UNITED
NATIONS 
GENERAL
ASSEMBLY
REMARKS BY
THE
PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY
H.E. MR. JULIAN R. HUNTE FOLLOWING
THE ADOPTION OF
DRAFT RESOLUTION A/58/L.66
FURTHER
MEASURES FOR THE REVITALIZATION OF THE WORK OF THE GENERAL
ASSEMBLY
UNITED
NATIONS HEADQUARTERS
1 JULY 2004
Excellencies,
distinguished delegates,
Now
that we have adopted the resolution contained in document
A/58/L.66, "Further measures for the revitalization
of the work of the General Assembly" by consensus,
allow me to reflect briefly on the progressive steps
we took leading to our important decision today.
When
we adopted resolution 58/126 on "Revitalization
of the work of the General Assembly" on 19 December
2003, we generally acknowledged that we had significantly
advanced the process of reforming and revitalizing the
Assembly. Our initiative, it was generally agreed, was
a major stride towards ensuring that the Assembly maintained
its position and continued to receive recognition as
the chief deliberative, policy-making and representative
organ of the United Nations.
We
sought to achieve two basic objectives in resolution
58/126. We initiated a number of specific, self-enabling
actions, for example, improving the way the General
Assembly does business, strengthening the Office of
the President; and enhancing the relationship between
three of the Charter's principal organs - the General
Assembly, the Security Council and the Economic and
Social Council. I am pleased to advise this Assembly
that these provisions are already being implemented,
to good effect.
We also established a framework of principles to increase
the efficiency and effectiveness of the Assembly in
resolution 58/126. Towards this end, we commissioned
a number of reports to lay the groundwork for additional,
concrete actions for the further revitalization of the
Assembly. Now, after eleven meetings of the General
Committee held in open-ended informal session and numerous
consultations and discussions at all levels, we have
successfully concluded this phase of our revitalization
work.
But
our work is not done by the adoption of the resolution
in document A/58/L.66 - it is just beginning. If this
Assembly does not faithfully implement the resolution,
then much of our work would have been in vain. All the
matters addressed in the resolution bear centrally on
our revitalization efforts. There are a number of important
aspects of the resolution, however, to which I would
wish to especially refer.
Beginning
at the Fifty-ninth session, the agenda of the General
Assembly will be organized under a number of headings.
The resolution states the purpose for taking this action
- to give a sense of structure to the work of the Assembly;
to achieve a better presentation of the issues and challenges
with which the Assembly deals; and to make the work
of the Assembly more accessible. In short, the headings
will serve as a defining principle that will allow Member
States and the general public, for the first time, to
appreciate at a glance the issues before the General
Assembly.
Let
me also refer to the resolution's provisions concerning
the content of the agenda of the plenary. The customary
agenda of the Plenary currently has 126 items. Of these,
47 are items dealing with organizational issues, elections,
appointments and the consideration of reports of Charter
organs. Therefore, we cannot adjust these items.
The
Assembly determines how the remaining 79 items are considered.
Of these 79 items, we have agreed that some 23, representing
about 25%, should be adjusted, either through transfer
to Main Committees, biennialization, triannialization,
suspension from automatic consideration and in a few
cases, elimination. The Assembly has gone far in making
these decisions that touch on so many agenda items -
further, I am told - than it has ever gone before. The
purpose of this far-reaching decision is to contribute
to the important work of rationalizing the Assembly's
agenda, in which all must remain engaged.
Indeed,
the resolution recognizes that the task of rationalizing
the General Assembly's customary agenda is far from
over. Therefore, the Assembly commits itself to "monitor
the effects of the adjustments and to continue to make
efforts to further streamline the agenda of the plenary."
The Main Committees are also enjoined to contribute
to this effort and to "give specific attention
to the rationalization of their future agendas by biennialization,
triennialization, clustering and the elimination of
items and make recommendations to the plenary of the
Assembly for its decisions by 1April 2005."
Should
the provisions of the resolution's section on Practices
and Working Methods of the Main Committees be implemented
faithfully, the door would be opened to transforming
the way they conduct business, to the benefit of the
revitalization of the work of the General Assembly.
Let me draw attention, especially, to three of the provisions
concerning the work of the Main Committees that are
likely to have particular impact.
The
first provision to which I would wish to refer is that
calling on all Main Committees to adopt a provisional
programme of work at the end of session for the next
session, to help future sessions plan, prepare, organize
and review documentation requirements related to the
programme. This is more than a technical provision -
now all Main Committee would be required to look ahead
to the next session of the General Assembly, and in
particular, at the reporting implications of their decisions.
Main
Committees tend to take discrete decisions on the issues
before them. Consequently, the Committees and indeed,
the General Assembly, has no means by which to overview
the collective implications of the outcomes of Committees
and Plenary. The review now required by Main Committees
might reveal overlaps in the decisions and might show
where requests for reports might be unduly onerous for
the Secretariat to prepare and for delegations to absorb.
The
second provision to which I would wish to refer calls
for the introduction of "Question Time" formats
in all Main Committees. The purpose of this decision
is to enable a dynamic and candid exchange with heads
of departments and offices, representatives of the Secretary-General
and Special Rapporteurs. This provision would introduce
greater transparency in the relationship between the
Secretariat and Member States.
