LE PRESIDENT: Comme vous le savez, nous avons bien avancé dans un domaine important, à savoir l'examen du rapport de la dixième session du Comité des forêts. Nous avons clos le débat et M. Walton a eu l'occasion de répondre à toutes les questions. Un petit problème s'est posé à propos d'un projet de résolution qui semble avoir été examiné par un comité informel qui n'a pas encore déposé ses conclusions. Je me propose donc de suspendre l'examen de ce point en attendant de connaître les résultats de ces contacts informels de façon à disposer d'un document plus formel qui, bien sûr, devra être traduit et distribué avant que nous puissions clore l'examen du point 8 de l'ordre du jour. Je vous demanderai de ne pas rouvrir le débat puisque nous devons arriver à une formule de conciliation sur le document qui a été distribué et qui sera quelque peu actualisé. Je vous ai fait part de mes sentiments en ce qui concerne le projet de résolution et je vous ai indiqué la procédure à suivre. Je suis en possession d'une longue note du Conseiller juridique, M. Moore, dans laquelle il dit, en conclusion, qu'un groupe de contact formel ou informel peut poursuivre les négociations à propos d'un projet de résolution et qu'en toute hypothèse, ce n'est pas là le rôle du Comité de rédaction. Je crois que ce que nous avons dit hier est conforme à la fois à la doctrine des Nations Unies et à la jurisprudence du Conseil. On ne s'est à aucun moment écarté de la procédure normale. Cette procédure doit toujours être respectée et c'est notre responsabilité de veiller au respect des normes qui nous régissent. Je m'efforce de les étudier le mieux possible, aidé en cela par les juristes compétents de la FAO.
S'il n'y a pas d'objection, je vais suspendre l'examen du point 8 de l'ordre du jour. Nous le reprendrons dès que possible.
Tony WADE (FAO Staff): This document is submitted annually to the Council at its Autumn Session. It is essentially an information document which, as you may recall, is normally appended to your Report.
The document contains information on two aspects of revisions to the Schedule of Sessions which was approved by the last Conference as supplement 2 to the 1990-91 Programme of Work and Budget. The two aspects are, first of all, a list of unscheduled sessions which have been approved during the period 1 January to 1 October 1990; and then, secondly, a list of those originally approved sessions which, for one reason or another, have had to be cancelled. In each case, reasons are given for either scheduling an additional session or for the cancellations. You will note that the document shows the direct cost of sessions which does not include staff time, travel costs, etc. It has been suggested that the date and place of each meeting would be a useful addition to the document, and the Secretariat will arrange for this in future sessions.
The Council's attention is drawn to the reduction in the number of sessions which had to be cancelled during this period. This Report shows 18 cancellations. This is an average of more than 50 sessions which have had to be cancelled each year over the last two biennia. The Director-General, in his response to the regret expressed by the Council at both its Ninety-fourth and Ninety-sixth Sessions concerning the high level of cancellations, has avoided as much as possible cancelling sessions because of the financial difficulties faced by the Organization, using instead other means to minimize the Organization's expenditures during this very difficult period.
Unscheduled sessions-which total 27 in this period-are running at the level usually experienced, and largely reflect decisions made either by the Organization's Governing Bodies or by Statutory Bodies after the preparation of the 1990-91 Programme of Work and Budget document which were, therefore, too late for inclusion in that document.
This Report is essentially for noting by the Council but the Secretariat is available to answer questions.
Sra. Monica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): Mi delegación tiene una pequeña pregunta que hacer con relación a este tema. Nosotros quisiéramos saber si en este documento figuran todas las reuniones que han sido canceladas, o si, por casualidad, hay alguna reunión que ha sido cancelada y que aquí no figura. Nos referimos concretamente a una reunión sobre telepercepción, que se iba a celebrar en el mes de diciembre, y sobre la cual mi delegación preguntó a la Secretaría porque tenía interés en el resultado de esa reunión, y se le informó en ese momento-hará un par de meses-que esa reunión estaba cancelada. Sin embargo, en este informe no figura. Era una reunión que iba a tener lugar durante cuatro días en el mes de diciembre.
CHAIRMAN: Do you have an answer at this moment in time? If that is not possible, you can give it afterwards.
Tony VADE (FAO Staff): I have to be frank; I do not have the answer before me. May I provide a direct answer outside the meeting, if that is satisfactory to the distinguished delegate?
LE PRESIDENT: La réponse sera communiquée dans un bref délai à la représentante de l'Argentine.
LE PRESIDENT: Je demande au Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques de bien vouloir prendre place. Je salue sa présence en le remerciant très vivement de l'honneur qu'il nous fait d'être parmi nous. Le point 22 traite des rapports des cinquante-quatrième et cinquante-cinquième sessions du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques. Le sous-point 22.1 concerne le rapport du Président du CQCJ; ce rapport ne doit pas faire l'objet d'une discussion. Le sous-point 22.2 concerne la façon dont les organisations d'intégration économique régionale pourraient devenir membres de la FAO.
Nous sommes saisis, au titre de ce sous-point, de différents documents. Je me permets de rappeler très brièvement qu'il s'agit du document CL 98/5, paragraphes 4 à 14. Il s'agit du rapport élaboré par le Comité, à sa session de mai 1990, sur l'étude de la façon dont les organisations d'intégration économique régionale pourraient devenir membres de la FAO. Il y a ensuite le document CL 98/19, paragraphes 3 à 12. Et enfin, il y a le document CL 98/23, qui contient un rapport du Directeur général sur la question du statut des organisations d'intégration économique régionale auprès de la FAO, accompagné du document CL 98/23-Sup.1 lequel contient une communication du Gouvernement italien et en annexe une lettre en date du 22 octobre 1990, adressée au Directeur général de la FAO par le Président du Conseil des communautés européennes, M. De Michelis.
Fotis POULIDES (Chairman, Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): I am pleased to introduce briefly the Reports of the 54th and 55th Sessions
of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters. Two principal subjects were considered. First, at its 54th Session, the Committee reviewed the Draft Headquarters Agreement for the World Food Programme. Second, at both its 54th and 55th Sessions, the Committee examined the Progress Reports by the Director-General on the study which he had undertaken regarding possible forms of membership for regional economic integration organizations in FAO as well as a draft report by the Director-General on options for a form of membership of such organizations.
The question of the Draft Headquarters Agreement for the World Food Programme is reported in document CL 98/5, paragraphs 17 to 28 of the Report of the 54th Session. In this respect, the Committee turned first to the proposed amendments relating to security matters which have been put forward by the Italian Government and reviewed these amendments as well as the counter-proposals envisaged by the Director-General. Second, the Committee looked at the possible implications of the draft Headquarters Agreement with respect to the existing relationship between FAO, the United Nations Organization and the World Food Programme.
The proposed amendments to the draft related to the inviolability of the Headquarters, protection of the Headquarters, immunity of officials of WFP and certain restrictions of enjoyment of privileges and immunities. The CCLM endorsed the approach proposed and concluded that negotiations should be pursued in an effort to reach agreement as soon as possible based on the conclusions and compromise solutions outlined in that document.
The Committee examined the impact of the Draft WFP Headquarters Agreement on the Relationship between the WFP, FAO and the UN in the light of the institutional relationship between WFP, on the one hand and the UN and FAO on the other as well as the recommendations in the Report by the joint UN/FAO Task Force in 1985.
The Committee concluded that the draft WFP Headquarters Agreement, if adopted, would have a substantial impact on the relationship between WFP on the one hand, and the UN and FAO on the other hand, and in particular on the location, status and powers of the WFP Secretariat as well as the legal status of the WFP itself. The Committee agreed that, to the extent that the draft agreement would substantially change that relationship, the desirability of effecting such a change would have to be passed upon by the Governing Bodies concerned.
The CCLM recalled that, at its 95th Session in June 1989, the Council had invited the Director-General to explore the options for a form of membership of FAO for regional economic integration organizations to which their Member States have transferred competence in some fields of activity of FAO, along with the full constitutional, legal, financial and other implications for the Organization of such options and to report thereon to the 98th Session of the Council in November 1990. As a result a series of talks had taken place between FAO and the Commission of the EEC.
The Committee noted that, in order to take full account of the special legal position of a regional economic integration organization to which its Member States had transferred competence in fields of activity of FAO, the concept which had been adopted for purpose of the talks was that of
"alternative membership" as opposed to either normal membership (which was really suited only for States) or associate membership (which was appropriate only for dependent territories).
The Committee looked closely at the various attributes which this implied and concluded that the concept of alternative membership was useful and that it would be advisable for the Director-General to continue the exploratory talks along those lines.
One of the most difficult questions which had arisen concerned the modality of participation of a regional economic integration organization in cases of concurrent competence were it to become a member. This matter was considered at some length at the 55th Session of the Committee and the results of the discussions are set forth in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the report of that session.
At its 55th Session, the CCLM was informed that, at the informal discussions between FAO and the EEC Commission in June 1990, the Commission had indicated that it would seek a status of full member of FAO and that a status of alternative member would not be acceptable. The ECC would agree, however, to exercise the attributes of that status in practice in a manner consonant with the concept of the alternative nature of membership.
In discussing this aspect, the Committee underlined that the scope of the study being carried out was not limited to the EEC, but was intended to cover any regional economic integration organization to which competence had been transferred by its Member States in areas of FAO's activities. Thus, whatever solutions were proposed would have to be suitable for any organization which met those criteria.
The Committee concluded that further consideration should be given to finding a compromise solution which would be appropriate for any regional economic integration organization to which the Member States had transferred competence in areas of FAO's activities. Such a formula would, therefore, have to be sufficiently flexible and adaptable whilst, at the same time, providing the required amount of certainty with regard to the membership status and membership rights of such an organization.
Various possibilities for a compromise solution could be considered. The attributes of membership for regional economic integration organizations could be defined in the Constitution without creating a separate category of alternative membership. Such membership attributes could be set out in the General Rules of the Organization rather than specified in the Constitution. A third option might be to set them out in a protocol to be agreed between FAO and a regional economic integration organization, with the approval of the appropriate governing bodies.
Finally, the CCLM considered the special problems posed by the ineligibility of regional economic integration organizations to participate in conventions and agreements under Article XIV of the FAO Constitution. The Committee recognized that it might be desirable to consider an amendment to Article XIV in order to deal with these problems whatever the results of the exploratory study on the broader question of alternative membership.
LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais dire que, suite à l'exposé du Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, nous prenons note des différents rapports. Nous remercions vivement Monsieur POULIDES de la façon dont il assume avec sagesse la présidence de cet important Comité. Nous n'avons évidemment pas à discuter des rapports qui nous sont soumis pour information.
LEGAL COUNSEL: The documents before you are CL 98/23, Report by the Director-General on options for a form of membership for regional economic integration organizations in FAO, and CL 98/23-Sup.1, which is entitled Communication from the Government of Italy regarding the Status of the EEC with respect to FAO.
First I would like to apologize for a slight mistake in the heading on the first document which refers to provisional agenda item 23 and it should of course be now agenda item 22.
In introducing these documents I shall try to be brief, but as this is a matter which is of great importance to the Organization and as the documents are quite lengthy I would ask for your indulgence if I spend more time than I would normally do on the substance of the matter.
The report of the Director-General sets out the results of the study which the secretariat has undertaken on the possibility of devising a form of membership for regional economic integration organizations in FAO. As you know the Director-General was invited to prepare this study by the Council itself at its 95th session in June 1989. The terms of reference given to the Director-General spoke of regional economic integration organizations in general. The report is therefore set out in these general terms. However, as the report reveals, the study was based to a large extent on discussions with the Commission of the European Communities as being the only regional economic integration organization that the secretariat could identify at the moment as meeting the criteria set down by the Council.
During the course of our discussions with the EEC commission, a large measure of agreement was reached on the practical way in which a form of membership for regional economic integration organizations could work. The main lines of a possible scheme are set out in the document before you.
I do not wish to go into detail. However, I would like to explain the criteria that were used to guide us in devising this scheme, because I believe that this will help the members of the Council to understand better the proposals set out in the document.
The first criterion that we used was the concept of the alternative nature of membership rights, or rather, of the exercise of membership rights. This means that on any given matter, either the regional economic integration organization or its member states, according to which has competence, could exercise membership rights, but never both. It means that the sum of the rights and obligations of the regional economic integration organization and its member states can never exceed the rights and obligations hitherto exercised by the member states.
In practical terms that translates into the working principle that never, and I repeat never, should the unit of a regional economic integration organization and its member states exercise more than the number of votes to which its member states are entitled. In the case of the EEC, for example, it would mean that there should never be any occasion on which the EEC and its member states would exercise more than the 12 votes of its member states, or in the case of the present Council, more than the 7 votes of the present Council members. This I wanted to make quite clear.
