for the 2001 session of the Committee.
On organizational matters, the Council took action on the themes for its 2001 substantive session. The theme for the Council’s next high-level segment would be the “Role of the United Nations system in supporting efforts of African countries to achieve sustainable development”. The coordination segment would have the theme, “The role of the United Nations in promoting development, particularly with respect to access to and transfer of knowledge and technology, especially information and communication technologies, inter alia, through partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including the private sector”.
The Council also decided to hold the fifth session of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development from 21 to 25 May 2001 in Geneva, and that the Commission on Population and Development would hold its thirty-fourth session on 2 to 6 April 2001.
The Council held elections postponed from previous meetings.
It elected Austria to the Commission on Science for Technology for Development by acclamation, but decided to further postpone the election to this Commission of two members from the African Group of States, three members from the Asian Group of States, and two members from the Western European and Other States Group.
To fill a pending vacancy in the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting, the Council elected Hungary by acclamation, and also further postponed elections for the remaining four vacancies on that body.
The Council also elected the Bahamas to represent the Latin American and Caribbean States at the Programme Coordination Board of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) by acclamation, and postponed the election of one member from the Western European and Other States.
Consideration of the implementation of Assembly resolutions 50/227 and 42/12 B was deferred, as consultations were still needed on that item.
The Vice-President of the Council also reported on the outcome of informal consultations on several of its agenda items.
Speaking this afternoon were the President of the Council, Makarim Wibisono (Indonesia), and the representatives of France (on behalf of the European Union and associated States), Costa Rica, Nigeria (on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China), Sudan, Cuba, United States, Mexico, Japan, Italy, Bolivia, Sierra Leone, China, Lesotho, Canada, Turkey, Algeria, Pakistan, India and Syria.
The Council’s resumed session will continue at 3 p.m. on 27 October, when the Council is scheduled to meet with Horst Kohler, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
Economic and Social Council - 3 - Press Release ECOSOC/5934 46th Meeting (PM) 18 October 2000
Council Work Programme
The Economic and Social Council met this afternoon to take action on several draft texts and to conclude postponed elections for vacancies.
By the terms of a draft resolution on the report of the fourth session of the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (document E/2000/L.32), the Council would establish an intergovernmental body called the United Nations Forum on Forests, which would promote continued policy development and dialogue among governments, involving international organizations and other interested parties.
The Forum would be established as a subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council, and its main objective would be promotion of management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and strengthening political commitment to that end. It would report to the Economic and Social Council and, through the Council, to the General Assembly.
The new body would initially meet annually, for a period of up to two weeks, with a high-level ministerial segment to be held for two to three days. The sessions of the Forum might be held at venues other than United Nations Headquarters in accordance with established United Nations rules and practices. The Forum would hold its organizational session in 2001 to adopt a multi-year programme of work and develop a plan of action.
According to the text, the principal functions of the new body would include promotion of international cooperation on forest-related issues; and implementation of the Intergovernmental Panel/Intergovernmental Forum on Forests proposals and other agreed actions; mobilization of financial, technical and scientific resources towards that end; and monitoring and assessment of progress at all levels. The new international arrangement would also strengthen political commitment to the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests through ministerial engagement, liaison with international and regional organizations and instruments, and promotion of action-oriented dialogue and policy.
The Council would decide that, within five years, the United Nations Forum would consider the parameters of a mandate for developing a legal framework of all types of forests. That process could develop the financial provisions to implement any future agreed legal framework and consider recommendations made by expert groups on the establishment of mechanisms on finance, technology transfer and trade.
Also by the terms of the draft resolution, executive heads of relevant organizations of the United Nations system and other relevant international and regional organizations, institutions and instruments would be invited to form a collaborative partnership on forests to support the work of the Forum and enhance coordination among participants.
The United Nations Forum should work on the basis of a multi-year programme of work, drawing on the elements reflected in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, the Forest Principles, Agenda 21 and the Intergovernmental Panel and Intergovernmental Forum on Forests proposals. It should maintain close links with the Commission on Sustainable Development. The Council also recommends that a collaborative partnership on forests should build on a high-level informal group, such as the Inter-Agency Task Force on Forests.
The draft also contains a request to the Secretary-General to establish a compact secretariat to assist the Forum to carry out its functions related to the international arrangements on forests. The Council would further recommend that the General Assembly decide on the funding for the United Nations Forum and its secretariat in accordance with the established budget procedures.
