A/55/PV.103 General Assembly

The General Assembly will now consider the reports of the Fifth Committee on agenda items 115, 116, 116 and 117, 116 and 123, 117, 122, 123, 126, 129, 130 (a), 132 to 137, 138 (a) and (b), 140, 143, 144, 148, 150, 152, 153 (a), 167, 169 and 176. I request the Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee, Mr. Eduardo Manuel da Fonseca Fernandes Ramos of Portugal, to introduce the reports of the Fifth Committee in one intervention. Mr. Ramos (Portugal), Rapporteur of the Fifth Committee: I have the honour today to present to the General Assembly the reports of the Fifth Committee pertaining to the second part of the resumed fifty-fifth session of the Committee. Regarding agenda item 115, entitled “Financial reports and audited financial statements, and reports of the Board of Auditors”, the report of the Fifth Committee is contained in document A/55/689/Add.2. In paragraph 6 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of a draft resolution which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. In connection with agenda item 116, entitled “Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations”, the Committee considered the report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on the inspection of the consolidation of technical support services in the Department of General Assembly Affairs and Conference Services, document A/55/803. The report of the Fifth Committee on this question is contained in document A/55/532/Add.3. In paragraph 7 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of two draft decisions. Draft decision I is entitled “Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services”, and draft decision II is entitled “Action taken on certain documents”. Both draft decisions were adopted by the Fifth Committee without a vote. Under the same agenda item, the Committee considered the report of the Joint Inspection Unit on the review of management and administration in the Registry of the International Court of Justice, document A/55/834. The report of the Fifth Committee on this question is contained in document A/55/982. In paragraph 6 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of one draft resolution, which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. The report on the delegation of authority for management of human and financial resources in the United Nations Secretariat and the report on the proposed regulations governing the status, basic rights and duties of officials other than Secretariat officials and experts on mission and regulations governing the status, basic rights and duties of the Secretary-General were also considered by the Committee under agenda item 123, entitled “Human resources management”. The report of the Committee on both questions is contained in document A/55/983. In paragraph 9 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of two draft decisions, which were adopted by the Committee without a vote. Continuing with agenda item 123, the report of the Committee on this item is contained in document A/55/890/Add.1. In paragraph 7 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of one draft resolution, which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. The report of the Committee regarding two questions relating to the programme budget for the biennium 2000-2001, under agenda item 117, is contained in document A/55/713/Add.2, particularly the question of the proposed programme budget outline for the biennium 2002-2003 for the International Trade Centre United Nations Conference for Trade and Development/World Trade Organization. In paragraph 7 of that report, the Committee recommends the adoption of one draft decision, which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. In connection with agenda item 126, “Report of the Secretary-General on the activities of the Office of Internal Oversight Services”, the report of the Committee is contained in document A/55/888/Add.1. In paragraph 6 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of one draft resolution, which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. Under agenda item 122, “Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations”, the report of the Committee is contained in document A/55/521/Add.3. In paragraph 5 of that report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of one draft decision, which was adopted by the Committee without a vote. Under agenda item 169, “Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of United Nations peacekeeping operations”, the report of the Committee is contained in document A/55/712/Add.1. In paragraph 4 of that report, the Committee agreed that no action be taken on the report of the Secretary- General on information on implementation of General Assembly resolutions 55/235 and 55/236. As to the 18 items on the financing of peacekeeping operations, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of 17 draft resolutions and one draft decision, which were adopted by the Committee without a vote, except for the draft resolution on the financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, which was adopted by the Committee with a recorded vote of 113 to 2 against. The report of the Committee on the financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, under agenda item 138 (b), is contained in document A/55/681/Add.1. As regards agenda item 153, “Administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of the United Nations peacekeeping operations”, the Committee considered a number of issues under this agenda item, such as the question of the support account for peacekeeping operations, the financing of the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi, the use of resident auditors, reformed procedures for determining reimbursement to Member States for contingent-owned equipment and troop costs, death and disability benefits, and the reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on peacekeeping operations. The report of the Committee on these issues is contained in document A/55/534/Add.2. In paragraph 19 of the report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of four draft resolutions on the question of the support account for peacekeeping operations; the financing of the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi; the use of resident auditors; and the question of reformed procedures for determining reimbursement to Member States for contingent-owned equipment and troop costs, which were adopted by the Committee without a vote. In paragraph 20 of the report, the Committee recommends to the General Assembly the adoption of two draft decisions, one on the reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services on peacekeeping operations and the other on death and disability benefits. Both draft decisions were adopted by the Committee without a vote.

