A/40/PV.121 General Assembly

It is my sad duty to announce the death of the Governor-General and former Prime Minister of Mauritius, His Excellency Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam. On behalf of the Gener a1 Assembly I convey to the Gover nment and the peopl e of Mauritius, and to the family of the Governor-General, our profound condolences in th e ir ber eavement. I request representatives to stand and observe a minute of s Hence in tr ibute to !:he memory of Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam. The members of the General Assembly observed a minute of silence.

I call upon the representative of Maur i tius. Mr. RAMIOGUN (Maur itius) : I shall convey the condolences of the member s of !:he General Assenb1y to the Government and the people of Mauritius and to the members of the family.

I shall now call on those representativas who wish to explain their vote before the voting on draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l. May I remind delegations that, in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes and should be made by delegations from their seats. Mr. MACIEL (Brazil): The Brazilian delegation has studied very carefully the draft resolution which is before the Assembly and has participated in some of the consultations held during recent weeks that have resulted in the present text. Naturally, some improvements have been made on the original version and the text is now virtually acceptable. However, we still have some deep misgiVings about the text itself: the language employed tends to imply that the United Nations capacity to attain the purposes and implement the principles of the Charter, including therefore the implementation of decisions taken by appropriate United Nations bodies, depends on the increased efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the institution. We know perfectly well that, although improvements are always desirable, the overall lack of United Nations effectiveness does not result from shortcomings in the Organization's administration and management but, rather, from the existence of conflicting and sometimes irreconcilable goals and national policies of Member States. In this respect, the draft resolution's text is misleading. This bias Is reflected in the definition of the terms of reference of the intergovernmental experts in operative paragraph 2 (a), whereby the General Assembly would entrust (Mr. Macie1, Brazil) that group with a very, very difficult task by citing political, economic and social issues. It should also be made very clear that it is the responsibility of equally sovereign Member States to strengthen the effectiveness of the United Nations in dealing with political, economic and social issues. I must say that I am happy to be able to say here that the representative of Japan has made that point in practically the same words, and that is of great help to us. I am aware, of course, that what is now being proposed is the creation of an intergovernmental group of experts, which is an important improvement over previous texts, and that the final decision will be in the hands of the General Assembly. , With those understandings in mind, the Brazilian Government will be ready and willing to co-operate towards the successful outcome of the group's work within the framework of the Charter and in accordance with the principle of the sovereign equality of states. Mr. ALZAMORA (Peru) (interpretation from Spanish): Our position on draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.1 stems from the following considerations. Forty years after the creation of the united Nations it is appropriate to consider the structure and functioning of the Organization to see whether in today's world they are both efficient and fair, whether they meet the purposes, principles and goals of the Charter, and whether they guarantee the independence of the Organization and equality among Members. We are the first to want both an efficient and a fair structure, but we believe that this momentum to improve our organization should stem from our own efforts and determination, not from outside or in the form of coercion. Therefore, this momentum should be aimed at making our organization not only more efficient To achieve but also more equitable, fairer, more independent and more democratic. that objective, it is essential that the managerial posts in the administration and the executive posts in the specialized agencies should not be filled exclusive1y and permanently by anyone group of States, because that violates the principle of geographical representation. Nor must anyone country have a larger financial participation in the running of the Organization proportionally than any other, to the extent that it can use that larger participation as a tool to jeopardize the Organization's freedom to act, influence its decisions or claim privileges. More than a wealthy and large Organization, we need it to be independent and dignified. If by being wealthier the Organization will be tied and dependent, then let it not be so richJ and, if by being larger it will be more vulnerable and weak, then 1et it not be so large. The main problem is therefore not the administrative efficiency of the Organization but, rather, its effectiveness. The prerequisite for the latter is not only the political will of the great Powers, over which we have no control, but also the democratization of the exercise of political and economic power within tne United Nations - and it is our duty to ensure that that is done in order to put it at the service of all Member States, the majority of which did not even exist or were not constituted as States when its structure and functioning were elaborated and, hence, did not participate in that process. In any case, we do not want administrative efficiency aloneJ we also want efficiency in the co-ordination of action within the United Nations system. And that is also being undermined owing to the lack of consistency we note today in tne activities of the specialized agencies of the system. Thus, we see that while the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations is fighting against hunger, the International Monetary Fund imposes policies that bring about hunger in many parts of the worldJ while the United Nations Industrial Development Organization promotes industrialization, the practices of the General Agreement on Tariffs and (Mr. A1zamora, Peru) Trade are discouraging industrialization in the third world; while the united Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization promotes education, the World Bank is ,abandoning the granting of loans in that particular area; and so on. The broad mandate being given to the Intergovernmental Group of Experts, enshrined in the principles of the Charter and specifically based on the sovereign equality of states and of geographical representation in filling posts - the only principles specifically referred to in the text - is directed at improving the efficiency of the United Nations in fUlfilling its political, economic and social goals. It is on the basis of that understanding with regard to the responsibility of the Group which is being established and its handling of the problems listed that my delegation will support the draft resolution. Mr. MARIN BOSCH (Mexico) (interpretation from Spanish): We listened with particular attention to the introduction a few minutes ago by the representative of Japan of draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.1, entitled "Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations", which its sponsors have submitted under agenda item 39, entitled "Commemo,ration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations". From the very outset we have had special interest in the initiative undertaken by Japan calling for the establishment of what today is called a Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts to consider the administrative and financial matters of the organization, with a view to improving the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations. We appreciate the efforts undertaken by the delegation of Japan to find through informal consultations a text that would receive the broadest possible support in the General Assembly. In the course of those consultations various (Mr. Marin Bosch, Mexico) delegations expressed doubts as to the advisability of including this matter under the item relating to the commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. Everyone is aware of the work done within the framework of the Preparatory Committee presided over by Ambassador Lusaka and the intense efforts undertaken by Ambassador Krishnan, who was entrusted with overseeing the preparation of a draft declaration. However, that work was not successful due to lack of agreement in the Drafting GrouPJ as will be recalled, attempts were made far into 24 October, the day on which, according to resolution ~9/l6l A, the commemorative session of the fortieth anniversary of the organization was to conclude. On the other hand, it must also be pointed out that the sponsors of draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l received a number of proposals aimed at enhancing the text, giving greater detail to the mandate of the Group of Intergovernmental Experts, and making clearer the purpose of the exercise it would undertake next year. Nevertheless, the changes made to the original text did not dispel the doubts of some delegations. That is why we are making this statement. The delegation of Mexico will go along with the decision to be taken by the General Assembly, though we have serious misgivings with regard to some aspects of the draft resolution. In the first place, we believe the exercise to be undertaken by the Group of Intergovernmental Exports should be limited to the purely administrative and.financial aspects of the functioning of the United Nations, leaving aside political issues. Owing to the very nature of its task, the Group's mandate cannot be extended beyond a year. It is difficult for us to understand the intent of the fourth preambular paragraph, operative paragraph 1 and the latter part of operative paragraph 2 (a). We believe that one cannot establish a link between the improved administrative and (Mr. Marin Bosch, Mexico) and purposes of the Charter. How can it be claimed that more efficient \ organization of the budgetary system would