The funding for the new body and its secretariat should be provided from the regular budget of the United Nations, within existing resources, resources of organizations participating in the partnership and extrabudgetary resources provided by interested donors. It would also call on interested donor governments, financial institutions and other organizations to make voluntary financial contributions to a trust fund to be established for the United Nations Forum.
The programme budget implications of the draft resolution regarding the establishment of the United Nations Forum on Forests are contained in document E/2000/L.33. The Secretary-General states that he considers that the current staff resources of the secretariat will eventually need to be strengthened. The necessary staffing resources to be funded by the United Nations might comprise four staff members at the Professional level and two staff members at the General Service level. It is assumed that the compact secretariat would continue to be strengthened through secondments from international and regional organizations and voluntary contributions.
The Secretary-General also considers that the resources contributed for activities related to forests are sufficient to enable the current staff of the secretariat on forests to carry out the activities related to the preparation and holding of the organizational and the first substantial sessions of the Forum. Should resources be insufficient between now and the first session of the Forum, the Secretary-General would submit revised estimates with a request for additional resources through a charge against the contingency fund. During the first substantive session, the Secretary-General would be in a better position to assess the actual requirements of the compact secretariat. He intends to submit his proposals for permanent funding through a statement on programme budget implications reflecting the decisions of the Forum on its long-term work programme.
A draft decision on themes for the substantive session of 2001 of the Economic and Social Council (document E/2000/L.34), submitted by the Council’s Vice-President following informal consultations, would have the Council decide on the themes for its 2001 substantive session. The theme for the Council’s high- level segment would be the “Role of the United Nations system in supporting the efforts of African countries to achieve sustainable development”. The coordination segment would have the theme, “The role of the United Nations in promoting development, particularly with respect to access to and transfer of knowledge and technology, especially information and communication technologies, among other things through partnerships with relevant stakeholders, including the private sector”.
A draft decision on the suspension of consultative status of the International Council of the Association for Peace in the Continents (document E/2000/L.35), submitted by the Vice-President following informal consultations, would have the Council suspend, for a period of three years, the special consultative status of the International Council of the Associations for Peace in the Continents as of 28 July 2000 in accordance with paragraph 57 of Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 of 25 July 1996.
Also before the Council was a draft decision submitted by the Vice-President, on the basis of informal consultations on the suspension of consultative status of the Transnational Radical Party (document E/2000/L.36). By the terms of that text, the Council would decide to suspend the general consultative status of the Transnational Radical Party, for a period of three years, in accordance with paragraph 57 of Economic and Social Council resolution 1996/31 of 25 July 1996.
According to a draft decision on follow-up to the twenty-third and twenty- fourth special sessions of the General Assembly (document E/2000/L.37), submitted by the Vice-President following informal consultations, the Council would decide, on an exceptional basis and as an interim measure, to invite the non-governmental organizations accredited to either the twenty-third or twenty-fourth special sessions of the Assembly to attend the forty-fifth session of the Commission on the Status of Women and the thirty-ninth session of the Commission on Social Development, provided that they had started the process of applying for consultative status in accordance with Council decision 1996/315 of 14 November 1996.
Another four draft decisions are contained in Part I of the report of the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (document E/2000/88). By the terms of the first draft, the Council would grant consultative status to 37 non-governmental organizations; reclassify one organization from special to general consultative status; not grant consultative status to five non-governmental organizations; decide to close consideration of the application of one non-governmental organization; decide that the applications of two non-governmental organizations should be resubmitted; and decide that one non-governmental organization reapply as a new legal entity.
By draft decision II, the Council would suspend the consultative status of two organizations, the National Council for the Association for Peace in the Continents and the Transnational Radical Party, for three years each.
By draft decision III, the Council would authorize the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations to hold a resumed session for a period of two weeks in January/February 2001 to complete the work of its 2000 regular session.
By draft decision IV, the Council would take note of the present report and approve the provisional agenda for the 2001 session of the Committee.
By the terms of a draft decision contained in an addendum to that report, the Economic and Social Council would decide to authorize the Committee to hold a resumed 2000 session for a half-day during the week of 25 to 29 September, in order to consider the response of the Transnational Radical Party.
On sustainable development, the Council had before it documents E/2000/29, Suppl.9 and E/2000/80-A/55/89. For background information, see Press Release ECOSOC/5925 dated 26 July 2000.
Also before the Council were documents E/2000/67, E/2000/85 and E/2000/79 on the implementation of General Assembly resolutions 50/227 and 42/12 B[8]. For further information, see Press Release ECOSOC/5922 dated 24 July 2000.