If there is no proposal under rule 66 of the rules of procedure, I shall take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the reports of the Fifth Committee which are before the Assembly today.

Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote. The positions of delegations regarding the recommendations of the Fifth Committee have been made clear in the Committee and are reflected in the relevant official records. May I remind members that, under paragraph 7 of decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that “When the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting, a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once, i.e., either in the Committee or in plenary meeting unless that delegation’s vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee.” May I remind delegations that, also 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. Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of the Fifth Committee, I would like to advise representatives that we shall proceed to take decisions in the same manner as was done in the Fifth Committee, unless the Secretariat is notified otherwise. This means that where recorded or separate votes were taken, we will do the same. I should also hope that we may proceed to adopt without a vote those recommendations that were adopted without a vote in the Fifth Committee.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

I call on the representative of Pakistan for an explanation of vote.

We are happy that the Assembly is today adopting a number of draft resolutions and decisions that were so painstakingly finalized in the Fifth Committee, including the one just adopted. I am taking the floor to point out that the resolution just adopted, as well as many others that we seek to adopt today, contains the phrase “taking note of”. Our understanding of that term is that it is a neutral phrase that merely takes cognizance of the fact that a report has been presented. “Taking note of” does not accord either approval or disapproval. For years, the General Assembly has been taking note of reports on this understanding. We joined the consensus in the Fifth Committee on this clear understanding, which I believe is shared by all delegations. However, we wish to take this opportunity to point out our reservations on the misleading legal opinion given in document A/C.5/55/42. We are not convinced of the need for the Legal Counsel to have created this unnecessary and avoidable confusion on the meaning of this term. We hope that corrective action will be taken by the Legal Counsel and that this misleading opinion will be withdrawn.

We have thus concluded our consideration of agenda item 115.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft decisions recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We turn first to draft decision I, entitled “Report of the Office of Internal Oversight Services”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the General Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision II, entitled “Action taken on certain documents”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 116.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution, entitled “Report of the Joint Inspection Unit on the review of management and administration in the Registry of the International Court of Justice”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda items 116 and 117.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the two draft decisions recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 9 of its report. We turn first to draft decision I. The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision I, entitled “Report of the Joint Inspection Unit on the delegation of authority for management of human and financial resources in the United Nations Secretariat”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision II, entitled “Proposed regulations governing the status, basic rights and duties of officials other than Secretariat officials and experts on mission and regulations governing the status, basic rights and duties of the Secretary-General”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda items 116 and 123.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision, entitled “Outline of the proposed programme budget for the biennium 2002-2003 for the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO”, without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 117.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 5 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 122.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

I shall now give the floor to those representatives who wish to make statements in explanation of position.

