- Headquarters Agreement
- Accord de
siège
- Acuerdo sobre la Sede
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): I shall ask the Assistant Director-General to present item 20.3, which is the Headquarters Agreement, so that you are all aware of the contents of this document, C 85/LIM/29.
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): The Commission has before it this morning document C 95/LIM/29 dealing with the Headquarters Agreement.
The Headquarters Agreement is an agreement between the Organization and the Host Government. It is a matter that has been under discussion for purposes of interpretation for some period of time. For your background information, we have attached appendices A and B to show extracts from reports of prior sessions of the Council that this matter has been brought before.
Secondly, I would like to inform the Conference that the question of the Headquarters Agreement and the interpretation under the Headquarters Agreement has been under active discussion with the Host Government since 1972.
During the past two years there has been much more active discussion and negotiation. More recently, the Director-General has received a letter from the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Government of Italy, and it addresses the question of the Headquarters Agreement and does make certain proposals.
There are a couple of items included in this letter which give the Organization cause for concern, and these matters have previously been reported to the Finance Committee and to the Council.
You will notice in paragraph 3 of the document before you it mentions two of those matters. One is the proposal by the Minister of Foreign Affairs to exclude all Italian staff from dutyfree privileges. This is a privilege that was extended very graciously by the Host Government some ten years ago, and it is now being suggested that it be removed. Such an action would require that certain of the emoluments of the General Services Staff and a more limited amount of the Professional Staff would then most likely have to be reimbursed under the budget of FAO, and therefore increase its requirements.
There are two reasons why this is objectionable to the Organization. One is certainly the increased cost that is involved. The second is that it does cause discrimination among the staff. The Director-General has taken the position that he wishes not to have to discriminate between privileges among his staff.
The second point raised in the Minister's letter is concerning a limitation to be placed on the number of staff that would enjoy full diplomatic privileges in the first category. There is a suggestion that the number of persons in FAO who would be classified as first category, which are essentially P-5s and above, be limited to 11.5 per cent of the total. This would immediately mean a reduction in the number of staff that would be in that category. This position and proposal is also objectionable in the sense that it would limit the Director-General's ability to include people in the P-5 and above first category in that the selection criteria that he uses for placing people in that category is because they are senior management, because they do have major responsibility and therefore should be entitled to the same privileges as all the other staff. If limitation were placed upon the number in that category it would require that some discrimination among the staff be placed in order to meet the requirements as proposed by the Minister's letter. This, too, seems to be objectionable to us.
There are some other proposals that are contained in the letter. The Director-General's position is that we continue to negotiate and try to resolve the differences of opinion on the interpretation of the Headquarters Agreement and reach some amicable position that would be satisfactory to the Host Government and to the Organization without increasing costs and without requiring discrimination among the staff.
This document is placed before this Commission for the purposes of updating the information on a very sensitive issue, but at the same time for information only. . It does not require action, but there may be some discussion. I would be pleased to answer any questions that may arise.
A. BACCHI (Italie): Le document C 85/LIM/29 ayant trait à l'accord de siège ne nous met pas en mesure d'évaluer toutes les démarches entreprises afin de conclure de façon constructive les pourparlers entre les deux parties pour envisager une interprétation de l'accord de siège plus appropriée aux exigences actuelles de la FAO et du Gouvernement du pays hôte.
En effet, un Comité conjoint FAO-Gouvernement italien a oeuvré très activement au fil des deux dernières années dans cet esprit. Toutes les questions concernant les privilèges des fonctionnaires de la FAO, surtout pour ce qui est des franchises, ont été à notre avis suffisamment explorées et examinées à fond.
Ces longs pourparlers au cours desquels on n'a jamais cessé de faire référence à l'attitude des autres pays hôtes d'organisations internationales ont abouti à la rédaction d'une lettre en date du 5 octobre écoulé, envoyée au Directeur général de la FAO par le Ministre italien des Affaires étrangères. Cette lettre reflète le maximum de l'effort que le Gouvernement italien est en mesure de garantir à la FAO en ce domaine. Jusqu'à présent la lettre en question n'a reçu aucune réponse.