contribute to the solution of the major problems that confront the international ~ommunity? What is required is that the political will of states go beyond mere rhetoric and be demonstrated in tangible acts. Secondly, we believe that any measure recommended by the Group to improve the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the united Nations must have - and I would stress this - the unanimous support of the intergovernmental experts to be appointed. Furthermore, the Group's work must be based on a series of criteria of which my delegation would like to emphasize the , following two: first, we must be certain that any proposal relating to administrative issues of our Organization would not jeopardize the principle of equal sovereignty of all its Members; and, secondly, it is imperative to ensure that the independence and effectiveness of the united Nations are not in any way undermined as a result of pressure, financial or otherwise - this in conformity with the letter and the spirit of tl'le Charter, particularly its Article 100. Thirdly, the delegation of Mexico would like to emphasize the content of the eighth preambular paragraph of draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.1. We reiterate our sincere gratitude for the efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the Secretariat he heads. From the very beginning of his term he has made every effort to improve the Secretariat's functioning, and the results have been positive and encouraging. Finally, we share the concern expressed by many delegations that the General Assembly, having failed in its efforts to draw up a declaration on the fortieth . annniversary of the Organization, should now adopt a document that is limited to the administrative and financial aspects of the Organization and leaves aside those issues of a political, economic and social character which are given a prominent place in the agenda of this session of the General Assembly. We are concerned that this decision is being taken under agenda item 39, entitled "Commemoration of thi! fortieth anniversary of the United Nations", when, according to our understanding of resolution 39/161 A, consideration of that item was concluded on 24 October laa Hr. AL-ASHTAL (Democratic Yemen) (interpretation from Arabic): I should like"to use this opportunity to make the following comments on draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l. First, the delegation of Democratic Yemen is astonished at the speed with which this draft resolution has been introduced directly in the plenary Assembly at this commemorative session. The General Assembly has faced many problems at this session, and it has spent much time, especially during the commemorative meetings, discussing them. Even so, we note that the draft resolution before us has been submitted rather speedily. Secondly, we find str~nge the nature of the consultations that have taken place. Some of those consultations have been selective and have in general not followed the course customary in United Nations practice. We in the Arab Group, for example, did not discuss this topic; nor was it discussed as extensively as it should have been within the Group of 77. Thirdly, we know that a preparatory Committee was established to prepare for the fortieth session and to submit a declaration celebrating this commemorative session. Instead of the United Nations adopting such a declaration for the commemorative session, we now have before us a draft resolution of an administrative and financial nature submitted under the agenda item on the commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations. We should like to place on record our deep regret at the General Assembly's failure to agree on the declaration prepared by the Preparatory Committee for the Fortieth Anniversary. (Mr.A1-Ashta1, Democratic Yemen) At the same time, we are surprised that the substitute for such a politically important declaration should be the document now before us, which deals with the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the united Nations. We believe that to emphasize administrative and financial aspects is to underestimate the political questions the Organization must address. We also find it strange that the draft resolution was submitted directly, to the General Assembly before being introduced in the Preparatory Committee for extensive discussion, as is the case with other subjects. We wonder at this special treatment of a draft resolution of so important a nature, in this special commemorative 8e~sion of the General Assembly, the fortieth session. The delegation of Democratic Yemen supports financial and administrative reform of the United Nations. We do not believe, however, that the political problems before the Organization are the result of financial and administrative problems. Everyone has stated that the failure to evince political will and to reach political solutions, as well as the failure to heed the resolutions of the United Nations, are the factors responsible for the problems besetting the Organization. We support in principle administrative and financial reform. But we believe that the proposed group of high-level intergovernmental experts must take geographic.al distribution into account and must reflect the equal sovereignty of representatives in expressing their views within the framework of the principles of the United Nations Charter. Mr. MARBUBANI (Singapore): The fortieth session of the General Assembly is drawing to a close. We have had a successful commemorative session, with the participation of many Heads of State or Government. Unfortunately, there has been no declaration, thus reflecting the continuing lack of political will which weakens t.his Organization. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) I therefore share the views of my colleagues who stress that the real weakness of the United Nations results from lack of political will of its Member States to implement its resolutions and decisions. Until its resolutions and decisions are respected, the united Nations will continue to be perceived as being weak and ineffective. This problem, however, cannot be solved by the United Nations. It can only be solved by the States Members themselves, who should implement the resolutions and decisions we adopt each year. There is, however, another dimension to the problems of this Organization, and that dimension concerns its administrative and financial efficiency. There is, unfortunately, a widespread perception that the united Nations is not well managed, a perception conveyed in the story of a young boy who visits the United Nations for the first time and asks his father, "Father, how many people work at the United Nations?" His father replies: "About half." This story is undoubtedly fictitious, but it conveys a certain perception of the United Nations. I am also aware that that perception of administrative and financial inefficiencies is sometimes highlighted by· countries whose real intention is to undermine the political and economic effectiveness of the organization. Nonetheless, wh~le there may be some ill-intentioned critics of the United Nations, there are others who believe that the interests of the majority of Member States will be served by strengthening the administrative and financial functioning of the Organization. The United Nations, like any other human institution, will languish if it has only uncritical lovers or unloving critics. Those who support the Organization, as Singapore does, should also want to see it strengthened through a review of its administrative and financial practices. That is why we support draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.I. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) Unfortunately, however, there have been many misperceptions of this draft resolution. The first misperception is that any such review, if it leads to financial savings, will benefit only the major contributor states, a perception based on the assumption that the major contributors have the most to gain from any financial savings. This is not true. If you consider contributions as the percentage of the total income, the biggest contributors are the small states. A simple analogy will help to explain my point. Take a man who earns $1,000 a month. For him, a $10 contribution means nothing. But for a man who earns only '10 a month - and there are many in the third world who do - $10 means his entire in~me. On this criterion, the United Nations Department of Public Information has listed 20 countries whose contributions are the largest percentage of their income, and by this criterion, the top 20 contributors are: Guinea-Bissau, the Gambia, the Congo, Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Yemen, Liberia, Norway, Maldives, Dominica, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Grenada, Botswana, Denmark, Sweden, Cape Verde, Seychelles, Togo, Swaziland, the Netherlands and Equatorial Guinea. It is therefore the small States that will benefit from any financial savings at the United Nations. The second misperception of this draft resol~tion is that it is a Trojan horse introduced by one country to undermine the fundamental principles of the Charter and to introduce weighted voting. We believe this will not happen. The draft resolution reaffirms the Charter. It also reaffirms the principles of sovereign equality to which a small State like Singapore is fundamentally committed. The draft resolution also calls for a geographically diverse group of experts to study the United Nations, and such a diverse group could never agree to any proposal that would undermine the Charter. More importantly, while some of the small States like Singapore find the principle of sovereign equality enshrined in the Charter to be precious, the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council also find (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) their privileged position in the present Charter to be equally precious. I suspect that they will oppose any move to alter the Charter even more strongly than the small States could ever do. The final point I wish to make is somewhat delicate. This Organization has 159 Member states, a large majority of which are very small states, like Singapore. For a very long time we have heard complaints that the principle of sovereign equality, which means that decisions are adopted by the