The ongoing reform of United Nations human resources management is robust with today’s milestone consensus. It enables the Secretary-General to implement the results-based management programme under way for a more effective, efficient and accountable Organization. The most valuable asset for any organization is its staff, implementing its goals and objectives. In this Organization, the staff each day faces compelling yet daunting mandates, from peace and security to dealing with aggressors, from economic development to outer space law, and from hosting global conferences to answering email from schoolchildren. Member States are also aware that United Nations human resource management activities figure into about two thirds of its budgetary outlays. The Secretary-General’s ambitious human resources management proposals, ripened during the past eight months of Assembly consideration, bear fruit today for implementing the future’s compelling yet daunting mandates. The United Nations Office of Human Resources Management now may devote greater attention to human resources policy development and the monitoring of departmental human resources action plans. The United States delegation looks forward to the enhancement of human resources planning processes, the further simplification of rules and the development of guidelines and task tools for inclusion in the electronic version of the human resources handbook; the implementation of a new system of recruitment, placement and promotion; the introduction of mechanisms to stimulate the mobility of staff; further improvements in the internal justice system, including the appointment of an ombudsman; the integration of core and managerial competencies into recruitment, staff development and performance appraisal; the strengthening of the components of a career development system for all staff; and the further implementation of work-life policies. My delegation understands that this reform programme is slated to be fully operational by early 2002. We know that several issues will continue to be included on the agenda, such as contractual mechanisms, the under-representation of some nationalities, Administrative Tribunal matters and reviewing the International Civil Service Commission and the Joint Appeals Board. We look forward to the Secretary-General’s progress report to the fifty-seventh session of the General Assembly. Today’s consensus shows how the Secretariat and membership’s shared responsibilities for programme planning and resource stewardship were designed to work hand in hand so as to give body and soul to the principles of the United Nations Charter. It is what the head of the Office of Human Resources Management, Rafiah Salim, hailed as a historic decision in the annals of human resources management in this Organization. This was accomplished thanks to a desire by all to move forward, enhanced cooperation within the Fifth Committee and a growing trust between Member States and the Office of Human Resources Management. The United States delegation wishes to thank the Bureau of the Fifth Committee, Member State colleagues and the Secretariat for exemplary service towards the goal of a results-oriented and accountable United Nations.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of Australia, Canada and New Zealand in explanation of position following the adoption of the resolution of human resources management. This resolution endorses the Secretary-General’s vision of a more effective and dynamic staff that is able to meet the challenges faced by the United Nations. In addition, we believe that the changes made in this resolution will enhance the ability of the United Nations to attract and retain high-quality staff who are committed to the goals of the Organization. The resolution that we have just adopted is lengthy yet very clear in its endorsement of the Secretary-General’s reform package. It is also extremely clear with respect to the next steps that should be taken in the area of reform and the information that is necessary for the General Assembly to further pursue the modernization of the process. We recognize that this resolution is being adopted almost six months after the close of the main part of the fifty-fifth regular session of the General Assembly and within a few short months of the beginning of the fifty-sixth regular session. Therefore, it will be extremely difficult for the Secretary-General to meet some of the reporting deadlines outlined in the draft resolution. (spoke in English) Canada’s delegation is particularly pleased that this resolution will lead to major changes to the recruitment process, which will result in shorter recruitment times, especially for unplanned vacancies, a more objective selection process, and clear lines of authority and responsibility for making hiring decisions. The section on mobility of staff is a clear recognition by the Secretary-General and Member States that this is no longer simply a Headquarters- based Organization. Movement of staff within and between duty stations will enhance not only their career prospects but also effectiveness and cooperation within divisions and departments, regional commissions and in field duty stations. Canada’s delegation would like to congratulate Mr. Aizaz Chowdhry of Pakistan for his hard work and dedication in coordinating this resolution. His impartiality, candour and confidence in the process are a major reason we were able to adopt the resolution today. Finally, we wish to sincerely thank all of the members of the Secretariat who helped us in our deliberations on this agenda item. We the representatives of the Member States have now completed our work on this issue. However, the task of implementing the reform is just beginning, and we wish the Secretariat every success in this crucial phase.