On the other hand, the criterion would logically mean that the unit of a regional economic integration organization and its member states should not be required to pay more than the total of the assessed contributions of its member states, and that the regional economic integration organizations should therefore not be assessed a contribution of the regular budget of the Organization in its own right. These propositions you will see reflected in the document before you, Mr Chairman.
The second criterion that we used was one that was derived from our study of the present competence of the EEC as the only example of a regional economic integration organization meeting the criteria set down by the Council at the moment. That study indicated that the EEC, broadly speaking, has competence in a number of technical sectors of the Organization's activities, such as fisheries management policy or agricultural trade matters, but that, again broadly speaking, it does not yet have competence in matters relating to the institutional life of the Organization and that competence in these matters remains at the moment with the member states. Applying this guiding principle in our exploration of the options for a form of membership led us to a number of conclusions that you will see in the paper before you today including, for example, the notion that regional economic integration organizations should not, at least at the moment, be eligible for membership of Council committees of restricted membership, such as the Finance Committee, the Programme Committee and the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters, since these committees deal primarily with matters relating to the institutional life of the Organization. Nor, incidentally, would a regional economic integration organization vote on such matters as the adoption of the budget, election of members of the Council and of members of Council committees, or indeed the election of the Director-General.
In our discussions with the EEC Commission, we have, as reported in document CL 98/23, reached a substantial measure of agreement, tentative agreement of course, on the practical attributes of membership that could be exercised by a regional economic integration organization admitted to membership of this Organization. We have not as yet reached agreement on the terms in which this could be reflected in the Constitution and other
Basic Texts of the Organization. We are in agreement, and I would like to stress this point, that any form of membership for a regional economic integration organization would need to be sui generis in nature-that is to say, it would not be exactly the same form of membership as that of Member Nations. But how to define that form of membership and how to reflect the attributes of membership in the Basic Texts is a matter which does require further thought and further consultation, we would suggest both with the EEC and by the competent bodies of this Organization such as the CCLM. The CCLM has already put forward three possible approaches that could be explored.
The questions that the Council is asked to address are basically twofold. The first is, does the Council in general find the practical attributes of membership for regional economic integration organizations as set out in the document appropriate or are there other approaches that the Council would wish the secretariat to take or points that it would wish to see clarified. The second is, does the Council wish to mandate the Director-General to continue his discussions with the EEC with a view to formulating appropriate draft amendments to the Basic Texts.
Should the Council decide to give the Director-General such a mandate, then draft amendments could be formulated for presentation to the CCLM in March 1991 and for political decision to the next session of the Council in June 1991. The letter from the Government of Italy appended to the second document before you today, CL 98/23-Sup.1, indicates that the European communities on the one hand have decided, on the basis of the discussions with the secretariat of FAO, to mandate the EEC Commission and the presidency of the Council of Ministers of the European Communities to hold further formal talks with a view to the formulation of draft amendments to the Basic Texts. That would allow for regional economic integration organizations such as the EEC to apply for membership in the Organization. The question is now whether the Council for its part wishes to grant a similar mandate to the Director-General.
There is one further point I sould add, almost as an appendix to this introduction, because it is indeed an appendix rather than matter germane to the main issue of membership in the Organization. And that is the question of the possible amendment of Article XIV of the Constitution to allow for regional economic integration organizations meeting certain criteria to become party to agreements and conventions adopted under Article XIV of the Constitution. The opinion of the Council is also sought on this point. In one sense the question is part of the general question of membership. If the Constitution were to be amended to allow for regional economic integration organizations to apply for membership of the Organization and if on that basis a regional economic integration organization, such as the EEC, were in fact admitted to membership, then without a doubt the amendments adopted would allow for that regional economic integration organization to become a party to agreements and conventions adopted under Article XIV of the Constitution.
In two senses, however, the issue is somewhat separate. In the first place there is the question of timing. Constitutional amendments relating to membership of the Organization would enter into force immediately. So also would amendments to Article XIV allowing regional economic integration
organizations to become parties to agreements concluded under that Article. But under the General Rules of the Organization as they stand at the moment, and unless those rules are suspended by the Conference, applications for membership in the Organization by regional economic integration organizations eligible for membership under amendments to the Constitution could not be entertained until the following Conference session. Secondly, an amendment to Article XIV along the lines suggested would allow for other regional economic integration organizations that may in the future meet the criteria set down by the Council to become parties to conventions and agreements concluded under Article XIV of the Constitution.
I am conscious of the fact that I have used more of the precious time of the Council than I would in normal circumstances have sought. I hope, however, that I may have been able to clarify by this introduction what is, after all, a most important, and not an easy, issue.
Gian Luigi VALENZA (Italie): Monsieur le Président, excusez-moi, mais j'avais tout à l'heure, au moment de la discussion du point 22.1 de l'ordre du jour, demandé au secrétariat de prendre la parole, mais peut-être ne m'a-t-on pas compris, et on ne m'a pas donné la parole. Alors, avec votre permission, je ferai une petite intervention sur le point 22.1 qui n'est pas encore clos, et à titre personnel évidemment, comme Représentant de l'Italie. Et je ferai ensuite une autre intervention sur le point 22, et cette seconde intervention sera faite au nom de la Communauté, en tant que Président en exercice en ce moment.
Au niveau du point 22.1, Monsieur le Président, pour ce qui est du premier point soulevé par le président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, je voudrais confirmer ici que le Directeur général de la FAO, par sa lettre du 11 juin 1990, me faisait savoir, entre autres, que la FAO accepterait de ne pas inclure dans le projet d'accord les clauses additionnelles concernant l'immunité de détention préventive des fonctionnaires en cas de demande d'extradition, et la non-applicabilité de la législation du travail italienne, au niveau des relations entre le PAM et les Membres de son personnel, pourvu qu'un échange de lettres, concernant l'interprétation de l'Accord de siège de la FAO, puisse avoir lieu entre l'Organisation et l'Italie, avant qu'un accord de siège ne soit signé pour le PAM. Je peux ajouter ici que les autorités italiennes sont en train de travailler activement à cela. Merci Monsieur le Président.
Je passe à la déclaration, au nom de la Communauté, sur le point 22.2. Monsieur le Président, je voudrais tout d'abord vous remercier au nom de la Communauté d'avoir inscrit cette question à l'ordre du jour de la 98ème session. Je voudrais également remercier le Directeur général, le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et le Comité financier pour l'attention avec laquelle ils ont examiné la question de l'adhésion de la Communauté à la FAO. Je pense que leurs différents rapports constituent une bonne base de discussion. Comme cela a été mis en évidence dans ces rapports, les Etats Membres de la Communauté ont transféré à celle-ci des compétences partielles ou totales dans un certain nombre de domaines qui relèvent également du champ d'activités de la FAO. Or, dans son état
actuel, l'Acte constitutif de la FAO ne permet pas la participation pleine et entière de la Communauté aux travaux de la FAO au même titre que les autres membres de l'Organisation.
Pour cette raison, la Communauté souhaite avoir des conversations exploratoires pour étudier les possibilités d'accorder à la Communauté un statut de membre correspondant à ses compétences. Nous sommes sensibles à l'intérêt porté à cette question lors de la 95ème session du Conseil de la FAO, et au mandat qui a été donné au Directeur général pour organiser ces conversations. Ces conversations exploratoires qui ont déjà eu lieu, ont d'ores et déjà permis d'éclaircir un certain nombre de questions ayant trait à une éventuelle adhésion de la Communauté à la FAO.
Il serait donc souhaitable, Monsieur le Président, Mesdames, Messieurs les délégués, que cette assemblée prenne en considération l'opportunité de recommander que la Conférence examine la question de l'approbation du principe de l'adhésion de la Communauté à l'Organisation ainsi que les amendements à l'Acte constitutif de la FAO, comme le demande d'ailleurs le Conseil des communautés européennes en vue de permettre l'adhésion de la Communauté elle-même. La Communauté pense par ailleurs qu'il convient d'envisager, comme indiqué dans notre lettre du 22 octobre dernier, que l'on entre dans la phase formelle du dialogue entre la Communauté et la FAO en vue d'établir des conditions d'adhésion mutuellement satisfaisantes qui permettraient à la Communauté de devenir membre lors de la prochaine Conférence de la FAO en novembre 1991.
Monsieur le Président, Mesdames, Messieurs les délégués, permettez-moi d'exprimer au nom de la Communauté ma reconnaissance pour la coopération de la FAO dans ce dossier et d'engager le Conseil à réserver une suite favorable à la demande que je formule en tant que membre de ce Conseil et en tant que représentant de la présidence des communautés européennes.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie l'Ambassadeur d'Italie de son intervention. Il a abordé deux sujets différents. Le premier concerne l'accord de siège du PAM qui a été discuté avant-hier et le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques nous a fait rapport sur l'activité du Comité, rapport qui ne donnait pas lieu à discussion. Le second sujet évoqué, par contre, ouvre bien une discussion.
Nedilson Ricardo JORGE (Brazil): First of all allow me to commend the work of the FAO Secretariat and CCLM on this issue. The studies undertaken are precise and comprehensive.
The Brazilian delegation believes that any form of membership in FAO of the EEC and similar organizations should have as a guideline the concept of the alternative nature of such participation. The essence of this concept would be that the EEC could exercise membership rights, including voting rights, on matters within its competence only where its Member States do not exercise their membership rights and vice versa.
In regard to voting rights, the EEC should have a number of votes equal to the number of its Member States that are represented in that governing body and exercise its voting rights only when individual Member States of the EEC do not exercise their rights and vice versa.
On no occasion could the EEC vote in addition to its Members. Along these lines it could be argued that the EEC is already part of the membership of this Council in so far as some Member States of that organization are represented in the Council. The EEC could exercise on matters within its competence a number of votes equal to the number of Member States that are Members of the Council. Of course, the EEC would exercise its voting rights only when its Member States do not exercise theirs and vice versa.
As a natural consequence of these guidelines in the corresponding debates in governing bodies either the EEC or its Member States but not both would be entitled to speak on that issue. In areas of concurrent jurisdiction or mixed competence the question of who should speak and vote is to be decided in advance of the meeting between the EEC and its Member States.
The Brazilian delegation supports the point of view that according to these guidelines the EEC could not become a Member of the Programme Committee, the Finance Committee or the CCLM for these committees deal mainly with matters concerning the institutional life of the Organization. Besides, the EEC representatives would not be eligible to hold office.
With respect to its financial contribution, it seems fair that the EEC contributes only with a small charge to cover administrative costs as each of its Member States already has it's own due contribution.
The Brazilian delegation also deems it appropriate to define clearly the competent areas between the EEC and its Member States. Even if this division of competence has an evolutionary nature, the legal instrument of formal admission of the EEC should have a detailed list of competence transferred to the EEC by its Member States concerning the areas relating to the programmes and activities of FAO. At the same time each Member State of the EEC should make a formal declaration confirming the areas that Member State has effectively transferred competence to the EEC, similar to what is established by the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea in its Appendix 9, Article 5, 1 and 2. In this way, the transference of competence would become clearly defined and this would allow more transparent participation of the EEC's declaratory processes within FAO.
Finally, concerning the legal form to be given to the EEC membership in FAO, the Brazilian delegation thinks that possible solutions will not constitute a major problem as long as the EEC membership remains commensurate with its powers in the aforementioned guidelines; that is, within the principle of alternate participation between the EEC and its Member States. Any proposed form of membership, therefore, must be sui generis. We favour in this sense the continuation of contacts between the EEC and the FAO Secretariat in order to reach an agreement on this question which will be presented for consideration at the next session of this Council.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Brésil de son intervention claire et précise et je me permets de l'en féliciter.
Sra. Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): El tema que analizamos hoy reviste la mayor importancia, tanto para la Comunidad Económica Europea como para sus miembros, individualmente, y para el resto de los miembros de esta organización. La documentación con que contamos para la ilustración de las diversas cuestiones involucradas ha sido particularmente apreciada por mi Gobierno. Agradecemos a la Secretaría-y especialmente a la Oficina del Consejero Legal y al Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos-el tiempo y la dedicación consagrados al análisis de la cuestión.
Señor Presidente, el tema es complejo y delicado y merece un estudio detenido. Al respecto, permítanos expresar las siguientes reflexiones:
1. Como bien se ha puesto de relieve en las deliberaciones del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos y en el documento del Director General, la solución que se adopte a este respecto deberá ser de aplicación no sólo a la Comunidad Económica Europea, sino a cualquier Organización regional de integración económica, a la que sus miembros hayan transferido competencias en alguno o algunos de los ámbitos de actividad propios de la FAO.