principle of one country, one vote, has led to the domination of the United Nations by the small States that make up the vast majority of its membership. There have even been suggestions that it is the small states that are responsible for the weak state of , Having served here for only 15 months, I can, however, say that the Organization. I have noticed this to be one of the biggest misrepresentations of how this Organization functions. In practical terms, most small States, because they have small delegations, are not represented in the critical informal consultations that create the resolutions and decisions we adopt. Quite often, the small States have had no ability to have any real impact on the huge agenda of this Organization or to contribute to the ways and means of improving the implementation of that agenda. This review, however, of the financial and administrative functions of the united Nations, affords the small States an opportunity to study all the administrative and financial functions of the Organization. That review should, ~ne hopes, give us an independent assessment of what is really going on in the Organization, much of which any individual small State cannot stUdy. I would therefore like to appeal to you, Mr. President, and through you to the regional groups to ensure that when those 18 members are chosen every effort is made to see to it that the small States are well represented in the Group and that it should not be comprised only of experts from the usual large or middle-sized States. (Mr. Mahbubani, Singapore) Singapore firmly believes that it is the small States which have the most to lose if the prestige and credibility of the United Nations is diminished in any way. For a long time we have assumed that this Organization will be permanent. History has taught us that no institution is permanent. Institutions only survive with constant care and attention. Since the intent of this draft resolution is to improve the administrative and finanoial efficiency of the united Nations, and since any such improvement can only help to rebuild the prestige and credibility of this Organization, Singapore will support the draft resolution and calls upon other small States to do so. Mr. EL-FATTAL (Syrian Arab Republic) (interpretation from Arabic): The delegation of the Syrian Arab Republic supports in principle initiatives to improve the administrative and financial matters of the United Nations in accordance with the purposes and objectives of the Charter. Securing a high-level group, known for its integrity, as the staff of the United Nations is a unanimous national demand of all States. In this context, we should like to make the following remarks on the draft resolution in document A/40/L.42/Rev.1. First, the establishment of an intergovernmental group of experts must be I based on a fair and equitable geographic and pOlitic~l distribution. It must essentially take into consideration the necessity of fair representation of the Group of 77. Secondly, we would have preferred the mandate of the intergovernmental group to be established under paragraph 2 of the draft resolution to be more clearly defined in order to dispel any ambiguity or doubts that might lead to interpretations contrary to the purposes of the draft resolution. Thirdly, in view of the importance of this particular topic, it would have been preferable had the draft resolution been circulated at an earlier stage in the session, thus enabling us in our capitals to study the SUbject more fully and a1so enabling the regional and national groups in the United Nations to examine the topic and hold in-depth consultations. Fourthly, the draft resolution must be implemented in a way that is compatible with the purposes of international co-operation for development and the establishment of more equitable economic relations which must take place through co-ordination within the United Nations. We hope that the draft resolution will not lead to diminishing the role or the activities of the Organization in economic, social and other fields as a result of administrative and financial changes. Mr. SHIHABI (Saudi Arabia): First I want to express my appreciation for the efforts exerted by the Ambassador of Japan and the other sponsors of the draft resolution in trying to draft a document acceptable to everyone. All of us agree with them on the need for improving the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations, not only on the fortieth anniversary, but every year. I must join previous speakers who mentioned the failure of the Assembly to reach consensus on a declaration for the fortieth anniversary as a sign of the 1ack of political will which could weaken the United Nations and the Assembly. The 1ack of political will is the main complaint to which the Assembly must one day address itself. To revert to the draft resolution, we would naturally have preferred to have had more time to go over it with our experts and with our Governments. But having reached the stage today when it is being put to a vote, we shall of course support (Mr. Shihabi, Saudi Arabia) it, in the hope that the mandate of the Group entrusted with this review will be strictly limited to what we understand the draft resolution to mean, and that the , words "in dealing with political, economic and social issues" should not mean an extension of the mandate of the Group beyond purely administrative and financial functions. I associate myself with many of the representatives who have spoken before me and expressed the hope that in selecting the experts of the Group, Mr. President, you will See to it that these forebodings are groundless. Mr. SAEMALA (Solomon Islands): This year the United Nations has reached the age of 40, an age when a human being would have developed a greater sense of confidence. Unfortunately we cannot say the same of our Organization which in its fortieth anniversary year has been subjected to severe questioning by many world leaders. It is therefore not in the least improper for the Organization to do some soul-searching and stock-taking. Perhaps it should stop and ask the question: "Where are we going, and are we going in the best possible direction?". I am sure that the draft resolution before us is aimed at asking exactly that question, so that in seeking an answer sincere and positive attempts will be made in the direction of greater efficiency, economy and achievement. One of the most severe criticisms levelled at the United Nations is that 80 per cent of its budget is attributed to personnel costs. That, in any language, is staggering and disproportionate, considering that among the objectives of the Organization is the fundin9 of projects to alleviate hunger and suffering and to raise standards of living so as to restore human dignity to the millions of misery-stricken people. I should like to dwell a little on the subject of personnel costs. In my delegation's opinion, not only have salary levels grown out of all proportion to reality; the associated pensions of retirin9 staff are in our view also astronomical. Because our manpower resources are very limited, it was only very lately that my delegation learned with horror that, as proposed by the Joint Staff Pension Fund Board, an Under-Secretary-Genera1 retir ing at the age of 60 at the end' of this year, after 35 years of service, could be eligible for an annual pension of Sus 91,000. The figure of SUS 91,000 as an annual pension speaks for itself and X need not elaborate. In fact, it might be more than my country's contribution. Another cause for concern is the increasing number of conferences and seminars. It seems that one just has to name it and the United Nations will organize it, with a team of experts, consultants, and all. Apart from the costs for experts, conference-servicing costs are increasing also. Anything between $250,000 and $500,000 for the latter is no departure from normal. One asks what all the multifarious conferences achieve. For instance, what, one might ask, is the objective of holding a conference on Namibia or apartheid in (Mr. Saema1a, Solomon Islands) Europe? We all abhor apartheid, and we have adopted countless resolutions on Namibia. But. could not those conference dollars be better spent alleviating the misery of people who are victims of apartheid in South Africa and of oppression in Namibia, instead of enriching the coffers of airlines and hotel chains? My delegation hopes that the review team will seriously examine the snowballing effect that is a common failure of almost everything the United Nations begins. Year after year, increasing bUdgetary provision is made for a particular item even though it is no longer as urgent or as necessary as it was when first proposed. For instance, while the number of colonies and trusteeships has fallen drastically, budgetary provision for these items has not decreased in any real or appreciable terms. Those are just a few examples of numerous such items in the bUdget. How much better the world would be, and how much improved the credibility of the United Nations would be if more funds were spent on actual projects related to raising the social and economic conditions of people, instead of ever-eJrowing expenditures being devoted to conferences and seminars. Having said that, I have a slight problem with operative paragraph 3 of draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l - and I. must express my disappointment that I received the document only this morning. In operative paragraph 3 of the English version - this may be out of order but I should like to seek clarification in this regard - the word "thebetween the words -possibleand "membersgives me some concern and gives rise to some questions. As it stands this paragraph reads: -Requests the President of the General Assembly, in consultation with the regional groups, to appoint as soon as possible the members of the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts with due regard to equitable and geographical distribution". (A/40/L.42/Rev.l, p. 2) My question concerns the definite article, "the". It seems as though the members have already been predetermined; I would have thought that, in line with the next operative paragraph, a qualifying phrase might have made it more clear. But the way I read it in the English version, we are trying to decide on members that have already been appointed. I should like some clarification on that point.