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union, the Central and Eastern European countries associated with the European Union — Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia — and the associated countries Cyprus, Turkey and Malta, as well as the European Free Trade Association country member of the European Economic Area, Norway, align themselves with this statement. It is with considerable satisfaction that we have adopted the resolution on human resources management. The negotiations were both lengthy and difficult, but, thanks to the willingness to compromise and the flexibility shown by all delegations, a consensus resolution was found. The final outcome is indeed a vote of confidence in the Secretary-General’s vision, to echo the words of the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Management, Ms. Rafiah Salim. Human resources management reform is a determining factor in the continued improvement of United Nations programmes and of their practical effects, and it will improve the Organization’s ability to attract and retain highly qualified staff. The resolution will, inter alia, increase mobility in the Secretariat, shorten the time of recruitment both in the Secretariat and in peacekeeping missions, provide for real delegation of authority to programme managers and ensure the development of a culture of continuous learning, in which the United Nations staff college will play a key role. With respect to the General Service to Professional examinations, the European Union fully endorses the understanding shared by all delegations and clearly expressed by the coordinator of the informal consultations on this item prior to the adoption of the draft resolution. The delicate balance now achieved enables us to limit the effects of over- representation while at the same time preserving career development opportunities for a proportion of the most qualified General Service staff. I will now conclude by adding some words of thanks. Normally, of course, this would be done at the last formal meeting of the Committee, but the perhaps rather embarrassing truth is that we were not optimistic enough to believe that we could actually finish our negotiations on time — which we did. Thus, we were not fully prepared for that joyful occasion and made only a very short statement at the last formal meeting of the Committee. The successful outcome of our deliberations could not have been reached without the tireless efforts of our coordinator, Mr. Aizaz Ahmad Chaudhry of Pakistan. His professionalism and his thorough grasp of all the intricate issues at hand, in combination with his optimism and his fabulous sense of humour, made him just the right man for the job. We are all indebted to him. However, the draft resolution, of course, had to be accepted by every delegation, and thus all delegations had to rise to the occasion, as the saying goes. And that, we actually did — all of us. On behalf of the European Union, I would like to express our great appreciation to all our colleagues. I certainly would not like to exclude anyone, but since my time is limited I will bow to necessity and ask the Chairman of the Group of 77 and China please to convey our thanks to all the members of his group. The sense of camaraderie and can-do that characterized our discussions was greatly facilitated by Iran’s chairmanship of the Group of 77 and China. We would also like to thank the delegations of Canada, Australia and New Zealand for their always constructive interventions, and the delegations of Norway and of the United States for their important contributions. No statement on the human resources management resolution would be complete, of course, without our sincere words of thanks to the representatives of the Office of Human Resources Management. The able leadership of Ms. Salim and her team — I should rightly say, “her dream team” — gave great support to us all. We also thank the members of the Bureau, the secretariat of the Committee and, in particular, the Chairman of the Fifth Committee, Ambassador Rosenthal, for his able leadership. To the long list of important draft resolutions adopted in the Fifth Committee during this session, including such important texts as those on the application of article 19 of the Charter and the new scales of assessment, the Chairman of the Committee can now also add important texts on reimbursement to Member States for contingent-owned equipment and troop costs, as well as this omnibus resolution on human resources management.