2. Como bien indica el párrafo 14 del documento CL 98/23, su incorporación en calidad de nuevo miembro, de plena conformidad con el artículo II de la Constitución, entrañaría el pleno derecho de voto, además del correspondiente a sus Estados Miembros, incluso en asuntos que no sean de su competencia, el pago de una cuota completa, además de la de sus Estados Miembros, y el derecho a la elección para todos los órganos o puestos de la Organización.
La República Argentina estima, señor Presidente, que ello atentaría contra la igualdad entre todos los Estados Miembros de la Organización, ya que el otorgamiento de derechos de voz y voto adicionales a los de sus Estados Miembros colocarían al resto de los miembros de esta Organización en inferioridad de condiciones. El conjunto de los derechos vinculados a la condición de miembro ejercidos por las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica o por sus Estados Miembros, no deberá ser superior a los derechos de cualquier otro miembro de la FAO.
3. Es claro entonces, señor Presidente, que la situación de las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica que satisfacen los requisitos enunciados por este Consejo, es particular, y no corresponde por entero a ninguna de las formas de participación como miembros previstas actualmente por la Constitución. Cualquier forma de admisión como miembros de la FAO debe, por consiguiente, tener un carácter sui generis.
4. Mi Gobierno ha estudiado con interés el concepto de "Miembro Alternativo" desarrollado por la Secretaría en el curso de las conversaciones mantenidas hasta el presente con la Comunidad Económica Europea y las posibles atribuciones de una forma particular de admisión
como miembros de las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica, delineadas en el documento CL 98/23.
4.1 Estimamos que la participación de estas organizaciones regionales en la Conferencia y el Consejo, y en los Comités de composición abierta de la FAO, se debería ajustar a los siguientes parámetros:
a) Las organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica deberían ejercer su derecho de voz y de voto-consistente este último de la suma de los votos de sus Estados Miembros-, únicamente en los casos en que los miembros no ejercieran el suyo en forma individual. Inversamente, los miembros sólo podrían participar y votar en el caso que ese derecho no fuera de competencia exclusiva de las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica.
b) En los casos de competencias concurrentes, comunes, complementarias o paralelas, las Organizaciones Regionales o bien sus Estados Miembros, pero nunca ambos, tendrían voz y voto. Correspondería a la organización regional y a sus Estados Miembros decidir antes de cada reunión quien habría de ejercer esos derechos; pero ello, señor Presidente, debería ser comunicado al resto de los Miembros con anterioridad a la reunión. En ningún caso el derecho a su voz y voto podría ser compartido entre la organización regional y sus estados miembros.
4.2 Las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica no tendrían derecho a ser miembro de los Comités del Consejo de composición restringida, ni sus representantes a ocupar cargos en la Organización.
5. Todo lo que antecede, señor Presidente, indica que para asegurar el adecuado ejercicio de los derechos a que dé lugar la admisión de una organización de este tipo, es necesario definir claramente en algún tipo de instrumento legal aprobado por la Conferencia de la FAO,-y aquí podemos apoyar la sugerencia que acaba de hacer Brasil-la división de competencias entre la misma, o sea entre la Organización, y sus Estados Miembros. Los campos de competencias comunes, concurrentes, complementarias o paralelos que pudieran existir, deberían también ser conocidos con algún grado de precisión por el resto de los Estados Miembros. Es necesario también, asimismo, que la Organización Regional de Integración Económica y sus miembros actúen disciplinadamente.
Al respecto me permito señalar que mi delegación no está de acuerdo con que la Organización Regional de Integración Económica y los miembros intervengan en el mismo carácter durante una sesión sobre el mismo tema.
6. Como indicáramos antes, el otorgamiento del estatuto jurídico de Miembro Pleno a una Organización Regional de Integración Económica no resulta aceptable para mi país, sin que se revea contemporáneamente el estatuto en que revistan en la Organización sus estados miembros. Estimamos, por consiguiente, que debe continuar el estudio de la cuestión ajustando correctamente la terminología de modo que no haya lugar a dudas acerca de la naturaleza necesariamente alternativa del Estatuto sui generis que podría adoptarse.
7. En lo que se refiere a la posibilidad de enmienda del artículo XIV de la Constitución de la FAO para autorizar a las organizaciones regionales de integración económica, a las que sus miembros hubieran transferido competencias en algunos ámbitos de actividades propias de la FAO, a ser parte en las convenciones y acuerdos concluidos en virtud de dicho artículo, creemos que tal posibilidad sería factible siempre dentro de los límites que se le otorgue a la Organización en virtud de su carácter de miembro alternativo. Tal modalidad deberá surgir expresamente del texto que modifique la Constitución o del Anexo que contenga las normas específicas que regulen la repartición de las competencias y las modalidades de expresión y voto.
Preferimos, por consiguiente, que el estudio de esta cuestión particular tenga un desarrollo paralelo y se mantenga vinculado al estudio global sobre la posible forma de admisión de las organizaciones regionales de integración económica a la FAO.
LE PRESIDENT: Je me permettrai, de façon à bien centrer le débat, de rappeler les questions qui ont été posées par le Conseiller juridique et sur lesquelles nous aurons à nous prononcer de manière précise. Nous voudrions tout d'abord avoir l'opinion du Conseil sur la façon dont il a été procédé jusqu'à aujourd'hui et savoir comment il envisage la possibilité pour la FAO, le Secrétariat de la FAO et le Directeur général, de poursuivre la discussion en prévision du prochain Conseil, en juin 1991, étant bien entendu que les résultats des discussions formelles devront être soumis à l'examen du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques. Je crois que l'Ambassadeur d'Italie a été très clair dans la demandé faite au nom du Conseil des communautés européennes: c'est une demande précise d'amendement des textes constitutifs pour une participation à part entière et non pas comme membre alternatif. Le problème doit être étudié avec soin dans toutes ses implications, suivant la demande présentée et non pas suivant une hypothèse de travail juridique qui n'est pas demandé par la Communauté économique européenne.
Le Conseiller juridique a signalé qu'il y aurait un problème de "timing" en ce qui concerne l'Article XIV de l'Acte constitutif et l'application de modifications éventuelles en fonction de cet article.
Ce sont donc les questions qui sont actuellement posées au Conseil et pour lesquelles nous ne demandons pas de décision, puisqu'il s'agit de poursuivre la discussion, mais des orientations, qui nous paraissent importantes pour la poursuite de nos travaux.
Raphael RABE (Madagascar): Monsieur le Président, permettez-moi tout d'abord d'adresser les vives félicitations de ma délégation à S.E. M. l'Ambassadeur de Chypre, Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, pour sa présentation très claire et complète du rapport du Comité. Nous félicitons tous les membres du Comité et leur adressons nos vifs remerciements. Nous remercions M. Moore pour sa présentation satisfaisante du point 22 de l'ordre du jour.
Plusieurs documents de valeur ont été élaborés par le Secrétariat pour permettre aux Etats Membres d'appréhender avec le maximum d'informations très utiles le point 22 de l'ordre du jour qui, à notre avis, revêt une importance particulière pour l'Organisation.
En effet, ce sujet a fait l'objet de rencontres de très haut niveau, de plusieurs séances de travail entre spécialistes et de plusieurs sessions du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques. Le Comité financier, par ailleurs, a aussi examiné en profondeur la question. C'est dire l'importance que les Etats Membres, la CEE et, bien entendu, le Secrétariat de la FAO accordent à l'examen du statut de cette organisation d'intégration économique régionale qu'est la CEE auprès de la FAO.
La délégation malgache a reçu de son gouvernement des instructions très précises pour soutenir toute décision proposée en faveur de la session de la Communauté économique européenne au statut de membre de la FAO.
C'est pourquoi nous nous félicitons du caractère résolu avec lequel le dialogue a été engagé. Nous sommes convaincus qu'ensemble, nous trouverons la meilleure solution, c'est-à-dire celle qui attribue à la Communauté un statut de membre à part entière de la FAO en harmonisant, bien entendu, ses droits avec ceux des membres qui la composent et en évitant le cumul de tels droits. On sait que la contribution, dans tous les sens du terme, que la CEE pourra apporter en tant que soutien aux activités de la FAO sera pour le moins à la mesure du rôle déterminant qu'elle joue sur le plan international, notamment dans les domaines où elle excelle, à savoir la production agricole dans le sens large du terme et la sécurité alimentaire.
Pour terminer, ma délégation appuie chaleureusement la demande adressée au Conseil par l'Ambassadeur d'Italie quant à la suite favorable à réserver à la requête de la CEE.
Victoriano Β. LEVISTE (Philippines): We again commend the Secretariat for producing an excellent document in CL 98/23. It will provide valuable guidance to the Council. The issue of options for the form of membership for regional economic integration organizations in FAO provides some interesting insights for the Philippines. We note that the Secretariat of FAO states that the EEC is the only present example of a regional economic integration organization meeting the criteria set down by the Council. This provides a good basis for debate since the Philippines is a member of ASEAN-the Association of the South Eastern Nations.
Mr Chairman, we are following with great interest the debates going on, especially those that touch on options for a form of membership, voting rights, membership of the Conference, Council and Committees of the Council, and the right to hold office. The issue of financial contributions would also provide interesting debates.
At this point we agree with paragraph 41 of document CL 98/23, that issue needs to be further discussed with the EEC and the CCLM. As this would create a precedent for other organizations of the UN System, the
Philippines will follow these issues with keen interest with a view to the fact that it can also create a wide range of possibilities for our country.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie le Représentant des Philippines. Nous savons tous que ce pays est membre de l'ASEAN, groupe particulièrement dynamique et actif. Je crois que l'on peut d'ores et déjà répondre que toutes les organisations d'intégration économique régionale bénéficiant du transfert des compétences nationales seront soumises exactement au même régime. Il ne s'agit pas de la discussion d'un projet concernant uniquement la Communauté économique européenne mais toutes les organisations d'intégration économique régionale auxquelles seraient transférées, en totalité ou en partie, les compétences nationales. Je crois qu'il y a d'ailleurs suffisamment de contact entre l'ASEAN et la Communauté pour que les expériences respectives de ces deux organisations puissent servir à l'une ou à l'autre.
Czeslaw MUSZALSKI (Poland): I would like to inform you that my country, Poland, welcomes the initiative of the EEC to join our Organization. Upon instructions of my Government, and on behalf of my delegation, I have the honour and pleasure to offer full support to this initiative. We believe that the membership of the EEC will create better conditions for closer cooperation between the EEC and FAO for the benefit not only of our region but also for the whole Organization, especially for the benefit of the developing countries.
In this connection, Poland favours amending the Constitution of the FAO to enable the EEC to accede to the FAO on the basis of Member status commensurate with its powers.
Peter FRANKLIN (Australia): Let me say at the outset that my delegation has no objections in principle to the EEC becoming a party to the FAO Treaty. Indeed, we see some practical values in its membership. Similarly, we have no substantive difficulty with the Secretariat and the Commission continuing to work together to develop a more detailed proposal for our consideration at future meetings of the Council provided, of course, that such discussions are understood to be entirely without prejudice to any subsequent consideration of this matter by the Council. We feel it would be important that any proposal which eventually emerges covers not only the constitutional but also the operational aspects. whilst we would wish to acknowledge that document CL 98/23 provides an excellent starting point, we feel it will be important for the Council to have before it a fully comprehensive proposal on the range of issues identified by my colleagues and neighbours from Argentina and Brazil.
We would also appreciate advance notice of the consequential changes which would be required to the Basic Texts to accommodate the proposal, and that this should include in particular the proposed formal definition of the term "regional economic integration organization".
At this point I would like to note our preference for accommodating the request of the EEC, by the method which involves the least possible changes to the Basic Texts. It is for this reason that we have previously supported the accommodation of the EEC by the modification of the old Associate Membership category.
In closing, I would like to note the desirability of parallel consideration being given to this matter in the Rome Chapter of the OECD Group to ensure that important coordination considerations, especially relating to the participation of the EEC in Bureau and Drafting Groups, are not overlooked.
Earl W. WEYBRECHT (Canada): Mr Chairman, we wish to thank the Legal Counsel for his introduction of this item and for the Report submitted by the Director-General on Options for a Form of Membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO.
My delegation also appreciates the constructive analysis provided by the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters. We have taken very close note of the letters sent to the Director-General by the Presidency of the Council of the European Communities conveying a request that the Constitution of the FAO be amended to enable the Community to accede to the FAO on the basis of Member Status commensurate with its powers.
My delegation would like to note that the request is in itself a measure of the progress that has been made in European unity. The request may very well pose complex problems for multilateral institutions like FAO, but they are nonetheless the problems of success and progress and, as such, are to be welcomed and addressed with creativity and positive imagination.
