Programme budget implications of draft resolution A/79/L.28/Rev.1 – Request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of Israel in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, other international organizations and third States

To learn more about all ICJ cases related to the question of Palestine, click here to visit the dedicated webpage.

17 December 2024

Seventy-ninth session

Agenda items 139 and 123

Proposed programme budget for 2025

Strengthening of the United Nations system

Request for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the obligations of Israel in relation to the presence and activities of the United Nations, other international organizations and third States

Programme budget implications of draft resolution A/79/L.28/Rev.1

Report of the Fifth Committee

Rapporteur: Mr. Elaye-Djibril Yacin Abdillahi (Djibouti)

1. At its 20th and 21st meetings, on 16 and 17 December 2024, the Fifth Committee, pursuant to rule 153 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, considered the statement submitted by the Secretary-General on the programme budget implications of draft resolution A/79/L.28/Rev.1 (A/C.5/79/29/Rev.1) and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions (A/79/7/Add.37). The statements and comments made in the course of the Fifth Committee’s consideration of this question are reflected in the relevant summary records.[1]
2. At its 21st meeting, on 17 December, the Committee had before it a draft decision (A/C.5/79/L.3), submitted by the Chair of the Committee on the basis of informal consultations coordinated by the representative of Guinea.
3. At the same meeting, the representative of Israel made a statement and requested a separate recorded vote on the draft decision contained in document A/C.5/79/L.3.
4. Also at the same meeting, the Committee adopted the draft decision contained in document A/C.5/79/L.3 by a recorded vote of 111 to 4, with 8 abstentions (see para. 5). The voting was as follows:

In favour:

Albania, Algeria, Andorra, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belgium, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Cyprus, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Finland, France, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lebanon, Libya, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Mexico, Monaco, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Nepal, Netherlands (Kingdom of the), New Zealand, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Sweden, Switzerland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Tunisia, Türkiye, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, Viet Nam, Yemen.

Against:

Argentina, Hungary, Israel, Paraguay.

Abstaining:

Cameroon, Czechia, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Lithuania, Republic of Moldova, Romania, United States of America.

Decision of the Fifth Committee

5. The Fifth Committee, having considered the statement of programme budget implications submitted by the Secretary-General[2] and the related report of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions,[3] decides to inform the General Assembly that, should it adopt draft resolution A/79/L.28/Rev.1, additional resource requirements amounting to 298,900 United States dollars would be required for 2025 under section 7, International Court of Justice, of the proposed programme budget for 2025, representing a charge against the contingency fund, together with an amount of 19,000 dollars under section 36, Staff assessment, to be offset by an equivalent amount under income section 1, Income from staff assessment.
   

   ---

         [1] A/C.5/79/SR.20 and A/C.5/79/SR.21.

      [2] A/C.5/79/29/Rev.1.

      [3] A/79/7/Add.37.