ABSTRACT. Offical report of the second part's final meeting of the 5. Committee session, with the approval of nine documents including those concerning the establishment of Tribunals in former Jugoslavia and Rwanda. Along with detailed explanation about budget procedures for both structures, there are also short summaries of the various speeches.

New York. In the final meeting of the second part of its resumed session, the Committee approved nine draft texts, including drafts recommending the appropriation or authorization of about $57.5 million for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Tribunal for Rwanda. The Committee also approved draft texts on the hiring of United Nations retirees, on the support account for peace-keeping operations and on administrative and budgetary aspects of the financing of such operations.

Under the provisions of the drafts on the Criminal Tribunals, the $57.5 million recommended for them would consist of an appropriation of $43,991,600 gross ($39,095,900 net) for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for the period 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1995, and $13,467,300 for the International Tribunal for Rwanda through 31 October 1995.

Documents before Committee

The draft resolution on the financing of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (A/C.5/49/L.66) would have the Assembly reaffirm that the Tribunal's costs should be met through additional resources on the basis of assessed contributions and financed through a special account outside the regular budget. The appropriation of $43,991,600 gross ($39,095,900 net) to the special account for the period 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1995 would include $26,175,000 previously authorized by the Assembly and $276,200 spent in 1993.

The Assembly would decide, as an ad hoc arrangement, that Member States would waive their respective shares in the credits from previous budgets of the United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR) totalling $21,995,800 gross ($19,547,950 net) and hence accept an equivalent increase in the assessments for a future budget period of UNPROFOR in the amount of $21,995,800 gross ($19,547,950 net) to be transferred to the Tribunal's account from the UNPROFOR account. The Assembly would apportion that amount for the period 1 January 1994 to 31 December 1995 among Member States in accordance with the scales of assessments for 1994 and 1995.

The Assembly would also review the mode of financing of the Tribunal at its fifty-second session.

The draft would also have the Assembly maintain the same arrangements for financing the Tribunal for the 1996-1997 biennium and consider at its fifty-second session the mode of financing of the Tribunal's requirements for subsequent periods.

The draft text on the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (A/C.5/49/L.67) would have the Assembly appropriate $13,467,300 gross ($12,914,900 net) for the Tribunal for the period through 31 October, without prejudice to any decisions of the Assembly on the mode of financing the Tribunal's costs. The amount would include the $2,914,900 previously authorized by the CABQ. By the terms of the draft, the Assembly would also authorize the Secretary-General to make the necessary arrangements, including the signing of a lease agreement and onstruction contracts for the premises of the Tribunal and the granting of contracts for up to 12 months for its staff, to provide it with adequate facilities and staff. The Assembly would ask the Secretary-General to finance the Tribunal's activities through a separate account outside the regular budget, pending a final decision on the manner of apportioning its expenses.

Action on Financing of Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia

MARIA ROTHEISER (Austria), coordinator of informal consultations on the financing of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, introduced the draft text. There had been a compromise agreement on the financing of the Tribunal. By the terms of the draft resolution, the Tribunal would be funded partly from the UNPROFOR account; the remaining half would come from the scale of assessments for certain years. She suggested that the draft be adopted without a vote.

SAMUEL HANSON (Canada) said delegations had been divided on matters of principle. Tribunals such as the current one should be funded from the regular budget. His delegation understood that the draft resolution did not provide for new or increased assessments. To achieve consensus Canada would not oppose the draft resolution. However, it did not support much of its text and would speak when the matter was taken up in the plenary.

The Committee approved the draft resolution without a vote.

MARY JO B. ARAGON (Philippines), also speaking for the "Group of 77" developing countries, said in explanation of position, that the Group recognized the importance of financing the Tribunal. Several delegations in the Group had made concessions in order to reach a compromise; it appreciated the compromise made by other delegations on the draft. Solutions could be reached through consensus if all views were considered.

RAFAEL MUNOZ (Spain), speaking for the European Union, expressed the hope that all Member States would make all efforts to pay their assessed dues to the Tribunal. The European Union would intervene in the plenary when it considered the draft resolution.

MARTIN SHARP (Australia) expressed satisfaction at the adoption of the draft and said he would speak on the matter at the plenary.

PETER RIDER (New Zealand) said that the Security Council had resolved that the Tribunal should be funded from the regular budget and all legal and judicial bodies should be funded that way. New Zealand went along with the consensus solution in order to get some financing for the Tribunal. The text submitted by New Zealand would be withdrawn in favour of the text approved by the Committee.

The Committee accepted his proposal.

Action on Financing of Tribunal for Rwanda

Mr. HANSON (Canada), who had coordinated informal consultations on the financing of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, introduced the draft text. Under its terms, the Tribunal would be funded in the same manner as the Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. There would be appropriation of $13.5 million gross that would be apportioned. Some of the funds would be derived from the credits in the account of the United Nations Assistance Mission in Rwanda (UNAMIR) that Member States would waive, and from assessments. The Committee should approve the draft without a vote.

The Committee approved the draft without a vote.

PETER MADDENS (Belgium) said he was gratified with the decision on the draft, adding that stable and sound financing for the Tribunal was a priority of his delegation. He thanked the Committee for its action.

YUKIO TAKASU, United Nations Controller, said the amount to be assessed for UNAMIR would not take into account the unencumbered balance in the Mission's account.