Le Gouvernement italien estime que ce Comité ne peut pas être saisi d'une telle question car le Comité ne peut pas remplacer d'un jour à l'autre un Comité conjoint qui a travaillé pendant des années. N'oublions pas qu'il s'agit d'un comité de la Conférence et qu'il ne s'agit pas du Conseil.
En effet, la lettre du Ministre italien des Affaires étrangères n'affecte pas la souveraineté de la FAO ni de son Directeur général. Par contre elle affecte seulement des critères de gestion interne pour lesquels sont compétents, à l'intérieur de l'Organisation, des organes institutionnels tels que le Comité des questions juridiques et constitutionnelles, et le Conseil.
Nous ne voyons donc pas l'opportunité que la Conférence soit saisie de ces problèmes à ce stade, c'est-à-dire au moment où des négociations sont encore en cours entre les deux parties, car du point de vue italien les pourparlers, les conversations qui ont été entamés depuis longtemps pourront être considérés comme conclus au moment où un échange de lettres aura lieu à ce sujet. Si l'échange de lettres n'est pas concluant, on devra avoir recours aux moyens prévus par l'accord de siège même. En effet, l'accord stipule que lorsque surgit un différend entre le pays hôte et la FAO sur l'interprétation de l'accord de siège et que la voie des négociations ne s'est pas révélée fructueuse, on aura recours à un arbitrage. Mais à l'heure actuelle la prise de position de la Conférence est à notre avis prématurée.
Pour ce qui est du point spécifique qui constitue le fond du problème, il faut remarquer que l'exclusion des fonctionnaires italiens et de tous les ressortissants italiens des privilèges en matière fiscale et douanière est une mesure adoptée par la presque totalité des pays hôtes d'organisations internationales. Pour ne citer qu'un exemple, nous ne sommes pas sans savoir que le Secrétaire général d'une très importante Organisation internationale siégeant à Paris n'a pas le droit, en tant que citoyen français, à la plaque CD pour sa voiture personnelle. La Suisse et d'autres pays adoptent une attitude conforme à ces principes.
Pour ce qui est de la nomination de fonctionnaires jouissant des privilèges diplomatiques, nous estimons qu'un principe de caractère général est accepté suivant lequel le nombre de fonctionnaires ne peut pas dépasser une certaine proportion par rapport au nombre global du personnel, par rapport à la totalité du personnel de l'Organisation même. C'est en effet ce qui se passe en Suisse auprès des organisations internationales ayant leur siège à Genève. Le statut diplomatique en général doit être en outre proportionné à l'importance des fonctions exercées à la FAO.
En proposant de retenir un certain pourcentage qui constitue d'ailleurs une très légère diminution par rapport au chiffre actuel, nous n'avons pas voulu dire que la FAO ou son Directeur général devait exercer une souveraineté restreinte mais nous avons plutôt voulu proposer un critère d'ordre général duquel s'inspirer, et auquel des exceptions sont admises. Une période de grâce de deux ans serait prévue pour atteindre le pourcentage de 11,5 pour cent. D'ailleurs le Conseil même dans sa réunion de juin dernier - et je ne vois aucune mention d'une prise de position du Conseil lors de sa dernière session - a exhorté les deux parties à faire aboutir les négociations dans les plus brefs délais et c'est dans cet esprit qu'on attend une réponse de la part du Directeur général, réponse qui pourra constituer une base pour conclure ces négociations en cours.
A. ABDEL-MALEK (Liban) (langue originale arabe): La délégation de mon pays voudrait exprimer sa gratitude à M. Crowther qui nous a présenté ce document C 85/LIM/29 sur l'Accord de Siège. Nous sommes vraiment très surpris de voir que le Gouvernement italien n'a toujours pas trouvé une solution au problème en suspens à savoir le privilège de franchise, et les privilèges et immunité diplomatiques pour ce qui est des fonctionnaires de la première catégorie, et cela en dépit de tout ce qui a été dit à la quatre-vingt-sixième et à la quatre-vingt-septième session du Conseil. Je me souviens que le Directeur général, M. le Président, avait annoncé à la dernière session du Conseil, en juin 85, que les privilèges accordés aux fonctionnaires de nationalité italienne représentent à peu près 100 000 lires italiennes par mois et par personne et l'on considère que c'est une partie intégrante de leur traitement. Donc, si on leur retirait ces privilèges qui constituent une sorte d'émoluments, cela voudrait dire que les gouvernements, les Etats Membres de la FAO devraient subir un coût plus élevé, car il faudrait augmenter les traitements des personnes en question.
