Previous Page Table of Contents Next Page


16. International Instrument on the Conservation and Development of Forests (continued)
16. Instrument international sur la conservation et la mise en valeur des forêts (suite)
16. Instrumento Internacional sobre Conservatión y Desarrollo de los Bosques (continuación)

Winston RUDDER (Trinidad and Tobago): Some say small is beautiful; others that small is possible. For the thirteen CARICOM countries on whose behalf my delegation is privileged to speak, "small" means in addition limited resources with reduced options for development, including painful choices. In such circumstances, you will readily understand our concern about limited forestry resources in our countries, and why we would be willing to forge alliances with other countries of the world - large and small, developed and developing, tropical and non-tropical - in examining all possibilities for ensuring the wise use and rational management of the world's forests and forest resources.

That is why we closely followed the debate on this agenda item on COFO at the last Council, and why we feel constrained to enter the debate once more at this Council. We are grateful for the documentation provided for this item, and the presentation which facilitated its understanding.

We note that the document is rather subdued, one in an almost self-effacing way which is completely devoid of advocacy. In our view, this matter is properly before Council, and we would do well to examine the issues fully and judge our positions calmly, objectively and on the basis of some reflection.

What are some of the facts? Firstly, there is an inextricable link between forests and development in terms of soil and water conservation within parks and agriculture, the fisheries industry and human settlement; in terms of climate and the sustainability of life as we know it; in terms of development as a productive resource for timber and for non-wood forest products which provide valuable opportunities for forest dwellers.

Another set of facts. World forests are not as fully utilized, nor are they as rationally exploited, as would permit meeting our considerations of conservation or development. Moreover, the world's forests have been, and are being, degraded. This situation applies whether we are speaking of boreal, temperate, sub-tropical or tropical forests. Some have been lost irrevocably; others are in that process; in yet others the rate of destruction is alarming, in tropical forests in particular.

Another set of facts. There seems to be an inevitable conflict of interest in terms of forest development matters in the UNCED process and, indeed, these will be dealt with in the coming months, for example, the Climate Convention in which the consideration of forests are but in terms of a carbon sink; and the Convention on Bio-diversity where the focus is on

forests as a reservoir of genetic resources with development potential. In both these Conventions considerations are in respect of conservation and preservation - very important issues.

However, as we understand the proposals in respect of an international instrument on forestry, a much more holistic, comprehensive examination is being carried out on forests in terms of both their productive and protective capabilities in terms of both conservation and development. In other words, we are taking a totally balanced view of matters relating to forests and forestry development.

Let us now examine a little UNCED 1992 and the preparations related thereto. Like Stockholm 1972, Rio 1992 is an ad hoc occasion, a milestone if you will, which allows us to take stock, replenish our moral and intellectual fibre and chart new courses for the future in terms of the development paradigm. What is important is what happens before and after UNCED. We see FAO as a permanent institution with some degree of continuity, the likes of which in our view is not envisaged for the UNCED Secretariat. The mission and mandate of FAO is to devise ways and means of dealing with international forestry development issues so as to ensure sustainability.

In our view, it is the premier institution in this area, and consequently is expected to lead the way in forest development - not unlike, perhaps, the WMO in respect of climate matters or the WHO in respect of health matters. Of course, FAO is not an island unto itself; thus, in all aspects of its development work it must consult and cooperate, and integrate its activities as appropriate, with relevant and significant others - the Member countries, national, regional and international bodies. But the burden of responsibility remains with the Organization, under, of course, the guidance and direction of its organs in specific areas of competence of which, by definition, forestry is but one.

Therefore the major question before us to consider, in our view, is whether, in the light of our observations on the state of the world's forests, we are sufficiently alarmed and concerned and feel equal to the task of devising some extraordinary mechanism for intervention and for the determination of strategies, as would galvanize action and mobilize resources for the conservation and development of forests. That, it appears to my delegation, is what considerations attending the development and preparation of an international instrument on forestry are all about.

Once we are agreed on this, it seems that we are inevitably committing FAO to assume some mantle of responsibility and leadership - that is to say, its defined role in cooperation with others in the preparatory process towards the development of this instrument. Conjunctural events like the UNCED Preparatory Process and UNCED itself may be used to catalyze action in this regard, as in the case of the Climate Convention. But, important though the phenomenon of catalysis is for expediting the rate of action, catalysts can never assume the role of the main active ingredients. In this regard the role of FAO in the process of preparing an international instrument on forestry cannot be subsumed by a temporary mechanism such as the UNCED Preparation Arrangements. To do so would be to considerably diminish the role and function of FAO in the field of forestry and forestry

development - and I am sure this is not what we intend. In any event, the UNCED Process ends with UNCED in June 1992. My delegation remains convinced that it is unlikely that conclusive decisions pertaining to the global consensus on forests can be achieved by that time.

A final note: While the TFAP, current or future, focuses on tropical forests, the proposed international instrument has a much broader scope and focus.

Amin ABDEL MALEK (Liban) (langue originale arabe): Je voudrais remercier Monsieur Murray pour la manière claire et concise avec laquelle il a présenté le document CL 99/18. En effet, comme à l'accoutumée, Monsieur Murray excelle dans le domaine des forêts comme dans les autres domaines qui étaient de sa responsabilité.

La délégation du Liban réaffirme la position adoptée par le Conseil à sa dernière session, en novembre 1990, concernant la mise au point d'un instrument international sur la conservation et la mise en valeur des forêts ainsi que la préparation de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement dans le domaine des forêts.

Je tiens également à remercier l'Organisation pour sa coopération et le soutien total qu'elle a apporté au secrétariat de la Conférence et pour la participation technique et l'expertise avec lesquelles elle a contribué dans le domaine des forêts.

Nous partageons également l'avis du Conseil en ce qui concerne le rôle pionnier qui incombe à la FAO, au sein de la famille des Nations Unies, dans le domaine des forêts.

La délégation du Liban saisit cette occasion pour appuyer les mesures préconisées par le Directeur général pour le maintien du soutien de l'Organisation à la Conférence et au Comité préparatoire afin de parvenir à un consensus mondial sur le sujet des forêts, de façon à garantir la gestion durable des ressources forestières qui réponde aux exigences du développement et de la protection de l'environnement.

J.M. SCOTT (United Kingdom): The document CL 99/18 correctly in our view makes clear the leading role of UNCED in working towards a global consensus on forests for the 1992 Rio de Janeiro Conference. FAO can play an important role in supporting the work of UNCED. We hope, for example, that FAO will make substantive technical contributions to the report being prepared for the UNCED third Prepcom.

Sture THEOLIN (Sweden): On this important matter I speak on behalf of the Nordic countries, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden.

Together with many others, the Nordic countries have during a number of years been advocating increased international attention for forest issues at global, regional and national levels.

In recent years, there has been a growing international awareness of the importance of forests for biological diversity for climatic stability, as a source of income and as a source for fuelwood and shelter.

Consequently, the sustainable development of the forest resources is receiving increasing attention. It is being dealt with here in FAO, in the UNCED process as well as in various other fora e.g. the European Economic Communitty, UNDP, ITTO and the World Bank.

The UNCED preparatory committee meeting in Geneva in March last decided that the Committee at its session in August 1991, will be in a position to examine all steps towards and options for a global consensus on the management, conservation and development of all types of forests, either as an integral part of the proposed Earth Charter, or separately. Finally, the Preparatory Committee noted that the way in which this work is to be completed may best be decided upon at the UNCED 1992.

At this juncture the Nordic countries would like to draw attention to four principles, which, in our view, are important elements in the consensus, which is being worked out:

The first is that we would like to stress the sustainable development, utilization and conservation of the world's forests. This would imply that forests and their resources are used as a source for income, food, shelter, habitat, fuelwood, etc. It is essential to see the sustainable development of forests in relation to agriculture and other uses of land. In this context, we would also stress the importance for securing sustainable development through a supportive international economic environment which promotes growth and development in various ways, such as market access and terms of trade.

The second important element we would like to stress is the contribution of forests to the maintenance of biodiversity. Conservation of biodiversity can be implemented in different ways, already applied in practice to some extent in most countries. National assessments should be made to identify biologically rich areas and to evaluate which methods of conservation and sustainable use are needed. In the negotiations on a consensus it will be of utmost importance to clearly specify objectives, since the ultimate results may vary widely depending on what objectives were set.

A third element in a consensus could be the contribution of forests to the stabilization of the global climate by measures for increasing forest cover and forest biomass worldwide.

It needs to be emphasized that reductions of emission in the energy and industry sectors is the single most important factor in averting climate change. However, there are also practices and technologies in forestry which affect the rate of growth in emissions. Growing forests, for instance, sequestrate carbon dioxides, while destruction of forests on the other hand, is an important source of carbon dioxide releases.

The value and efficiency of measures within the forestry sector for climate stabilization need to be further evaluated through national assessments, taking into account the specificity of countries and regions.

A fourth element in a global consensus on forests could be financial and technical assistance to the forest sector in developing countries.

The revamping of the TFAP and the development of a new sectorial forest policy within the World Bank are important contributions towards this end. The new forest research institute to be established within the CGIAR system will work for the same objectives.

In the Nordic view, assistance to institution building and strengthening of national capacity form important parts of a global consensus on forests.

In the Nordic view, a major obligation of the partners in a global consensus would be the formulation, implementation, assessment and revision of national policies and guidelines to achieve sustainable development, utilization and conservation of forests. A number of countries already have well-formulated national plant and guidelines.

The development of a global consensus on forests is not an easy undertaking. Considerable efforts and imaginative thinking by international organizations and governments are needed in this process. FAO and other international organizations like UNEP, ITTO, WMO, IUCN - just to mention a few - have been invited to contribute to the preparations for the UNCED 1992 in the forestry sector.

The Nordic countries hope that constructive and fruitful decisions of forests, based on the outcome of the Second Session of the Preparatory Committee, will be taken at UNCED in Rip de Janeiro. We also hope that UNCED will adopt a programme of action on forests and forestry in the world as a part of Agenda 21, which will lead the international community into the 21st century.

FAO should have an invaluable role to play in this process. In this task the Organization has an obligation to live up to the international community's expectations with regard to FAO as a focal point for excellence and competence in forestry.

For the Nordic countries it is natural to work for improved international consultation and cooperation. There are no easy solutions to realize the concept of sustainable development or of the eradication of poverty. We do believe that there are fundamentally good reasons for a common approach to the complex forestry problems and opportunities. We think that the development of forest resources can serve as an important vehicle for sustainable development, both in the subsistance economy and in a modernization and industrialization process. In this context we do not believe that solely a sustainable management of natural resources is enough. The creation of new forests to serve specific purposes is an important element in a developmental strategy. A tree plantation strategy, to be successful, must be market-oriented with realistic opportunities for profitable production. Forestry must become production-oriented on a long term rather than exploitative.

I now end the Nordic part of this intervention, and I will speak on behalf of the Swedish delegation and add a few remarks on our own agrarian and forest development, as our own national experience very much forms the basis for our own striving for a global agreement of forestry.

During a relatively short period of time Sweden has developed from a relatively backword agrarian society to a rich industrial country. Still, more than half of Sweden's net export earnings derive from the forestry sector. Pragmatic solutions to land use problems, rapid development of agriculture and a gradual development of forests and forest based industries have formed the basic elements in this process of change. For a long time, there has been a positive wood balance. At present there is an annual growing stock in the order of 25 millions m3 per year. It is important to realize that this development has taken place thanks to the existence of an expanding forestry industry, not in spite of that. In fact, there are more trees in Sweden today, than some hundred years ago. The most productive regions in our country today were ecological disasters at that time. A profitable market for forest products has been a basic prerequisite for development in Sweden. Furthermore, Swedish forestry is increasingly related to the ecological conditions of the various sites of the forests.

I wish to add these national experiences to underline the interest and the seriousness with which we address these issues.

Tang ZHENGPING (China) (Original language Chinese): Firstly, I would like to thank the Secretariat for preparing for the Conference the document CL 99/18, and I would like to offer the following comments on this item.

At present, environmental protection has become an issue of international concern. The conservation and development of forests, which form an important part of our environment, could play a very significant role in maintaining global ecological balance, improving conditions for human existence, as well as ensuring sustained agricultural development. Consequently, there is a need for a global consensus on the management, conservation and rational development of all types of forest. We have taken note that much work has been done and many papers produced by FAO and other relevant organizations in preparing for the international instrument on the conservation and development of forests. In this connection, we should like to express our appreciation.

We consider that forest resources fall within the sovereign jurisdiction of the countries concerned. The conservation, development and rational utilization of forest resources should primarily be realized, and in the final analysis, could only be realized through national legislations. In this connection, the conclusion of an international instrument on the conservation and development of forests will undoubtedly help to speed up the global efforts for forests conservation and development. Therefore, the international community should adopt practical and effective measures so as to speed up the transfer of technology and intensify training and education for developing countries. Furthermore, international cooperation is needed to ensure effective participation of all countries, especially of developing countries. In view of the fact that the instrument covers a wide range of subjects and involves many complicated aspects and that the

UN General Assembly is currently debating on the subject, we believe that instead of hastily starting any legislating process, FAO should strengthen its cooperation and coordination with the preparatory committee of UNCED and other relevant international agencies. However, the Chinese delegation hopes that FAO and other relevant UN agencies will continue their necessary technical and legal preparations in this regard.

Haruo ISHII (Japan): I would like to thank the Secretariat for its efforts, especially those of the Forestry Department and Legal Office, for participating in the UNCED process to substantively contribute, within the purview of FAO, in providing technical and legal expertise to facilitate the discussion of the UNCED process. We are pleased to have before us the very concise and informative document CL 99/18 to which we would like to pay tribute.

This document has dealt with the series of international discussions and considerations concerning the global consensus on the management, conservation and development of all types of forests and the FAO's contribution to the process.

We welcome FAO's contribution to the preparation with a substantive role to play for the work on the comprehensive report on forests and forestry. We expect FAO's further contribution to this preparation to accommodate in the report what has been requested in the Second Prepcom in Geneva. These are very much relevant and legitimate ones such as those described in (a) (i) of paragraph 4 of the revised decision combatting deforestation, which reads "The historical loss of boreal, temperate, subtropical and tropical forests worldwide, its causes and its respective contribution to global environment degradation. (v) Analysis and quantification of the respective economic values of boreal, temperate, subtropical and tropical forests...".

