At its resumed fifth-ninth, in April 2005, the General Assembly encouraged the Panel of Counsel to increase outreach activities and requested the Secretary-General to consider the inclusion of travel costs in section 28A, Office of the Under-Secretary-General for Management, of the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2006-2007, for that purpose and decided that activities requested in the resolution that would give rise to additional resource requirements during the biennium 2004-2005 should be included in the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2006-2007 (resolution 59/283).
The appeals process
At its fifty-fifth session, in 2001, under the item entitled "Human resources management", the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to report to it on an annual basis on the outcome of the work of the Joint Appeals Board (resolution 55/258, sect. XI, para. 5).
At its resumed fifty-seventh session, in April 2003, under the item entitled "Administration of justice at the United Nations", the General Assembly welcomed the Secretary-General's initiative in requesting the Office of Internal Oversight Services to conduct a management review of the appeals process, requested the Secretary-General to ensure that the management review covered particular areas of the appeals process and requested the Secretary-General to develop an effective system of personal responsibility and accountability to recover financial losses to the Organization caused by management irregularities, wrongful actions or gross negligence of officials of the United Nations Secretariat that resulted in judgements of the Administrative Tribunal, and to report thereon to the Assembly at its fifty-eighth session (resolution 57/307).
No advance documentation is expected
At its resumed fifty-ninth session, in April 2005, the General Assembly decided that the time limits recommended by the Office of Internal Oversight Services would be mandatory within the appeals process once adequate capacity was in place, and no later than 1 January 2006; requested the Secretary-General to proceed with the transfer of the responsibility for formulating decisions on appeals from the Department of Management of the Secretariat to the Office of the Secretary-General; decided to amend staff rule 111.2 (a) to provide that staff wishing to appeal an administrative decision should submit to the executive head of their department, office, fund or programme a copy of the letter addressed to the Secretary-General requesting a review of the case; decided that the Secretary-General should form a panel of external and independent experts to consider redesigning the system of administration of justice; also decided that the panel should be composed of a pre-eminent judge or former judge with administrative law experience, an expert in alternative dispute resolution methods, a leading legal academic in international law, a person with senior management and administrative experience in an international organization and a person with United Nations field experience; and decided that the panel should start its functions no later than 1 February 2006 and should submit its findings and recommendations by the end of July 2006 (resolution 59/283).
Issues pertaining to the United Nations Administrative Tribunal
At its fifty-seventh session, the General Assembly considered this matter (resolution 57/307).
At its fifty-eighth session, the General Assembly, desiring to assist the United Nations Administrative Tribunal in carrying out its future work as effectively as possible, decided to amend article 3, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal with effect from 1 January 2004 (resolution 58/87).
At its resumed fifty-ninth session, in April 2005, the General Assembly decided to amend article 3, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal, with effect from 1 January 2006, to provide that the Tribunal should be composed of seven members, no two of whom may be nationals of the same State and that members should possess judicial experience in the field of administrative law or its equivalent within their national jurisdiction and that only three members should sit in any particular case (resolution 59/283).