Monitoring Policy Making at the United Nations |
| ||||||||||||
Fifth Committee Begins Discussion of Alternatives to Current Arrears Calculation under Charter’s Article 19 - UN Finance - Global Policy Forum Fifth Committee Begins Discussion of
Alternatives to Current Arrears Calculation
under Charter’s Article 19UN Press Release
26 March, 2001The Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary) this morning took up three items: the method of calculating arrears in Member States’ payments under Article 19 of the United Nations Charter; the United Nations Fund for International Partnerships (UNFIP); and enhancing oversight mechanisms in United Nations funds and programmes.
Concerning Article 19, the Committee had before it a Secretary-General’s report, requested by the General Assembly last year, which reviews several aspects of the calculation of Member States arrears under the Article and offers several alternative definitions or interpretations. The Article reads, in part, that a Member State in arrears in the payment of its financial contributions shall have no vote in the General Assembly if the amount of its arrears equals or exceeds the amount of its contributions due from it for the preceding two full years. The alternatives focus, in particular, on the interpretation of “arrears” and “contributions due for the preceding two full years”, as well as the distinction between “gross” and “net” amounts in their determination.
Speakers recognized the importance of the mechanism as an incentive for Member States to meet their Charter obligations. While most speakers agreed that the payment of assessed contributions in full, on time and without conditions was a prerequisite for putting United Nations finances on a sound and sustainable footing, several delegates questioned the usefulness of the proposed changes, saying that they could harm a significant number of Member States.
Speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, the representative of Chile said that utilization of the methodology proposed in the report meant an increase of some $9 million in the amount of minimum payments necessary for Member States to avoid application of Article 19. Although its adoption could raise the number of countries subject to sanctions under that Article from 33 to 48, the measure would not have any impact on the financial situation of the Organization, since it would imply a collection of less than 0.23 per cent of the total annual budget. From the legal point of view, there was no reason for the changes in the existing system.
The representative of Venezuela said that trying to solve the Organization’s problems by changing Article 19 was like trying to save a heart patient by giving him a facelift. First of all, it was necessary to identify the cause of the problem, which resulted from the failure of the United States to pay. Modification of Article 19 would not change that reality.
Recognizing the concerns that the proposed measures might create additional financial burdens for some countries, the representative of the United States said that Article 19 should remain strong. Member States from all regions had assumed additional financial responsibility as part of the compromise resolution on the scale of assessments last December, and her country’s main priority was to fulfill its end of the bargain. While it had not yet done so, she was confident that she would soon be able to say that it had.
The representative of Sweden, on behalf of the European Union and associated States, added that Article 19 should be applied in a fair and consistent manner. The methods used in Article 19 were not directed at Member States with genuine difficulties, for which the Charter and the Committee on Contributions made full provision.
Read the whole UN Press Release here: GA/AB/3434
More General Articles on UN Finance