We know that those are very difficult tasks; however, we sincerely hope that FAO will successfully tackle these assignments and further contribute to the preparation of the comprehensive report.

We welcome the decision for combatting deforestation agreed upon in Geneva, saying that Working Group I will, at its third session, examine all steps towards options (including, at a minimum, taking into account the special situations and needs of developing countries, a non-legal binding authoritative statement of principles) for a global consensus on the management, conservation and development of all types of forests, either as an integrated part of the proposed charter or separately.

We are of the opinion that the discussion and consideration for the formulation of a consensus on the management, conservation and development of all types of forests should be exclusively in the hands of the nations. In this regard, paragraph 8 of the decision in Geneva is considered to be an appropriate one.

At the second Prepcom meeting in Geneva, Japan proposed "International Charter for the World's Forests" and explained the concepts and the main element. Let me briefly touch upon the elements here:

First of all, I would like to refer to the two basic natures of the Charter. The first and most important one is that it is not a legally binding instrument. It is a set of guiding principles and initiatives to be taken at both national and international levels in order to achieve sustainable development of forests which will be designed and implemented by each country under the spirit of international cooperation.

The second point is the fact that what is to be embodied in the Charter would be applicable to every type of forest, whether it be tropical, temperate or boreal.

The third character, or in other words, the structure of the Charter, is as follows: there could be a preamble focusing on the necessity of the Charter, then the goals to be achieved through the establishment of the Charter would come, and this would be followed by a set of principles and initiatives to be taken both at national and international levels.

Now I would like to name the main elements of the goals, the basic principles, the initiatives to be taken at the international level.

The goals are (1) the recognition and establishment of a comprehensive approach towards the problem of the world's forests, based on the concept of conservation and sustainable utilization; (2) the promotion of initiatives at national, regional and global levels which would reinforce the various roles of forests; and (3) the establishment of international cooperation aiming at the conservation and sustainable utilization of forests.

Next, the basic principles, which constitute the most important part of the Charter, are the following five points.

(1) Establishing the concept of sustainable development.

(2) Respect for the sovereignty of the countries in which forests are located.

(3) Consideration of valuable genetic resources and protection of wildlife.

(4) Response to the global warming problem.

(5) Respect for the interests and ways of life of the local people.

As for the initiatives to be taken at the national level, we have listed eight items.

(1) Conservation and sustainable utilization of existing forests.

(2) Designation of protected areas in ecologically vulnerable forests.

(3) Restoration of the forests already lost or destroyed.

(4) Promotion of comprehensive development and conservation plans for the welfare of the rural community.

(5) Encouragement of sound and effective forestry activities.

(6) Promotion of efficient timber consumption and the effective use of wood.

(7) Promotion of studies, education and public relations on forestry and other forest-related issues.

(8) Strengthening institutional aspects related to forests and forestry.

Finally, the initiative at the international level could be, (1) joint research and monitoring, (2) exchange of technology, information and personnel, and (3) intergovernmental coordination in the field of timber trade among all nations concerned. As for cooperation between the developed and developing countries, financial and technical assistance on both multilateral and bilateral basis should be strengthened.

As the Japanese delegation stated at the Geneva Conference, our intention is to provide another "brick" to this process of reaching a global consensus, and that Japan is totally open and flexible to the valuable comments from our friends.

Ugo COLOMBO-SACCO (Italy): The Italian delegation wishes to thank the FAO Secretariat for the technical inputs and expert advice provided on this item.

We have been following with the utmost interest the role played by FAO in this year's initiatives on the conservation and the development of forests. The technical support of FAO in the implementation of the UNCED Preparatory Committee decision on combating deforestation rests on a sound basis. The comparative advantages acquired through the years by its long-standing forestry department, especially in some of the crucial sustainable development issues mentioned at paragraph 7(f) of the above-mentioned decision.

We share also the concept that efforts should be made to address the inter-linkages and harmonization of activities between forests, climate change and biodiversity.

Last but not least, the Italian delegation appreciates the Director-General's approach underlined in paragraphs 4 and 18 of document CL 99/18 according to which the overall coordination and guidance for the preparation of the Rio de Janeiro Conference belongs to the UNCED Preparatory Committee and the UNCED Secretariat, while FAO's role is one of lending technical support in their search for a global consensus on forest management, conservation and development.

Soedjadi HARTONO (Indonesia): Thank you for giving me the opportunity to present views and observations of the Indonesia delegation on this very important item. My intervention will be brief since this item was quite heavily commented on in the previous FAO Council in November 1990. Having given a detailed explanation in our previous intervention, we intend to draw your attention to some more issues that relate to this proposed instrument.

Indonesia subscribes to the view that the nations of the world are living together interdependently in our globe, sharing the same air, ocean, atmosphere, etc. This interdependency, which has become more intense over time, inevitably creates externalities. In a world of inderdependency, blaming each other will not resolve the environmental problems faced by nations. Therefore, working more closely together in solving the problems common to all, wherein the developed countries assist the developing ones, should be more fruitful to all parties concerned. In addition, Indonesia believes that the tropical forests will be preserved only if they are accorded economic value. The constraint of trade in tropical products in the form of bans, embargoes, and other restrictions in importation are counter-productive, and will not promote sustainable forest development.

As we strongly stated in the last FAO Council, we are bound by Resolution 44/228 which, among others, decides that all branches of UN bodies are urged to contribute fully to the preparation by the UNCED on the basis of guidelines and requirements to be established by the Preparatory Committee of the Conference. We, therefore, certainly will do our best to cooperate towards the successful preparation of a comprehensive report on forestry as requested by the Preparatory Committee of the UNCED. It is our hope that the reports will elaborate all aspects of forestry development, so that it would not restrict the interests of developing countries.

As referred to by the UN General Assembly concerning deforestation, it was deliberated in the second Preparatory Committee which was held in Geneva, 18 March - 5 April 1991, and it was reaffirmed that UNCED process is the most appropriate forum for conclusive decisions pertaining to global consensus on forests.

For the purpose of preparing all necessary activities towards the UNCED, I would like to propose a three-pronged approach:

1. Leading towards the development of a global forest action plan;

2. Leading towards the formulation of principles and guidelines, possibly declared into a charter or declaration.

3. Leading towards indentifying ways and means to free or generate funds in support of the action plan, which are to be deposited in a specific fund.

Separately negotiated results of the three-pronged approaches could be announced jointly if possible, or separately, at UNCED and could then form the main elements of a subsequent instrument. Nevertheless, it would be UNCED itself which would decide on the issue of such an instrument and on a target date. In the meantime Indonesia would support the proposals for carrying out the necessary studies which would have to be undertaken anyway. Indonesia also proposes that cooperation be established for afforestation of critical lands and other available non-forest lands. This is to serve the common interest of enlarging the globe's greenhouse gas absorption capacities, and it would be less expensive to have afforestation carried out in the developing countries.

After presenting the foregoing observation, my delegation would like to express its views in facing this global forest issue as follows:

1. It is an urgent need to conduct comprehensive studies on the question of forestry. The studies should be undertaken in order to draw a balance and holistic overview on all types of forest, including tropics, non-tropics, temperate, and boreal ecosystems.

2. In the assessment of the multifunctional role of forests, the economic aspect should be given an adequate portion in the light of presenting a balanced view between ecological and socio-economic function of the forest.

3. It should be stressed that poverty is one of the important underlying factors which accelerate the process of deforestation. Thus, it is of paramount importance that in addressing the question of deforestation, the improvement of the quality of life of the people shall be given adequate attention.

4. A stable, fair and remunerate price for timber products shall be maintained to enable the forest producing countries to undertake the necessary measures in exercising a sustainable management of their forests, as well as to support the programmes for the wellbeing of their people.

5. Transfer of technology to the developing countries at preferential and concessional terms is urgently needed to enable them to appropriately manage and develop their forest resources.

To conclude my intervention my delegation wishes to call to the attention of the Council that, in our effort to contribute substantive views and ideas on this issue, the Government of Indonesia will organize an International Conference on Progress of Sustainable Development, which is planned to be held in Jakarta in February 1992.

Earl W. WEYBRECHT (Canada): Canada considers forests to be an important global issue, and the Canadian delegation is pleased that the international community is now dealing with the issues and opportunities associated with the conservation and sustainable development of all the world's forests.

In our intervention at the first UNCED Preparatory Committee in Nairobi, and in statements made at subsequent international meetings, including the Committee on Forestry (COFO) last September, the FAO Council last November and, more recently at the second UNCED Prepcom in Geneva, we have consistently advocated that United Nations agencies work together to develop the concept of an international instrument on forests. The first steps have been taken. There is now global consensus that the issue of the world's forests needs to be addressed collectively by the international community. The UNCED preparatory process is now fully involved with the issue of forests and forests will, no doubt, be one of the most important areas of discussion next year at Rio de Janeiro.

Canada is pleased with the progress made at the most recent UNCED Prepcom and regards the decision to pursue an "Authoritative Statement of Principles" for approval at UNCED as one of the major successes of the

second Prepcom. In this regard, we look forward to the development of proposals for the authoritative set of principles by the UNCED Secretariat. Canada also accepts the conclusion of the second Prepcom decision that the UNCED process is "the most appropriate forum for conclusive decisions pertaining to a global consensus on forests".

Since the second Prepcom, Canada has registered these views at international and bilateral meetings at which forests have been discussed. This includes the technical workshop on options for global forest management in Bangkok.

Mr Chairman, the FAO is to be commended for the cooperation and assistance that it has provided and continues to provide to the UNCED Secretariat. Special credit is due for the excellent background paper "Global Overview of Status and Trends of the World's Forests" which the FAO prepared for the Bangkok Technical Workshop. Canada looks forward to the FAO continuing to work closely with the UNCED Secretariat on this and other important initiatives related to the development of an international instrument on forests. From the beginning of the discussion on forests, Canada has advocated the FAO share its technical expertise in this field with the other international organizations interested in an eventual international instrument on forests, and the early endorsement of the concept by the FAO has helped significantly in focusing international attention on the issue.

The UNCED process and the forthcoming conference in Rio de Janeiro offer an opportunity for us all to equip our respective governments to be in a position to approve a Statement of Principles on the Conservation and Sustainable Development of all forests and to consider what steps may be necessary following Brazil '92.

Canada has advocated and continues to advocate efforts leading ultimately to the development of a comprehensive International Instrument on Forests in the context of the United Nations system. We are not interested in a forest convention that would simply serve as a means of imposing international controls over someone else's or, for that matter, our natural resources. Nevertheless, Canada recognizes the global concerns for sensitive and sustainable development and conservation of forest resources wherever they are located in the world. An eventual Convention on the Conservation and Sustainable Development of Forests, presenting a balanced perspective on both the economic and the environmental importance of forests, is in Canada's view the best way to address these issues. However, the Canadian delegation agrees that such an Instrument will not be concluded until after Brazil '92 and will continue to work within the UNCED process to further the well being of the world's forests.

Pinit KORSIEPORN (Thailand): The delegation of Thailand would like to express our appreciation of document CL 99/18 which is very informative and up-to-date. We appreciate, in particular, its focus on the FAO activities towards the preparation of the United Nations Conference on the Environment and Development in Forestry.

Having carefully reviewed the document in front of us we wish to stress the fact that, with its long-standing experience and expertise in forestry, the FAO has significantly contributed towards the preparation of the UNCED. In this regard, my delegation would like to commend the FAO's Department of Forestry. Like the other delegates we hope the FAO will continue to lend its technical support - I repeat technical support - to the Preparatory Comittee for the UNCED in Brazil in June next year. Such support would certainly assist UNCED in its search for a global consensus on the management, conservation and development of all types of forests as stated in paragraph 5 of the Second Session of Preparatory Committee for UNCED.

To comply with your advice regarding the time constraints, my delegation shares the views that were expressed by the Malaysian and Indonesian delegates concerning the International Instrument to the Conservation and Development of Forests. I refer in particular to the disagreement on the initiative of the FAO to propose any legal binding instrument at this stage in this Council. Thank you.

Vishnu BHAGWAN (India): I would like to thank the FAO Secretariat for the document CL 99/18 and Mr Murray for his crisp and concise presentation. I wish to be quite brief as this item has been discussed in the previous Council meeting, as has the Committee on Forestry.

We believe that it is necessary to take a comprehensive view of all aspects of environmental degradation of which deforestation is only one part. At the same time forests are vital national resources which have to be developed for the benefit of the country, conservation obviously being a vital part of such development. The idea behind the UN Conference for Environment and Development is clearly to take such a comprehensive view.

My delegation is happy to note that FAO fully recognizes the role of UNCED Prepcom and has been extending full cooperation and support in providing substantive technical inputs and expert advice on the subject of forestry.

Having made a promising beginning FAO is taking a comprehensive view of all environmental issues, including forestry. My Government is unable to support any action which will detract from this comprehensive approach. We therefore believe that full support should continue to be given to the preparation of the comprehensive report on forestry which the Secretary-General of UNCED is to present at the 3rd Session of the Prepcom.

All of the decisions, including the one concerning the International Instrument on Conservation and Development of Forest, should wait until the outcome of the UNCED meeting is available. In this connection we support the proposal of the distinguished Ambassador of Malaysia that the agenda item be, for the time being, entitled as the Report on the Preparation of UNCED.

Ms. Luz DEL MONDO (Philippines): First of all the Philippine delegation would like to express its appreciation of FAO's valuable technical inputs to the preparations for next year's UNCED.

The forestry sector is at the centrepiece of my country's natural resources and ecosystems. While the Philippines' forestry sector's contribution to our national economy has declined in recent years, its continued development and that of the environmental sector is a prerequisite for sustained growth in agriculture and industry.