On non-governmental organizations, the Council had before it documents E/2000/88 (Parts I and II), E/2000/110 and E/2000/111. For background information, see Press Releases NGO/370 dated 27 July 2000 and NGO/367 of 23 June 2000.
Adoption of Agenda
MARTIN BELINGA-EBOUTOU (Cameroon), Vice-President of the Council, said that consultations had been initiated on the themes for the high-level and coordination segments for the next session in 2001. Consensus had been reached on the high-level segment theme and the theme for the coordination segment.
On the high-level segment, he said the theme agreed on was the "Role of the United Nations system in supporting the efforts of African countries to achieve sustainable development". As for the coordination segment, the theme agreed upon was "The role of the United Nations in promoting development, particularly with respect to access to knowledge and transfer of technology, especially information and communication technology, inter alia, through partnerships with relevant stakeholders including the private sector".
The Council then adopted the decision contained in document E/2000/L.34 entitled "Themes for the substantive session of 2001 of the Economic and Social Council".
The Council then decided to hold the fifth session of the Commission on Science and Technology for Development from 21 to 25 May 2001 in Geneva.
It also decided that the Commission on Population and Development would hold its thirty-fourth session from 2 to 6 April 2001.
Action on Sustainable Development
The Council then resumed its consideration of the agenda item entitled "Economic and environmental questions: Sustainable development".
BAGHER ASADI (Iran) introduced the text on the Intergovernmental Forum on Forests (document E/2000/L.32). He said he had presented a progress report at the closing plenary of the Council on 28 July upon which informal consultations had been held from 18 to 22 September.
At the end of a long week, he said, they had succeeded in resolving all difficulties, including the membership of the new body. The document before the Council today contained the text of the draft resolution, which had been approved by consensus. Agreement had been reached on the establishment of the United Nations Forum on Forests as a subsidiary body of the Council composed of all Member States of the United Nations and of the specialized agencies, with full and equal participation, including voting rights.
The Forum was expected to meet for a short organizational meeting as soon as possible to elect officers and decide on the venue for its secretariat. The organizational meeting would be held in February 2001 in New York and would, therefore, have no financial implications for travel.
He said the distributed document contained wording from the draft text approved on 22 September in informal consultations. Due to the negotiated nature of the text of the draft resolution, the original text as distributed by the Council secretariat was the valid one.
The representative of France said that he, and the European Union in general, were not in favour of adopting a text that had not been translated into all official languages. The text did not correspond exactly to the one negotiated during last month’s informal consultations. He would like to be able to ensure all negotiators that the exact text as originally negotiated would be used.
They were being asked to take a decision on a text which was available in only one official language, he said. On that point of principle, if a decision were not taken today, it would lead to new delays in the start-up of the Forum’s work. In that regard, he would be willing to make an exception, but would like to flag his reluctance with that procedure. It should, in no way, constitute a precedent.
The representative of Costa Rica said that it was important for her delegation to have the text in Spanish. However, because of the importance of the issue of forests, she would, exceptionally, not have a problem adopting the text, even though it was not in Spanish.
The representative of Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said that he would be in favour of adopting the draft and awaiting the texts to be issued. If there was any variance, he would request an amendment. He too realized the importance of the issue, and would support the text’s adoption.
The representative of the Sudan asked the Secretariat, in view of the document's importance, if the new document would appear in the form of a corrigendum or if it would be reissued for technical reasons only. It might be important for delegations to know what form the document would be issued in, after they had adopted the draft resolution.
The representative of the Russian Federation said that he was satisfied with the completion of the agreement on the draft resolution and was ready to support it. The decision constituted an important stage in the process. The Russian Federation supported Iran's proposal on changes of the text. The agreed text had cost too much effort. While the Russian Federation supported submitting all documents in all languages, it would support an exception in this case, which, he hoped, would not create a precedent in the future.
MAKARIM WIBISONO (Indonesia), Council President, said that, with the support of the delegations, the draft would be reissued for technical reasons. It would reflect the document agreed upon by the Council.
The Council then adopted the text on the establishment of the United Nations Forum on Forests without a vote.
The representative of France spoke on behalf of the European Union and associated States in explanation of position. He said that while the Forum would play an important role in the sustainable development of forests, creation of a subsidiary body with universal membership set a regrettable precedent, and for that reason the Union had only reluctantly agreed to the adoption. He hoped the decision would not create a precedent and would remain an exception. Despite the reservations expressed, his country hoped the work of the new body would be productive.