In response to the representative of the Solomon Islands I would give the following clarification. Since no resolution has yet been adopted, the President has not yet consulted with anyone. When the resolution has been adopted, then, in the normal course of events, there will take place as soon as possible a meeting of the chairmen of the regional groups - it will take place after this morning's meeting if possible - at which they will be advised of the need to convene their groups in the light of the resolution and to decide who shall represent them. I believe that, in accordance with united Nations practice, at the outset equitable geographical distribution should be ensured. I would assure the representative of the Solomon Islands that no member has yet been chosen for inclusion in the Group ~ince no resolution has yet been adopted and no consultations have taken place. Mr. SAEMALA (Solomon Islands): I thank you very much indeed for the clarification, Mr. President, but I still have diffi~ulty with this formulation. Perhaps the wording could be changed in such a way as to make it clearer and to bring it into line with the other paragraphs. Perhaps we could say: " ••• to appoint as soon as possible the proposed number of members of the Group". I am very sorry if this proposal is out of order, but such a change would make me more comfortable with the text.

I thank the representative of the Solomon Islands for his statement, but I cannot go any further than I have already ihdicated, since for me the Spanish version of the text I am following is correct. We have heard the last speaker wishing to make a statement in exp1anation of vote before the voting. The Assembly will now take a decision on draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l. The programme bUdget implications of the draft resolution are contained in the report of the Fifth Committee, document A/40/l063• May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to adopt draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l? Draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l was adopted (resolution 40/237).

