A/64/PV.81 General Assembly
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 that are before the Assembly today.
It was so decided.
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, that is, either in the Committee or in plenary meeting, unless that delegation’s vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee.”
Before we begin to take action on the recommendations contained in the reports of the Fifth Committee, I should like to advise representatives that we are going to proceed to take decisions in the same manner as was done in the Fifth Committee, unless members are notified otherwise in advance.
132. Proposed programme budget for the biennium 2010-2011 Report of the Fifth Committee (A/64/548/Add.2) The Acting President: The Assembly has before it two draft resolutions recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 8 of its report. We will now take a decision on draft resolutions I and II. We turn first to draft resolution I, entitled “Special subjects relating to the programme budget for the biennium 2010-2011”. The Fifth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Vote:
31/37
Consensus
130. Review of the efficiency of the administrative and financial functioning of the United Nations Report of the Fifth Committee (A/64/596/Add.1) The Acting President: The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution, entitled “Towards an accountability system in the United Nations Secretariat”. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 64/259).
The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 130.
Draft resolution I was adopted (resolution 64/260).
Vote:
32/413
Consensus
Draft resolution II is entitled “Conditions of service for the ad litem judges of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda”. The Fifth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
Draft resolution II was adopted (resolution 64/261).
The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 132.
138. Joint Inspection Unit Report of the Fifth Committee (A/64/724) The Acting President: The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution, entitled “Report of the Joint Inspection Unit for 2009 and programme of work for 2010”. The Fifth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 64/262).
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 138.
141. Review of the implementation of General Assembly resolutions 48/218 B, 54/244 and 59/272 Report of the Fifth Committee (A/64/723) The Acting President: The Assembly has before it a draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. We will now take a decision on the draft resolution. The Fifth Committee adopted it without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?
The draft resolution was adopted (resolution 64/263).
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 141.
142. Administration of Justice at the United Nations Report of the Fifth Committee (A/64/582/Add.1) The Acting President: The Assembly has before it a draft decision recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 7 of its report. We will now take action on the draft decision. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft decision without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do likewise?
The draft decision was adopted.
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 142, as well as its consideration of all the reports of the Fifth Committee before it.
128. International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 Letter from the Secretary-General (A/64/710) Letter from the President of the Security Council (A/64/727) The Acting President: In document A/64/710, the Secretary-General transmits a letter dated 1 March 2010 from Judge Patrick Robinson, President of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, regarding the case of the Prosecutor v. Popović et al. In document A/64/727, the President of the Security Council transmits to the President of the General Assembly the text of Council resolution 1915 (2010) of 18 March 2010, whereby the Council, inter alia, decided “that the total number of ad litem judges serving at the International Tribunal may temporarily exceed the maximum of twelve provided for in article 12, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the International Tribunal, to a maximum of thirteen at any one time, returning to a maximum of twelve by 30 June 2010, or upon completion of the Popović case if sooner”. May I take it that the Assembly decides that the total number of ad litem judges serving at the International Tribunal may temporarily exceed the maximum of 12 provided for in article 12, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the International Tribunal, to a maximum of 13 at any one time, returning to a maximum of 12 by 30 June 2010, or upon completion of the Popović case if sooner? It was so decided.
The General Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 128.
112. Appointments to fill vacancies in subsidiary organs and other appointments (j) Appointment of three ad litem judges of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal Letter from the Secretary-General addressed to the President of the General Assembly (A/64/664) The Acting President: Members will recall that by its resolution 63/253 of 24 December 2008, the General Assembly decided, inter alia, to appoint three ad litem judges for a term of one year each to address the problem of the backlog of cases being transferred from the old system to the Dispute Tribunal. At its sixty-third session, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Internal Justice Council, appointed the following persons as ad litem judges of the Dispute Tribunal for a one-year term of office beginning on 1 July 2009: Mr. Michael Adams (Australia), Mr. Jean-François Cousin (France) and Ms. Nkemdilim Amelia Izuako (Nigeria). In document A/64/664, the Chairperson of the Internal Justice Council has indicated that the Council feels that “the threat of the United Nations Dispute Tribunal being ‘swamped’ by the influx of new cases ‘before it has really got up and running’ would ’severely prejudice the implementation of the new system’”. The Internal Justice Council has therefore advised the Secretary-General that “this undesirable result could be avoided if the terms of office of the current ad litem judges were to be extended for a further 12 months”. On the recommendation of the Fifth Committee, the General Assembly took a decision earlier today to extend the tenure of three ad litem judges of the Dispute Tribunal for one additional year beginning on 1 July 2010. The Internal Justice Council has recommended the extension of the terms of office of the following three ad litem judges for an additional one-year term of office beginning on 1 July 2010: Michael Adams (Australia), Jean-François Cousin (France) and Nkemdilim Amelia Izuako (Nigeria). May I therefore take it that the Assembly wishes to extend the terms of office of the three ad litem judges Michael Adams, Jean-François Cousin and Nkemdilim Amelia Izuako for an additional one-year term of office beginning on 1 July 2010? It was so decided.
May I also take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of sub-item (j) of agenda item 112?
It was so decided.
7. Organization of work, adoption of the agenda and allocation of items Request for the inclusion of an additional sub- item in the agenda of the sixty-fourth session: Elections to fill vacancies in principal organs: Election of a member of the International Court of Justice (A/64/236) The Acting President: The General Assembly will now take up a request submitted by the Secretary- General in document A/64/236 relating to the election of a member of the International Court of Justice. In his note, the Secretary-General informed the General Assembly of the resignation of Judge, former Vice-President and former President Shi Jiuyong as a member of the International Court of Justice effective 28 May 2010. A vacancy in the Court will therefore occur on 28 May 2010. The agenda of the sixty-fourth session of the General Assembly does not contain a sub-item on election of members of the International Court of Justice. The Secretary-General has therefore deemed it necessary to request, pursuant to rule 15 of the rules of procedure of the General Assembly, the inclusion in the agenda of the current session of an additional sub-item entitled “Election of a member of the International Court of Justice”, under agenda item 110. Owing to the nature of the item, unless there is an objection, may I take it that the General Assembly agrees that the relevant provision of rule 40 of the rules of procedure, which would require a meeting of the General Committee on the question of the inclusion of this additional sub-item on the agenda, could be waived? It was so decided.
May I take it that the General Assembly, on the proposal of the Secretary- General, wishes to include in the agenda of the current session, an additional sub-item entitled “Election of a
member of the International Court of Justice”, as a sub-item of agenda item 110 under heading I?
It was so decided.
May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to consider this sub-item directly in plenary meeting?
It was so decided.
I should like to inform members that this additional sub-item becomes sub-item (c) of agenda item 110 on the agenda of the current session.
I should also like to inform the General Assembly that the election to fill the vacancy shall take place on 29 June 2010.
The meeting adjourned at 10.30 a.m.