My delegation would just like to raise a few points under this item. Firstly, the issues involved far transcend the FAO. They concern the institutional structure through which the multilateral system might best accommodate the common exercise of sovereignty by the EEC. For this reason, it is vital that our response to this request be framed in a much broader context. We feel that in the further exploration of the options in the proposed dialogue between the FAO and the EEC, the UN in particular should be closely consulted in view of the influential precedent our response will establish.
Secondly, neither Canada nor we presume any other Member would be prepared to accept any formula which would accord more rights in the FAO to European Community Members than are accorded in this Organization to other Members. Our reading of the request is that the EEC is not seeking any such preferential treatment. It rather seeks membership commensurate with its powers. What this means is that the number of votes would never exceed the number of countries in the EEC.
Thirdly, any formula through which a form of membership for the EEC may be accommodated will need to be precisely defined. We will have the same view in relation to an amendment to Article XIV of the Basic Texts.
Fourthly, the further exploration or dialogue would need to consider the mechanism through which the evolving division of competence between the Community and its Member States would at all times be clearly defined for FAO purposes by the Community and its Members. The onus of clear definition should not be borne by the Organization or its non-EC Members, and questions of competence would not reduce the obligation of the EEC or its Member States.
Finally, we support the proposal to authorize the Director-General, in consultation with the CCLM, to enter a formal dialogue with the Community to explore and refine options, and possibly to recommend a specific response in light of our considerations today.
We would welcome an opportunity to review this subject again in the June Council Session. We believe that the Member States need to be closely associated with the development of the mechanism and would want to be kept informed of the progress in the dialogue to ensure that they are fully prepared when this matter is discussed again by the Governing Bodies.
Steven D. HILL (United States of America): The United States delegation appreciates the careful work of the Director-General and the Office of the Legal Counsel on Options for a Form of Membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO. The Director-General's Report on this subject will serve as a useful basis for further consideration of the issues involved.
Because of the importance of this question and the precedent that the FAO's decision of this question may create for other international organizations, it is crucial that the implications of regional economic integration organization membership are thoroughly explored. My delegation believes that there are a number of issues that should be addressed more completely before it is appropriate for the FAO Council to consider what form of membership may be appropriate for regional economic integration organizations. For example, the Secretariat has determined that at present there is only one regional integration organization to which their Member States have transferred competence in some field of activity of FAO, but we must keep in mind that other organizations might in the future also fit this description.
It would, therefore, be useful to explore: one, what organizations besides the EEC currently qualify as regional economic integration organizations, and whether this term itself should be defined more precisely; two, what organizations, if any, might so qualify in the foreseeable future; three, which of these present and potential regional economic integration organizations may in the foreseeable future have competence transferred to it in the field of activity of FAO; and, four, which if any such organizations may be interested in FAO membership.
In addition, we feel it would be useful for the Council to consider the possible effect that allowing regional economic integration organizations to become Members might have on other kinds of organizations that might later seek similar types of membership.
Another point that requires further analysis is the precedent that according any form of membership status to regional economic integration organizations in FAO would create in other international organizations.
The Director-General's Report indicates that several UN System agencies, informally canvassed, saw little problem with the concept of alternative Membership, but foresaw substantial problems with according a regional economic integration organization full membership. Further analysis of this important consideration would be appreciated.
Turning to the request by the EEC, my delegation would appreciate clarification of the EEC Council's request for "Member status commensurate with its powers", especially in the light of the EEC's statements to the Director-General that it would only consent to accede to FAO on the basis of full membership, but that it would be willing to exercise its rights of membership along the lines of the proposed alternative Membership. This raises the question as to what are the specific problems the EEC has with the status of alternative Membership as outlined in the Director-General's Report. In fact, we feel it would be helpful for the Council to have a further explanation of the problems the EEC and its Member States now face in working within the existing FAO structure and why these problems cannot be resolved by amending specific provisions in the FAO Basic Texts as opposed to granting EEC membership status.
We note that the Director-General's statement indicates that a detailed statement of EEC competencies will be established in the course of future discussions. We believe that such a statement would be crucial for an informed decision as to EEC membership and would appreciate in addition some indication of the competencies that are likely to be transferred in the foreseeable future. In short, my delegation believes that because of the number of questions that require further attention and because of the precedent this issue may establish, it is too early to consider entering into discussions with the EEC aimed at establishing mutually satisfactorily accession terms.
Again we appreciate the work that has gone into the Director-General's report but feel the Secretariat should continue to discuss the issues involved with the EEC as well as with FAO Member States and other international organizations.
With respect to the question of amending Article XIV to allow the EEC to become a party to existing conventions and agreements concluded under the Article in the same way as non-member states, it is not clear to my delegation that the Director-General and the EEC agree that such an amendment is desirable. If in fact this is something that the EEC Member States desire my delegation feels that it would be useful for the Director-General to explore further how Article XIV could be amended but it should be made clear that any amendment would not prejudice the larger question of regional economic integration organization membership in FAO. Before any considerations could be given to amending Article XIV it would be necessary to determine exactly what agreements would be affected; any amendment would have clearly to resolve the relationship between regional economic integration organizations' rights and responsibilities and those of the Member States under Article XIV agreements. For example, we believe that
only FAO Members should have the right to participate in the negotiations of such agreements.
These, and other issues, would have to be clarified before any further discussion on this issue can take place.
CHAIRMAN: Members of the CCLM will have the opportunity to follow the discussion very well.
Je crois que l'on a répondu déjà clairement en ce qui concerne le principe des organisations régionales avec transfert de compétences. Là, je crois que ce qui est demandé n'est pas uniquement le statut de la Communauté, mais le statut des organisations économiques régionales ayant des compétences propres enlevées aux Etats Membres. Et j'ai quand même pu préciser, suite à l'intervention de l'Ambassadeur d'Italie, ce qui était demandé par la Présidence du Conseil des Communautés. Alors, il est facile de répondre sur le plan juridique "pourquoi pas le statut de membre alternatif?". Pas de statut de membre alternatif, parce qu'il n'y a pas d'alternative, en ce sens que dans certaines matières, il y a transfert de compétences; et quand il y a transfert de compétences, il va de soi-mais tout cela devra être précisé juridiquement-que les membres qui ont transféré la compétence n'ont plus rien à dire directement dans le cadre du débat, puisqu'ils ont transféré la compétence à une organisation régionale. Donc, il n'est plus question d'alternative, mais il est question de transfert. Il faut évidemment que tout cela soit précisé de manière extrêmement claire; et, l'intervention très importante du Comité, dont les Etats-Unis font partie, me parait déterminante pour la suite des travaux.
Masayuki KOMATSU (Japan): Before I touch upon the EEC matter I would like to make one small comment, because I think that is important and appropriate and that is to reaffirm what we have said under the agenda item 17, when we considered the Report of the 59th and 60th Programme Committee concerning some mechanism or measures to be considered for the broader participation for both the Programme and Finance Committees.
Then about the EEC, we would like to extend our compliments to the elaborate explanation on the FAO study on the possible form of membership of regional economic integration organizations in FAO. In this regard we would also like to make our whole-hearted appreciation over the efforts made in the consultations on these matters between the FAO Secretariat and the European Economic Commission.
First of all, Japan considers this matter of vital importance that the EEC has an active role in the FAO's activities through appropriate framework. It is well known that because Member Nations of the EEC have been delegating their area of competence to the Community the economic integration will be achieved steadily and well-preparedly and the EEC has participated in several international agreements such as NAFO, North Atlantic Fisheries Organization, NEAFC, the North-East Atlantic Fishery
Convention and the International Commodity Agreement on Wheat and the Convention on Conservation for Antartic Marine Living Resources, etc.
As we ponder upon the history of the EEC's status this matter contributes to the discussion on the Indian Ocean Tuna Management Body draft agreement. Since the beginning of the discussion on the Indian Tuna draft agreement, Japan has been of the view that in order to achieve the effective management for the Indian Ocean Tuna the EEC's full and active participation in any form of the agreement should be indispensable.
In this regard the Japanese delegation is more than pleased to say that Japan will agree to the constitutional amendment to accommodate the full and active participation in the FAO Constitution, Article XIV, such as the Indian Ocean Tuna Agreement, so that the problems of the EEC membership on urgent matters will be solved in a timely fashion. However, Japan fully recognizes the eargerness on the side of the EEC to become a full member of FAO by derivation from the Indian Ocean Tuna draft agreement.
Our fundamental understanding on the membership of the EEC is generally as follows: one, since the EEC exists by the delegation of competence of Member States and through the mutual coordination function, it is no doubt clear that the EEC is no more than the summation or the addition of twelve Member States. Accordingly it is very clear and simple that the EEC and its Member States have no right to force non-EEC member countries to accept what is beyond the relation that the EEC has been partially delegated competent authority from Member States. This notion should apply to the number of votes, the right to run for the Council's seats, etc. Furthermore, theoretically speaking, if the EEC became something like the super-national body in the international society which has entirely delegated all competencies from all Member States, like in the case of the fishery management, we can understand that the EEC may become a similar entity as far as economic activities are concerned, like the United States of America, which in that case apparently has one vote. Having said this, as far as the principle of the alternative membership is concerned, which the FAO Secretariat has produced in the documents CL 98/5, CL 98/19 and CL 98/23, our delegation is willing to support the concept of alternative membership of the EEC. However, our delegation is of the view that further study and clarification should be conducted to facilitate our non-EEC members understanding on this matter, deeply and purely in order for us to give the endorsement to the EEC's request. First, what is the regional economic integration, or what is the definition of the regional economic integration? I read document CL 98/23 and Tokyo also examined this but in its paragraph 5 it said the first criterion, which I assume is regional economic integration, needs no explanation. However, we definitely need further elaboration and explanation because we do not understand.
Secondly, about the idea of competence, maybe we can categorize three areas: one, what is the area of competence of the EEC to which the Member States delegate all their competencies; maybe the second area is what are the areas of full competencies of Member States which Member States never delegate to the EEC.
Thirdly, what are the areas of partial competence of the EEC and the areas of partial competence of the Member States. We strongly feel about the
specifications of the areas with the comprehension and detailed list of agriculture, forestry and fishery sectors respectively, because, for example, even the case of fishery is not simple. We have learned that the EEC has competence in fishery management and fishery negotiations but both the EEC and Member States have a competence in the development policies. We are temporarily of the view in the case of the first category the EEC should be given alternative membership. We think the preparation of the list is very important for us to understand to avoid the confusion of the EEC's contribution and intervention amongst other members.
The third thing that should be clarified is what should be the Member States' status in the areas of full competence of EEC. If the delegation of competence will proceed fully we are wondering if Member States will be losing the membership of FAO in such an area. We would like to have elaboration on this point.
Fourthly, other than the EEC we can foresee that ASEAN, as the delegation of the Philippines mentioned, and various other regional bodies in Africa, such as IGADD, SADDAC, although their levels of maturity are different among them and from the EEC, however, we are not convinced fully why these organizations are treated outside of these studies for possible membership of the regional economic integration. We are concerned that if we have dealt only with the EEC we may face unforeseeable inconvenience.
We are not satisfied with the explanation expressed in the view of other organizations of the UN family in CL 98/23, paragraph 42. As a matter of activity of EEC, since economic activity of EEC is not confined to agriculture, forestry and fisheries, this should include, we assume, industrial and other activities. We think more elaboration and further consultation should be conducted exhaustively with other UN specialized agencies and United Nations New York.
We would like all these five points to be further examined at the CCLM and reported back to the coming June Council for clarification, for facilitation of approval of membership of EEC.
Finally, the Government of Japan appreciates the importance of EEC and good will and good relationships with Japan and as a matter of principle we strongly need the active participation of EEC in FAO.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie très vivement le distingué Représentant du Japon de sa substantielle intervention. Je me permets très respectueusement et en toute amitié de lui faire remarquer que certaines des questions qu'il a posées ont déjà reçu réponse dans l'exposé introductif de notre Conseiller juridique, M. Moore, qui a d'ailleurs signalé de manière explicite quels étaient, à l'heure actuelle, les domaines de compétences exclusives communautaires dans le domaine des pêches que vous avez mentionnés, et le domaine du commerce international agricole. Il s'agit-c'est important-d'une matière évolutive. Nous sommes dans un monde qui évolue et je crois qu'il ne faut pas voir les choses de manière "fixiste" mais qu'il faut voir l'évolution du monde dans son ensemble. Or, je crois avoir dit, pour situer le débat-et je me suis permis respectueusement d'intervenir-qu'il ne
s'agit pas uniquement de la Communauté mais de toutes les organisations où il y a transfert de compétences.