Through various conservation measures we have managed to arrest the rate of deforestation in our country. From a high rate of 300 000 hectares per year in the late 1960s, the rate has gone down to less 100 000 hectares per year in the late 1980s. Other steps to arrest the destruction of our forests include a ban on logging in critical areas including virgin forests above 50 percent in mean slope and above 1 000 meters in elevation; a census of forest occupants and their involvement in social and community projects to promote equitable access to the management and utilization of forest resources; the launching of the National Forestation Programme to reforest one and four-tenths million hectares of denuded areas by the year 2000; adoption of the innovative debt-for-nature swap programme to help reduce the country's foreign debt while providing local funds for projects on nature and ecology. Our Government recognizes the role of forests for forest dwellers, local communities and indigenous people; the importance of sustainable multiple use of forests, as well as the attendant principles such as those related to the role of forests in soil and water conservation and the need to promote biological diversity. Our Government pursues research on possible ways of diversifying the use and marketing of tropical forest products by the forest people themselves. This action shows support for sustained management of these products within an overall framework that does not jeopardise their traditional uses.

We acknowledge the need for constructive international cooperation and for the transfer of technology, education, training and research in undertaking the multiple tasks of conserving and developing the world's forests. But international cooperation best succeeds when there is genuine agreement and commitment on the part of donors as well as recipients on programmes for the sustainable management of forests at global, regional, national and local level. At the 14th Session of the Asia/Pacific Forestry Commission the formulation of forestry field programmes for the Asia/Pacific projects and funding and consultation with national planning authorities were discussed and examined. Careful attention should be paid to conserve the sovereignty, the need for balance, the need for fairness, particularly taking into account the special situation and needs of developing countries as we strive for a global consensus on the management and development of all types of forests.

As regards the International Instrument, it appears that further work and studies are required to expand the information on deforestation to also cover temperate and boreal forests, thus giving a world coverage.

We continue to support the position of Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand on the need for dialogue and a full exchange of information and consultations between donors and recipients, between developed and developing countries, before an International Instrument on the Conservation and Development of the World's Forests is signed and implemented.

Thomas YANGA (Cameroun): Monsieur le Président, permettez-moi d'exprimer ma joie qui est celle de la délégation du Cameroun de vous voir présider les travaux de notre Conseil en ce moment où nous abordons un point de l'ordre du jour particulièrement important, à la fois pour le Cameroun et pour de nombreux autres pays membres de la FAO.

J'aimerais exprimer nos remerciements au Secrétariat pour le document succinct et clair qu'il nous a soumis et dont M. Murray, Sous-Directeur général, nous a fait un résumé substantiel et complet.

S'agissant de l'idée d'un instrument international sur la conservation et la mise en valeur des forêts, je voudrais rappeler que lors de la dernière session du Comité des forêts, la délégation du Cameroun avait clairement exprimé l'appui de notre gouvernement à la préparation d'une convention internationale sur la conservation et la mise en valeur des forêts. Nous demeurons convaincus qu'il faut un instrument international spécifique pour couvrir l'ensemble des forêts du monde et nous nous félicitons du consensus toujours plus grand autour de cette idée fondamentale.

C'est fort de cette conviction et dans le but de faciliter la concertation et l'entente internationale auxquelles mon pays reste très attaché, que le Cameroun a parrainé avec d'autres pays la réunion informelle sur un éventuel instrument international sur la mise en valeur et la protection des forêts mondiales, réunion qui s'est tenue à Genève les 21 et 22 février 1991, comme il est mentionné au paragraphe 9 du document CL 99/18.

Cette réunion a été, à notre avis, très positive et très utile, car à la lecture du rapport de la deuxième session du Comité préparatoire de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement, annexé au document du Secrétariat, nous sommes heureux d'y retrouver les empreintes de certaines idées avancées lors de cette réunion informelle. Il s'agit notamment du contenu du paragraphe 5 de la décision du Comité préparatoire de la CNUED qui reprend en gros une proposition fort réaliste et pragmatique qui avait été avancée par la délégation française en février dernier à Genève et qui stipule que: "Le Groupe de travail N° 1 sera en mesure à sa troisième session d'examiner toutes les mesures et les options allant dans le sens d'un consensus mondial sur la gestion, la conservation et la mise en valeur de tous les types de forêts, y compris au minimum, compte tenu de la situation et des besoins particuliers des pays en développement"; une déclaration de principe faisant autorité sans être juridiquement contraignante soit dans le cadre de l'achat de la terre qui a eté proposé, soit séparément, tout en notant que c'est lors de la CNUED en 1992 que l'on pourra le mieux décider de l'achèvememt de ces travaux.

Cette session du Conseil offre une nouvelle fois l'occasion à ma délégation de réaffirmer l'appui du Cameroun à l'idée d'un instrument international sur la mise en valeur et la conservation des forêts. Nous estimons que le contenu du paragraphe 5, dont je viens de donner lecture, de la décision du Prepcom, offre un cadre et un calendrier appropriés pour aboutir à l'indispensable consensus mondial sur cet instrument. Par ailleurs, la préparation d'une déclaration de principe non contraignante juridiquement, qui sera signée lors de la réunion de la CNUED en 1992 et qui sera complétée plus tard par des protocoles particuliers et plus contraignants, nous semble une vision très réaliste de l'évaluation de la situation présente concernant l'état d'avancement de cet instrument international.

Nous estimons en outre que cette déclaration de principe devrait réaffirmer les principes soutenus par la FAO tels qu'ils sont énumérés au paragraphe 15 du document du Secrétariat dont, entre autres, la souveraineté exclusive des Etats Membres sur leurs ressources forestières, la mise en valeur de ces ressources pour le développement économique et social des populations de ces pays et de ces régions abritant des écosystèmes forestiers, le transfert des ressources et des technologies appropriées aux pays en développement afin de leur permettre d'exploiter judicieusement leurs ressources forestières tout en assurant leur pérennité et la conservation, voire l'amélioration, de leur potentiel biogénétique.

Afin de parvenir à un objectif ultime d'une convention sur les forêts, la délégation camerounaise estime que la FAO doit jouer un rôle fondamental, tel que lui confère sa constitution, en particulier les organes directeurs et consultatifs de la FAO constituent des fora appropriés qui peuvent utilement contribuer à l'élargissement du consensus mondial sur l'instrument international sur les forêts.

A cet égard, ma délégation est reconnaissante à la FAO pour la préparation du document CL 99/18 dont le titre est, à notre avis, suffisamment explicite, à savoir "Instrument international sur la conservation et la mise en valeur des forêts - Contribution de la FAO à la préparation de la Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement dans le domaine des forêts".

En effet, la FAO a le devoir de contribuer à la préparation de la CNUED dans le cadre de ses responsabilités et de ses compétences, et par conséquent elle doit contribuer à l'aboutissement du consensus mondial sur l'Instrument international sur les forêts que le Comité préparatoire de la CNUED recherche.

Pour terminer, la délégation du Cameroun appuie la démarche adoptée par le Directeur général de la FAO telle qu'elle ressort du document soumis par le Secrétariat à notre intention.

J.B. SHARPE (Australia): My delegation is pleased with the priority accorded by FAO to forestry in its Summary Programme of Work and Budget. The conservation and development of forests is an interest we share.

Australia participated in the COFO meeting of September 1990 when the forestry instruments issue was debated at length. It was also discussed in detail at the last Council meeting in November. However, we are still in the process of developing our own detailed position on an international instrument on forests. Consideration of policy options will be closely linked to our existing policies on biodiversity and climate change.

A Forests Working Group, chaired by my Department in Canberra, is presently examining the issue in the context of Australia's preparation for the third meeting of the Preparatory Committee for the UNCED Meeting in August.

Australia affirms the role of UNCED as the appropriate forum for consideration of sustainable development issues, including the development of an international instrument on forests. We endorse the technical

contribution which FAO is now making to the development of an international instrument on forestry, and consider that its efforts will make a substantial contribution to the work of UNCED.

Muhammad Saleem KHAN (Pakistan): Mr Chairman, may I first of all express our immense pleasure at your assumption of the Chair for this session. We have the greatest confidence that this Council will come to very successful conclusions under your able guidance.

As observed by several other delegates, we have given our detailed views on this subject in the 98th Session of Council last November and therefore will be brief on this occasion. We thank FAO for its progress report under agenda item 16 and welcome the results of the UNCED Prepcom Second Session held in Geneva in March 1991. We note with satisfaction the contribution of FAO to the success of this session as well as that of the second meeting of the UNCED Working Party on Forests.

We particularly welcome and encourage the Director-General's stated intention in paragraph 18 to continue to lend technical support to UNCED and its Prepcom, with particular reference to paragraph 5 of Prepcom 2's decisions.

We note that paragraph 5 of Prepcom 2's decisions does not contradict the 98th Council decision in relation to the development of an international instrument on the environment and the development of forests. Paragraph 5, however, does note that the completion of this work may best be decided on at the UNCED meeting in 1992.

In this context, we also note the amendment proposed by the delegate of Malaysia to the title. Document CL 99/18 in the context of future reporting is appropriate and consistent with paragraph 5 of the second Prepcom Report and therefore, we support this amendment accordingly.

As was noted at the 98th Session of FAO's Council, there is no doubt that FAO will have a substantial contribution to make to the development of the legal, technical and intellectual content of such an instrument.

The said paragraph 5 of UNCED's decision does not preclude that such an instrument can be appropriately reported on as part of the FAO contribution to the continuing preparations for UNCED 1992.

Paulo Estivallet de MESQUITA (Brazil): For us also, it is a pleasure to see our esteemed neighbour chairing this meeting.

As under item 8 of the agenda, we had an item presented for information when in fact it was for discussion and decision. Conversely, on this item events have more or less turned it into an item for information, so we are not supposed to take any decisions, or negotiate, or anticipate what goes on elsewhere, so I can make a very brief statement.

My delegation would like to thank the Secretariat for the preparation of document CL 99/18. This concise document describes accurately recent events in FAO and in the UNCED Prepcom with regard to forest issues. We are pleased with the recognition of the role of the ÜNCED Prepcom in the overall coordination and guidance for the preparation of the 1992 conference. Forests in fact will be among the key issues at the Rio 1992 conference. As requested and recognized by the Council, FAO has an important contribution to make to the UNCED process whilst refraining from trying to prejudge the outcome of the global approach to the conservation and use of forests.

We are pleased with the cooperation of FAO with the Secretariat on forestry issues, and are confident of the capacity and determination of FAO to continue to assist the preparatory process for the 1992 conference in the light of the decisions adopted by the Prepcom in April of this year.

Matthias SCHWOERER-BÖHNING (Germany): My Government welcomes the fact that FAO has made its expert knowledge available in the preparation of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 in the manner requested by the 98th Session of Council. Document CL 99/18 gives clear and detailed information on that.

As the preparations of the three possible events on world climate, biodiversity and forests, are progressing, an overlap of regulations concerning forests becomes increasingly noticeable. Therefore, we believe there is need for meaningful linkages of these three events with a view to achieving not only a concurrent but a complementary effect in relation to forests. In our view, this continues to be an important task, especially for FAO as the responsible international organization in the sphere of forestry. For this purpose, use should be made of the existing United Nations coordinating mechanisms as outlined in paragraph 12 of document CL 99/18, such as a further sub-inter-agency meeting, if necessary. We hope some progress will be made at the forthcoming Third Session of the UNCED Prepcom to bê-held this August in working out a global consensus on the management, conservation and development of forests. In our opinion, such a consensus should be available until UNCED 1992 covering the complete catalogue of basic elements and principles.

On the basis of this, governmental negotiations on a forest convention should commence as soon as possible after UNCED 1992. Should such efforts not be successful, there would be a risk that arrangements for the conservation and development of forests would be taken out of their mutual context. This would impede the necessary coordination with the other two Conventions. For this reason, we hold the view that at UNCED 1992 at least a binding agreement should be reached on essential elements for a forest convention, coordinated with the two other Conventions, and a timetable for further action to be taken at UNCED 1992.

Michael MARTIN (United States of America): The United States wishes to recognize the efforts of FAO in supporting the work of the Prepcom for the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development. In particular, FAO has done a superb job of lending its technical expertise in

forestry, and its wealth of experts in forestry and related development to the efforts of the Working Group I of the UNCED Prepcom. FAO is in an ideal position to continue to play an important supportive - and I underline "supportive" - role as nations seek for a global consensus on forests in the UNCED Prepcom process. The United States remains vitally interested in fostering the dialogue through the UNCED Prepcom on a global consensus on forests. At the same time, we are involved in continuing dialogue on a bilateral basis with many countries over all regions of the world. We continue to welcome to views of all countries on this very important subject.

Jean-Pierre POLY (France): Lors de la précédente session de notre Conseil, il a été convenu que la FAO aurait une "contribution significative" à apporter à la mise au point "du contenu juridique, technique et intellectuel d'un instrument international sur la conservation et la mise en valeur des forêts".

Le document qui nous est présenté montre à quel point notre Organisation s'y emploie, en participant activement à la préparation de la prochaine Conférence des Nations Unies sur l'environnement et le développement (CNUED), notamment dans le cadre du groupe de travail sur les forêts qui, lors de sa prochaine session, sera conduit à examiner l'ensemble des mesures et des options allant dans le sens d'un consensus international sur la gestion, la conservation et la mise en valeur de tous les types de forêts.

A ce stade, je crois devoir rappeler la position française telle qu'elle a été exprimée lors des consultations informelles sur un instrument juridique international, organisées à Genève, au mois de février dernier, et évoquées, il y a quelques instants, par mon collègue du Cameroun.

Ma délégation considère qu'un objectif raisonnable consiste en l'adoption, dans le cadre de la CNUED, d'une déclaration ministérielle sur la forêt mondiale, élaborée au sein du Comité préparatoire, déterminant les principes de base et les lignes directrices pour une gestion durable, respectueuse des écosystèmes, étudiant la nature de l'instrument juridique à venir, et fixant la procédure de son élaboration et le calendrier de la négociation.

Un tel objectif, à la mesure des enjeux pour la communauté internationale, permettrait de préserver, dans le réseau des conventions en cours d'élaboration - je pense à la biodiversité et au climat -, l'identité des questions forestières, facilitant ainsi la conception d'un instrument équilibré entre les exigences du développement et celles de la conservation.