I shall now call upon delegations wishing to speak in explanation of vote after the voting. Mr. BEAUGE (Argentina) (interpretation from Spanish): Argentina has always been prepared, as it is today, to co-operate in every possible way to improve the efficiency of the United Nations. It is for that reason that we have supported draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l. However, my delegation would like to make a few brief comments. First of all, we regret that under agenda item 39, "Commemoration of the fortieth anniversary of the United Nations", it was not possible to make progress on substantive political issues by adopting a solemn declaration. Notwithstanding the importanc~ of administrative and financial matters, it is essential to stress the fact that the main purpose of the Organization is to seek solutions for the political, economic and social problems facing the international community by identifying such problems and reaffirming the political will of Member States to negotiate and to find compromise solutions to them. We would have preferred, therefore, to see the text just adopted submitted under another agenda item. Secondly, an Organization such as ours needs constant co-operation and agreement amongst all its Members. My delegation believes that the purpose underlying draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l will not be achieved without the full agreement and co-operation of all States Members of the Organization, within the framework of the Charter. Mr. BWAKlRA (Burundi) (interpretation from French): I should like, at the outset, to perform a sad duty on behalf of the Group of African countries, and on behalf of my own country, to express to the delegation of Mauritius our most sincere condolences on the death of the former Prime Minister of that country, His Excellency Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam. The passing of this statesman is a loss not only for Mauritius but also for all of Africa. Indeed, Africa will always remem~r the important role Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam played in strengthening African unity when he assumed the responsibilities of Chairman of the Organization of African Unity in 1976-1977. We request the delegation of Mauritius to be good enough to convey to his family our profound condolences and sympathy. On behalf of the African Group I should also like to express to the delegation of the Philippines our profound condolences on the death of General Carlos Romulo. We are very aware of the important role he played as a high-level and very skilled and competent diplomat, one of the founders of the United Nations, in the service of strengthening the Organizations. His death is a loss not only to his country, the Philippines, but also to the entire international community. Draft resolution A/40/L.42/Rev.l has been the subject of in-depth study by the African Group of delegations, on whose behalf it is my honour to speak. we undertook negotiations with the sponsors and with representatives of the other regional groups in order to ensure that the interests of Africa and the principles of the United Nations Charter were duly reflected in the draft resolution. AS I stated in the course of informal consUltations, the Group of African States in the united Nations welcomed the initiative of the Japanese delegation in submittin9 a draft resolution aimed at considering the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations, since the African Group is also concerned with the effectiveness of the United Nations and with enhancing its role. Forty years after its creation, the Organization is in need of a study of its working methods and of its effectiveness in order to improve its functioning and to strengthen its role in maintaining international peace and security and promoting international co-operat ion and development. The African delegations to the United Nations have actively contributed to th" negotiations on the draft resolution just adopted. That participation was inspired by a desire to create a conunon ground for actions aimed at strengthening our Organization. However, the consideration of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the Uni ted Nations is part of a more comprehensive study of the Organization that should be carr ied out. Such a consideration is only one aspect of the overall problems facing the United Nations. It seems clear that there is a correlation between the administrative and financial problems of the United Nations and the other problems facing the Organization relating to the rationalization of ~ts working methods, its decision-making processes and its ability to implement its own resolutions and decisions, which frequently remain dead letters. Problems of management lead necessar ily to political, economic and social problems. Participants in the fortieth commemorative session of the Organization have appropr iately stressed that fact. Nonetheless, the Afr ican delegations have made concessions in order to achieve a compromise, one that I might deser ibe as a positive one. , In spite ,of the goodwill of the African States in achieving a consensus, we are obliged, however, to note and to admit that the draft resolution just adopted was submitted in .a difficult context, one marked by the syndrome of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural organization, where problems we believed were uniquely financial and administrative ultimately led to an extreme politicization and to a situation likely gravely to endanger that international organization, one that has proved itself in its own particular fields of education, science and culture. Africa and the third world in general still need that organization. (Mr. Bwakira, Burundi) In the Fifth Committee the debates were characterized by statements from certain delegations which expressed concerns about the budgetary functioning of the united Nations and its specialized agencies - I have in mind mention even in passing of weighted voting in the United Nations. All studies to be undertaken under this resolution - which we have just adopted - should be done in strict accordance with the principles and provisions of the Charter. The African group considers that any reform should take into account the principle of sovereign equality of all States in accordance with para9raph I of Article 18 of the Charter, namely, that -Each Member of the General Assembly shall have one vote-. The Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts set up by this resolution will submit a report to the General Assembly, and it goes without saying that all Member States reserve the right to discuss it as appropriate. Equitable geographical distribution with regard to the 18 members of this group will be in keeping with established practice, and it is understood that the African States will have five members. The Group of African States is ready to co-operate fully with you, Mr. President, in the appointment, as soon as possible, of the members of the Group of Intergovernmental Experts from Africa. We hope that the work of this Group will not prevent the other organs and subsidiary bodies of the United Nations from continuing their work under the mandates given to them by the General Assembly. Moreover, it is important to stress that the Group of Intergovernmental Experts must accomplish its mission in strict respect of the authority and international character of the Office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations. In conclusion, we consider that the Group to be established by the resolution will contribute effectively to the study of the administrative and finanoial functioning of the Organization. The Group of African States believes the resolution to be a proposal that was submitted to the General Assembly as a dynamic compromise. Its adoption is additional proof - if such proof were needed - of the will and determination of the African delegations to strengthen the role of the United Nations and to give it sound management. I should like to stress once again that the Group of Intergovernmental Experts must in its task remain within the mandate given to it by the General Assembly and carry out its work in strict respect of the principles and provisions of the Charter and of the principle of sovereign equality of all Members. Lastly, we are pleased, with the adoption of this resolution by consensus. Mr. VELAZCo-SAN JOSE (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): The draft resolution which we have just adopted has travelled a long road of intense negotiations from the time it was introduced by the delegation of Japan. It could not be otherwise, since the substance of the question is of direct interest to all Member States. 1 should like at the outset to take this opportunity to congratulate the delegation of Japan for having taken this initiative aimed at improving the administrative and financial functioning of our Organization. I should also like to congratulate the other 'sponsors and all those who in one way or another have worked assiduously in order to achieve this finished product reflecting the interests of us all. Much has been said on various aspects of this proposal. I shall therefore confine ~self to a few additional comments on the work of the Group of High-level Intergovernmental Experts, whose establishment we have just approved. As the title of the reSOlution indicates, the mandate of the Group is clearly defined. That is my delegation's understanding -. and I believe it is a general, if not unanimous, • understanding - that the work of the Group will focus exclusively on administrative (Mr. Velazco-San Jose, Cuba) and financial matters and not on other specific questions entrusted to other bodies of the United Nations. My delegation also understands that the work of the Group should not hinder or overlap the work of other bodies of the United Nations. Its work should complement the work of these bodies and be general in nature. Thus we hope that questions such as the scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the Organization will not be considered by the Group of Experts, since they fall under the competence of qualified experts in other bodies, such as, in this case, the Committee on Contributions. In order for the recommendations and conclusions of the Group to enjoy general support in the General Assembly, we believe that they must be adopted following general agreement within the Group itself. Moreover, we should like the record to indicate that my delegation applauds the work of the secretary-General as chief administrator of the Organization. Thus, we consider that the setting up of the Group is not to be construed as implicit or explicit criticism of the work carried out under his mandate. On the contrary, in our view this Group is being established in order to help the Secretary-General carry out his functions more effectively and to strengthen his central role in the administration and management of the Organization. I cannot conclude without repeating our congratulations to the delegation of Japan for this major initiative. 1 also congratulate everyone on having successfully reached a consensus acceptable to all. Having been adopted, the draft resolution is no longer merely a Japanese text but a manifestation of the will of the General Assembly. We thank all participants in the negotiating process for having displayed flexibility and understanding, without which it would not have been possible to reach this general agreement. Mr. LUPlNACCI (Uruguay) (interpretation from Spanish): My delegation endorses the ideas that have just been expressed regarding the draft resOlution the Assembly has just adopted. This testifies to the unanimous will of all Member states of the United Nations to improve and consolidate the administrative efficiency of the Organization. This goal of efficiency is fundamental to an organization such as ours, since it has such lofty goals and such broad functions, That is why we support the resolution which has just been adopted, it being understood that the Group will be established in accordance with the provisions of the Charter, in keeping with its purposes and principles and within its legal and institutional framework. That means that it is our understanding that the work of the Group of Experts will have to follow those principles without infringing on areas of competence of any other body under the Charter. The Group should thus seek to identify the means and infrastructure adequate for a more effective functioning of the Organization. That is the interpretation my delegation also gives to paragraph 2 (a) of the resolution: "To conduct a thorough review of the administrative and financial matters of the United Nations, with a view to identifying measures for further improving the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the united Nations, which would contribute to strengthening the effectiveness of the United Nations in dealing with political, economic and social issues." (A/40/L.42/Rev.l) My delegation I s understanding of the resolution is that, in order to deal with Group in this direction affecting other functions or goals and purposes of the Organization. I would conclude by expressing my gratitude to the delegation of Japan for its efforts in submitting this draft resolution, the adoption of which manifests the unanimous will of the Members of the United Nations to make the Organization function better anu to increase its effectiveness. Though such a sentiment is already expressed in the resolution we have adopted, we should like to thank the Secretary-General for the work he has done and continues to do. He may count on our full support.