The representative of Nigeria, speaking on behalf of the “Group of 77” developing countries and China, said that the process leading to the adoption of the resolution had been difficult. The Group firmly believed that the right decision had been taken when universality of the Forum had been approved. That would allow all States to be represented at the Forum. He also endorsed the view that the location of the venue of the Forum would be decided in the first organizational meeting at the intergovernmental level. The proposals made in the discussions should be taken into consideration. The group of negotiators had been tremendous. They had all contributed to the decision. His delegation was prepared to support all the efforts of the new body.
The representative of Costa Rica agreed with the statement by the representative of Nigeria and said that the results of the negotiations had been produced by the commitment of the coordinator of the discussions. Those negotiations had culminated in the creation of a new structure for consultations.
She said serious commitment was needed to achieve the concrete results that all countries expected on the subject of forests. It was necessary to provide the Forum with all the necessary tools, as the beginning of its work was of an urgent nature. The Forum would become an important environmental body, and it should be provided with adequate funds and technical means. It was also important to base decisions on accurate information on the status of forests around the world.
Costa Rica had a particular interest in the work of the Forum and it reaffirmed its commitment to the topic, she said. Her country had offered to become the Forum’s home.
Mr. WIBISONO (Indonesia), Council President, then expressed gratitude to all involved for the successful work on the resolution.
Implementation of Assembly Resolutions 50/227 and 42/12 B.
Reporting on the results of informal consultations on the matter, the Vice-President of the Council, Mr. BELINGA-EBOUTOU (Cameroon), said that consultations on the matter should continue, for the discussion had not been completed in the informals.
The Council then decided to defer consideration of the matter.
Action on Non-Governmental Organizations
The Council then turned to the texts contained in the report of the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations (document E/2000/88).
Acting without a vote, the Council first adopted draft decision I on the applications for consultative status and requests for reclassification from non-governmental organizations.
Turning to draft decision II on suspension of consultative status, the Council was informed that, following informal consultations, it had been decided to replace that draft with texts contained in documents E/2000/L.35 and E/2000/L.36.
Reporting on the informal consultations held on those two texts, Mr. BELINGA-EBOUTOU (Cameroon), Vice-President of the Council, said the texts concerned two different non-governmental organizations. The first decision, in document E/2000/L.35, related to the International Council for the Association of Peace in the Continents. The Committee had submitted a decision recommending that the Council be suspended for three years to take effect 28 July.
The second decision, in document E/2000/L.36, was on the Transnational Radical Party. The Committee had recommended a three-year suspension to take effect as of the date of adoption by the Council of such a decision.
The representative of Cuba said that there was a mistake in the Spanish version of the first draft. In the third line it should read "as of 28 July". She requested that a correction be made.
Mr. WIBISONO (Indonesia), Council President, then invited Council members to make statements before the vote on the first text (E/2000/L.35).
The representative of Cuba said that her delegation was sorry that they had to proceed to a vote to adopt a decision recommended by the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations. Cuba would vote in favour of the draft, not only because the decision taken by the Committee should be respected, but also because it had become obvious that the organization had committed serious violations. Her delegation felt that they should respect the process that had been taken in the Committee.
The representative of the United States said that the Economic and Social Council was being called upon to suspend the organization for three years. Her delegation had expressed that they were opposed to that recommendation, and would continue to oppose it. The International Council for the Association of Peace in the Continents was a human rights organization. Although that organization's statement had been critical of Cuba, it had not challenged the sovereignty of Member States. She believed that the organization should be judged on the content of its intervention. That content, while critical of Cuba, was within established norms. She urged all Council members to reject the recommendation.
The representative of Mexico said that it was the practice of her delegation to respect the work of the Economic and Social Council. In this case, the Committee had the competence to analyse and evaluate specific issues and draft recommendations in a motivated manner. For that reason, her delegation would vote in favour of draft resolution on the International Council for the Association of Peace in the Continents.
The representative of Japan said that her country was not a member of the Committee on NGOs. However, it had decided that the International Council for the Association of Peace in the Continents had not violated any regulations. Therefore, her delegation would vote against the suspension of the organization.
The representative of the Russian Federation said that his delegation had taken part in the consideration of the matter. He fully shared the opinion of Cuba on the abuse of consultative status with the Economic and Social Council. He was particularly concerned that the organization in question had undertaken actions against the delegation of Cuba in the past. He considered absolutely legal the opinion of the Committee on the suspension for three years and would vote for it.
The Council then adopted the text on the International Council for the Association of Peace in the Continents with a vote of 25 in favour to 18 against, with 9 abstentions (Benin, Brazil, Costa Rica, Fiji, India, Mauritius, Morocco, New Zealand, Sierra Leone). (For details of vote see Annex I.)