My delegation echoes the words of other delegations that have explained their position on the valuable resolution we have just adopted. Its value lies principally in the importance and sensitivity of its subject: the staff of the United Nations, who define the identity of the Organization. Everywhere, they are the active troops in the field, working to fulfil the mandates assigned by the General Assembly. In that light, the General Assembly has always made it clear that the staff constitutes a valuable resource; this has also been the view of all Secretaries- General. Hence, my delegation considers that the level of consultation with the staff on all proposals placed before the Fifth Committee — whether at the fifty- sixth session or at the fifty-seventh session — should be commensurate with our understanding that they are a valuable resource. Their views, independent of the views of the Secretary-General, should be fully stated, so that we can form a clear and accurate understanding of their opinions, their concerns and their ideas. Naturally, there are many areas in which the Assembly wants to consult the staff, including transfers, the administration of justice and other areas set out in the resolution we have just adopted. My delegation considers that this has been set out clearly and unambiguously, and it is our view that there is no further need to consult any department, including the Office of Legal Affairs, on the provisions of the resolution: even when such consultations take place, they are carried out before the Assembly adopts a draft resolution. With respect to consultations to interpret General Assembly mandates, they fall within the exclusive rights of the Assembly itself, which has the authority to explain such provisions. No other body has the authority to interpret them. We would request that, when reports are submitted in the future and when any procedures are adopted, these be formulated in the light of that understanding, and that General Assembly mandates be interpreted strictly. I echo the comments of the representative of Pakistan concerning the words “takes note”. Our sincere appreciation goes to the representative of the current Presidency of the European Union for his own expression of thanks to Member States. Flexibility, of course, was the hallmark of the Fifth Committee’s work towards the adoption of this resolution. There is no doubt that constructive cooperation among all delegations made it possible to agree on that important text. My thanks go also to the Assistant Secretary-General for Human Resources Management, Ms. Rafiah Salim, and to her team for all their help. I thank the Chairman of the Fifth Committee for all his efforts throughout the session to guide our work to a successful outcome. Further, we convey sincere thanks to the coordinator of the informal consultations on item 123, who made tremendous efforts to achieve consensus. We greatly appreciate those efforts, and we appreciate his having corrected errors we had noted during the Committee’s adoption of the draft resolution. We hope that it will become standard practice in the future for coordinators to take it upon themselves to review the language of draft resolutions before and after they are reproduced, with a view to ensuring that what has been agreed in informal consultations is accurately reflected in the texts adopted by Committees and by the General Assembly. That would protect the credibility of the Assembly’s committees and would surely prevent us from making mistakes such as those we noted during the second resumption of the Fifth Committee’s session.