Vous avez évoqué une question concernant la SADCC, concernant l'ASEAN-et vous avez oublié le Pacte andin qui est important pour l'Amérique latine-et d'autres organisations régionales qui connaîtront également une évolution. L'étude entreprise couvre l'ensemble des organisations régionales où il y a transfert de compétences, et je crois que la réponse doit être donnée de manière très claire. Je me permettrai aussi de vous signaler qu'il serait peut-être superfétatoire que de poursuivre l'examen sur un statut qui n'est pas demandé. Ce qui est important, à mon sens, c'est de continuer à examiner ce qui est demandé et qui sera soumis aux instances compétentes selon la procédure normale, le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et le prochain Conseil de la FAO, avant d'arriver à la Conférence sur la base de dossiers prêts, dossiers dont je suis convaincu que le Japon les suivra avec intérêt, mais aussi avec beaucoup de vigilance.
Sra. Margarita LIZARRAGA SAUCEDO (México): Mi Gobierno ha examinado con suma atención el informe del Director General sobre este tema que nos ocupa. A nadie escapa la importancia que tiene la posible admisión de una organización regional de integración económica como miembro de una organización internacional reservada a Estados. Es la primera vez que una entidad diferente a la de Estado soberano pasaría a formar parte de una organización internacional de vocación universal. El Presidente que se sienta en este caso transcenderá el ámbito de nuestra Organización. Es por esto que consideramos que todos los aspectos jurídicos, administrativos, técnicos y prácticos deberán estar claramente definidos cuando nos pronunciemos en definitiva sobre este asunto.
Nos preocupa particularmente la definición de competencias y la forma en que se ejercerán éstas entre los Estados Miembros y la Comunidad. En especial se deberá mantener el principio de igualdad soberano de los Estados y el de "un Estado, un voto", por lo que se deberá tener especial atención para que en el proceso de toma de decisiones en nuestra Organización no se otorguen a la Comunidad y a sus Estados Miembros derechos de voto concurrentes que violen los principios constitutivos. En ningún caso se podría aceptar, asimismo, que la presencia de una organización represente un costo adicional para sus Estados Miembros. Coincidimos con otras delegaciones-particularmente Brasil, Argentina y otros, que nos precedieron-en el sentido de que se requiere contar con una posición documentada, aportada por la propia Comunidad, sobre las modalidades, formas y temas en que participarían la Comunidad y/o sus miembros para poder tener mayores elementos de juicio. También coincidimos en que la Comunidad no debe formar parte de los órganos rectores de composición restringida. Uno de los aspectos claves que se han señalado es la participación disciplinada de sus miembros y las definiciones de funciones y objetivos de la Comunidad y de la FAO para tener más claro si alguno de ellos no representa valores encontrados-proteccionismo agrícola, interferencias en las zonas económicas exclusivas y otros-que traigan consigo efectos negativos a los países miembros, particularmente los terceros países.
Queremos que después de un examen más a fondo de las diferentes posibilidades, se encontrará la solución apropiada para la admisión de cualquier organización regional de integración económica a la que los Estados Miembros hayan transferido competencias en las esferas de actividades de la FAO. Cualquier fórmula por la que se opte deberá ser lo suficientemente flexible y adaptable para que proporcione la seguridad sobre el Estatuto y los derechos de los miembros de la Organización, particularmente el de los Estados.
La Comunidad es una realidad que no podemos ni debemos ignorar, por lo que no nos oponemos a su eventual incorporación a nuestra Organización, después de una apropiada negociación que tome en cuenta todos los elementos e implicaciones ya mencionados u otros. Estamos seguros de que la Comunidad Europea aportaría a la FAO un importante aliento, que redundaría en un reforzamiento de la Institución, pero que debemos ser cautos y analíticos para llegar a un buen arreglo.
Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Nos une, señor Presidente, una grata y honrosa amistad de vieja fecha a Fotis Poulides, digno Embajador de Chipre y competente Presidente del CACJ. Los representantes de Colombia hacemos propicia esta oportunidad para rendir un homenaje muy sincero a la forma tan consagrada e inteligente como Fotis Poulides viene ofreciendo sus valiosos servicios a nuestro organismo. El Dr. Moore, con su competencia, generalmente reconocida, ha hecho una declaración jurídicamente impecable y ampliamente ilustrativa.
Los representantes de Colombia reiteramos en esta oportunidad lo que ya expresamos en el Consejo de junio del año pasado, cuando por primera vez se discutió este tema. El Gobierno de Colombia entiende esta solicitud de la Comunidad Económica Europea como otra manifestación del deseo de todos los miembros de esa importante Comunidad de tomar parte cada vez más activa y eficazmente en las actividades de la FAO en favor de los países en desarrollo. Por ello, pensamos que hay que buscar los medios para que la Comunidad y sus Estados Miembros, a la luz de la división de sus responsabilidades, puedan estar en condiciones de participar plenamente en los trabajos de nuestra Organización en aquellos ámbitos en que los países de la Comunidad Económica Europea ha transferido sus competencias a ésta.
El Director General de la FAO ha cumplido acertadamente las decisiones del Consejo de junio pasado, en el sentido de que, como lo dice el párrafo 3 del documento CL 98/23, pedimos al Director General que estudiara las opciones existentes para una forma de admisión como miembros de la FAO de las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica a las que sus Estados Miembros hubieran transferido competencia en algunos ámbitos de actividad propios de la FAO.
Todos los documentos disponibles para este tema indican claramente que el Director General y los representantes de la Comisión de la CEE han adelantado una serie de conversaciones exploratorias, como las ha vuelto a llamar el Embajador Valenza, en su adecuada presentación, y ésto se ha llevado a cabo con buen ánimo de ambas partes. Los representantes de Colombia, además, reconocemos los esfuerzos realizados por el Comité de
Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, importante Comité que en dos períodos de sesiones-mayo y septiembre 1990-, se ha ocupado de este asunto con mucha competencia y gran seriedad. Todas las alternativas consideradas por el CACJ han sido cuidadosamente analizadas por los representantes del Gobierno de Colombia.
Opinamos también que la reacción del Director General frente a las directrices emanadas del CACJ, han sido adecuadas y se han enmarcado dentro de los necesarios límites de prudencia que corresponde a un tema tan delicado y novedoso como éste. Se trata de algo nuevo, revolucionario, de histórico podríamos definirlo, sui generis. como lo ha llamado el Doctor Moore, porque sus alcances se proyectarán más allá del campo de la FAO y, seguramente, tendrán repercusiones en otros organismos del sistema de las Naciones Unidas, como juiciosamente lo anotaron Canadá y Estados Unidos.
Nosotros queremos manifestar nuestro acuerdo con la declaración del colega y amigo Leviste, de Filipinas, y del colega de Japón quienes hablaron de ASEAN así como Polonia, quien se refirió al mismo asunto, en el sentido de que nosotros pensamos que no será conveniente circunscribir este asunto sólo a la CEE, sino que es necesario actuar con la más amplia y real concepción de que si bien hoy-por el momento dijo el Dr. Moore-, si bien hoy la CEE sería la única organización que reuniría las condiciones sobre las cuales estamos discutiendo, una decisión positiva de la Conferencia abriría las puertas en el futuro a cualquier otra organización regional de integración económica que llegara a reunir estos mismos requisitos. Naturalmente, repetimos, porque no se trata de un hecho rutinario, sino de algo que tendría implicaciones que aún no conocemos exactamente; es apenas lógico que en este debate se hayan planteado interrogantes e inquietudes, muchos de los cuales nosotros compartimos, particularmente aquellos expresados por Brasil y Argentina.
Con realismo, señor Presidente, trataremos de situarnos en el punto en que ahora nos encontramos.
Según comunicación dirigida al Director General por el Sr. Gianni de Michelis, Ministro de Relaciones Exteriores de Italia, país que ocupa la Presidencia del Consejo de las Comunidades Europeas, texto que aparece en el documento CL 98/23-Supl.l: "El Consejo de las Comunidades Económicas Europeas ha decidido solicitar que se enmiende el acta constitutiva de la FAO con objeto de que la Comunidad pueda adherirse a ella con un estatuto de miembro que corresponda a sus competencias".
En el párrafo 3, del mismo Suplemento 1, el Director General afirma que: Si el Consejo expresara interés en continuar examinando posibles formas de admitir como miembros de la FAO a Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica él, el Director General, estaría dispuesto a entablar nuevas conversaciones con los representantes de la CEE, con arreglo a lo sugerido por el Gobierno de Italia.
Dentro de ese marco, los representantes de Colombia pensamos que este Consejo debe autorizar al Director General para que reactive sus conversaciones y contactos con los representantes de la Comisión de la
Comunidad Económica Europea, a fin de aclarar algunas cuestiones que aún están pendientes de decidir.
Pensamos nosotros que a través del debate celebrado sobre este tema, países como Brasil, Argentina y Japón han planteado algunos asuntos que merecen la mayor atención y que al ser compartidos en general por los Miembros del Consejo constituyen ya directrices para que el Director General las tenga en cuenta en las conversaciones ulteriores que va a celebrar con los representantes de la Comisión de la CEE.
Pensamos que será necesario definir muy bien que no habrá duplicación de votos, que en ningún momento el voto de la CEE podrá ser superior al número de sus miembros, o sea, como dijo Argentina, que no habrá ni voz ni voto adicionales, que las intervenciones deberán realizare dentro de un contexto racional para evitar conflictos, que no sólo la CEE sino cualquier organización regional de integración económica que ingrese en la FAO en esas condiciones no podrá ser elegida, a título propio, miembro del Consejo ni de los comités, de composición limitada. Pensamos también que el resultado de las conversaciones que se lleven a cabo sobre los aspectos que anteriormente venían tratando la FAO y la CEE, podrían arrojar resultados que se reflejarían en la posible modificación del artículo 14 de la Constitución para permitir que, cualquier organización en esas condiciones, pueda ser parte de convenciones y de acuerdos. Como lo dijo el colega del Japón, nosotros creemos también que tal vez, en este campo, la participación de cualquier organización regional de integración económica podría en realidad ofrecer una contribución muy positiva.
Queremos ahora dirigirnos al Doctor Moore porque pensamos que si el Consejo-no ahora sino en su reunión de junio próximo-decidiere recomendar a la Conferencia que se modifique el párrafo 2 del artículo 2 de la Constitución, entendemos que todas estas salvaguardias jurídicas que consideramos indispensables no podrían incluirse en el texto mismo de la Constitución. Entonces, Dr. Moore, ¿sería posible que, a través de una interpretación jurídica, de una declaración o de un Anexo, se pudieran definir con mucho cuidado y con diáfana claridad jurídica todas estas condiciones que nosotros consideramos indispensables, como lo han subrayado la mayoría de los miembros del Consejo?
En cuanto al itinerario futuro, pensamos que si el Director General considerase en principio satisfactorios los resultados de esas nuevas conversaciones, tal vez podría someter el tema a la consideración de los Comités de Programa y Finanzas en su sesión de la primavera de 1991, en caso de que surgieren aspectos programáticos y/o financieros que deban ser considerados por esos Comités.
Igualmente este Consejo podría pedir desde ahora al CACJ que, en cuanto el Director General someta a ese CACJ este asunto, ese Comité podría ocuparse de nuevo de los aspectos legales que aún necesiten ser considerados y, si fuere el caso, preparar un proyecto de enmienda al párrafo 2 del artículo 2 de la Constitución, enmienda que estaría dirigida a permitir que, además de los estados a que se hace referencia en ese artículo, pueda ser aceptada como miembro de la FAO toda organización de integración económica regional a la cual sus estados que sean miembros de la FAO hayan transferido competencias en los casos específicos del mandato de nuestra Organización.
Los representantes de Colombia opinamos que esos trámites reglamentarios podrían ser adoptados en el calendario que hemos indicado, en orden a facilitar al Consejo, en su reunión de junio de 1991, la adopción de una recomendación a la Conferencia basada en todos los antecedentes y condiciones, pues será necesario tener en cuenta el plazo de antelación de 120 días a la apertura de la reunión de la Conferencia con que hay que distribuir toda propuesta de enmienda a la Constitución.
Finalmente-sé que me he tomado mucho tiempo y me excuso con Ud. y mis colegas, pero tengo instrucciones de muy altas autoridades nacionales-, en cuanto al momento en que deberá entrar en vigencia la enmienda, hemos tomado nota del deseo expresado por las comunidades que desearían obtener ese estatuto de miembro durante la Conferencia de noviembre de 1991. Igualmente hemos tomado nota de las juiciosas y fundadas observaciones que hace el Director General al final del párrafo 3 del documento Suplemento 1, según las cuales normal y jurídicamente la Conferencia no podría, en el mismo período de sesiones, decidir las enmiendas y al mismo tiempo aceptar la solicitud de una de tales organizaciones económicas regionales.