Concernant les principes directeurs de cet instrument, peut-être convientil de rechercher parmi les résultats de la Conférence ministérielle pour la protection des forêts en Europe, organisée conjointement à Strasbourg par la Finlande et mon pays en décembre dernier, quelques éléments d'inspiration. Rappelons que cette conférence, à laquelle la FAO a activement participé, a permis aux représentants des pays européens et à la Commission Economique Européenne d'affirmer leur intention de promouvoir et

de renforcer la coopération à l'intérieur de l'Europe dans les domaines de la protection et de l'aménagement durable des forêts, et de démontrer, par un accord sur des objectifs et des principes communs, leur volonté de mettre en oeuvre progressivement les conditions et les moyens nécessaires à la gestion et à la conservation à long terme du patrimoine forestier européen. Une déclaration de cette nature, adaptée au contexte, certes beaucoup plus diversifié, du patrimoine forestier mondial, pourrait répondre sans doute, dans une large mesure, aux préoccupations souvent partagées de la communauté internationale.

Ainsi pourraient être créées les conditions favorables permettant au Programme d'action forestier tropical (PAFT) de devenir l'un des outils privilégiés de cet instrument juridique, cadre stratégique par excellence pour les travaux du groupe consultatif dont il a été question ce matin.

Cette considération me conduit, en conclusion, à souhaiter que soit confirmée la mission que notre Conseil a confiée à la FAO en lui demandant de participer activement à l'élaboration de cet instrument, notamment dans le cadre des travaux préparatoires de la CNUED.

F.C. PRILLEVITZ (Netherlands): We support those delegations which encourage FAO to continue its very important technical contribution to the Prepcom of UNCED.

Sra. Mónica DEREGIBUS (Argentina): Mi delegación va a competir con la delegación de Países Bajos y le va a decir a usted, señor Presidente, que la delegación de Argentina apoya las declaraciones de las Delegaciones de Malasia y de la India. Pero, además, le vamos a hacer a usted una pregunta: Nosotros quisiéramos saber hasta qué hora está previsto que trabajemos hoy.

Tadeusz STROJWAS (Poland): The delegation of Poland wishes to join other delegations in supporting what is staced in this Council's Report from its Ninety-eighth Session, that the Council endorses the concept of an international instrument on the conservation and development of forests.

Let me also point out that the delegation of Poland recognizes FAO's leadership within the United Nations system in the field of forestry, One may ask, why? In our view FAO is a part of the broad agricultural sector. If not, why are we part of an international forum to deal with, to handle, to discuss extremely important, and sometimes painful, forestry problems in many parts of the world? This is why we are of the opinion that, if and when it is negotiated, FAO would make a substantial contribution to the development of the legal and intellectual content of such an instrument.

With regard to preparations for next year's Conference on Environment and Development, it is clear to us that FAO makes a substantial contribution to that Conference's report on forestry and forests.

Adel EL-SARKI (Egypt) (Original language Arabic): My delegation would like to thank Mr Murray for his excellent introduction to this item. It welcomes the leadership role played by FAO in the preparations for UNCED. It has made our deliberations easy.

We also welcome the efforts made by the Organization in the field of preservation of forests and their development. This will, of course, assist us to achieve sustainable development and environmental protection.

Alberto MURILLO MORANTES (Venezuela): Venezuela tiene en todo caso el derecho de los países a un desarrollo socioeconómico sostenible. Así como el derecho soberano de los países en desarrollo sobre el uso de sus recursos naturales de manera articulada con sus propias prioridades y objetivos de desarrollo.

Por ello apoyamos la declaración hecha por la delegación de Francia y todas las actividades que la FAO debe desarrollar en este tema.

Ulrich KNÜPPEL (CEE): Comme il a déjà été annoncé à l'occasion de la 98ème session de ce Conseil en novembre 1990, la Communauté Européenne soutient la proposition de créer un instrument légal international en vue de protéger les forêts dans le monde de façon à garantir pour le présent et le futur le succès de tous les efforts de développement basés sur les activités forestières, ceci au bénéfice de toutes les populations concernées.

La Communauté Européenne est d'avis qu'un tel instrument international devrait être élaboré en deux étapes. D'abord, une déclaration générale sur les forêts serait soumise pour adoption à la Conférence des Nations Unies pour l'Environnement et le Développement en 1992. Cette déclaration devrait contenir un certain nombre de principes pour la protection et l'exploitation des forêts, y compris certains éléments substantiels d'une convention sur les forêts; ainsi que les procédures et le calendrier pour la négociation d'une telle convention.

Dans une deuxième étape, une convention générale sur les forêts serait préparée dans les enceintes des Nations Unies. Cette convention devrait prendre en compte les fonctions écologique, économique et sociale des forêts mondiales et créer un nouveau cadre dynamique pour la coopération internationale dans le domaine de la protection et du développement des forêts.

Bernardo ZENTILLI (CNUMAD): El Secretariado de UNCED debe trabajar en estrecha colaboración con las Agencias y Organizaciones de las Naciones Unidas, con los organismos intergubernamentales y no gubernamentales y expertos y otras posibilidades según el mandato de la Resolución 44/228 de la Asamblea General.

En el caso de las actividades relativas a los problemas forestales, el Secretariado ha contado con una colaboración intensa de todos estos cuerpos y muy especialmente de la FAO, donde caracterizamos al Departamento de

Montes. Sin el apoyo de esas agencias y del último mencionado, habría sido prácticamente imposible cumplir con la tarea que los gobiernos nos habían asignado, o nos habían solicitado, en las Comisiones preparatorias precedentes.

Nos complace, igualmente, ver que este tema no sólo ha atraido la atención de los países consumidores de productos forestales y de los mayores productores, sino que poco a poco se incorporan a la discusión de este tema países que sin estar caracterizados por sus recursos forestales, tienen actualmente, y tendrán evidentemente en el futuro, que hacer frente a necesidades de índole forestal en cuanto a materias primas, cubierta forestal y los otros servicios que los bosques proveen.

Permítame, finalmente, señor Presidente, agradecer los comentarios positivos expresados por los Miembros del Consejo hacia UNCED. Esperamos que con esta continua colaboración, tanto del Consejo de la FAO como de los Departamentos Técnicos, y especialmente del Departamento de Montes, podamos satisfacer las demandas para un programa preliminar de la Agenda 21, y a través de una lista de principios solicitada por los gobiernos en la segunda sesión del Comité preparatorio y que permita a la tercera sesión de dicho Comité discutir adecuadamente el tema y, eventualmente, dar las directrices que nos lleven suficientemente preparados para la Conferencia de julio de 1992.

C.H. HORRAY (Assistant Director-General, Forestry Department): I am in the perhaps unhappy position of not having many - or not having any - questions to answer on this particular item. Allow me, however, just to make a few comments which might be useful and which would help to clarify at least one misconception which is apparently abroad. I will deal first with the misconception. The paper before you was intended to recount accurately and without any presuppositions what transpired since the last Council at the various international bodies and the role which FAO, in adhering to the wishes of the Council, performed in those meetings and in preparation for those meetings. FAO has not takèn, nor do we intend to take, any initiative, nor was any such intention conveyed implicitly in the paper before you, and I hope not in my opening remarks either. I want to stress from the outset that we were not intending and did not have the intention to take initiatives or to presuppose, prejudge or anticipate what is expected. We recognize fully that the development of an instrument of any form from the simplest to the most complex, legally binding or not, is the responsibility of governments in the full exercise of their sovereign rights to control, manage, utilize and benefit from the resources. As has been made abundantly clear, the mechanism or the process for undertaking these discussions and negotiations should be the UNCED prpcess. Hence, throughout the period since the last Council, we have devoted our energies to supporting strenuously the UNCED process in all its aspects. We contributed to the Prepcom II, and we are even now contributing and assisting with Prepcom III, to take place in August. We take npte of the concern expressed by some countries, led by the distinguished delegate for Malaysia, that the description of the title ôf the paper and our presentation of it should be amended in future so that we present a report on UNCED and the UNCED process. I detect, however, that there is a certain confluence of views on some sort of instrument, but that this should be

handled through the UNCED process, through the Prepcom and that with the combination of the Conference next year, we would all look forward to seeing what comes after that. I merely would reaffirm at this point the Director-General's intention to continue to support to the fullest extent possible the Prepcom and its work leading up to the UNCED process. In this matter, we are in the total and complete direction of all member countries. We are at their full service, and we are here to perform as a technical and loyal Secretariat.

CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr Murray. And with that, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the end of Item 16. I want to thank you all for allowing me to lead you for this short moment. Like the old saying goes "for his place, let a better one take".

Mr Antoine Saintraint, Independent Chairman of the Council. took the chair
M. Antoine Saintraint, Président indépendant du Conseil, assume la présidence
Ocupa la presidencia el Sr. Antoine Saintraint, Presidente Independiente del Consejo

LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais très sincèrement remercier Monsieur Kima Tabong d'avoir bien voulu présider ce point important de notre ordre du jour. Il l'a fait avec compétence, tact et autorité et je lui suis particulièrement gré d'avoir bien voulu assurer la présidence de cette réunion de notre Conseil.


24. Report of the Fifty-sixth Session of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters (Rome, 15-17 April 1991)
24. Rapport de la cinquante-sixième session du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques (Rome, 15-17 avril 1991)
24. Informe del 56° período de sesiones del Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos (Roma, 15-17 de abril de 1991)

24.1 Cooperation Agreement between the African Development Bank (ADB) and FAO
24.1 Accord de coopération entre la Banque africaine de développement (BAfD) et la FAO
24.1 Acuerdo de Cooperación entre el Banco Africano de Desarrollo (BAD) v la FAO

24.2 Survev of Regional Economic Integration Organizations, including Definition and Status
24.2 Etude portant sur les organisations d'intégration économique régionale, y compris leurs définitions et statut
24.2 Estudio de las organizaciones regionales de integración económica, incluida la definición condición jurídica

24.3 Report bv the Secretariat regarding Possible Forms of Membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO, including Possible Amendments to the Basic Texts

24.3 Rapport du Secrétariat relatif à la forme que pourrait revêtir l'adhésion à la FAO d'une organisation d'intégration économique régionale, y compris les textes des amendements éventuels aux Textes fondamentaux de la FAO

24.3 Informe de la Secretaría sobre posibles formas de participación, como miembros de la FAO, de las organizaciones regionales de integración económica y posibles enmiendas a los Textos Fundamentales

LE PRESIDENT: Nous allons passer au point suivant de notre ordre du jour et je vais à cette occasion saluer le Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, qui a bien voulu rehausser la discussion de sa présence, l'ambassadeur Poulides. Je le remercie d'avoir bien voulu participer à notre séance.

Monsieur l'Ambassadeur Poulides, Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, Monsieur le Sous-Directeur général, Monsieur le Conseiller juridique, Mesdames et Messieurs Membres du Conseil, nous allons examiner le rapport de la 56ème session du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques qui s'est tenue à Rome du 15 au 17 avril 1991. Le document qui nous est soumis l'est pour décision.

Nous avons trois sous-points dans le cadre de l'examen de ce rapport. Le premier traite de l'accord de coopération entre la Banque africaine de développement et la FAO. Il s'agit en fait d'un accord de coopération qui est appelé à remplacer un protocole d'accord de 1981.

Ensuite, nous avons pour information une étude portant sur les organisations d'intégration économique régionale y compris leur définition et leur statut, étude qui a été préparée par l'Université de Cambridge. C'est une étude intéressante qui est presque une thèse de doctorat académique qui présente une très bonne synthèse des différentes organisations d'intégration économique régionale existant actuellement, qui incontestablement ne peut que nous servir à éclairer nos débats.

Enfin, nous examinerons un document substantiel qui est le rapport du Secrétariat relatif à la forme que pourrait revêtir l'adhésion à la FAO d'une organisation d'intégration économique régionale, y compris les textes des amendements éventuels aux Textes fondamentaux de la FAO.

Est-ce que quelque membre du Conseil désire intervenir sur le point concernant l'accord de coopération entre la Banque africaine de développement et la FAO?...

Ce point a été examiné par le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques et je crois qu'il n'a que des relations lointaines avec les autres points à l'ordre du jour. Je demanderai donc à Monsieur l'Ambassadeur Poulides de faire une très brève présentation de ce point avant que nous passions au point suivant.

Fotis POULIDES (Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): I have great pleasure in presenting the report of the 56th Session of the CCLM. The 56th Session of the CCLM was of particular importance because of the nature of the items with which the Committee was dealing. First, the Committee considered a cooperation agreement between the Organization and the African Development Bank and the African Development Fund. Then the Committee examined in-depth the question of the possible forms of membership for regional economic integration organizations in FAO. The report has been distributed as document CL 99/5, the cooperation agreement between the African Development Bank, the African Development Fund and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

The Committee noted that the cooperation agreement which it had been asked to review would replace the Memorandum of understanding between FAO and the African Development Bank and the African Development Fund which had come into force in August 1981 and had been operating effectively since that time. However, cooperation had been growing steadily, and it now appeared desirable to strengthen and improve the framework for cooperation between FAO and these organizations in Africa. The new agreement would create a more suitable framework through which assistance could be channelled to member countries in the region. The CCLM agreed that the cooperation agreement was in order from a legal and constitutional point of view and recommended its approval by the Council. The text of the proposed agreement was reproduced in Annex A of the report of the CCLM.

Ali AL-MAHRUG (Libya) (Original language Arabic): It is a great honour for me to address the Council on the cooperation agreement between the African Development Bank and FAO on behalf of the Union of the Arab Maghreb.

Mr Chairman, I speak on behalf of the Union of the Arab Maghreb. At the outset, I think we should congratulate the CCLM on the work it carried out and efforts it made as regard the subjects of such interest to our Organization.

As regards cooperation between the ADB and FAO, the Maghreb countries follow closely the information provided by the Chairman of the CCLM. We have carefully scrutinized the Report of the Fifty-sixth Session of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters on this whole question of cooperation between ADB and FAO in order to strengthen such cooperation. We were satisfied to note that this cooperation was so fruitful because it covered more than half of the projects for agricultural development in the area.

Therefore, we would say that the Memorandum of understanding of 1981 should be replaced by an agreement to strengthen cooperation with African countries. For this purpose the countries of the Union of the Arab Maghreb support the conclusions reached by the CCLM and also support the agreement reached between ADB and FAO.