Like others, my delegation welcomes the adoption of the resolution on human resources management and expresses its great appreciation of the work done by the representative of Pakistan, coordinator of the discussions on this resolution.

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 123.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 126.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 129.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Iraq-Kuwait Observation Mission”, recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 130.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 132.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 133.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 134.

The Assembly will take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly also wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 135.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 136.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 137.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force”, without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 138. (b) United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon Report of the Fifth Committee (A/55/681/Add.1)

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution entitled “Financing of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon, which was recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 12 of its report. A single separate vote has been requested on the fourth preambular paragraph and on operative paragraphs 2, 3 and 15 of the draft resolution. Is there any objection to that request? There is none. I shall now put to the vote the fourth preambular paragraph and operative paragraphs 2, 3 and 15 of the draft resolution recommended in paragraph 12 of document A/55/681/Add.1, on which a single separate vote has been requested. A recorded vote has been requested.

I now put to the vote the draft resolution contained in paragraph 12 of document A/55/681/Add.1 as a whole. A recorded vote has been requested.

I shall now give the floor to those representatives who wish to make statements in explanation of vote.

As I reserved my right in the Committee to explain my delegation’s vote, I am doing so now. Members of the Assembly have all heard in the past our positions related to the Qana incident, in which the Hezbollah deliberately used the United Nations camp to launch Katyusha rockets at Israel and felt quite comfortable doing so from a safe place with a sizeable civilian population nearby. I wish to remind the Assembly that there is no precedent whatsoever for a particular Member State’s bearing sole financial responsibility for damage sustained by United Nations forces in the context of peacekeeping operations. It is understood that when peacekeepers are deployed in an area of conflict, they fully understand the dangers inherent in such a task. As such, any damage that is incurred should be absorbed by the general budget for peacekeeping operations, in accordance with the principle of collective responsibility. I should like briefly to clarify a few facts on the unfortunate incident in Qana, which took place in April 1996. First, the Hezbollah terrorist organization set up its ammunition base 300 metres from the United Nations camp in Qana, in southern Lebanon. It decided to do so knowing the danger to Lebanese civilians living in the camp, including possible damage to the property of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon. Israel had officially warned the United Nations about this dangerous situation, but this did not succeed in causing Hezbollah to move. After fortifying itself at the base, the Hezbollah fired dozens of Katyusha rockets on towns and villages in northern Israel. My country, as is the right of sovereign States anywhere in the world, cannot and will not tolerate bombs falling on its territories and will not stand by while people are being killed. After three consecutive days of Hezbollah bombing from the base alongside the Qana camp, and after numerous warnings from Israel, including by Prime Minister Peres himself, the Israeli Defence Force had to put a stop to the firing and root out its source — the Hezbollah base. No country would, or will ever, stand idly by and wait for days as rockets fall on its towns and cities, imperilling the lives of its citizens — no country. On 24 May 2000, Israel completed the withdrawal of its forces from south Lebanon, in full accordance with Security Council resolution 425 (1978). That withdrawal was confirmed by the Secretary-General in document S/2000/590 and by the Security Council in its resolutions 1310 (2000) and 1337 (2000), as well as by statements by the President of the Security Council on 18 June 2000. Nevertheless, Hezbollah continues to operate in the area with complete freedom. In the wake of Israel’s withdrawal, Hezbollah quickly moved to fill the posts vacated by the Israeli army and now uses them as a base for attacks on Israeli soldiers and civilians. In the last few months, Hezbollah has crossed the blue line, infiltrated Israeli territory and carried out a number of operations that have claimed the lives of Israeli soldiers. In addition, Hezbollah forces abducted three Israeli soldiers on 7 October 2001 who were patrolling the Israeli side of the blue line. To this day, we have no information on their whereabouts or their condition, as even the Red Cross has been prevented from visiting them. Is there any country in the world that would accept not knowing a single detail about its personnel missing in action? No country — not the permanent members of the Security Council and not any other country — would accept such a situation. The Red Cross is silent; the Lebanese Government is silent; and the three soldiers are still missing. Israel seeks a quiet and peaceful border to its north. We wish to see, and we will act resolutely to bring about, the return of international peace and security. In that connection, I should like to recall that in his report of 31 October 2000 the Secretary-General observed that the time had come to establish the state of affairs envisaged in Security Council resolution 425 (1978). That would require, “first and foremost, that the Government of Lebanon take effective control of the whole area vacated by Israel last spring and assume its full international responsibilities, including putting an end to the dangerous provocations that have continued on the Blue Line.” (S/2000/1049, para. 18) That has not yet been done, owing to various reasons. Israel therefore calls again upon the Governments of Lebanon and of Syria to heed the call of the international community and comply fully with their obligations under the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the principles of international law. We further call upon those Governments to proceed with the deployment of Lebanese armed forces up to the Blue Line to ensure the return of effective authority of the Government of Lebanon in the area and to prevent the activities of non-governmental elements operating in the territory under their control, so as to ensure the restoration of international peace and security. Those long-overdue actions would serve to ensure stability along the northern border while demonstrating a commitment to peace and security in the Middle East. With respect to the budget of the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) suggested in the document before us, Israel maintains that UNIFIL should remain in its current area of operation as long as its mandate, as defined by Security Council resolution 425 (1978) has not been fulfilled in its entirety. My delegation is once again distressed by the political manipulation of the Fifth Committee by certain Member States, and hopes that such action will stop; it diverts the attention of the Committee. I call upon Member States next year to drop the annual four paragraphs suggested with regard to Qana and dictated by the delegation of Lebanon, and to agree on the draft resolution, as we do on all draft resolutions in the Fifth Committee, by consensus. That principle of no voting has been reiterated by every single representative who has addressed the Committee in the past. Israel will gladly join consensus on a draft resolution on the financing of UNIFIL without the political elements that are introduced yearly.

A number of representatives have asked to speak in exercise of the right of reply. I remind members that statements in exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second, and should be made by delegations from their seats.