Afortunadamente el propio Director General-estamos seguros, iluminado por el Dr. Moore, quien es la conciencia jurídica de esta organización-, al final de ese mismo párrafo sugiere el único medio jurídico que permitiría realizar los dos hechos simultáneamente en la misma Conferencia de noviembre de 1991: la suspensión del reglamento, suspensión a la cual ya se ha recurrido en oportunidades anteriores.
No obstante la seriedad y atención con que debe procederse en un asunto como éste, los representantes de Colombia pensamos que ya en la Conferencia, dentro de 13 ó 14 meses, nos encontraremos al término de un largo e intenso proceso a través del cual se habrán decantado, con responsabilidad y prudencia, todos los aspectos permanentes y pertinentes. Es así como la Conferencia tomaría une decisión debidamente analizada y sopesada sin improvisaciones. Si, como lo esperamos, así fuere, ojalá con el consenso general con que ahora se ha autorizado reanudar esas conversaciones exploratorias, no tendría mucho sentido aplazar por dos años, hasta la Conferencia de 1993, la aplicación de una decisión tan trascendental e importante como ésta. Por ello, los representantes de Colombia, en el Consejo de junio de 1991, propondremos que el Consejo recomiende a la Conferencia la suspensión del reglamento para que la enmienda a la Constitución y la admisión de una organización que reúna los requisitos plenamente determinados, se puedan cumplir en esa misma Conferencia.
EL PRESIDENTE: Creo que nunca he dicho que su intervención sea más corta. Antes de entregar la palabra al distinguido representante de Etiopía, quiero dársela a la distinguida representante de Argentina, que me la pidió.
Sra. Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): No quisiera interferir en su lista de oradores. Simplemente algunas cuestiones han sido mencionadas en el debate
que no estaban incluidas en nuestra intervención anterior y nos gustaría que nos permitiera dar nuestra opinión sobre ellas, pero al final de su lista de oradores.
Assefa YILALA (Ethiopia): My delegation would like to thank the Chairman of the CCLM, Mr Moore, for his introduction and the Secretariat for the document placed before Council.
The participation of the EEC in the meetings and sessions of FAO have been positive and always useful. This increased participation, in the light of the present request for possible membership commensurate with its powers, we feel will be an asset to those positive contributions. Therefore, it is a welcome move in principle.
As this is the first time that a regional economic organization has requested membership, the situation is deserving of study and careful analysis as outlined in the document before the Council. There will be areas of short-coming that will still need to be studied further.
Paragraph 43 of the document indicates that full and unrestricted membership will give rise to substantial problems and concern. Therefore, my delegation expresses its agreement with the need for further clarification of the conditions and provisions of admission of the EEC into FAO. The document also indicates that the competence of the EEC does not cover all the areas embraced by the Organization, which may mean that the EEC will be acting only in the areas of its competence, thus leaving other areas for member countries both of the EEC and of FAO. The pursuance of possible and appropriate membership will still need to be dealt with further by the EEC and its member countries, along with areas where responsibilities are not completely delineated and divisions of responsibility are not clear or shared.
My delegation wishes to mandate the Director-General to study the matter further, including the possible amendment of Article XIV if it happens to be unavoidable, and present it to the 99th Session of the Council. However, we would ourselves like to raise two questions for clarification.
The present consideration and study covers requests coming from a regional economic integrated organization, including those which might develop in the future. We would like some clarification as to whether a regional organization combining political and economic spheres, such as the OAU, cannot be considered along the same lines for membership.
Another question is whether such requests should be considered at a global level for all regional economic organizations, reference being made to the United Nations General Assembly so that membership requests coming from such organizations to this and other organizations can be considered with less difficulty.
Mme. Alice NIOMBELA-MAMBULA (Congo): Ma délégation a suivi l'exposé de M. Moore avec intérêt et, suite à cela, elle sera brève. Nous sommes d'accord pour que les négociations puissent se poursuivre au niveau de la FAO afin de trouver la forme la plus appropriée pour que la CEE devienne membre de la FAO; mais le Secrétariat doit faire de son mieux pour élaborer les critères pouvant permettre aux autres organisations d'intégration économique régionale de le devenir aussi, le moment venu.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie la Représentante du Congo. Je crois que la réponse qu'on peut lui donner est tout à fait positive.
Amin ABDEL-MALEK (Liban) (Langue originale arabe): La délégation du Liban est d'accord, en principe, pour que la CEE devienne membre de la FAO. Néanmoins, après avoir entendu les interventions des diverses délégations qui ont participé au débat, et en particulier celles du Brésil et de l'Argentine, la délégation du Liban préfère, à l'heure actuelle, rester prudente. Avant d'achever l'examen de la question, il faut donner suffisamment de temps au Secrétariat pour qu'il l'examine avec le CQCJ et que soit établi un rapport détaillé contenant tous les points soulevés aujourd'hui et les solutions possibles, rapport qui devra être présenté au Comité du programme, au Comité financier et au Conseil, à sa prochaine session.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vais donner la parole au Représentant du Maroc en m'excusant car, à propos des organisations d'intégration économique régionale, je me suis permis de citer le Pacte andin et d'autres organisations. Il va de soi que le Maghreb connaît également une situation évolutive que nous suivons avec beaucoup d'intérêt et que la solidarité maghrébine nous parait extrêmement importante dans l'édification du monde de demain.
Mustapha SINACEUR (Maroc): Monsieur le Président, je pense que vous avez tout à fait raison puisque j'ai l'honneur de prendre la parole au nom des pays de la région.
Nos délégations se sont penchées de très près sur la question et ont écouté avec intérêt les exposés du Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et du Conseiller juridique de la FAO. Nous pensons qu'en la matière, l'adhésion d'une organisation d'intégration économique régionale à la FAO est envisageable dans la mesure où les compétences déléguées par ses Etats Membres couvrant des domaines très larges devront être définies clairement.
S'agissant précisément de la demande d'adhésion de la CEE, nos délégations l'envisage favorablement comme étant une preuve de l'intérêt que la Communauté accorde à notre Organisation. Nos délégations reprennent à leur
compte les conclusions du CQCJ et considèrent qu'à l'heure actuelle, le statut de membre alternatif paraît le plus approprié, étant entendu que cette question doit faire l'objet d'une étude approfondie qui nous permettra, au moment opportun de prendre une décision définitive.
Vanrob ISARANKURA (Thailand): I would like to comment as follows. First of all, like the Philippine delegation, my delegation fully agrees with paragraph 41 CL 98/23 that this matter should be discussed further with the EEC. It will be very welcome if everything can be finished in due time, as was proposed by the delegate of Colombia, so that we are ready to discuss it again at the next session.
Secondly, with regard to the initiative to conclude an agreement for the establishment of an Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, we realize that the EEC could play an active role in that Commission. we also understand the problems as pointed out in paragraph 44 concerning regional economic integration organizations participating in conventions and agreements under Article XIV of the basic texts.
On this occasion I propose that we recommend that the CCLM should find a possible amendment of Article XIV to allow for regional economic integration organizations to become partners to the conventions and agreements concluded under this item as soon as possible.
Michael ΚΙΜΑ TABONG (Cameroon): My delegation first of all wishes to thank the Director-General, the Secretariat and the Chairman of the CCLM for the brilliant introduction of this subject. We also wish to thank the delegate of Italy for his valuable contribution.
The delegation of Cameroon always bases considerations on principles and precedents. Hence, the admittance of EEC into the FAO will create a precedent and this will open the way for other regional economic organizations that may follow. Hence, there will also be the question of competence of their membership. This needs to be examined very carefully.
My country has a long association with the EEC and we have had the Lome and the Yaounde Conventions. Therefore, we will support the membership of the EEC. But there are still a lot of loose ends that we should be taking into account. I do not need to repeat those very valuable observations which have already been made by other delegations, namely, those of Australia, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Mexico and Colombia. These already provide abundant food for thought to the Director-General and the Secretariat. We hope they will be examined very carefully,
Sra. Maria Susana LANDAVERI (Perù): Agradecemos la extensa presentación del tema 22. Sobre las posibles formas de admisión como miembro de la FAO de las organizaciones regionales de integración económica acogemos con beneplácito la solicitud de la Comunidad Económica Europea de examinar la
posibilidad de obtener en la FAO un estatuto de miembro que corresponda a sus competencias. Agradecemos el informe del Director General sobre el tema, en cuanto aclara puntos de especial interés para poder tomar una posición sobre esta posible admisión de organizaciones regionales de integración económica.
Apoyamos la admisión de la CEE como miembro de la FAO, en vista de que cumple con los requisitos de organización regional de integración económica cuyos Estados Miembros han transferido algunas competencias en sectores relacionados con las actividades de la FAO, como se explica en el párrafo 5 del documento CL 98/23. Asimismo, reconocemos que esta admisión sienta un precedente, para que, en el futuro, otras organizaciones de integración económica donde haya transferencia de competencias puedan ser parte de ésta y otras organizaciones del sistema de las Naciones Unidas. Como ya fuera mencionado, éste sería el caso del Pacto Andino y también del SELA (Sistema Económico Latinoamericano), en nuestra región.
Como ya han manifestado otras delegaciones, es indispensable que antes de la admisión de la Comunidad en nuestra Institución se debatan y definan exactamente todos los puntos referentes a las competencias de aquélla, su ejercicio de las mismas, sus atribuciones, el aspecto financiero, etcétera, y, por ende, se estudien y debatan claramente todas las posibles enmiendas de la Constitución de la FAO, u otro tipo de modificación necesaria para que puedan ser tomadas en consideración en la próxima reunión del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos de este Consejo y, de ser factible, como lo explicó el distinguido delegado de Colombia, la Comunidad Económica sea admitida como miembro de la FAO durante la Conferencia de noviembre de 1991.
LE PRESIDENT: Hier, nous avons été saisis d'un projet de résolution qui a été présenté par les Pays-Bas. Il y a eu des discussions d'un groupe de contact informel; et je suis saisi d'un document qui peut-être devra être précisé sur un point ou l'autre. Je proposerai la distribution de ce document dans la salle et la discussion en début d'après-midi, de façon à ce que vous ayez le temps d'en prendre connaissance. Donc le document va être distribué immédiatement dans toutes les langues de notre Organisation; et nous en discuterons en début d'après-midi.
Sra. Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): Señor Presidente, como le dijera anteriormente, mi delegación quisiera formular unas breves observaciones acerca de algunas propuestas que se han hecho en el curso del debate. En primer lugar, permítame referirme a una parte de la intervención del Embajador Bula Hoyos, de Colombia, que mencionó la eventual enmienda del artículo II.2 de la Constitución. Yo creo que es del caso dejar aclarado aquí que, a nuestro juicio, la inclusión de las organizaciones regionales de integración económica en el artículo II.2 de la Constitución implicaría, de alguna manera, darles el mismo "status" que a los Estados Miembros de esta Organización.
Nosotros hemos analizado preliminarmente la cuestión y creo que podríamos llegar a tener problemas con la inclusión en el mismo artículo. Por eso yo quisiera expresar una suerte de reserva a la iniciativa del Embajador Bula Hoyos en ese sentido.
En segundo lugar, Tailandia ha propuesto que el Consejo solicite al Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos que le presente una propuesta de enmienda para el artículo XIV. Mi delegación no estima conveniente que esta propuesta de enmienda se haga en forma independiente a la solución de todas las cuestiones pendientes que se refieran a la eventual admisión de una organización regional de integración económica, de modo que si en el próximo Consejo, o en la próxima Conferencia, no estamos en condiciones de tomar decisiones con relación a la cuestión global y si la cuestión global continúa pendiente, mi delegación preferiría que este tema del artículo XIV quedara ligado a la evolución de la cuestión.
Por último, con relación a lo dicho por el señor Delegado de Japón acerca del informe del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, pero no precisamente con relación a este tema, cuando él indicó que quería expresar el deseo de su delegación de que se revisara la composición de los Comités del Programa y de Finanzas, mi delegación cree que sería inconducente realizar ese tipo de análisis o de estudio en este momento, puesto que, según lo que nosotros recordamos, un estudio semejante terminó no hace más de uno o dos años. Por consiguiente, estaríamos volviendo a repetir aquí las mismas actividades que no han encontrado solución en un pasado muy cercano. Yo creo que es inútil que volvamos a considerar una y otra vez los temas sobre los cuales recientemente no nos hemos podido poner de acuerdo.