Thomas YANGA (Cameroun): Je voudrais brièvement prendre la parole au nom de l'ensemble des pays africains pour dire que nous sommes très heureux de la conclusion de l'accord de coopération intervenu entre la FAO et la Banque africaine de développement. Nous sommes convaincus que cet accord permettra d'accroître la coopération qui existe entre les pays africains et la FAO à travers la Banque africaine de développement et à cet effet, nous voulons appuyer et demander au Conseil d'appuyer les conclusions du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques à ce sujet.

LE PRESIDENT: Je crois que nous devons nous féliciter de l'accord de coopération entre la Banque africaine de développement, le Fonds africain de développement qui est intrinséquement lié à la Banque, et notre Organisation. Cet accord de coopération est appelé à remplacer un protocole d'accord de 1981. Nous avons eu l'occasion de le lire, il est très complet, et nous souhaitons tous que la FAO puisse collaborer pleinement avec la Banque et le Fonds africain de développement.

Après nous être réjouis de la signature de cet accord, qui va intervenir, nous le souhaitons, rapidement, nous allons passer au point suivant de notre ordre du jour.

En ce qui concerne les documents CL 99/21 et CL 99/21-Sup.1, il s'agit d'une étude de l'Université de Cambridge. Il me parait difficile de discuter de l'étude. Si éventuellement l'un ou l'autre membre, au cours du débat, souhaite aborder, critiquer l'étude, la trouve peut-être incomplète ou trop complète, il aura l'occasion de faire ses commentaires à propos du rapport du Secrétariat qui s'intègre dans le cadre du rapport de la cinquante-sixième session du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, concernant la forme que pourrait revêtir l'adhésion à la FAO d'une organisation d'intégration économique régionale.

Je voudrais, peut-être en guise de préambule, vous dire que votre président indépendant du Conseil, le fait des hasards, des circonstances de la vie, est un Européen, qu'il est né un jour, il y a déjà bien longtemps, en Belgique, ce qui n'enlève en rien sa totale indépendance. Je puis vous assurer que je présiderai les travaux de manière entièrement objective, et si vous m'interrogez à un moment donné sur ma vision personnelle concernant les relations en Europe, elle n'est peut-être pas partagée par tous, je vous l'expliquerai avec beaucoup de clarté, beaucoup de netteté, car j'ai l'habitude de dire ce que je pense. Certains me poseront peut-être à un moment donné la question de savoir de quoi il s'agit et de quelle Europe il s'agit. J'exprimerai à titre personnel mes vues personnelles en toute clarté, et surtout en totale indépendance, sans aucun lien, sans aucune instruction et sans aucune suggestion quelconque.

Fotis POULIDES (Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): In considering the question of the possible form of membership of regional economic integration organizations in FAO, at its Fifty-sixth Session the CCLM had reported on a Survey of Regional Economic Integration Organizations, including Definition and Status, which had been prepared following a request by the Council in November 1990. This study had been undertaken by the Research Centre for International Law of the University of Cambridge, taking into account a number of criteria established by the Secretariat.

The CCLM found this criteria to be correct. They are set out in paragraphs 10 to 12 of its Report. The CCLM considers that the survey was extremely important, well prepared and was of help to it in considering the question.

The Survey in its final form has been submitted to this Session of the Council in document CL 99/21 and Supplement 1 thereto.

LEGAL COUNSEL: I would just like to supplement the introduction of the Chairman of the CCLM on two points related to the matter of the Survey before we move on to the main subject of the options for a form of membership.

First of all, in accordance with the recommendations of the CCLM, the Secretariat had arranged for a revised version of the Survey of Regional Economic Integration Organizations taking into account the comments of the CCLM to be prepared by the Research Centre of International Law at the University of Cambridge. This document is now before you as document CL 99/21.

Following the preparation of the basic survey we received information regarding the signature at the end of March 1991 of the Treaty for the Establishment of a Common Market among Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The analysis of this new Treaty is contained in document CL 99/21-Sup.l for the information of Council members. Both documents respond to the requests made by the Council in its 98th Session in November 1990 that a Study should be carried out regarding regional economic integration organizations in other parts of the world that might be interested in possible membership of FAO.

The Study, as you will have noted, concludes that at the present time the EEC is unique in satisfying all the criteria set down by the Council, but points out that certain organizations come closer than others in meeting those criteria.

The basic documents of a number of organizations appear to allow for the transfer of competence. There is as yet, however, no evidence that this transfer has taken place in practice. The Study concludes that the success of the EEC may act as a stimulus to other regional organizations and that a number of these might in the long-term achieve a level of integration that would allow them to qualify under the criteria established by the Council.

LE PRESIDENT: Je vous rappelle que nous avons, en ce qui concerne ce point, différents documents. Tout d'abord le document CL 99/5 qui est le rapport de la cinquante-sixième session du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques qui s'est tenue en avril 1991. Ensuite nous avons deux documents, un rapport supplémentaire du Directeur général sur la forme que pourrait revêtir l'adhésion à la FAO d'une organisation d'intégration économique régionale, le document CL 99/27, et un supplément au rapport supplémentaire.

Dieu sait si nous n'aurons pas le supplément du supplément du rapport supplémentaire. Pour l'instant nous avons un supplément au rapport supplémentaire du Directeur général sur la forme que pourrait revêtir l'adhésion à la FAO d'une organisation d'intégration économique régionale. II s'agit du document CL 99/27-Sup.1. Ce sont les trois documents essentiels: le rapport du Comité, le rapport supplémentaire du Directeur général et le Supplément au rapport supplémentaire. Vous voyez que la matière est un peu compliquée. J'ai eu l'occasion d'étudier attentivement les documents et je suis convaincu que tous les membres du Conseil auront, avec attention, étudié ces différents documents.

En ce qui concerne la méthode de travail, puis-je me permettre très modestement de faire une suggestion, étant entendu que nous sommes ouverts à toutes les suggestions qui pourraient être faites concernant la façon dont nous allons procéder? Je crois qu'il serait utile que les membres du Conseil fassent connaître leur avis sur un plan politique, de la façon la plus précise possible, de manière à dégager l'opinion du Conseil. Nous éviterions à ce stade, dans toute la mesure possible, de commencer des discussions d'ordre purement juridique.

Dans un second stade, nous pourrions examiner un certain nombre de points de droit, ou tout au moins faire l'inventaire de ceux qui mériteraient de retenir davantage l'attention, quitte à ce moment-là à procéder comme nous l'avons fait pour les ressources phytogénétiques, c'est-à-dire avoir un petit groupe de travail composé des membres du Comité et des membres du Conseil les plus intéressés par ce problème pour clarifier les points de droit qui pourraient être clarifiés beaucoup plus facilement au sein d'un petit groupe qu'au sein de notre Conseil.

Je crois qu'il serait important qu'au départ nous ayons un large débat et que les membres du Conseil fassent connaitre leur position, mais si possible une position claire et précise, parce qu'il faudra que l'on puisse connaître l'opinion du Conseil, quitte éventuellement à ce que l'on réponde aux objections; mais indépendamment des objections, il paraît important que le Conseil soit consulté et prenne une position concernant les problèmes qui sont soumis, étant entendu que dès à présent les objections éventuelles d'ordre juridique pourraient être formulées. Mais dans un premier stade on ne commencerait pas des discussions d'ordre juridique, on pourrait les réserver pour un second stade.

Est-ce que cette approche serait de nature à rencontrer l'agrément du Conseil ou estimez-vous devoir faire des observations ou des remarques supplémentaires concernant la méthode de travail?

F.C. PRILLEVITZ (Netherlands): Mr Chairman, yes I think we can follow you although it is difficult to avoid certain legal matters in our statements. What I would like to propose is that after the introduction of this item, and we have had almost that, I can speak on behalf of the European Community, and then of course the other Council members can express their opinion. Then, that you give me also the possibility to answer questions with the help of the representative of the European Commission and also of course the Legal Counsel of FAO and then perhaps we will be at the end of the afternoon or perhaps the beginning of tomorrow, and you will break this

discussion, give a break so that we can prepare ourselves for giving answers. Perhaps you can discuss operational activities or another item on the agenda.

LE PRESIDENT: Une question a été posée concernant la séance de cet aprèsmidi. Il entrait plus ou moins dans nos intentions, mais nous sommes entre les mains du Conseil, de prolonger la séance jusqu'à 19 h 30, au maximum jusqu'à 19 h 45, de façon à pouvoir avancer dans nos travaux et nous reprendrions, bien sûr après les deux points dont on a parlé ce matin, ce point à notre ordre du jour de demain, en fonction de ce que vous aurez exprimé. Je crois que nous avons largement le temps d'ici 19 h 30 de recueillir déjà un large avis du Conseil.

Je vais tout d'abord donner la parole à l'Ambassadeur Poulides, Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques.

Fotis POULIDES (Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters): Membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO. The question of Possible Forms for Membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO has been under consideration both by the Council and the CCLM since June 1989. At its 98th Session in November 1990 the Council considered a report by the CCLM which was based, in part, on a search of exploratory talks held between the Secretariat of FAO and the Commission of the European Communities, the European Communities being the only present known example of Regional Economic Integration Organization meeting the criteria set down by the Council.

Following its discussions the Council had requested the Director-General to hold further talks with the EEC, and called for the preparation of further documentation so that it might be in a better position to consider the whole question of possible membership by Regional Economic Integration Organizations. In particular the Council had called for the preparation of a draft of possible amendments to the Basic Texts of the Organization that would allow for such membership. The Council had requested that the matter be referred for consideration by the CCIH at its 56th Session, and that the CCLM report to the Council at its present session.

Section 4 of the Report of the CCLM recalls the evolution of the question of possible forms of membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO, and relates in detail the considerations of the Committee with respect to the various amendments which would be required to the Basic Texts of the Organization, in particular the Constitution and the General Rules.

I shall not recall all of the matters discussed by the Committee because these are set out in some detail in the report. On the other hand, I hope that it will be useful if I underline the principal considerations and the main problems which dominated our discussion. First, I should like to emphasize that there was general agreement amongst the members of the CCLM on the main lines of the draft amendments which were under consideration and of the text of the amendments themselves. On the other hand, there were several proposed amendments on which the Committee was not able to reach a

consensus. The Committee requested that the Secretariat pursue its work on these issues and report thereon to the Council directly. The Secretariat has therefore held further discussions with representatives of the EEC and these have been summarized in two supplementary reports by the Director-General. The relevant documents are CL 99/27 and CL 99/27-Sup.l. These will be introduced by the Legal Counsel.

I shall limit myself to a presentation of the position as it emerged from the Report of the CCLM on the understanding that with regard to some matters further progress has been made in the discussion to which I have just referred.

The text proposed by the CCLM including, in some cases, alternative proposals which are set out in square brackets may be found in Annex B to the Report. A very fundamental issue before the CCLM was whether the approach used by the Secretariat would provide a sound legal base for dealing with the matter. The Committee noted that the initial approach had been that of establishing a new category of membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations which would be entitled "Alternative Membership". However, at the request of the EEC this approach was changed to that of admitting such organizations as a member. At the same time, however, a number of additional provisions would be added to the Constitution and to the General Rules of the Organization which would place restrictions on the form of membership and would reflect the notion of the alternative exercise of membership rights. Thus, in practice the attributes of a member organization would be the same as those of alternative membership. The CCLM concluded that this approach would be correct and that it had the advantage of requiring only a minimum number of amendments to the FAO Constitution. More detailed provisions would be included in the General Rules of the Organization dealing with the practical aspects of membership and could, if necessary, be amended in future by the Conference itself.

A number of questions were asked in connection with the proposed amendment to Article II.3 of the Constitution. In particular whether it would be necessary that all member states of a Regional Economic Integration Organization would have to be members of FAO, or whether it would be sufficient for a lesser number of FAO Member States. The relevant parts of the proposed amendment are in square brackets. One of the most complex questions which arose was in connection with Article II.5 of the Constitution. There was general agreement that a member of the organization should not participate in what has been qualified as the institutional life of the Organization, and it follows therefrom that they would not be members or bodies of the Organizations which were of restricted membership. The question was then how this principle could best be reflected in the Basic Texts. One possibility would be to make provision in the Constitution for a member of an organization to participate in all meetings of the Organization dealing with matters within its competence, except as otherwise provided in the Constitution. A provision would provide that it could not participate in bodies dealing primarily with the institutional life of the Organization, and specific rules would be adopted to that effect. An alternative could be not to refer at all in the Constitution to the institutional life of the Organization, but to allow for delegation to that effect in the General Rules of the Organization.

However, these approaches met with some objections in terms of institutional impact and it did not seem correct to allow for the General Rules to contradict or derogate from the Constitution itself. It would appear that informal discussions have led to a compromise solution set out in the Supplement to the Supplementary Report of the Director-General which appears in document CL 99/27-Sup.l.

The CCLM also gave close consideration to proposed amendments to Article XIV of the Constitution. The purpose of this amendment is to allow Regional Economic Integration Organizations to participate in bodies set up under that Article. The Committee recorded that this had been a problem in the past because the Article as it stands does not allow for such participation and the matter had become urgent. Agreements concluded under Article XIV had their own life and therefore must be entirely self-contained. Such an agreement would be open to participation by Regional Economic Integration Organizations having exclusive competence over matters within the purview of the agreement. Since this might cover a wide range of Regional Economic Integration Organizations, it would be proper that the agreement itself makes specific agreement concerning the voting rights and participation of each such organization participating therein.

In considering the proposed amendment to the General Rules, some very fundamental issues were raised in respect of Rule XLIV. This would be a new rule to deal with the issue of the distribution of competence between the member organization and the member state. It would require a statement of competence at the time of application for membership, and would also require the taking-up of this statement as appropriate. Moreover, a declaration would be necessary before each meeting of a body of FAO so that it would be clear whether the regional organization or its member states would have competence for the matters under discussion.

A very delicate problem arose in connection with the question of competence in matters for which there had not been a specific declaration to the Organization in respect of transfer of competence, and in particular whether it was necessary to include an express presumption to the effect that competence in respect of such matters remained with the member states.