I had been reluctant to ask to speak in exercise of the right of reply. But, as we see from the report of the Fifth Committee, the representative of Israel was among those who spoke in explanation of vote on this item in the Committee, and the Assembly has been reminded that delegations that explain their votes in the Committee should refrain from doing so once again in the Assembly. I wish to comment on some of the false allegations that the Assembly has grown used to hearing every year. The most insolent accusation was that some Member States have engaged in political manipulation. Member States have expressed the political will of the international community, and when States voted in favour of this draft resolution they were acknowledging that a deliberate crime had been committed against the symbol of the United Nations and the symbol of peace in our region: the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), its personnel and its camp at Qana. A United Nations officer lost his life in that deliberate bombardment. We continue to recall that, at the time, the Secretary- General characterized it as a deliberate act. It was videotaped by one of the aeroplanes; the tape was shown in Europe, and images were published in many newspapers throughout the world. We therefore share the view that the bombing was deliberate. Thus, false claims that this was not a deliberate act are entirely out of place. Moreover, Israel’s responsibility in that regard cannot be confused with the collective responsibility for the financing of UNIFIL. Under international law, Israel bears liability for its deliberate bombing. Any party that deliberately commits a transgression, especially against the United Nations, must pay the price. Hence, linking this with Israel’s withdrawal from southern Lebanon is entirely inconsistent with Israel’s obligations. We heard characterizations such as “the Hezbollah terrorist organization” (supra). That group, alongside other Lebanese resistance forces, compelled Israel to withdraw from the territory it had occupied. But the most insolent statement made by the representative of Israeli occupation was a call upon Syria and Lebanon to control the heroic acts of national resistance aimed at liberating their land. We remind those who would make allegations in this regard that Lebanon exercises sovereignty over its territory. The heroic resistance in southern Lebanon enjoys Lebanon’s complete support and that of my country. The call issued by the representative of Israel, and his allegations, are misleading and totally erroneous. Syria has always called for the return of a just and comprehensive peace that would restore all its rights. The resumption of negotiations is not an objective in itself; the objective is the restoration of rights. Syria has long called for a balanced, just and comprehensive peace on the basis of the relevant resolutions of the Security Council, with a withdrawal to the lines of 4 June 1967. Under those terms, Syria would indeed like to see a balanced, just and lasting peace.

I am speaking in exercise of my right of reply to the statement made a moment ago by the representative of Israel. He accused us of politicizing this matter, while he himself delved very deeply into a political issue that is far removed from the competence of the Fifth Committee. We believe that the representative of Israel was trying to escape by running forward. We would wish him to return to the subject at hand without addressing the political aspects. This is an administrative and financial matter and should remain so. In this context, I will reply point by point to the statement made by the representative of Israel. First, concerning the politicization of the issue, we stress that all the additional paragraphs to this resolution called for by the Group of 77 are purely financial and administrative in nature. They contain no political wording whatsoever. Israel should not leap into political discourse, but should implement the resolutions of the General Assembly calling on it to pay compensation for the damages it caused to the compound of the international forces in southern Lebanon. All those present here will recall that 102 Lebanese civilians — children, the elderly and women — were killed in Israel’s attack against Lebanon and the international forces compound. Had we wished to politicize the matter, we would have asked for additional paragraphs calling for compensation to Lebanon for damage to its facilities and civilian population. Instead, the Group of 77 is calling for reparations and compensation for the United Nations, not for my country, Lebanon. The United Nations headquarters in Lebanon was damaged, as assessed by the Secretary- General, who sent a group of experts and engineers. They came up with a cost estimate of that damage, which the General Assembly adopted, calling on Israel to pay that amount. I repeat and stress that the compensation was to be paid to the United Nations, not to Lebanon. In this regard, I would refer to paragraph 30 of the resolution, in which the Secretary-General is encouraged to continue to take additional measures to ensure the safety and security of all personnel under the auspices of the United Nations participating in the Force. This is a generic paragraph, the inclusion of which in the resolution was not called for by the Group of 77. It is used in reference to every peacekeeping operation in the world. It calls for ensuring the safety and security of all personnel. Thus, how can the General Assembly be accused of politicizing the matter when it calls for reparations for damage to its own premises and headquarters? How can we accuse the United Nations or the General Assembly of politicizing this matter when we call for this and ask the Secretary- General to ensure the safety and security of United Nations forces? Another point I wish to make is that we totally agree with Israel that my country was one of the first to sign the United Nations Charter. We also know that paragraph 2 of Article 17 of the Charter asserts the principle of collective responsibility, requiring the expenses of the Organization, including the budgets of peacekeeping operations throughout the world, to be borne by the Members as apportioned by the General Assembly. We cannot deny this, but I ask: Can we conclude from this principle of collective responsibility that any State, be it Israel or any other, may deliberately bomb the premises of international forces and then ask the rest of the world to pay reparations for the damages it has deliberately caused? Such an erroneous conclusion cannot be drawn from the principle of collective responsibility. Moreover, such a conclusion is diametrically counter to the principle of international liability, by which a country that attacks another State or an international organization, such as the United Nations, must pay compensation for the damages incurred. This is precisely what Lebanon is calling for and what the Group of Arab States and the Group of 77 have kindly accepted to assume. Another point relates to the use by Hezbollah of the United Nations compound to launch rockets at Israel. I will not speak at length on this issue, but I would refer the representative of Israel to the report of the Secretary-General and his Military Adviser, Major- General Franklin van Kappen, which was drafted by the most impartial entity. It states that: “during the shelling there had been a perceptible shift in the weight of fire from an area south-west of the compound (the mortar site) to the compound itself”. (S/1996/337, para. 11) It is very clear that the most impartial entity in this world is saying that Israel decided to bomb a certain point, for instance on the right, and then to shift to the left in order to attack the compound of the international forces and to harm them and the Lebanese civilians who had taken refuge there in the false belief that Israel would not dare to bomb an international compound. They were wrong, because Israel did dare and did bomb. My last point relates to the prisoners of war. The representative of Israel claimed that three of its soldiers are being held in southern Lebanon. That is true. The Lebanese resistance has held three Israeli soldiers, as it has openly declared on television. However, does the representative of Israel know why the Lebanese resistance holds those soldiers? He does, but conveniently ignores it. There are 13 Lebanese prisoners of war being held without trial in Israeli prisons in Israel. Some have been held for almost 25 years. Does the representative of Israel know that there is a law in force in Israel — the Dirani and Obeid Law — which stipulates the detention of two Lebanese citizens against the wishes of the High Court of Justice of Israel?