Pour ce qui est de la limite du nombre de fonctionnaires de la première catégorie jouissant de la totalité des privilèges et immunités diplomatiques, il faut absolument que cette question soit laissée à la discrétion du Directeur général, conformément à l'article XIII section 28 de l'Accord de Siège. Nous sommes absolument certains que le Directeur général appliquera ces règles qui lui sont imposées et ne dépassera pas les limites spécifiées. Il aurait à demander à la Conférence générale d'augmenter cette catégorie de fonctionnaires, parce que cela entraînerait une augmentation de coût. Nous ne pensons pas que le Gouvernement italien ait des raisons de craindre ce que pourrait faire le Directeur général en la matière.
M. le Président, hier nous avons écouté son Excellence l'Ambassadeur Pascarelli, qui nous a parlé de l'immunité de juridiction. Nous l'avons écouté avec un grand intérêt parce qu'il nous a donné tous les arguments juridiques. Je pense que l'ambassadeur Pascarelli devrait se voir confier la défense de la position de l'Organisation afin que ses frères de nationalité italienne continuent à jouir des mêmes privilèges dans cette Organisation. Ce serait un acte humanitaire et je souhaite que M. Pascarelli défende la position de l'Organisation pour ce qui est de la limite du nombre des fonctionnaires de la première catégorie jouissant de la totalité des privilèges et immunités diplomatiques.
N. R. KAMSVAAG (Norway): I do not want to go into a discussion about this matter, but I do have a question on our orientation. Perhaps in the introduction I missed some information given about the practices in other countries where similar international organizations are Located. I would be happy if the Secretariat could tell us what is the practice in other countries when it comes to matters such as that.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): If there are no other delegates who wish to take the floor, I shall give the floor once again to Mr Crowther in order that he may answer some of the questions raised.
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): Firstly, regarding the question raised by the representative from Norway, I do not have all of the detailed information before me, but I do know that there is a mixture among the various Headquarters Agencies. You should realize that each Host Government that provides privileges and immunities to the various United Nations specialized agencies in various cities enters into a separate agreement depending upon what arrangements they can and are willing to accord to particular agencies. Austria, for example, has been very liberal and provides for a great deal of immunities and privileges for all staff. On the other hand, in New York probably some of the minimum immunities are provided for nationals. In Geneva, Paris and London the privileges provided are all quite different. There are some immunities provided to nationals in some cities which are not provided in others. It is not a uniform position in all countries. It is by all means subject to agreements that are entered into between the Host Governments and the respective United Nations agencies. We can look at both extremes and find that is a total mixture.
I think our concern here in Rome in the case of either the first category or the question of the removal of privileges from Italian nationals who have enjoyed those privileges is that we are now being faced with the position of taking away privileges previously offered over a long number of years. If the privileges had not been offered, that would be one thing, but they have been offered for at least the last decade. Now to reverse the position and take away the privileges makes it quite difficult and probably quite costly. Nonetheless, the Director-General is in a position where he would like very much to conclude the negotiations and work very closely with Italian representatives to find an equitable solution. However, he does not see that it would be appropriate for us to arbitrarily increase the cost to the Organization for removal of such privileges, and we are hopeful that we can find an equitable ground on which to conclude negotiations agreeable to the Host Government and to the Organization.
CHAIRMAN (original language Arabic): We have noted the contents of this document on Headquarters Agreement. Negotiations are indeed still going on between the Italian Government and the Organiz ation. Therefore, I believe that it would be best to conclude those negotiations at the earliest possible moment for the benefit of the Organization.
I will ask Dean K. Crowther to introduce the second item on our Agenda for today, which is Item 23.1 Relations with the Host Government, Headquarters Accommodation, C 85/LIM/25.
- Headquarters Accommodation
- Locaux du
siège
- Locales de oficina en la
Sede
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): You have before you the document just referred to, entitled Headquarters Accommodation. There are two Appendices, A and B, which are extracts of previous Reports of Sessions of the Council.