LE PRESIDENT: Je remercie la Déléguée de l'Argentine de ses trois questions et précisions. En ce qui concerne l'article II, je note ses réserves expresses. Eh ce qui concerne l'article XIV, je crois que celui-ci s'inscrit dans l'ensemble de l'étude-et de la poursuite de celle-ci-que le Directeur général demande au Conseil. Donc il est clair que cela forme un tout. Et en ce qui concerne le point C, j'ai pris beaucoup de notes au cours de la discussion de cet intéressant débat; en ce qui concerne le premier point, j'ai simplement noté "out of order"; ce n'est pas en discussion pour le moment, ce n'est pas dans le cadre de ce point que nous allons commencer une discussion.
Vous avez raison, et je partage votre avis, en ce qui concerne la composition des comités. Je crois que c'est un domaine qui a été étudié, qui est délicat, mais qui n'est pas à l'ordre du jour en ce moment.
Yousef Ali Mahmoud HAMDI (Egypt) (Original language Arabic): We would like to thank the Director-General, the Legal Counsel and Ambassador Poulides, our dear friend, the Chairman of the CCLM. We have a number of questions that are still pending and which await answers before we can positively respond by accepting the request submitted by the EEC for membership in our Organization. We, of course, welcome this request.
However, there were many questions posed by previous speakers relating to the various regional economic integration organizations and the possibility of their accession to membership in this Organization. Therefore, I would like to stress the need for continuing dialogue and study in order to delineate the characteristics and features that would qualify any regional organization to become an active member of our Organization.
LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais annoncer que l'honorable Représentant de Malaisie nous a transmis son intervention, de façon à l'insérer dans le verbatim des travaux de cette séance. Je crois que c'est une bonne méthode; nous avons toujours accepté cette formule. Il en sera ainsi.
Gonzalo BUIA HOYOS (Colombia): Sólo deseamos declarar, señor Presidente, que usted mismo definió muy bien el sentido de este debate. No estamos en la etapa de tomar decisiones y ni siquiera de hacer recomendaciones en firme. Hicimos una sugestión sobre la posible modificación del artículo II, párrafo 2, de la Constitución, para que sea tenida en cuenta en las discusiones que llevarán a cabo el Director General y los representantes de la CEE. Además, pedimos al CACJ que se ocupara de este asunto, porque, como el Dr. Moore espero lo confirmará, el CACJ es un órgano asesor del Consejo, pero que no se puede ocupar del fondo de las cuestiones, sino de los aspectos jurídicos; de manera que la declaración de Argentina es pertinente y será considerada cuando el CACJ presente su informe. Entendemos que el CACJ se reúne en marzo de 1991.
Ya que estoy en el uso de la palabra, quiero decir que en mi declaración anterior, cuando dije que pensaba que los resultados de esas ulteriores conversaciones podrían producir elementos útiles para modificar el artículo XIV de la Constitución, entendía apoyar la propuesta argentina, en el sentido de que sea global cualquier propuesta de enmienda que se haga.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie très vivement de votre intervention. Je crois qu'il n'y a aucune contradiction entre ce qu'a déclaré l'honorable Représentant de l'Argentine et vous-même. L'honorable Représentant de l'Argentine a simplement dit que, dans l'hypothèse où l'on examinerait cette question (et nous n'aurons pas de décision à prendre pour le moment), elle exprimait ses plus formelles réserves sur ce point précis. Mais je crois qu'il n'y a aucune contradiction entre les deux interventions.
Masayuki KOMATSU (Japan): As far as how to proceed on the consideration of the membership of the EEC is concerned, we have two separate issues. One refers to the urgent matter of Article XIV, particularly with respect to Indian Ocean Tuna. Another really important matter is the general issue and nature of alternative membership.
We have, as you know, had serious discussions on the effective management of Indian Ocean Tuna but through the lack of participation of the EEC on Article XIV we could not reach agreement. Around the Indian Ocean we have fisheries and we have people. Those people definitely need some kind of mechanism and hopefully under Article XIV it will be possible to establish a body for the purpose of effective management.
Although we can proceed generally on the discussion relating to the membership of the EEC, we have to consider the process to speed up and to facilitate the participation of the EEC via Article XIV Membership so as to achieve effective management and the optimum use of the Indian ocean tuna fisheries.
In that regard, I would like to support the proposal put forward by the distinguished delegate of the Kingdom of Thailand because it really is of vital importance.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie très vivement. Je n'ai pas la prétention de répondre, mais j'ai fait connaître mon sentiment lorsque l'honorable déléguée d'Argentine a posé sa seconde question. Je crois que de fait, l'article XIV s'inscrit dans un ensemble et que, comme pour toutes les questions, il faut se hâter lentement, c'est-à-dire se hâter en faisant le tour des problèmes, et en essayant de les régler dans leur globalité.
J'ai encore pour le moment deux orateurs inscrits: L'Australie et le Ghana. L'Ambassadeur d'Italie voudrait prendre la parole également. Est-ce qu'il y a d'autres orateurs qui désirent intervenir (parce qu'il serait souhaitable que nous puissions clôturer la liste)? Le Kenya. Il est important que nous clôturions la liste, ne fusse que pour les problèmes de traduction. Je vous ferai part de mon sentiment, et je vous ferai une proposition concernant la poursuite de nos travaux dans l'après-midi et également concernant les activités du Comité de rédaction. Alors, est-ce que je peux considérer qu'après les interventions du Kenya, du Ghana et de l'Australie, et la conclusion de l'honorable Ambassadeur d'Italie, nous pourrons tirer les conclusions de ce débat? Pas d'observations? Il en sera ainsi.
Peter FRANKLIN (Australia): I take the floor to discuss the issue raised by the delegates of Thailand, Japan and Argentina, particularly in relation to Article XIV. It seems to my delegation that the discussion on this item was in a very broad sense looking at the issue of the EEC membership of the FAO. There is another consideration which runs parallel and which is far more specific, which has particular implications for the management of fisheries in the Indian Ocean. I would hope that the consideration of the EEC participation in those specific arrangements was not unnecessarily delayed by consideration of the broader issue. However, I would ask for advice from the Legal Counsel as to the viability of considering the two issues in parallel and the implications of one for the other.
Joseph R. TURKSON (Ghana): My delegation is very grateful to Mr Moore and the Chairman of the CCLM for their eloquent presentation of the document CL 98/23.
While my delegation does not object to any state or any regional economic organization being admitted into FAO we pause to analyse paragraph 43 of the document which points out that acceptance of full and unrestricted membership would give rise to substantial problems and concern. I do not want to repeat what other delegates have put across to bore you, but let me underline that the Director-General should direct further studies into the issue because we are setting a precedent. Let us remind ourselves that a precedent once erroneously set will have some bad repercusions. Once again my delegation reiterates a thorough study of the issue. This does not mean that we are against the admission of the EEC into the FAO. My country has had a long association with the EEC countries and we will always welcome them in any organization.
Patrick Mutava NZUE (Kenya): My delegation would just like to say something with regard to the application by the EEC. We have closely followed the debate of the discussion on this matter.
The role played by the EEC as a regional economic organization, not only in support of the FAO's furtherance of its broad aims and objectives, but also in the development of the third world countries as a whole is beyond question. Kenya would therefore support any measures that would enhance this role. However, we would like to echo support of the matter of principle that this application is likely to raise in the future as there are potential regional organizations which may have to follow. The precedent we set today shall become the rule of tomorrow. In view of this my delegation supports the Ethiopian view, further examination of the implication of this matter, with particular reference to the legal position of such membership and the application of the same to other organizations who may wish to seek membership in the future, should be thoroughly examined and I think this would help to clear further any possible inconvenience that such a situation might be created in the future.
Gian Luigi VALENZA (Italie): Merci Monsieur le Président. Je vous ai demandé à nouveau de prendre brièvement la parole simplement pour remercier sincèrement les différents délégués qui sont intervenus sur ce sujet et qui ont donné pour la plupart, une preuve d'imagination positive dans l'examen de la requête qui nous occupe aujourd'hui. Cette requête a du reste été définie comme "historique" par certains. Je crois que cela est vrai, aussi nous sommes heureux de participer personnellement et de pouvoir, un jour, dire: "nous aussi, nous y étions".
LE PRESIDENT: Merci pour votre intervention. Nous avions différentes questions à examiner, qui ont d'ailleurs été fort bien précisées par Monsieur Moore. La première question était de savoir si le Conseil marquait
son accord avec l'approche, telle qu'elle s'était déroulée dans le passé, et quelles étaient les lignes de conduite pour l'avenir. La seconde question était le mandat donné au Directeur général. Enfin la troisième question-il s'agit en quelque sorte d'une addition-était la qualification et certaines applications pratiques en ce qui concerne les aspects juridiques, notamment l'article XIV, l'Acte constitutif et le Règlement général. Je vais maintenant demander à Monsieur Moore de répondre de la façon la plus complète possible à toutes les questions qui on été posées, et j'essaierai ensuite de résumer le débat et de vous faire une proposition qui, je l'espère pourra être acceptée.
LEGAL COUNSEL: I would like to thank all members of the Council for an extremely interesting debate and some very interesting questions that have been posed. My horoscope today said that I would be faced with a lot of difficult questions and I think that has been borne out. However, I am comforted in the fact that these questions are in fact questions which the Council, I believe, wishes to be settled in our further discussions with the EEC, and other organizations if necessary, and also by the CCLM itself. So that will have to be discussed over the course of the next few months. However, if I might be permitted a few comments on these questions, in, perhaps, an attempt to clarify some of these issues.
First of all, the question regarding what is in fact a regional economic integration organization that meets the criteria set down by the Council and is it only the EEC or in the future will there be a possibility of other organizations meeting this criteria? Now, the two criteria that have been set down by the Council so far relate, first of all, that the organization should be a regional economic integration organization. It is a little difficult for me to define exactly what that is; it is certainly a regional organization that deals with economic integration. Whether it should also include political integration is a matter we will have to discuss but I note that there is a need for a clear definition of this.
The second point, the second part of the criteria, is that it should be an organization to which member states have transferred competence in some fields of activity in FAO. This is a criterion that has been used in other organizations or agreements to which the EEC is already a party and I think we can clarify that somewhat. It certainly does include the transfer of treaty making powers but again this is a matter which has to be carefully looked into. There has to be a very careful definition of these bodies to be drawn up and in this instance we will be looking at the precedents that have already been established and we will also be keeping an eye on the other bodies that might in the future meet these criteria. This is a matter that we will try to deal with further in our report.
Another question that has been raised, and by almost all of the delegates, I believe, is the question of the competence of regional economic integration organizations, and in particular the EEC. I would like to make one comment on this, that obviously there is a need for a very clear definition and a precise definition, a statement of competences to be drawn up at such time as there may be an application for membership, or before that, by any regional economic integration organization. This has already
been envisaged in our talks with the EEC, although we do not as yet have that statement of competence.
The second point is that there will be a need for an obligation for a regional economic integration organization to disclose information well before any meeting as to which of the two, the regional economic integration organization or its member states, are competent in any particular matter and to answer any questions raised by any member nations regarding this.
The third and final point on competences. It has been suggested to me by the legal adviser of one of the UN agencies that it will be necessary to have what I will call a "fail-safe" formula, in other words a formula saying that if there is any disagreement between a regional economic integration organization and its member states as to who exactly is competent in any given matter, FAO should have its own formula to rely on so that it does not get drawn into any disputes of competence between the regional economic integration organization and its member states. So this is a matter we are looking into and may be this is something that the CCLM would look into in more detail.
I have also noted the concern expressed by a number of delegates that whatever proposal is put forward should not affect the rights of other member nations and we will certainly look into that to ensure that it will not in any way prejudice the right of other member nations. But it does appear that the formula put forward would have to bind not only, and this is another point made by a number of delegates, not only a regional economic integration organization but also its member states. So this is a question that needs to be looked into further, exactly how we would do that if we get that far.
A fourth point is the concern expressed by a number of member nations here about the precedent value of any solutions that may be found or any approach that may be recommended by the Council at its next session, and the need to discuss this with all other agencies of the United Nations system. As you know, and it has been reported in the various documents before you, we have discussed these matters informally with all the UN agencies. We discussed the matter principally on the basis of "alternative membership" to begin with. We will continue to discuss the matter with all of the UN agencies legal offices in order to ensure that whatever solution might eventually be proposed will be one that could be accepted by, or would not cause difficulty to, other organizations in the UN family.