Paragraph 2 of Rule XLIV is in square brackets. The question arose as to whether the Organization would have to indicate who would vote in respect of matters for which both the organization and the member states had concurrent competence. As a result, there are also square brackets in paragraph 5 of the Rule.

A complex question is that of the right to participate in discussions in meetings of the Organization on matters where both the member organization and member state enjoy concurrent competence. The first alternative proposal is that in such cases, the member organization and member state should agree between the two of them which should participate in the discussion. The second, while seeking to set a practice, would not limit the rights of both the member organization and its member states to speak. The Committee agreed that these proposals involved political issues and that the alternative text should be passed on to the Council for decision.

This presentation has been longer than usual, but as you know, Mr Chairman, the question of membership of Regional Economic Integration Organizations in the Organization has now reached a very advanced stage. Although a great deal of progress has been made, some problems do remain. I felt it was my duty to underline them to the members of the Council. I understand that Legal Counsel may wish to add some brief observations on the subject, in particular with regard to events which have taken place since the CCLM met in April.

LEGAL COUNSEL: The Report of the CCLM on this agenda item has been introduced by the Chairman of the CCLM. I would like to introduce the other two documents before the Council on this agenda item. The first is document CL 99/27 entitled "Supplementary Report by the Director-General on Options for a Form of Membership by Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO", and the second is the supplement to that report, CL 99/27-Sup.l which was issued late last week and gives the latest information on recent discussions that have been held with the EEC Commission.

I would like first to say a few introductory words about the Supplementary Report by the Director-General. This report covers a number of matters that the CCLM itself asked the Secretariat to look into and to report on directly to the Council today.

The first matter is the reaction of other UN agencies to the general proposals made by the Secretariat and by the CCLM for a form of membership for Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO. Its reactions are set out in the Supplementary Report of the Director-General, as far as possible in the words actually used by those Legal Officers. The United Nations Legal Office had no difficulties at all with the proposed form of membership. The WHO and ILO Legal Offices found it generally acceptable. The latter would have preferred the concept of alternative membership, but recognized that in practice there was no difference between alternative membership and the alternative exercise of membership rights.

The Legal Officer of IAEA also found that the proposed form of membership would not, in his own words "cause any insurmountable legal problems".

The CCLM also asked us to look into two other matters, namely, the special problem of membership rights and agreements concluded under Article XIV, and that of the procedures for establishing a quorum of declarations regarding the exercise of voting rights. The results of our investigation are set out in the document before you.

We were also asked by the CCLM to report to the Council on further discussions held since the date of the CCLM meeting with the representatives of the EEC. We have had two such meetings subsequent to that date, both of which focused mainly on the alternative provisions in the text of the CCLM report contained in brackets.

At this point, I would like to turn to the second document before you - CL 99/27-Sup.l - since this for the most part incorporates the results of discussions held with the European Commission last week. The document suggests certain compromise wordings for the matters at present contained

in brackets in the report of the CCLM which may perhaps attract a greater measure of consensus among Member Nations. The paper also suggests possible wording to cover the particular issue of voting rights in agreements concluded under Article XIV of the Constitution, that being a matter which the CCLM had asked the Secretariat to look further into.

My final point concerns the future action that the Council may wish to take. I may be possible for Council in its discussions to resolve some of the matters on which alternative texts have been presented by the CCLM. It may, on the other hand, be difficult for Council in practice to reach an agreement on all issues, given the pressure of time and the need for delegations to consult their governments on this important issue. One suggestion made in the Supplementary Report of the Director-General is that the Council may, if it wishes, continue with the process of considering possible amendments to the Constitution on this matter and propose a set of draft amendments for consideration by the Conference in November in order to meet the deadline set down in the Constitution without necessarily attempting to remove all of the brackets. It could then ask the CCLM or other bodies to look further into the matters contained in brackets, and make known its views on these matters to the CCLM at its 100th Session and thus to the Conference later in November.

In summary, we also understand that a number of delegates here today may not yet be in a position to express a firm and final political decision regarding the question of membership of FAO by Regional Economic Integration Organizations. We do not think it is necessary to take such a final decision at this stage. This decision will be taken at the Conference in November. Meanwhile, the Council may wish to take the process one stage further by formally proposing the amendments to the Conference so that the Conference itself may take that political decision.

LE PRESIDENT: Il est important que le Conseil donne un éclairage sur les différents points de vue. Si certains ne peuvent pas donner un éclairage complet pour le moins peuvent-ils donner une première lueur qui permettrait progressivement de dissiper ce que j'appelle des zones d'ombre à côté des zones de lumière où la clarté est faite. Mais il faut au moins circonscrirè avec précision où se trouvent les zones d'ombre et les zones de lumière.

Pour introduire le sujet je donnerai la parole au représentant des Pays-Bas.

F.C. PRILLEVITZ (Netherlands): I was so surprised last week to find that we could already buy "attributes" of the European Community, so I have a sun hat here. To celebrate this occasion I will put it on. However, that prevents me from keeping eye contact with you, Mr Chairman, because of our favourable seating and I would prefer to continue keeping an eye on you!

I would like first to thank you in the name of the Community for having put this question on the agenda of the 99th Session.

I would also like to thank the Director-General, the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters and the Finance Committee for the

attention with which they have examined the question of the Community's accession to the FAO. I think that their respective reports constitute a good basis for a positive solution to our endeavour.

The Member States of the Community have transferred and continue to transfer to the Community competences in a number of areas, certain of which are also areas of FAO activity. With regard to exclusive competences, the Common Agricultural Policy, Fisheries and Commercial and Tariff Policies have to be mentioned. Among the sectors where the competence is concurrent between the European Community and its Member States, in general development, forestry, environment and research have to be referred to.

However, in its present form, the FAO Constitution does not allow the Community's full and complete participation in the work of this Organization corresponding to its competences. The FAO statutes were indeed drafted long before the birth of the European Community 30 years ago and could not take into account the new phenomenon which the European Community represents in international life. As the Member States of the Community transferred their competences in these areas, they are no longer in a position to exercise them. This leads to legal and institutional uncertainties.

Confronted with this dilemma and taking into account the evolving character of this institution, the EC felt obliged to solicit the modification of the FAO statutes with a view to covering fully the areas with which it has been entrusted.

The full participation of the EC in the work of the Organization should also lead to a significant increase of cooperation which should be to the benefit of the least developed Member Nations of the FAO. In the same spirit, a new arrangement on cooperation has been concluded between the Commission of European Communities and FAO.

Since 1987 in an informal, and since April 1989 in a formal, fashion, a dialogue had been installed between the EC and the FAO in order to seek, in respect of the relevant rules and competences, a concrete field of cooperation.

In this context, may I recall that on 26 April 1989, Mr Ordonez, Acting President of the EC Council of Ministers, addressed a letter to the Director-General of FAO, asking in the name of the 12 EC Member States which are also members of this Organization, to approach the competent bodies with the view "of examining the possibility for the Community to obtain the status of Member corresponding to its competences".

On 30 June 1989, the FAO Council authorized its Director-General to explore the possibilities of accession to FAO for regional economic integration organizations and in particular the EC, as well as the legal and financial consequences of such an accession.

On 22 October 1989, taking into account the results of the exploratory conversations between the Commission and the FAO Secretariat, Mr De Michelis, Italian Minister for Foreign Affairs, in his capacity as

President of the EC Council, sent a letter in the name of the EC Member States, which requested:

- to accept the principle of the accession of the EC to FAO with a status corresponding to its competences;

- to approve amendments to the statutes of the FAO in order to make this accession possible;

- and to allow the EC to become a member during the FAO Conference in November 1991, if the EC/FAO talks lead to a positive result.

In November 1990, the FAO Council indicated its readiness to see "the talks between EC and FAO to continue with a view to propose modifications to the Basic Texts which would allow the EC to acquire the quality of a member of the FAO".

Since then, talks have taken place between the EC delegation and the FAO Secretariat until recent days within the orientations given by our Council in November 1990.

On this occasion, some delegations expressed their concern that the balance of mutual rights and obligations should not be modified and that their legitimate interests should be guaranteed. In particular, the wish was expressed that the accession should not lead to an increase in the totality of rights and obligations of the Community and its Member States as a whole.

The amendments foreseen to the Constitution of FAO show that this will not be the case. Indeed, the basic principle of the accession will be the alternative exercise of rights and obligations. Therefore, the global balance of these rights and obligations would not be modified.

Now I would like to give some details on the positive impact which the future accession of the Community to FAO will produce in the area of development.

In addition to the action already undertaken by the Member States within FAO, the Commission of the European Communities envisages a cooperation with the Organization in the areas of food and agriculture, including fisheries and forestry.

This cooperation will also involve regular consultations in order to examine together respective policies, programmes and activities in the area of agricultural and rural development. This approach would be applied as well in the field by establishing a system of regular consultations between representatives from the EC and FAO in order to ensure mutual support of their programmes and to review potential complementarities.

As you will see from the texts of the framework agreement between the Commission of the European Communities and the FAO, new efforts will be made in all the fields of cooperation.

As a conclusion, I would very much hope, in the name of the Community, that the Council will allow us to advance decisively towards a choice which is dictated by the evolution itself of the Community which, together with its Member States, wishes to participate even more in the challenge of development.

We are aware that the EC accession to FAO would also be a new fact in the United Nations system, and we appreciate very much the favourable approach taken by the Legal Service of this Institution.

In summing up, I believe that the effort of the Community to become a member of this institution corresponds to the necessity brought about by the new economic and political reality which the European Community has become.

Its accession would, however, not increase the European Community's weight within FAO by virtue of a sui generis member status, which is characterized by the alternative exercise of competences between the Community and its Member States. In this regard, I may mention the following examples: neither has the EC as such any additional vote, nor can it participate in the restricted Committees, nor is it eligible within the different executives of the FAO; such competences will continue to be exercised by its Member States.

Let us hope that the request made by Mr De Michelis in his letter of 22 October 1990 in the name of the EC Member States, which are also members of FAO, will receive your approval and that the European Community can become a member of this Organization during the Session of the Conference in November this year.

John KNOX (United States of America): The question of EC membership in FAO is an extremely important one. As we are all aware, this is the first time the EC has sought membership in an international organization in the United Nations family. And admitting the EC as a member organization would mark the first time the United Nations system would open membership to an entity other than a State.

Before we can support amending the FAO Constitution to allow the EC to apply for membership, it is therefore necessary to be sure that we have satisfactorily addressed all problems and questions concerning the issue. In this regard, my delegation would like to raise three general areas of concern.

First, although it is clear that the basis for EC membership would be the principle of alternative exercise of membership rights, we note that it has not yet proved possible to agree upon language implementing that principle. Under the principle of alternative exercise of membership rights, the EC would exercise membership rights within FAO only within its competence and only to the extent that its Member States do not exercise their rights.

The United States continues to believe that, as it stated at the November Council meeting, membership by the EC, or for that matter any other Regional Economic Integration Organization, is possible only in accordance with this principle, which ensures that EC membership would not result in an increase in the membership rights of the EC and its members.

The difficulty has been to find language that clearly reflects this principle. The United States believes that the language provided to the Council by the CCLM, as supplemented by the language contained in document CL 99/27-Sup.1, could provide a basis for consensus among members.

But we are aware that consensus has not yet been reached. In particular, we understand that some states believe that the rules should not allow both the EC and its members to speak on issues of concurrent competence. This is obviously a crucial issue, one that goes to the very heart of EC participation in FAO. My delegation believes that a possible compromise on this issue in accordance with the principle of alternative exercise of membership rights might be to allow either the EC or its member states - whichever does not speak as a member - to speak as an observer.

There may be other specific drafting suggestions that should be further discussed. We support the suggestion made by the Chairman and the Legal Counsel that delegations with specific proposals could perhaps meet in an informal working group, to attempt to arrive at a text without some of the brackets which it currently has.

However, it appears obvious to us that until we have agreed upon language, it is not possible to approve it, or to recommend that the Conference adopt it. My delegation therefore agrees with the suggestion in the Director-General's supplemental report, as noted by the Legal Counsel, that the Council could pass on the language to the Conference, leaving language in brackets where it cannot be agreed upon, without making a formal decision as to whether the language should be adopted by the Conference.

Just as it is necessary to ensure that EC membership does not increase the rights of the EC and its members, it is equally necessary that EC membership does not occur at the expense of FAO Member States. Our second area of concern is that EC membership accommodates FAO Members' legitimate interests. In particular, one crucial interest is our need to know in adequate detail which areas are within the EC's exclusive competence and which areas are within competence shared by the EC and its members, so that we can foresee which of the EC and its members would be responsible for a particular area. We would note that we view the paper circulated by the EC at this Council meeting as not adequate for this purpose.

We therefore urge the EC to provide a more detailed statement of competence well in advance of the Conference, so that States will have time to examine the statement before making their decision on admitting the EC as a member organization.

Finally, the United States would like a clearer picture of how EC membership in FAO would affect the EC's ability to participate in other organizations and agreements.

We have two particular concerns here. First, we would like the scope and basis of EC participation in joint bodies, such as the Codex Alimentarius and the World Food Programme Committee on Food Aid, to be more clearly defined. It appears to us that the EC would be able to participate in those bodies, but only according to the principle of alternative membership, so that the EC would only participate on behalf of its member states, and only in areas within its competence. We also believe, at least at first glance, that it would probably be necessary to amend the terms of reference of those bodies to clarify the terms of EC participation. We would be interested in the opinion of the Legal Counsel on this point.

We are also concerned with the effect EC membership in FAO might have upon its ability to participate in international agreements generally. A clause found in many international agreements - known as the Vienna Clause -provides that those agreements are open to member states of the UN or of any specialized agency.

We believe it is clear by its express terms that it only applies to member states, and therefore would not apply to the EC even if it became a member organization of FAO. At the same time, although we are not aware of any, it is possible that an international agreement provides that it is open for accession to any "member" of a UN specialized agency. The United States believes that any such provision would not apply to member organizations.

Any other interpretation of the clause, in our opinion, would work a great change in international law, because the EC would be able to join agreements without negotiating a special protocol or amendment to provide for its accession, as it must do now, such a change would be far beyond the EC's stated purpose in seeking to join FAO - this is, to increase its ability to participate effectively in this Organization.