The representative of France, speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, said that the complaint against the Transnational Radical Party had been made last June by the Russian Federation. The members of the Council had to take a decision. The recommendation by the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations had come after long deliberations. At the end of their session, the Committee had decided to recommend that the organization be suspended for three years.
Several delegations had asked the Committee to reconsider its decision, he said. Several States had clearly said that they were no longer bound by the decision taken in June. The Union recalled the rules and principles that should be complied with. First, there was the need to give the non-governmental organization an opportunity to defend itself. The Union could not overemphasize the importance of Article 56, which provided that any non-governmental organization must have an opportunity to respond, and that the Committee must study that response as early as possible. Second, the Committee needed to complete the procedure. It must not transmit its decision to the Council before it exhausted its whole procedure.
As to the substance, he wished to know what charges had been laid against the Transnational Radical Party. When, in his statement, the representative of the organization, Mr. Idigov, had spoken as the President of Chechnya, he had recognized his mistake. At that point, the President of the Human Rights Committee had given Mr. Idigov the floor again and he was able to continue on behalf of the Transnational Radical Party. The Transnational Radical Party had reiterated its regrets to the Committee.
The Union believed that the sanctions were incommensurate with charges, he said. Regarding the content of Mr. Idigov's statement, he had described the worrisome humanitarian situation in Chechnya and had appealed for a peaceful and political settlement of the conflict. For those reasons, the Union was against the draft recommending the suspensions. The Union called for a recorded vote on the text.
Speaking before the vote, the representative of Italy said that his country was not a member of the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations. He supported the statement by the representative of France. Action against an NGO deserved the qualified attention of the Council. In the case of the Transnational Radical Party, the proper procedure had not been observed. The NGOs Committee had made its decision without having examined the full response of the Transnational Radical Party. The draft decision before the Council had been approved by the Committee before the response had been received. Also, no real evidence had been submitted to substantiate accusations against the organization, including those of drug trafficking and terrorism. The claim that the Party supported paedophilia was totally unfounded.
The only accusation with foundation, he continued, was that Mr. Idigov had made a mistake in presenting himself to the Commission on Human Rights. After that, the Party had apologized about the mistake. It had also been granted permission to continue in the Commission on Human Rights. Therefore, he believed that a three-year suspension would be disproportionate. He would vote against the suspension.
The representative of Bolivia said that he was worried about the issue of substance. He would like the interested delegations to consider that point. What worried him was the distinction between the status of NGOs and that of political parties. Political parties had their own goals and attributions, and naturally they were involved in the politics of their countries. Non-governmental organizations also had their own arrangements. He worried that even in the Council NGOs were becoming mixed up with political parties.
He said it was not a problem of one Chechen violating rules -- it was an issue of substance. He was worried that the Council would try to undermine the system. It was necessary to return the problem to the NGOs Committee to determine the problem, if the organization in question was really an NGO or a political party.
The representative of Sierra Leone said that in the past couple of days he had seen serious allegations against the Transnational Radical Party. The position of his country on terrorism, which was one of the allegations by the Russian Federation, was well known: Sierra Leone opposed it. However, there were no details of what had transpired in the NGOs Committee.
He said the decision to be taken today concerned all Member States, for it was a procedural impropriety. The Party had not been given sufficient opportunity to present its case. The allegations against it had not been substantiated by evidence. Such impropriety flouted a fundamental principle of international justice. Every party should be able to present its case. He did not believe that the Transnational Radical Party had been given sufficient opportunity to do that. In this case, justice had not been carried out by the Committee on NGOs. His delegation would not support the text.
The representative of the Russian Federation expressed regret that a vote had been called for on the draft in question. He recalled that the decision had been taken by consensus in the Committee on NGOs. The Committee had clearly followed the criteria of due process as stated in the Committee’s report. In addition, the Committee had taken its decision after careful and comprehensive consideration of all aspects of the case, including the response of the Party and responses from its representatives. In that when it had withdrawn its original request for the withdrawal of the consultative status of the Party. The Party had also been given a chance to present its response.
The request for a vote undermined the authority of the NGOs Committee, displaying a certain lack of respect for that body, he said. In practice, there had been no cases when a consensus decision of a subsidiary body of the Economic and Social Council had been disputed. This created an unwelcome precedent. Also, the Transnational Radical Party was not an NGO in the true sense of that word, but a political party.