The Assembly has concluded its consideration of item 39 of the agenda.

I first invite members, to turn their attention to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 17 (a), entitled -Appointment of members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions· CA/40/68l/Add.2). The Fifth Committee recommends in paragraph 4 of its report that the General Assembly should appoint the following persons as members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1986: Mr. Ahmad Fathi Al-Masri; Mr. Traian Chebeleu; Mr. C. S. M. Mselle, Mr. Oluseye D. Oduyemi, and Mr. Christopher R. Thomas. In the same paragraph the Fifth Committee also recommends that the General Assembly should appoint Mr. Richard Nygard as a member of the Advisory Committee for a two-year term beginning on 1 January 1986. May I,take it that the Assembly adopts those recommendations? The recommendations were adopted.

We come now to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 17 Cb), entitled wAppointment of members of the Committee on Contributions- (A/40/l044). In paragraph 6 of that report the Pifth Committee recommends the appointment of the following members for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1986: Mr. Andrzej Abraszewski; Mr. John Pox; Mr. Elias M. C. Kazembe, Mr. Yasuo Noguchi; Mr. Adnan Yonis; and Mr. Assen Iliev Zlatanov. In the same paragraph, the Pifth Committee also recommends that the General Assembly should appoint Mr. Gilberto Vergne Saboia as a member of the Committee on Contributions for a one-year term beginning on 1 January 1986. May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to adopt those reoommendations? The recommendations were adopted.

I now invite members to turn their attention to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 17 (c), entitled "Appointment of a member of the Board of Auditors" (A/40/l04S). In paragraph 5 of that report the Fifth Committee recommends that the General Assembly should appoint the Senior President of the Audit Office of France as a IIember of the United Nations Board of Auditors for a three-year term beginning on 1 July 1986. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt this recommendation? The recommendations was adopted.

May I now invite members to turn their attention to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 17 (d), entitled ·Confirmation of the appointment of members of the Investments Committee" (A/40/l046). The Fifth Committee recommends in paragraph 4 of its report that the General Assembly should confirm the appointment by the secretary-General of the following persons as members of the Investments Committee for a three-year term beginning on 1 January 1986: Mr. Aloysio de Andrade FariaJ Mr. B. K. Nehru; and Mr. Stanislaw Raczkowski. May I take it that the Assembly adopts that recommendation? The recommendation was adopted.