A further question that has been raised, concerns Article XIV, and the question was raised I think by the United States and touched upon by a number of other countries, as to whether there was agreement between the EEC and FAO regarding amendments to Article XIV. I think there is certainly the need for such amendments. I think there is certainly such an agreement insofar as has already been mentioned by the delegate of Argentina. The EEC is in agreement that there should be such amendments, if this is done within the framework of the general discussions concerning possible membership of the EEC of FAO as one regional economic integration organization meeting the criteria set down by the Council. But I would like to make one point in this connection. Article XIV is a little different
from the rest of the articles of the Constitution, in that it provides for the setting up of separate agreements, to which various parties can be members. But they are separate agreements, separate from the Constitution itself. Therefore there is a need, whatever we do, even if we are just considering the question of membership, to amend certain articles of the Constitution and Article XIV as well, because in that sense it has a separate life of its own, as it deals with the powers to conclude legally separate agreements. Therefore whatever we do in the rest of the discussion on proposals on membership, we would have also, in the framework of that general question, to propose some form of amendment to Article XIV.
Finally, the delegate of Colombia raised a question which has been touched on by others. He said, would it be possible to have an amendment to Article II.2 and then to set out the various attributes of membership in a separate document. I think it would be premature to go into the actual mechanics of how we could propose an amendment to the Constitution, and this is a matter which I think needs to be discussed further with the CCLM and certainly requires further exploratory talks with the EEC and further studies by us. But I think the important point here is that there does seem to be an expressed desire on the part of the members of the Council that somewhere or other the attributes of membership should be spelt out, or the rights that could be exercised by a regional economic integration organization, should be spelt out very very carefully.
The CCLM in its wisdom at its last session has put forward three possible options for doing this. Either we could spell out all those rights of membership, or the way those rights would be exercised, in the Constitution itself, or they could be spelt out in the General Rules of the Organization, which gives more flexibility, or they might perhaps be spelt out in a separate document which could be agreed upon between the acceeding party and FAO. These are three possible options which the CCLM put forward and I think those are three possible options which should be explored further by the Secretariat in its discussions and also of course, by the CCLM.
I hope I have covered most of the points that were raised and the questions that were asked.
Masayuki KOMATSU (Japan): Thank you, Mr Moore, for your clarification and explanation but there is one point on which I would like clarification concerning Article XIV. If am not mistaken you mentioned that it required the amendment of Article XIV plus other relevant articles. If what I am understanding is right, what are the relevant articles other than Article XIV? My understanding is to incorporate the participation of the EEC as a member of FAO to that particular Article XIV. I thought that since we are talking about Article XIV, just simply to amend Article XIV would be sufficient.
LEGAL COUNSEL: My point in fact was that if there is to be a proposal to amend the Constitution to allow for membership of regional economic integration organizations in the Organization this will require the
amendment of a number of Articles of the Constitution. It would also require an amendment of Article XIV of the Constitution, because that provides for who can negotiate and participate in agreements set up under Article XIV. It was not to say that, if you wish to deal only with Article XIV agreements, that you would have to amend other articles of the Constitution. Article XIV in a sense is complete, it is an entity of its own. You could just amend Article XIV and not other articles, but that is a matter which the EEC is not seeking, as I understand it. They are not merely an amendment of Article XIV, but membership in the Organization generally. That, as I would repeat, would include a number of amendments to a number of articles of the Constitution including Article XIV.
LE PRESIDENT: Nous n'allons pas entamé une discussion de fond juridique qui pourrait nous entraîner beaucoup plus loin. Ce n'est ni le cadre ni le moment pour le faire.
Vous permettrez peut-être à votre président, en quelques très brèves minutes, de tirer les conclusions de cet intéressant débat. Je suis d'une génération qui a connu les horreurs de la guerre, à laquelle j'ai participé. J'ai connu l'Europe divisée contre elle-même et je me réjouis de voir que l'on tend à une unification.
Je dirai quand même, à titre personnel, que la discussion, pour savoir quelle est la différence entre l'économique et la politique, revêt peu d'intérêt. S'il y a transfert de compétences économiques, il y a automatiquement transfert de compétences politiques. Si les Etats Membres d'une organisation économique transfèrent les compétences en matière de pêche, il est clair que leur politique en matière de pêche devient une compétence exclusive de cette organisation économique qui, subséquemment, devient une organisation politique. En effet, il n'y a pas de transfert de pouvoirs dans le domaine économique qui n'entraîne automatiquement un transfert de pouvoirs politiques. Il faut être clair sur ce point. Il est sans intérêt de tracer des frontières entre l'économique et le politique: toute discussion à portée économique a une implication d'ordre politique, au sens bien sûr le plus noble du terme.
Le Représentant de l'Italie a signalé qu'il y avait ce que j'appelle des zones claires de compétence communautaire exclusive, des zones évolutives et des zones qui restent de compétence nationale. Il y a, entre les trois zones, une évolution qui tend progressivement vers l'unité et l'unification que tout le monde souhaite.
On a parlé du rôle des organisations économiques régionales, qui sont en réalité des organisations qui deviennent politiques. La simple lecture de notre ordre du jour nous permet de voir qu'il s'agit des organisations d'intégration économique régionale qui remplissent un certain nombre des conditions.
Il faut être pratique et concret. Il serait vain de se livrer à une série d'exercices juridiques sur les différentes hypothèses qui pourraient se poser sur le plan juridique mais il faut s'efforcer de rencontrer toutes les objections d'ordre juridique, institutionnel, pratique et politique.
Je ne sais pas s'il sert à grand chose de sortir du cadre de la demande qui est présentée. Il ne me parait pas très intéressant d'étudier des statuts qui n'ont pas été demandés. Il faut étudier la demande qui est faite et répondre à toutes les questions qui ont été posées. Sur ce plan, je tiens à remercier très sincèrement tous les membres du Conseil car leurs interventions ont été très positives. Je n'ai noté ni obstruction ni position négative mais, au contraire, un besoin de clarification. Il est clair que, dans un domaine aussi important, toutes les questions posées doivent recevoir une réponse, mais cette réponse doit être donnée dans la perspective de la demande présentée.
Il reste une tâche importante à accomplir dans le cadre de négociations qui, jusqu'à présent, furent exploratoires; cela a été souligné par beaucoup. En effet, les premiers documents sont le fruit de conversations exploratoires, informelles; ce que l'on demande maintenant c'est qu'il y ait des conversations formelles qui permettront de répondre clairement à toutes les questions qui ont été posées et, éventuellement, à des questions que vous auriez oublié de poser et que vous pourrez toujours transmettre au Secrétariat de la FAO.
Oui, le statut sera applicable à toutes les organisations d'intégration économique régionale qui remplissent les conditions requises.
Oui, nous passons-et là, vous avez été très clairs-de négociations exploratoires aux négociations formelles. J'ai également noté que personne n'a émis de réserves formelles sur l'autorisation donnée au Directeur général de poursuivre ces négociations, étant entendu que le résultat de celles-ci sera communiqué.
On a parlé des comités conjoints. On a parlé, en toute hypothèse, de la prochaine réunion du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et de celle du Conseil de juin 1991, où nous aurons l'occasion de discuter de questions bien claires et précises auxquelles il faudra apporter des réponses tout aussi claires et précises. Il est indispensable de procéder à une exploration des sentiments des différents membres du Conseil de façon à préparer le travail dans les meilleures conditions.
On a parlé de l'Article XIV de l'Acte constitutif et de certaines questions juridiques spécifiques. Je pense que nous devons donner mandat à la FAO de poursuivre l'examen juridique des différents aspects de cette question et que nous ne devons pas limiter les juristes dans leurs investigations. Il faut simplement spécifier que celles-ci doivent se faire selon l'orientation que vous avez clairement déterminée.
Dans son exposé introductif, M. Moore a évoqué les questions qui se posaient à propos du passage du caractère exploratoire au caractère formel. Quant à l'opportunité de donner mandat au Directeur général pour qu'il poursuive ces négociations formelles, je n'ai pas entendu d'objection. Il y a eu un certain nombre de réserves sur un certain nombre de points: celles de l'Argentine et des Etats-Unis, par exemple. Il y a eu les questions posées par le délégué du Japon et tous les délégués qui ont bien voulu intervenir. Je les en remercie sincèrement. Je crois que, pour le moment, nous devons faire confiance aux rouages de la FAO, notamment au Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et, bien sûr, à son président.
Steven D. HILL (United States of America): I may have misunderstood your summation. It is quite clear to me that we have not given a mandate to the Director-General to open formal discussions with the EEC as to its accession to FAO. I think it is quite clear from our discussion that talks should continue between the EEC and the FAO Secretariat and that these talks should then be reported on to the CCLM for further consideration by the Council but I do not believe we have a mandate for formal talks.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois avoir été clair sur le mandat de conversations formelles qui déboucheront sur des propositions qui seront soumises aux organes compétents, en l'occurrence, le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et le Conseil de la FAO. Le Conseil émettra alors un avis à l'intention de la Conférence puisque la décision à prendre appartient en définitive à la Conférence. Nous avons demandé aux Etats de façon très claire un mandat pour la poursuite de conversations qui déboucheront sur un document, lequel suivra la voie traditionnelle.
Suis-je suffisamment clair? Ai-je répondu à la question que vient de poser le Représentant des Etats-Unis?
Steven D. HILL (United States of America): Thank you for your clarification, Mr Chairman, but I would like the record to reflect my intervention, my clarification of our understanding.
LE PRESIDENT: Je vais vous demander de répéter votre intervention. Puisque vous demandez que le procès-verbal reflète votre question, il est important que vous la précisiez.
Steven D. HILL (United States of America): As we said in our intervention, we believe that talks should continue between the FAO Secretariat and the EEC in regard to questions that have been raised about possible forms of membership by regional economic integration organizations. Perhaps we have a difference of definition over the words "formal talks" but clearly these talks need to be continued in an exploratory phase. They are not the opening of formal negotiations.
LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que c'est une question de nuance. Il y a eu des conversations exploratoires et l'on aboutit maintenant à un stade où la Communauté demande à pouvoir entamer un dialogue formel avec la FAO, suivant les procédures prévues par nos statuts. Nous n'allons pas avoir maintenant une discussion juridique sur la question de savoir si l'exploration est formelle ou informelle. De toute façon, l'exploration se poursuit puisqu'il y a une demande officielle. Jusqu'à présent, il n'y avait pas de demande officielle. Il y en a une maintenant et le Conseil a
été consulté pour savoir si cette demande officielle devait recevoir une réponse positive ou négative. C'est par oui ou par non que vous devez vous prononcer et je n'ai entendu aucune délégation dire non.
Gonzalo BULA HOTOS (Colombia): Creo que el colega de Estados Unidos podría tranquilizar su inquietud si nos referimos al párrafo 3 del Suplemento 1, en el cual el Director General dice claramente que "él estaría dispuesto a entablar nuevas conversaciones con los representantes de la CEE", con arreglo a lo sugerido por el Gobierno de Italia. Creo que ésta es la autorización que le da el Consejo al Director General.
LE PRESIDENT: C'est très clair. C'est ce que je vous ai demandé.
LEGAL COUNSEL: Perhaps I could give a word of explanation on how I understand the use of the word "formal".
As I understand it-and perhaps the EEC Observer will be able to correct me-the second stage of discussions from the point of view of the EEC may have changed its nature somewhat, in that up until now the EEC has been having exploratory talks with us only. But now the EEC Council of Ministers has taken a decision to hold what they view as more formal talks. Because they have decided, as I understand it, to go for membership of the Organization or for a form of membership of the Organization.
From our point of view I do not think the word "formal" enters into it at all. Because, as I understand it, no particular decision has been taken here that prejudges the whole question of membership. We are then seeking merely to continue the talks in order to come to some more definite conclusion and to present some option or proposal to the next session of the Council in June on which the Council can then take a political decision.
I hope that clarifies the use of the word "formal" from our point of view. I do not think the status of the talks changes at all.
Dato Wan Jaafar ABDULLAH (Malaysia): As the European Economic Community's application is not only precedent-setting but would also involve amendments to the FAO Constitution, Malaysia would like to suggest this matter to be examined carefully.
Malaysia does not see much difficulty with the principle of membership for regional economic organisations and the understanding is that ASEAN qualifies by this definition.
The modality for qualifying criterion for all regional economic organizations would have to be looked into. Similarly there should be no
differentiation in privileges and benefits for various regional economic organizations notwithstanding the fact that in the initial stages after qualifying as a full member, the EEC may not insist on voting rights.
The Malaysian delegation wishes to seek clarification on the description in para 2 of document CL 98/23-Sup.1 of December 1990 referring to the EEC's accession to FAO and I quote "on the basis of member states commensurate with its powers".
The term "power" and who makes the judgement at what level of "power" an organization qualifies for full membership in the FAO requires further clarification.1
LE PRESIDENT: Nous arrivons au terme de ce débat. Il me reste à remercier tous les membres du Conseil pour les précieuses indications qu'ils viennent de nous donner.
The meeting rose at 12.45 hours
La séance est levée à 12 h 45
Se levanta la sesión a las 12.45 horas
___________
1 statement inserted in the verbatim records on request.