He said adherence to the principles of the Charter was being voted on today. It was known that the Transnational Radical Party was encouraging efforts directed against sovereignty and territorial integrity of his State, encouraging separatism. His country had provided additional evidence to that effect. The Transnational Radical Party was also continuing actions against Member States of the United Nations.
As for the matter of drugs, he said that the Party did not only dispute the provisions of the Anti-Drug Convention of the United Nations, but was conducting a campaign for liberalization of unlawful distribution of drugs. On the question of the violation of the rights of children, he said that the Party had fought against prohibition of child pornography on the Internet. Thus, in the upcoming vote, Members would have to say yes or no to that organization. In view of the facts, he would vote for the consensual decision achieved in the Committee on NGOs.
The representative of Cuba said that the Committee had agreed to suspend the NGO for a three-year period. That NGO, however, was not an NGO, but a political party in a specific region. That political party had exerted pressures on foreign ministers of the region. The Committee had had to reassess the technical analysis of the issue and the case had become politicized. The Transnational Radical Party was a political party and it was involved in using mechanisms of pressure that did not correspond to the work of an NGO.
The Party had accredited 74 representatives to attend the meeting in Geneva. What freedom did that organization defend when it tried to exert pressure based on money, and tried to impose its viewpoints on the United Nations? The Party had given itself the right of taking the Council back to cold war days. They were very intelligent in their manipulation campaign and had carried out much propaganda. To be able to send 74 people to Geneva, they must have ample resources. The Economic and Social Council should ratify the decision taken by the NGOs Committee. Political parties could not be given consultative status. It had been proven that the Party had violated elements in resolution 96/31, which guaranteed consultative statutes. Cuba would vote in favour of withdrawing consultative status from the Party.
The representative of China said that some delegations had left the impression that the NGOs Committee, in dealing with the Party, had had a procedural problem. First, that it had failed to provide an opportunity for the Party to clarify its position. Second, that it did not fully follow the relevant elements of resolution 96/31. Such a notion was entirely wrong. The Chinese delegation was a member of the NGOs Committee and had participated in the whole process of the deliberations. As far as he knew, the NGOs Committee had entirely followed the relevant procedures.
The Committee had given the party three opportunities to state its views, he said. The first had been in June when the Committee had invited representatives from the Party and had held a lengthy dialogue. The second opportunity had been in July. A special meeting had been convened, during which a discussion was held on the preliminary reply. The third time was in September, when a committee meeting was held again to discuss the Party’s reply. He believed that the NGOs Committee, in considering the issue, had fully followed the relevant provisions of resolution 96/31. He reiterated that the draft decision had been made by the Committee after a long discussion and solicitation of views. There had been no problems in terms of procedures.
The representative of Canada said that the Council should oppose the suspension of the Party. On a more general point, he was concerned with the undue extent to which the limited time and resources of the NGOs Committee and the Council had been taken up with in recent months with discussion on the perceived grievances of Member States. An outside observer might gain the impression that the Organization was under siege by NGOs. The more real danger related to the ability of intergovernmental bodies to relate effectively with representatives of civil society. He hoped that once the discussion was over, it would be possible to restore balance and perspective to discussion.
The NGOs Committee should give top priority to clearing up the backlog of applications and a determination to approach work in a manner consistent with the commitment made by leaders at the Millennium Summit to promote closer relations between the United Nations on the one hand, and the representatives of NGOs on the other. A good start would be to reject the suspension of the Party. It presented no threat to the United Nations or to its goals.
The representative of the United States said that the Party's representative had erred when he misrepresented himself at the beginning of his statement. He had acknowledged his error, however, and had apologized. The Party was critical, but called for a peaceful settlement of the conflict. While critical of the Russian Federation, the Party had not committed an act that violated the United Nation Charter. Her delegation had not found other accusations to have any basis in fact. The activities did not warrant suspension. She accepted the apology of the Party for its misrepresentation error and opposed any sanction.
The representative of Japan asked if the Council was dealing with general comments, or explanation of vote.
Vladimir Sotirov (Bulgaria), Acting Council President, said that explanations of vote were being presented.
The representative of Japan said that her delegation had carefully analysed all the information on the matter. It was unable to conclude that the Party was involved in any activities in violation of relevant resolutions. For that reason, her delegation would vote against the motion to suspend the consultative status of the Party.
The Council then rejected the text on the Transnational Radical Party by a vote of 20 in favour to 23 against, with 9 abstentions (Benin, Brazil, Fiji, Mauritius, Morocco, Pakistan, Rwanda, Suriname, Syria). (For details of the voting, see Annex II.)