We cone now to the report of the Fifth Committee dealing with the appointment of members of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, under agenda item 17 (e). In paragraph 5 of document A/40/l047, the Committee recommends that the General Assembly should appoint Mr. Roger Pinto, Mr. Ahmed Osman and Mr. Samarendranath Sen as members of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 1986. (The president) May I.consider that the AElsenDly adopts that recommendation? The recommendation was adopted. The PR&9IDENT (interpretation from Spanish): Next we turn to the report of the Pifth Committee on agenda item 17 (f), concerning the appointment of menbers of the International Civil service Commission (A/40/1048). In paragraph 10 of its report the Fifth Committf:!e recommends that the General AS8elllbly should appoint Hr. Gen iobi Akatani, Mr. Michel Auchere, Mrs. Claudia Cooley, Mr. Antalio Fonseca Pimentel and Mr. Alexia Stephanou as aembers of the International Civil Service Commission for a fOur-year term of office beginning on 1 January 1986. It also recollDDends that the General Assembly should appoint Mrs. Turkia Daddah, Mr. Karel Rouska and Mr. Andre Xavier Pirson for a one-year ter. of office ~eginning on 1 January 1986. May I take it that the General Assenbly aPl'rOlTes these recommendations? The recommendations were adopted. The PR&9IDENT (interpretation from Spanish); Finally, we turn to the report of the FifthCOl\IIIittee on agenda item 17 (g), which relates to the appointllent of melllbers and alternate meJ'lt)ers of the United Nations Staff Pension In paragraph 5 of document A/40/1049, the Fifth Committee recommends the appointllent of Mr. Sol Kuttner, Mr. Mado Majo11 and Mr. Nichael G. Okeyo as ..lIbers, and Mr. Jobst Rolborn, Mr. Miguel A. Ortega and Mr. Yukio Takasu as alternate llenDers, of the united Nations Staff Pension Committee for a three-year ter. beginning on 1 January 1986. Make I take it that the General Assembly decides to adopt that recommendation? The reco~endation was adopted.

We have concluded our oonsideration of agenda item 17 (a), (b), (c), (d), (e), (f) and (g). The Assembly will now consider the relX>rt of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 114, entitled "Financial reports and audited financial statements, and reports of the Board of Auditor s" (A/40/789). The Assembly will now take a decision on the recommendation of the Fifth Commi t tee contained in para gra ph 5 0 fits report. In paragraph 5 the Conunittee recommends the adoption of a draft resolution, entitled "Financial reports and audited financial statements, and reports of the Board of Auditor sft. The Fifth Committee adopted that dr aft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assenb1y wishes to do the same? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 40/238).

We have now concluded our consideration of agenda item 114. We now turn now to the relX>rt of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 115, <:oncerning the progranune budget for the biennium 1984-1985 (A/40/l058). The Assembly will now take decisions on the two draft resolutions and the two draft decisions recommended by the Fi fth Committee in paragraph s 7 and 8 of its report. I shall first put to the vote draft resolutions A and B, which concern the progranune budget for the biennium 1984-1985 and the final income estimates for the biennium 1984-1985. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria Bahamas Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Beli:z:e, Benin, , , k' Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Bur lna Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, Demcra tic Kampuchea, Demcra tic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Repub~ic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Moza!ltlique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden~ Syrian Arab Republic, Th~iland, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, united Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe • Aga inst: Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Czechoslovaki.a, German Demcratic Republic, Germany, Federal Republic of, Hungary, Japan, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet SOcialist Republic, union of Soviet Socialist Republics, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United States of America Abs ta in ing : Australia, Belgium, France, Israel, Italy, Luxenbourg, Nether lands, Por tugal, Romania, Spain Draft resolutions A and B were adopted by 125 votes to 12, with 10 abstentions (resolutions 40/239 A and B).

Next we turn to draft decision I, enti tied ·Standards of accomrooda tion for air tr avel ". The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision I without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft decision I was adopted.

Finally, we come to draft decision 11, which concerns the "Use of experts, consultants and participants in ad hoc expert qroups". The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision 11 without objection. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt it? Draft decision 11 was adopted.

We have concluded our oonsideration of agenda item 115. I now invite members to turn their attention to the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 117, entitled "programme planning" (A/40/l059). The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resol~tion recommended by , the Fifth Committee in paragraph 45 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted that draft resolution without objection. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to adopt the draft resolution? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 40/240) •

The General Assenbly has thus ooncluded its consideration of agenda item 117. The As.senbly will now consider the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 118, enti tled "Financial emergency of the United Nations" (A/40/l060). The Assent>ly will now take a decision on the recommendations contained in paragraph 11 of the report of the Fifth Committee. • Draft resolutions I A and I B deal with the financial emergency of the United Na tions. The Fifth Committee adopted draft resolution I A without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly decides to do likewise? Draft resolution 1 A was adopted (resolution 40/241 A) •

We now turn to draft resolution I B. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In failour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cameroon, canada, Cape Verde, Central Afr ican Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, eypr us, Democratic Kampuchea, Democra tic Yemen, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, r-bzambique, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, SOlomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, SWeden, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Toga, Trinidad and Tobago, Tun is ia, Turkey, Uganda, Uni ted Arab Em irates, Uni ted Kingdom of Great Br ita in and Northern I reland, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, zimbabWe , Aga inst: Bulgar ia, Byelorussian Sov iet SOcialist Republic, CUba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Mongolia, Poland, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of soviet SOcial ist Republics, United States of America, viet Nam Abstaining: Japan, Romania Draft resolution 1 B was adopted by 132 votes to 12, with 2 abstentions (resolution 40/241 B). *

Draft resolution II, concerning the "Issue of special postage stamps", was adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do the same? Draft resolution 11 was adopted (resolution 40/242).