In addition, I would like to report generally on an up-date on the question of headquarters accommodation. Here in the Caracalla Complex two projects are involved. The first is a project which was started some time ago to build an additional 70 rooms on the eighth floor of Building D. We are very pleased to say that the progress certainly is moving along quite well. With the last contract that was permitted for electrical, plumbing and heating works we believe that the project may continue as scheduled, and there is a possibility that it will be completed in the autumn of 1986.
This provision of an additional 70 rooms will ease the burden of overcrowding with which we are now faced. You may realize that in some instances we have found it necessary to install offices in corridors and in Conference Rooms in order to utilize every foot of available space.
Secondly, in order to avoid the situation of the FAO Organization split between two locations, one here at the Caracalla Complex and one at Building F, which is on the Cristoforo Colombo about five and a half kilometres from here, we have approached the Italian Government which has very graciously agreed to include in their Financial Bill a request for appropriations in the total amount of 25 000 million lire. That would provide additional accommodation here in the Caracalla Complex to house the staff now at Building F, and at that time we would have the entire Organization in one location. That does require the appropriations legislation to be completed; it does require authorization for letting the contracts. Only when that has been completed can the construction begin.
There are a number of steps that must take place, probably in three phases. There will be some change between Building A and Building B, and there will be a major new building between Buildings C and D that will connect those two buildings at the rear. Finally, the existing Building E, situated between Buildings C and D, was built as a temporary building 20 odd years ago and has long since served its capabilities. It must be torn down and a smaller building built to replace it. We believe that with the new appropriations legislation now on its way through the Italian Parliament that possibility now exists.
We are very appreciative of the Italian support for the accommodation that seems to be well on its way at this time.
The document before you describes those Reports on the progress, and we are very pleased to say that the Italian Government is very strongly supportive.
If there are any questions we would be very pleased to answer them.
CHAIRMAN (Original language Arabic): We have listened to the explanation given by Mr Crowther on the basic document. Are there any comments?
I should like to ask Mr Crowther to introduce Item 22, Scale of Contributions 1986-87, C 85/LIM/3, C 85/LIM/13.
Dean K. CROWTHER (Assistant Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): Agenda Item 22, Scale of Contributions 1986-87, and the information concerning the scale is included in the documents before you.
Document C 85/LIM/3 is an extract from the Report of the Eighty-seventh Session of the Council, and it contains a recommended Draft Resolution for approval by the Conference. The Resolution provides that the FAO Scale of Contributions for 1986-87 should be derived directly from the United Nations Scale of Assessments currently in force for 1985 but adapted slightly for the different membership of FAO from that of the United Nations. The United Nations Scale has been
in force for the three-year period from that Scale. The only difference between the 1984-85 FAO Scale and that recommended for the 1986-87 Scale arises as a result of the admission of two new Member Nations during this Session of the Conference.
The practice of deriving the FAO Scale from the United Nations Scale was established in 1955 by a decision of the Eighth Session of the Conference that the FAO Scale for future biennia be derived directly from the UN Scale of assessment during the calendar year of each Conference session. This was confirmed after a thorough and detailed review by che 18th Session of the Conference in 1975. As will be noted from Document C 85/LIM/3 and C 85/LIM/13 the Resolutions Committee has examined the draft resolution and found it receivable. That document also contains, as an appendix to the Resolution, the proposed scale adjusted to take into account the admission of two new member nations which occurred on 9 November 1985.
I would draw attention to the consideration of the Council as set out in Document C 85/LIM/3, and it will be noted that the United Nations as well as the General Assembly have not yet completed their work on the UN Scale of Assessments from 1986-1988 which will be the next three year period. It is not expected that a decision will be forthcoming from the General Assembly before the conclusion of this Session of the FAO Conference and, of course, the scale is not available today for consideration by our Commission.
Under the circumstances and in accordance with the recommendation of the Council which noted the necessity for the Organization to have a known scale adopted by the Conference in order to promote the timely calling for the set contributions, the resolution is as shown in C 85/LIM/3, and as recommended by the Council it is suggested that the 1986-87 FAO scale should continue to be derived from the current UN Scale. If there are any questions from delegations I would be happy to respond to them.