Speaking after the vote, the representative of Mexico said that her delegation had meant to present its explanation before the vote, but she had been under the impression that general comments were being made. It was the practice of her delegation to respect the decisions of the Council. In this case, the Committee on NGOs had had time to analyse the information and formulate recommendations with proper justification. For that reason, her delegation had voted in favour of the draft.
The representative of Bolivia reiterated his country’s position that political parties were different from NGOs. In this case, the distinction had not been clarified. For that reason, his country had voted in favour of the draft.
The representative of Cuba said that the Council had made its decision on the proposal formulated by the Committee on NGOs. However, the very fact of the debate and the narrow margin by which the draft had been rejected was an important call for attention on the part of NGOs that their activities would be scrutinized. He supported the outcome of the vote. Cuba would be vigilant to the activities of the political party or organization in question in the future.
As a general statement, the representative of Turkey said that while his delegation was not a member of the Economic and Social Council, it was a member of the Committee on NGOs, which had made recommendations on the draft. He wanted to set the record straight on a couple of matters.
The statement that the Committee had violated procedure was incorrect, he said. He also wanted to clarify that the relevant resolution stated that if the status of the NGO was withdrawn, it would be given an opportunity to respond. For that reason, the Committee had taken its decision on the suspension or withdrawal first, and requested a response from the NGO in question afterwards. One delegation had clearly stated that the Transnational Radical Party had not been given an opportunity to respond. He opposed that statement. The Party had been given one full afternoon and one morning to respond.
The representative of Lesotho said that his country had intended to abstain in the vote on L.35. Due to a technical error, the vote against the draft had been recorded. He wanted to set the record straight.
Mr. Sotirov (Bulgaria), Acting President, said the Council would take note.
The representative of Algeria said that her delegation was a member of the Committee on NGOs and she wanted to clarify the situation on the procedures in that body. It was regrettable that some delegations had falsified the information given to the Council. The Committee on NGOs had followed all the procedures. It was not a court of law to judge the NGOs. It had granted consultative status to about 400 NGOs and had withdrawn it in a couple of cases. The Transnational Radical Party had been given ample opportunity to respond, and the Economic and Social Council should be aware of that fact. She hoped the results of the vote would make delegations seriously reflect on the matter.
The representative of the Sudan said that she had followed all other interventions and she regretted that the Council had not adopted the recommendation of the Committee on NGOs, which was an integral part of the Council. She also wanted to express surprise that interventions of some delegates had questioned the respect for the procedure in the Committee. She wanted to reaffirm that the Committee on NGOs had applied all established rules and procedures. The delegations who claimed that the Committee had violated the procedure had been present at the deliberations of the Committee, and she was surprised.
The Council then turned to draft decision III entitled “Resumed 2000 session of the Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations”. The Council was informed that there was agreement that the resumed session would now take place from 15 to 26 January 2001.
Draft decision III was then adopted without a vote.
The Council then adopted without a vote draft decision IV on the report of the Committee on NGOs on its 2000 session and its provisional agenda for the 2001 session.
The Council then began its consideration of draft resolution E/2000/L.37 on the follow-up to the twenty-third and twenty-fourth special sessions of the General Assembly.
Mr. BELINGA EBOUTOU (Cameron), Vice-President of the Council, informed delegates about the informal consultations on the draft, saying that the Council would decide on an exceptional basis and as an interim measure that those NGOs which had participated in those two sessions would be also authorized to participate in the meetings of the Commissions on Social Development and on the Status of Women.
The representative of Algeria said that the title of the draft as it presently appeared did not really reflect its contents. The title should concern the participation of NGOs in the meetings.
The representative of Pakistan said that the point raised by the representative of Algeria was valid. The last line of the draft contained incorrect information and should be changed. He offered another version of the title, but said that if there was a consensus on the suggestion by Algeria, he would go along with it.
The representative of Cuba said that she had followed closely the deliberations on the issue. Provided they already had consultative status, NGOs could take part in the forthcoming meetings. In view of the serious work done by the Committee on NGOs, a positive decision should be taken, giving the NGOs in question a chance to attend the forthcoming meetings. In order to avoid any mistakes in the future, it would be a good idea to suspend a meeting to work on the text. As for the title, it was better to concentrate on the contents of the meeting.
Mr. BELINGA EBOUTOU (Cameroon), Council Vice-President, said that the concerns expressed had been covered by the introduction he had made. The point was to authorize as an exception some NGOs to take part in the work of the Commission on the Status of Women and the Commission on Sustainable Development. The NGOs that would be authorized to take part were the same ones that had taken part in “Beijing + 5” or “Copenhagen + 5”. There was no need to suspend the meeting to find the right wording. He agreed with the representative of Algeria on the title. He could also agree with the representative of Pakistan.