We have thus concluded our consideration of agenda item 118. The General Assembly will now consider the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 121, relating to the pattern of conferences (A/40/847). *Subsequently the delegation of Afghanistan advised the Secretariat that it had intended to vote against. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 10 of its report • The report of the Fifth Committee on the programme budget implications of that draft resolution is contained in document A/40/974. A recorded vote has been requested on section I of the draft resolution. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Afghanistan, Algeria, Angola, Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belize, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, BUlgaria, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Byelorussian Soviet SOcialist Republic, Cameroon, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cuba, Cyprus, CzechoslOQakia, Democratic Kampuchea, Democratic Yemen, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equator ial Gu inea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, Gabon, Gambia, German Democratic Republic, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Guyana, Honduras, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Ireland, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, lok:>ngolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Nepal, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Ph ilippines, Poland, Qatar, Roman ia, Rwanda, sa int wcia, Sa int Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and Principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, TIJgo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, Ukrainian SOviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist RepUblics, United Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen, Yugoslavia, Za ire, zanb ia, Zimbabwe A.ga lnst: Un i ted Sta tes of ArRer ica Absta in ing: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmar k, France, Germany, Federal Republic of, Grenada, Iceland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Sweden, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Section I of the draft resolution was adopted by 131 votes to 1, with 17 abs ten t ions.

We turn now to the draft resolution as a whole. The Fifth Committee adopted this draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly also wishes to do so? The draft resolution as a whole was adopted (resolution 40/243).

The Assembly has concluded its consideration of agenda item 121. We shall consider next the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 124, entitled "United Nations common system". That report is contained in document A/40/l061. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted that draft resolution without objection. May I take it that the Assembly also wishes to adopt it? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 40/244).

We have now concluded our consideration of agenda item 124. The Assembly will consider next the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda item 125, entitled "United Nations pension system". That report is contained in document A/40/l057. We shall now take decisions on the two recommendations by the Fifth Committee contained, respectively, in paragraphs 8 and 9 of its report. The draft resolution contained in paragraph 8 is entitled "Report of the united Nations Joint Staff Pension Board". The Fifth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to adopt this draft resolution? The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 40/245). The PRESlPENT (interpretation from Spanish): The draft decision contained in parag~aph 9 of the Fifth Committee's report deals with the investments of the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. This draft decision was adopted by the Fifth Committee without objection. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to adopt it? The draft decision was adopted.

We have thus concluded our consideration of agenda item 125. The Assembly will now consider the report of the Fifth Committee on agenda items 126 (b) and (c), which relate to the financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon and the review of the rates of reimbursement to the Governments of troop-contributing States. That report is contained in document A/40/l037. The draft resolutions recommended by the Fifth Committee are contained in paragrah B of its report. I put to the vote first draft resolution I A. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Benin, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican RepUblic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, portugal, Qatar, Romania, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Sao Tome and 'principe, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, In favour: Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, united States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: Afghanistan, Albania, Bulgaria, Byelorussian soviet Socialist Republic, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Mongolia, Poland, Syrian Arab Republic, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Viet Nam Abstaining: Democratic Yemen, Iraq, Maldives, Yemen Draft resolution I A was adopted by 124 votes to 15, with 4 abstentions (resolution 40/246 A).

I now put to the vote draft resolution I B. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. In favour: Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia, Zaire, Zambia, Zimbabwe Against: A~ghanistan, Albania, Bulgaria, Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Mongolia, (Syrian Arab Republic, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of soviet Socialist Republics, Viet Nam Abstaining: Democratic Yemen, Iraq, Maldives, Romania, Yemen Draft resolution I B was adopted by 122 votes to 14, with 5 abstentions (resolution 40/246 B) *.

The Assembly will now vote on draft resolution II. A recorded vote has been requested. A recorded vote was taken. Antigua and Barbuda, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Burkina Faso, Burma, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Central African Republic, Chad, Chile, China, Colombia, Congo, Costa Rica, Cyprus, Democratic Kampuchea, Denmark, Djibouti, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Equatorial Guinea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Federal Republic of, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Guyana, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Ivory Coast, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Liberia, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malawi, Malaysia, Malta, Mauritania, Mauritius, Mexico, Morocco, Nepal, Netherlands, New zealand, Nicaragua, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Rwanda, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Somalia, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Suriname, swaziland, Sweden, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, uganda, united Arab Emirates, United Republic of Tanzania, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Yugoslavia, Zaire, zambia, zimbabwe In favour: Afghanistan, Albania, BUlgaria, Byelorussian soviet socialist Republic, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, German Democratic Republic, Hungary, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Mongolia, Syrian Arab Republic, Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, Union of soviet Socialist Republics, Viet Nam Against: Algeria, Benin, Democratic Yemen, Iraq, Maldives, Romania, Yemen Abstaining: Draft resolution II was adopted by 120 votes to 14, with 7 abstentions (resolut ion 40/247). *Subsequently, the delegation of Poland advised the Secretariat that it had intended to vote against.

I call on the representative of Democratic Yemen, who wishes to speak in explanation of vote. Mr. MURAD (Democratic Yemen) (interpretation from Arabic): My delegation abstained in the vote on the draft resolutions contained in document A/40/1037, on the financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. Those draft resolutions have financial implications, which my delegation believes the aggressor - Israel - should bear. We cannot allow the united Nations to reward the aggressor by bearing the consequences of its aggression against Lebanon. The United Nations has condemned that aggression and called for the withdrawal of the Israeli occupation forces immediately and unconditionally. I am referring to Security Council resolutions 508 (1982) and 509 (1982), which were adopted unanimously. Until Israel ends its aggression against Lebanon and implements the relevant General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, we believe that this aggressor - Israel' - must bear the consequences of its aggression.

The Assembly has now concluded its consideration of agenda items 126 (b) and (c). The meeting rose at 1 p.m.