As
you would know, much of my time in recent years has
been dedicated to the work of the United Nations - as
Permanent Representative of St Lucia, Minister of External
Affairs of St Lucia, and since September 2003, as President
of the United Nations General Assembly. I must say that
over the years I have begun to notice disquiet on the
part of Member States, stemming from a sense that they
are not always being kept fully informed about developments,
or that proposals on matters of critical concerns are
put before them on which adequate consultations may
not have taken place. I would not wish to comment on
the merit of these concerns. It is my view, however
that the device of " Question Time'" should
allow for candid questioning and equally candid responses
that would help address any concerns, including on the
matter of transparency.
The
third provision to which I would wish to refer is that
which mandates that interactive debates and panel discussions
shall be utilized or expanded by all Main Committees,
beginning with the Fifty-ninth Session. Some Main Committees
already make good use of this method of work, to good
effect. I believe that these mechanisms to be invaluable
tools for ensuring important interchanges about policy
developments, and as with question time, to engage in
dynamic and candid discussions, unconstrained by diplomatic
nuances. Interactive debates and panel discussions are
an important means, I believe, of keeping the United
Nations abreast of new issues and ideas.
The
section of the resolution on the General Committee also
represents an important institutional development. The
provision of resolution 58/126 that the General Committee
should, "play the leading role in advising the
General Assembly on the efficient organization, coordination
and management of its work" has been a guiding
principle for my Presidency from the beginning. While
taking cognizance that its composition was such that
Member States were unwilling to grant it recognition
as the "Bureau" of the Plenary, I have sought
to make the General Committee a more effective body.
My view, in this regard, is that inadequacies, real
and perceived in the General Committee could be overcome,
working within the exiting Rules of Procedure of the
Assembly.
I
am sure we all agree that the General Committee has,
over the last ten months, become a more dynamic institutional
tool. It was through the General Committee, for example,
that the practice of informal briefings for delegations
on topical issues has been put in place. You will recall
that during my presidency, briefings have been held
on the Budget, Staff Security and NEPAD. The resolution
we have adopted recognizes these briefings as "a
positive experience", and encourages the General
Committee to continue to hold them. Importantly, it
has been through the General Committee, meeting in open-ended
informal session that the deliberations on the content
of this resolution have taken place, and as result,
we have a consensus text.
This
new, more dynamic approach to the General Committee
is to continue, in line with the provisions of the resolution.
Six concrete responsibilities are given to the General
Committee. The most novel is the provision which calls
on the Secretary-General to present to the General Committee
and thorough it, to the General Assembly, the proposed
programme of work of the forthcoming Assembly with relevant,
related information on the status of documentation.
This is a potentially far-reaching provision, as it
will provide delegations with a tool to better plan
and programme the work of the Assembly on an annual
basis.
Currently,
Member States do not begin to consider a programme of
work for the Assembly until the third week in September,
and this does not include a programme of work for the
plenary. Moreover, the work programme of each Main Committee
is considered separately and independently - coordination
is not an issue in this exercise. I would encourage
the Secretariat to give careful consideration to the
preparation of this newly-mandated report so that member
states will have a thorough product before them. My
understanding of this provision is that the first report
of this nature will be presented to the General Committee
in July 2004; I look forward to receiving that report.
Let
me refer to one further issue I consider to be of critical
importance, and which we have been discussing since
last year. It is the proposal to reorder the work of
the General Assembly by scheduling it over two substantive
periods of the session. This proposal has the strong
support of many delegations, particularly those from
small states.
I
continue to hold the view that this proposal has merit
for all delegations, in that it will permit them to
better appreciate, better focus and therefore better
act on the extraordinary number of issues that the Assembly
seeks to address in the September to December period
every year. I think it important to point out that in
this four month period last year, we considered 276
items and sub-items, had submitted to us 347 reports
totalling 5,500 pages, and adopted 287 resolutions.
It is not clear to me why we should continue to operate
in this fashion.
At
its Fifty-ninth session, when the General Assembly resumes
consideration of the proposal for scheduling the work
of the Assembly over two substantive periods, Member
States would have more time to consider this important
proposal.
I trust that at that time, delegations would give more
measured and favourable consideration to this issue.
Excellencies,
distinguished delegates:
We
have come a long way in our efforts to revitalize the
General Assembly during this Fifty-eighth Session of
the General Assembly. Working together, we have achieved
a result which we can all be justifiably pleased about.
Let me here recognize all those who worked tirelessly
to show, beyond doubt, that we are serious about revitalization
of our General Assembly.
I
am most appreciative to my Facilitators - the Permanent
Representatives of Algeria, H.E. Mr Abdallah Baali,
Jamaica, H.E. Mr Stafford Neil, Netherlands, H.E. Mr
Dirk van den Berg, Singapore, H.E. Mr. Kishore Mahbubani,
Slovenia H.E. Mr Roman Kirn and South Africa, H.E. Mr
Dumisani Kumalo; to the various groups and delegations
that provided input into the process; and to the Department
for General Assembly and Conference Management that
has provided excellent background information and support
for the process. I would be remiss if I did not also
thank my Chef de Cabinet, Ambassador A. Missouri Sherman-Peter
and Senior Adviser for United Nations Reform, Mr Miles
Stoby. I thank you all.
Excellencies,
distinguished delegates, I thank you for you attention.