I will not speak at length. I was rather amazed, listening to the representative of the Zionist entity today, to hear him say that the cause of the bombing of the United Nations compound in Qana was the presence of a Hezbollah ammunition depot 300 metres from the compound itself. At the time the draft resolutions were adopted in the Fifth Committee, I heard the same representative state that the reason for the Qana bombing was the Hezbollah occupation — and I repeat the word occupation — of the United Nations camp in that town and its launching of attacks on Israel from that camp for three days prior to Israel’s action. Which of the two statements made by the representative of the Zionist entity should I believe? It is no wonder that that representative has resorted to bald-faced lies. That is a job at which he excels. I advise him that instead of twisting the facts, the Zionist entity must recognize its act of aggression and pay the reparations to which it has been obligated by the General Assembly. It should do so if it respects the Assembly and the international legality it represents.

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of sub-item (b) of agenda item 138.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 140.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 143.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 144.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 148.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution entitled “Financing of the United Nations Civilian Police Mission in Haiti” without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 150.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 152.

The Assembly will now take a decision on four draft resolutions recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 19 of its report and on two draft decisions recommended by the Committee in paragraph 20 of the same report. We turn first to the four draft resolutions. The Fifth Committee adopted draft resolution I, entitled “Support account for peacekeeping operations”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

The Fifth Committee adopted draft resolution II, entitled “Financing of the United Nations Logistics Base at Brindisi, Italy”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

The Fifth Committee adopted draft resolution III, entitled “Experiences learned from the use of resident auditors at peacekeeping missions”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

The Fifth Committee adopted draft resolution IV, entitled “Reformed procedures for determining reimbursement to Member States for contingent-owned equipment and troop costs”, without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

We turn next to the two draft decisions. Draft decision I is entitled “Reports of the Office of Internal Oversight Services”. The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision I without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

Draft decision II is entitled “Death and disability benefits”. The Fifth Committee adopted draft decision II without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of sub-item (a) of agenda item 153.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 167.

May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to take note of the report of the Fifth Committee contained in document A/55/712/Add.1?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 169.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I consider that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?

We have thus concluded this stage of our consideration of agenda item 176.