We will have to look into this question further. But if there is any doubt on this point, it may be desirable to make clearer in the FAO Constitution that Regional Economic Integration Organizations would join FAO in a sui generis status.

We would appreciate hearing from the FAO Legal Counsel on this question. We would also like to ask the EC whether it shares our view that the Vienna Clause would not apply to the EC even if it joins the FAO.

LE PRESIDENT: Je vous remercie des suggestions que vous avez faites, notamment en ce qui concerne la possibilité d'un groupe de travail informel. Je note aussi les commentaires que vous avez faits en ce qui concerne le problème plus spécifique du Codex qui relève à la fois de la FAO et de l'Organisation mondiale de la santé, du CFE qui est un autre problème; et nous prenons acte du fait que d'autres organismes du système des Nations Unies ont été contactés déjà et que le premier rapport a été fourni, il est inséré dans le document CL 99/27.

En ce qui concerne la question des compétences, le document a été distribué. Nous ne l'avons pas cité jusqu'à présent, il s'agit du document CL 99/INF/18 de juin 1991, document qui a été transmis pour information dans une matière qui me paraît, par essence, évolutive.

Edtiardo HERMANNY (Brazil): As we have already in previous discussions on this important issue, the Brazilian Government is not opposed in principle to a possible form of membership for the EEC in FAO, as long as this membership is sui generis and based on the principle of alternate participation between the EEC and its member states. However, the Brazilian delegation feels that some of the proposed amendments to the FAO Basic Text presented by the CCLM are inappropriate and difficult to accept. The first major problem we see in these draft admendments is that they create, particularly by the proposed amendment of paragraph 2 of Article 2 of the FAO Constitution, a juridical status for the EEC analogous to the status of Member Nations. That is, the EEC, as a member organization of FAO, would have full membership status. We feel in this case there is a difference between alternative membership, a concept rejected by the EEC itself, and a form of full membership with its rights based on the principle of alternative exercise, a proposal difficult to accept. This latter possibility as proposed by the CCLM would create a situation where a full member would have more than one vote. This would violate the basic principle that one member shall have only one vote. The concession to the EEC of a full membership status with multiple votes would create a dangerous precedent for all multilateral agencies, something that might prove to be inconvenient. The political implications of this precedent for the decision-making system of all international organizations is something that requires careful consideration. The Brazilian delegation prefers, therefore, that the form of membership granted to the EEC be sui generis and not similar to the membership status of Member Nations. This form of membership should be something different from full membership in order to avoid the situation just described: a full member with multiple votes. In this regard, we suggest that the CCLM continue to study other alternatives to the form of membership the EEC would have in FAO, bearing always in mind, as we have already stated at the 98th Session of the Council last November, that any proposed form of membership must be sui generis and shall remain commensurate with the principle of alternate participation.

One possibility that might be explored is the preparation of a specific protocol between FAO and the EEC describing precisely the rights and restrictions of the EEC participation in FAO. The Brazilian delegation would also like to recall the report of the Director-General of FAO in document 98/33, paragraph 21, when he mentioned that if at any time exclusive competence in all FAO matters were transferred to a member organization by its members, this member organization would have only one vote, according to the FAO Constitution and to the EEC practice. We would prefer that this possibility be clearly referred to and foreseen in the text.

Along the same lines, we would mention the question referred to by the Director-General of FAO in paragraph 9 of document 99/27 concerning the participation of member organizations in agreements under Article 14 of the Constitution. We think that it should be laid down in the Constitution itself that in agreements falling entirely within the exclusive competence of a member organization, this member organization should exercise one vote only. The Brazilian delegation would also like to make it clear that it rejects the possibility that EEC and its member states could participate in the same debate. We believe this would be contrary to the principle of alternative participation. As we have previously said, either the EEC or

its member states, but never both, would be entitled to speak on a given issue, even in areas of concurrent jurisdiction or mixed competences. In these cases, the question of who should speak is to be defined in advance of the meeting.

The Brazilian delegation would also like to stress that the distribution of competences between the EEC and its member states should be clearly and explicitly defined as a condition for its membership. In this connection, we would like to be able to examine as soon as possible a detailed list of competences transferred to the EEC by its member states concerning the areas of the FAO's programmes and activities. After these considerations, which we hope will be viewed in a constructive way, the Brazilian delegation deems that the study and contacts should continue and that it is too early for the Council to express its final position on this important issue.

LE PRESIDENT: Concernant les questions très claires que vous avez posées, il a déjà été répondu par le Représentant des Pays-Bas: je crois qu'il n'est jamais question d'une voix supplémentaire.

Miss Ting WEN LIAN (Malaysia): My delegation indeed was most impressed by all the legal and other arguments and documents that have been presented. We are sure that our relevant legal and other authorities would be very interested to study in greater detail the impressive array of papers on the subject. My delegation would simply like to make some general statements at this stage.

My delegation is aware that this is an important subject to the EEC, and we would like to assure the EEC that we are not against their proposal in principle. However, it was our impression that during the 98th Session of the Council many delegations expressed the need to study this subject carefully, as any acceptance of EEC membership to FAO would set a precedent. There were many areas that still required clarification. Along with that important point was the call that there should be provisions for other Regional Economic Integration Organizations to avail themselves of the same privilege.

While we are not against the EEC membership per se, we feel that every effort should be made to avoid excluding other Regional Economic Integration Organizations. The criteria set down should not therefore seek to exclude other regional economic organizations from the outset nor should they be used as a justification for uniqueness and thus disqualify other organizations. After all, those criteria are man-made in Rome or elsewhere, in Cambridge or wherever.

While we see the need for this important subject to be further studied, my delegation would further propose that the subject of EEC membership of FAO first be referred to the United Nations parent body in New York for its approval in principle. My delegation considers it appropriate for the United Nations in New York to approve the EEC membership in order that a political decision can be taken on the subject in New York before the EEC proceeds to seek membership accordingly in any of the other UN Agencies.

In our view it is more appropriate for the UN Headquarters or the UNGA to coordinate the views of the UN Agencies rather than for FAO to do it in this forum.

Meanwhile, my delegation would like to say that Amendments prepared by the FAO Secretariat to facilitate the membership of the EEC should be held in abeyance until the UNGA decision or the global approval from the UN is obtained.

As you are all aware, Malaysia is a member of the Regional Group known as ASEAN. My delegation is anxious that ASEAN has an opportunity to assess the implications and ramifications of EEC membership vis-à-vis ASEAN interests.

LE PRESIDENT: La FAO n'a pas de parents. Je ne dirai pas que la FAO est une agence orpheline mais elle ne dépend pas d'une agence qui existait avant la création des Nations Unies. Elle peut consulter éventuellement des organes des Nations Unies, mais elle ne dépend ni d'organes, ni de l'Assemblée générale, ni de l'ECOSOC, ni d'un autre organe. La FAO a ses instances statutaires qui doivent prendre leurs responsabilités.

Alvaro José ROBELO GONZALEZ (Nicaragua): Los países de Centroamérica y Panamá reconocemos la gran importancia de la labor de la Comunidad Europea y la colaboración que brinda a los países en vías de desarrollo en materia de asistencia y finaneiamiento de sus proyectos y programas, y por ello consideramos positiva su aspiración de ingresar en la FAO.

Sin embargo, en consideración a instrucciones que han recibido algunos de los países de la Subregión Centroamericana y Panamá, consideramos importante puntualizar las cuestiones siguientes:

a) El Consejo debe recibir con suficiente anticipación, en forma oficial y de manera clara y precisa, la lista de las competencias que la Comunidad ha ofrecido.

b) Se debe aclarar la forma en que la Comunidad proporcionará ayuda económica a la Organización y, por ende, a los Estados Miembros.

c) Se debe aclarar, además, si la CEE, como miembro de la FAO, pretenderá ser miembro de los Comités restringidos de esta Organización y de otras organizaciones.

d) Debe quedar claramente establecido que cualquier disposición que se adopte será aplicable a todas las organizaciones regionales de integración económica.

e) Si la CEE entra en la FAO, que es un organismo multilateral, gubernamental y universal, no puede seguir limitando su participación y su ayuda a determlnados países, pues esto cambiaría la esencia de la FAO.

f) En ningún caso se podrá aceptar que la presencia de una organización represente un costo adicional para los Estados Miembros.

F.M. MBEWE (Zambia): As regards the membership of Regional Economic Integration Organizations we know from the Survey that only the EEC presently meets the conditions for entry into FAO as set out by the Council. It is unfortunate. Maybe they should have made stiffer conditions so that nobody enters which would thereby reduce the debate.

Be that as it may, the membership discussion invariably centres around the EEC membership of FAO. It will definitely set an important precedent for the future, if indeed other organizations would qualify in meeting those conditions set by the Council.

We have serious reservations about the membership of EEC in FAO but we are now slightly pleased that some of our fears have been expelled by backroom discussions between FAO and the EEC, and subsequent meetings with the CCLM. I am grateful for this work that has taken place, which has culminated in the documents before us today.

Coming to the membership of the EEC, we wish to say a few things regarding the Articles, as the Chairman had requested.

We agree that the EEC should be admissable to the Organization on the basis of alternative membership, that is, it substitutes for Member States on the basis of competence already resting with the EEC rather than Member States. In this regard it will be necessary for the EEC to provide us with a list of competences prior to the Conference in November, if indeed a decision is taken that this issue should be submitted to the Conference.

Having noted that there is no contradictory legal view from other UN bodies, I wish now to turn to the proposed amendments in Annex B:

(1) Article II - A member is admitted when two-thirds of the majority of the members agree. The question is what is meant by the "majority of the members present"? Is it well understood by some delegations? Maybe it is, but I am not sure that I understand what it means. Does it mean 67 percent, which is two-thirds? Does it mean 75 percent or 80 percent? What is the majority present? We need to get some answers and some clarifications there.

(2) In Article II.3 it is essential that the country membership of FAO in the Regional Economic Organization is made a conditionally for membership to avoid situations, though remotely possible, where the organization is representing competence interests of a non-member State. The square brackets should accordingly be removed. On the underlying premise that the Regional Economic Organization takes over the areas of competence from Member States, we support the proposed Article II.4 on page B2, and in the same vein we support the first alternative wording of Rule XLIV.6 on page B7.

Having said what I have said under Article II, I believe that the wording of Article II.5 is in line with our earlier observations and positions.

Finally, we wish to reserve our right to this subject at the Council preceding the Conference or during the Conference itself in respect of membership of the EEC vis-à-vis if there is a response to our position regarding alternate membership.

LE PRESIDENT: En ce qui concerne les amendements à l'Acte constitutif, le texte de l'Article XX des Textes fondamentaux est très clair: il faut une majorité des deux tiers des suffrages exprimés mais cette majorité doit être supérieure à la moitié du nombre total des Etats Membres de la FAO, pas seulement des Etats Membres présents, c'est-à-dire qu'il faut l'approbation de 51 pour cent des membres de la FAO. Il faut donc que cette majorité des deux tiers des suffrages exprimés soit supérieure à 51 pour cent des Etats Membres de l'Organisation. C'est là le texte de l'Article XX de l'Acte constitutif de la FAO.

Peter FRANKLIN (Australia): First let me say that Australia has no in-principle difficulty with the FAO's Basic Texts being modified to better reflect the changes that have occurred in the EEC competence in the range of issues within FAO's sphere of activity. This seems both realistic and sensible given the unique status and authority which the EEC now has on a range of significant agricultural and fisheries issues.

We feel that modifications to the Basic Texts are specially important in relation to Article XIV, Fishery Bodies. The activity and effectiveness of these bodies are currently limited by the inability of the EEC to become a contracting party, and we would hope that this situation can be rectified in the near future.

Having said that, we wish to ensure that the transition to the new arrangements being proposed is as smooth as possible and that the modifications to the Basic Texts are appropriate in the circumstances. While much has been written on the draft amendments to the Basic Texts and the rationale for those changes, we have yet to see much on how these changes would be put into effect in a more practical way.

Document CL 99/INF/18, which was circulated recently, deals in very general terms with this aspect. However, it provides no real guide as to how the EEC and its members would participate in the activity of the many conferences, councils, commissions, committees, and inter-governmental groups, which are at the very heart of the activities of the FAO. Therefore, we would request that before matters progress too much further we be provided with additional information on the respective areas of competence of the EEC and its members, and how it might be exercised on a case-by-case basis. This is of particular interest to us in areas of shared competence, as well as in those situations where particular meetings or agenda items might cover simultaneously areas of exclusive competence of both the Commission and its individual members.

In closing, I would wish to reiterate our hope that any delays that may occur in progressing the broader membership issue would not unduly hold up progress in relation to making the necessary changes to the Constitution to enable the EEC to become a party to Article 14 agreements. We understand

that the consideration of this aspect can, if necessary, proceed separately, and we would commend that course of action should there be any prospect of significant delay in solving the broader membership issues.

Thomas YANGA (Cameroun): Monsieur le Président, selon votre suggestion, je voudrais tout de suite exprimer l'appui du Cameroun à l'admission de la CEE en tant qu'organisation Membre de la FAO. Par conséquent, le Cameroun se prononce, en principe, en faveur des amendements nécessaires à apporter aux Textes fondamentaux de la FAO afin de rendre cette adhésion effective.

A cet égard, on devrait garder présentes à l'esprit d'autres organisations régionales qui pourraient évoluer vers des stades qui les obligent ou leur permettent de demander leur adhésion à la FAO, dans un avenir plus ou mo ins proche. Il s'agit là d'un défi que les Etats Membres de la FAO devraient relever pour éviter des retouches aux Textes fondamentaux de l'Organisation chaque fois que le problème se poserait.

De même, l'une des questions cruciales à résoudre est celle des compétences simultanées.

Enfin, mon pays se réjouit déjà de la coopération accrue, et que nous espérons effective, qui ne manquera de s'instaurer entre la FAO et la CEE en faveur, notamment, des Etats Membres en développement de la FAO.

LE PRESIDENT: En ce qui concerne la question qui a été posée, il va de soi que les organisations d'intégration économique régionale qui répondent aux conditions voulues sont concernées par les amendements à l'examen. Ces amendements n'ont pas été étudiés pour une seule organisation mais pour les organisations où des transferts de compétence ont lieu.