A. ABDEL MALEK (Liban) (langue originale arabe): La délégation du Liban tient à remercier pour la deuxième fois M. Crowther pour avoir présenté les documents C 85/LIM/3 et C 35/LIM/13 sur le barème des contributions 1986/87. Nous approuvons la propsotion du Secrétariat d'adopter le barème des quote-parts des Nations Unies en vigueur, et nous appuyons également les amendements proposés pour tenir compte de l'admission des deux nouveaux membres. Nous approuvons également la proposition qui a été faite d'établir le barème des contributions de la FAO pour 1986-87 sur la base de celui de l'ONU en 1985, et nous appuyons un projet de recommandation relatif à ce point.
J.P. ROLLIN (Federal Republic of Germany) (original language German): My delegation is basically in favour of the FAO Scale of Contributions being derived from the UN Scale of Assessments. However, additionally, we would favour having the differences in the number of members always being brought in line with each individual case.
Sra. Doña Silvia CARBALLO VIVES (Cuba): Nuestra delegación está de acuerdo con el proyecto de resolución presentado por la Secretaría de la FAO en el documento C 85/LIM/13, por considerar que las cuotas de los organismos especializados de Naciones Unidas se igualen para así mantener la armonía y coherencia dentro de la comunidad de naciones.
Dean K. CROWTIIER (Assistane Director-General, Administration and Finance Department): The distinguished representative from Germany raised an important point of which everyone should be aware. The difference between the scale of contributions in the United Nations, which is currently in effect in the FAO scale, causes a slight deviation which we must amend each time. In this instance there are seven members of the UN who are not members of FAO and six members of FAO who are not members of the UN. We use precisely the same formula for deriving those scales, based directly on UN membership or on participation in other UN agencies or Commissions. We have to make this adjustment and have done so in the past. It is a very slight adjustment but is included in the formula, which otherwise remains the same in deriving it from the United Nations. That is all I have to say, and the resolution is available for the Commission.
CHAIRMAN: If there are no other speakers, we have approved the Resolution .../85 approving the scale of contributions for 1986-87.
We now introduce item 19, which is the Statutory Report on the Status of Conventions and Agreements thereto. The documents are C 85/10 and C 85/10 Sup. 1. I ask Mr Roche the Legal Counsel to introduce this item.
LEGAL COUNSEL: In keeping with Rule XXI.5 of the General Rules of the Organization, the Director-General reports to the Conference whenever a convention, agreement, or a supplementary convention or agreement, concluded under Article XIV of the Constitution, comes into force or ceases to be in force, or has been amended and the amendments have come into force.
In addition, under established practice, the Director-General informs the Conference of any developments which may occur in connection with: treaties, if any, concluded between FAO and Member Nations under Article XV of the Constitution: treaties concluded outside the framework of FAO in respect of which the Director-General acts as depositary; and the status of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies as applied to FAO.
The two documents before you contain the relevant information on the status of the treaties, as of 4 November 1985, to which I have just referred. There have been no futher developments to report since C 85/10 Sup. 1 was issued
There is, however, one matter to which I should like to draw the attention of the Conference. At its 20th Session in 1979 the Conference adopted a revised version of the International Plant Protection Convention. Although the Conference has urged parties to the Convention to deposit instruments of acceptance of the amendments contained in the revised version, I am afraid response has been slow and the revised version has not yet entered into force. There are 85 parties to the Convention, and it is the FAO Convention with the greatest number of parties. So far, 37 parties have accepted the revised version. The revised version of this very important Convention will enter into force - as indicated in para. 22 of document C 85/10 - on the 30th day after acceptance by two thirds of the parties, i.e. 57. Therefore 20 more acceptances are still needed before the revised version of the Convention enters into force.
That is all I have to say by way of introduction to this item, and if delegates have any questions to ask, I am at their disposal.
CHAIRMAN: We thank Mr Roche for his introduction. We have taken note of what is included in these documents. Are there any questions, comments or requests from the floor? If there are none, after taking note of these documents I declare this Session adjourned until 2.30 p.m.
The meeting rose at 11.00 hours
La
séance est levée à 11 heures
Se levanta la sesión a las 11
horas