The representative of India said that the point was that the title referred to one agenda item. There were other agenda items. Would they participate in only one agenda item? The proposal made by Algeria covered that concern.
The representative of the Sudan said that her delegation had listened carefully to the introduction of the draft decision on the participation of NGOs. It was important to facilitate the procedures for NGOs so that they could participate in the work of both the Commission on the Status of Women and the Commission on Sustainable Development. For those reasons, she supported the proposals made by Algeria regarding the draft decision.
The representative of Japan said that, in terms of the title, her delegation was flexible. Her preference was to follow the example of the previous decision. Looking at wording from the previous decision, she was again flexible, but to keep one month would present confusion for those applying for status. The intention of the drafter of the decision should be to clarify the time period.
Mr. SOTIROV (Bulgaria), Acting President, asked if the Council would agree with the proposals put forward by Algeria and Pakistan.
The representative of Cuba said that her delegation thought it would be useful for NGOs if the Council was to take a final decision. She agreed with Algeria's proposal. The end of the title should include a reference to resolution 96/31. This would help avoid confusion.
The representative of Syria said that he would go along with consensus. He drew the Council's attention to a mistake in document E/2000/88. The Arabic version referred to the representative of China. The English text referred to the representative of Chile, not China.
The representative of China said that they had just noticed the problem.
The Council then adopted the decision with the title "participation of NGOs in the forty-fifth session of the Commission on the Status of Women and the thirty-ninth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development". The last sentence would read, "applying for consultative status, in accordance with Council resolution 96/31 of 25 July 1996”.
Elections
The Council elected Austria to the Commission on Science for Technology for Development by acclamation for a four-year period beginning on 1 January 2001.
Regarding the remaining vacancies to that body, the Council decided to further postpone the election of two members from the African States, three members from the Asian States, and two members from the Western European and Other States.
With respect to elections to the Intergovernmental Working Group of Experts on International Standards of Accounting and Reporting, several vacancies remained to be filled, including four members from the African States, two members from the Eastern European States and two members from the Latin America and Caribbean States. All of the vacancies were for a term of three years, beginning on 1 January 2001.
Mr. SOTIROV (Bulgaria) informed the Council that Hungary had been endorsed by the Eastern European States Group to fill one of the vacant seats in that Group.
The Council then elected Hungary by acclamation and decided to further postpone elections for the remaining vacancies.
Turning to elections to the Programme Coordination Board of the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS), Mr. SOTIROV said that vacancies remained to be filled for one member of the Latin American and Caribbean States and one member from the Western European and Other States.
Mr. SOTIROV informed the Council that the Bahamas had been endorsed by the Latin America and Caribbean States Group to fill that Group's vacancy. The Council elected the Bahamas by acclamation for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 2001. It also decided to postpone the election of one member from Western European and Other States.
(annexes follow)
Economic and Social Council Press Release ECOSOC/5934 46th Meeting (PM) 18 October 2000
ANNEX I
Vote on Suspension of Status of International Council of Association for Peace in Continents
The draft resolution on the suspension of consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the International Council of the Association for Peace in the Continents (document E/2000/L.35) was adopted by a recorded vote of 25 in favour to 18 against, with 9 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, China, Colombia, Comoros, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Honduras, Indonesia, Mexico, Oman, Pakistan, Russian Federation, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Suriname, Syria, Venezuela, Viet Nam.
Against: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Lesotho, Norway, Poland, Portugal, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Benin, Brazil, Costa Rica, Fiji, India, Mauritius, Morocco, New Zealand, Sierra Leone.
Absent: Cameroon, Guinea-Bissau.
(END OF ANNEX I)
ANNEX II
Vote on Suspension of Status of Transnational Radical Party
The draft resolution on the suspension of consultative status with the Economic and Social Council of the Transnational Radical Party (document E/2000/L.36) was not adopted, by a recorded vote of 20 in favour to 23 against, with 9 abstentions, as follows:
In favour: Algeria, Angola, Bahrain, Belarus, Bolivia, China, Colombia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Oman, Russian Federation, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, Venezuela, Viet Nam.
Against: Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Honduras, Italy, Japan, Lesotho, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Sierra Leone, United Kingdom, United States.
Abstain: Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Fiji, Mauritius, Morocco, Pakistan, Rwanda, Suriname.
Absent: Cameroon, Guinea-Bissau.
* *** *