Masayuki KOMATSU (Japan): Thank you very much Mr Chairman for giving me the floor under one of the most important agenda items at this Council meeting. I also would like to thank the Chairman of CCLM and the FAO Secretariat for the preparation of the compiled documents for our consideration, and our delegation wishes to extend our compliments also to the European Economic Commission for their collaboration in contributing to the document compilation.

First of all, as a matter of principle, Japan can support the participation of the EEC in FAO's activity in the area where the EEC has the competence which has been delegated from the member states of the EEC, because the EEC has been progressing to achieve the integration with having the authorities transferred by the member countries of the EEC, and it has become a member of several international organizations such as the North Atlantic Fisheries Convention (NAFC), North-East Atlantic Fishery Convention, International Commodity Agreement on Wheat and the International Convention on Conservation for Antartic Marine Resources.

However, Japan, together with other countries, pointed out that sufficient elaboration to study on the issues such as the possibility and the necessity of the international organizations other than the EEC to join and

participate in FAO, clarification of the specific details of the area of the competence of the EEC (and also those of the areas of the member states of the EEC), and ramifications of having EEC as a member in FAO to the other United Nations Systems, particularly to the specialized organizations. Accordingly, Japan is of the opinion that at this 99th Session of the Council, those points which have been raised at the last Council Session - as I mentioned above - should be further discussed to the full extent.

Suppose FAO Member States are going to admit the membership of the EEC as far as the area of the competence and those of the competence of the EEC member states do not become clear. Japan is of the opinion that it is unclear if the amendment to the FAO Constitution is genuinely needed or not, and furthermore it is unclear how possible amendment to the FAO Constitution should be. For example, yesterday when the Council discussed on the 19th Session of the COFI report, our delegation was more perplexed than before when we listened to the intervention of the United Kingdom, France and Germany, particularly when the United Kingdom delegation spoke. UK was clearly opposed to the Expert and Inter-governmental Consultation on the High Seas Fishery. I believe that the high seas fisheries matter, since it is conducted outside of the territorial waters of the twelve member nations, is the area of exclusive competence of the EEC. However, member nations made interventions on their own behalf, and most of all the member countries' opinions were clearly different from that of the EEC, which said that it supported the report of the COFI session. Thus, Japan believes that a lot of things, if we are not mistaken, are to be clarified. In this regard I would like to remind the Council that in the report of the 98th Session of the FAO Council we agreed that as is stated in paragraph 238 of the report it says "In particular a statement of competence as detailed as possible would need to be prepared", listing the areas in which full competence had been transferred, areas in which competence was shared. Moreover - this is important - mechanism would have to be devised so that member nations would be able to know at any time, any time, whether competence on any given matter laid with the Regional Economic Integration Organization or its member states.

In this regard, Japan is of the view that it is indispensable and prerequisite to have a full explanation by the EEC with submission of the list of the areas of competencies of the EEC and those of shared area, as well as the list of areas of the competence of member states of the EEC. It is inappropriate that any substantive responses from the EEC were not given to FAO, even if these were requested at the last Council meeting.

The issue of membership of the EEC to FAO is not, we believe, only the issue of FAO, and it could exert a greater influence to the other United Nations organizations, especially specialized agencies. Therefore Japan is of the view that this matter should be seriously taken up by the governing bodies of the other United Nations organizations. We also would like to know with greater detail on what was discussed at the meeting beween the FAO Legal Counsel and the United Nations Legal Counsel which took place in Geneva on 3 May. Hoewever, Japan believes the consultation and discussion amongst these legal counsels of the UN specialized organizations are very useful.

Even though we are aware that the draft amendment to the FAO Constitution has been presented to us, Japan understands that it is prerequisite to discuss fully the above mentioned things, thereby to clarify the areas of competence of the EEC; thereafter we must consider how this matter should be treated amongst the entire UN System. All these matters are fully taken into consideration. We think we should go into consideration of the greater details on the possible amendment of the FAO Constitution.

I also would like to touch upon the point that we agreed upon at the last Council meeting. That is that the membership status of a Regional Economic Integration Organization would have to be sui generis. Any draft amendment to FAO Constitution should be prepared pursuant to what we have agreed upon - that is any Regional Economic Integration Organization should be sui generis - on the premise that the EEC wil provide the further information before the member of the FAO, on what our delegation believes to be submitted. We have preliminary specific comments on the draft. However, again I must clarify our position that our comments should not be construed as our approval in participation in the consideration of the draft amendment.

(1) Definition, Requirement for the Membership. Japan is of the view that an international organization, such as the EEC, should be considered to be expressed and defined in a clear form, and we are of the view that paragraph 2 and paragraph 3 of Article II of the draft amendment prepared by the FAO Secretariat is not sufficiently elaborated. The definition of the Regional Economic Integration Organization should be elaborated by deleting the proposed paragraph 3 of the Article by FAO, replaced with the new paragraph 2 of Article III which I am going to suggest. Those definitions should include the following elements: such organizations should consist of the sovereign states which are the members of the FAO; such organization has the authority over the provisions of the FAO Constitution; such organization is delegated an authority to join the FAO. Therefore, paragraph 3 of Article II would be as follows: For the purpose of this Constitution a "Regional Economic Integration Organization" means an organization constituted by sovereign states of a given region that are members of the organization which has competence in respect of matters governed by this Constitution, and has been duly authorized in accordance with its international procedures to become as a member of the Organization. This was made by having a reference to paragraph 6 of Article I of the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer.

We are of the view that since part of the duties in the Constitution are implemented through such organization and other parts of the duties are fulfilled by member states, both such organizations and all members of such organizations should be a member of FAO.

Concerning areas of competence, Japan is of the opinion that the competence of the Regional Economic Integration Organizations within the purview of FAO should be clearly stipulated in the Constitution, not in the General Rules, because of the importance of ensuring the duty implementation by Regional Economic Integration Organizations, and balancing the right and duty of member states. The areas of competence of the Regional Economic Integration Organizations should be clearly stipulated and any changes in the areas of competence should be notified to the Director-General of FAO, and the Director-General accordingly should notify members of such changes.

Therefore, the Article should be as follows: In the application for membership and the declaration made in a formal instrument referred to in paragraph 3 of this Article, any Regional Economic Integration Organization shall declare the extent of its competence with respect to the matters governed by this Constitution. Such organization shall also inform the Director-General of the Organization of any substantial modification in the extent of its competence. Reference was also made to the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer.

Thirdly, procedures to amend the FAO Constitution. Japan must make sure that the amendments will be pursuant to Article XX of the Constitution, and no new obligations to Member Nations of FAO should be allowed. Therefore, there should be a specific Article to make a reference to no new obligations.

Fourthly, Member Nations. There are so many places in the Articles in which the term "Member Nations" is used - for example, Articles III, IV, V, XI, XV, XVI and XX. Japan is of the view that we must have a close and careful examination as to whether EEC membership may be applicable to those Articles. In this regard, we believe that the last sentence in the proposed amendment to paragraph 2 of Article II is inappropriate. It should be revised, for example, as follows: "except as otherwise expressly provided references to Member Nations under this Constitution are applicable to Regional Economic Integration Organizations or organizations within the limit of their respective competence."

We have difficulty in understanding the concept of membership right and we further have difficulties in understanding the meaning of "concurrent competence". If the meaning of the latter is that both such organization and member state of such organization have a right to speak and so on at the same time, or concurrently, we have difficulty in accepting that idea. In the following Article it should be noted when such organization and member of such organization both have duties of the FAO Constitution. Any Regional Economic Integration Organization and its member states may result, however, in derogation from the obligation under this Constitution outside of their respective responsibilities for the performance of their obligation under this Constitution. We need also to make clear a provision to specify whether the EEC can participate in the Conference or not.

Finally, on the subject of procedure regulation, we believe that Rules XLIV and XLVIII should be stipulated in the Constitution. I would like to support the proposal put forward by my colleague from Australia with regard to Article XIV.

José V. ROMERO (Philippines): I would like to state immediately that my delegation has no quarrel with the entry of the EEC into this august body. Before I go into that, however, let me first commend the management of this Organization for having prepared such excellent paperwork for the guidance of this conference. I specifically point to the report prepared by the Cambridge University International Law Centre. I believe that Legal Counsel, and my colleague here from Pakistan, and myself, cannot quarrel with the paper prepared by our university. We have always been led to believe that everything they do is competent and of integrity. I hope that is not a myth.

Having said that, may I also say that we associate ourselves with some of the reservations expressed by some people in FAO, particularly our colleagues in ASEAN, who pointed out that we are only human beings. All of this documentation has been prepared by human beings, who may be lacking in foresight and thought. There have been many valuable contributions made by the delegates of the United States, Brazil, Japan, Australia and many more. I am not here to cover the same ground except to say that these points are well taken, and that perhaps a lot more thought can be given to all of these points so that when we meet again in November, there will be less discussion on these issues.

Our delegation supports this proposal, subject to the condition that there is not one voice added to the twelve voices we already have here. The right to speak must be very clear at the outset so that a list of community competence can perhaps be included as an annex in the FAO Constitution so we will know exactly who is to speak, on what issue, and when so there will not be a debate. My experience in some intergovernmental groups clearly shows there may be some divergence of opinion among member countries within the Community. I do not know whether the entry of the EEC into FAO will abolish all those differences - perhaps it will.

In terms of membership, it has been said that we will only accept EC membership as sui generis, but perhaps the membership of ASEAN could also be sui generis. In the Common Fund for Commodities when we were about to aggregate international commodity boards, those who had come forward were given the opportunity to fulfil the requirements for full membership. One of the requirements was that both consumers and producers would be included in the international commodity boards and clearly in some of those they were not, so they were given some time to get their act together, to sit down together and come up as one international commodity board. In other words, there was a transitory provision, which is not necessarily the point of view of my delegation, but I would like to raise the point. Might it not be possible to put in a transitory provision for membership of the EEC in FAO? In other words, I am asking, might it not be possible to have a trial marriage between FAO and EEC? If we say they will become members by 1993 when they will clearly be one country with one political policy, one economic policy and so on, they will probably be much more comfortable than they are today. So, as in the Catholic Church, they would be accorded the status of catechumen until they became a full Catholic, having learned their doctrinal requirements fully.

We associate ourselves with a lot of the views already stated. I think they should be seriously considered. I reiterate the fact that as a general principle we have no quarrel with the membership of the EEC provided that all of these things are sorted out.

Yvan JOBIN (Canada): La délégation canadienne est heureuse de cette possibilité qui lui est fournie d'exprimer la position du Canada sur une question que nous considérons comme très importante. Cette position s'articule autour des deux grands axes suivants.

Le Canada se réjouit des progrès remarquables réalisés dans le processus historique d'intégration européenne, processus que nous avons suivi avec beaucoup d'intérêt depuis ses débuts. Le Canada attache une très haute priorité à l'expansion de ses relations avec la Communauté européenne, comme en témoigne l'importante déclaration transatlantique adoptée récemment par le Premier Ministre du Canada et la présidence de la Communauté. Nous nous félicitons du rôle constructif joué dans les affaires internationales par la CEE. Les progrès de l'intégration des douze suscitent, cela va de soi, des défis nouveaux. Dans ce contexte, nous nous réjouissons du vif intérêt porté par la Communauté à la FAO.

Par ailleurs, le Canada, qui a une longue tradition d'appui actif au multilatéralisme, tient fortement à un fonctionnement efficace de la FAO et du système onusien. Une telle efficacité nous apparaît d'autant plus vitale que la FAO, plus peut-être que toute autre institution du système des Nations Unies, est appelée à assumer un rôle crucial et irremplaçable dans la réponse de l'humanité aux défis redoutables qui se posent à elle en cette fin de siècle.

A la lumière de ce double ordre de considérations, le Canada, tout en étant désireux de contribuer à la mise au point d'une formule permettant de répondre aux aspirations de la CEE en ce qui a trait à sa représentation au sein de la FAO, estime donc essentiel que toute formule retenue à ce sujet ne soit pas de nature à compliquer le fonctionnement de la FAO. Toute formule retenue devrait donc être claire et dépourvue d'ambiguïtés. Le caractère possible de précédent du nouveau statut qui serait ainsi reconnu à la CEE au sein de la FAO rend un tel souci d'autant plus essentiel.

A cet égard, j'aimerais réitérer les grandes lignes de la position exprimée par la délégation du Canada à la quatre-vingt-dix-huitième session du Conseil en novembre dernier qui, à nos yeux, demeurent toujours valables:

1) Toute formule retenue ne devrait pas accorder plus de droits et d'avantages à la Communauté et à ses membres qu'aux autres Etats Membres de la CEE;

2) Il s'ensuit notamment que le nombre des votes de la Communauté et de ses membres ne devrait jamais dépasser le nombre de pays dans la CEE;

3) Toute formule de représentation de la Communauté devrait donc être définie de façon claire et précise;

4) Il conviendrait de prévoir un mécanisme par lequel l'évolution des compétences de la Communauté et de ses membres serait clairement définie;

5) Les questions de compétences ne devraient pas réduire les obligations respectives de la Communauté et de ses membres.

La délégation du Canada désire exprimer son appréciation pour le travail positif accompli depuis le dernier Conseil par le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques (CQCJ) dans l'examen des implications de la demande de la CEE en ce qui a trait à la modification des Textes fondamentaux de la FAO. Je suis heureux de souligner que le Canada est en mesure de souscrire à la très grande majorité des amendements proposés par le CQCJ.

J'aimerais toutefois attirer votre attention, Monsieur le Président, sur trois points que nous considérons comme importants et qui mériteraient, à notre avis, d'être clarifiés.

Nous constatons que le CQCJ n'a pu se mettre d'accord sur une formule spécifique en ce qui a trait à la participation de la CEE et de ses membres aux discussions dans les organes de la FAO. Nous espérons vivement que pourra être mise au point une formule assurant le respect du principe de l'exercice alternatif du droit de parole par la CEE et par ses Etats Membres qui soit acceptable à la Communauté et à ses membres, ainsi qu'à l'ensemble des Etats Membres de la FAO.

Par ailleurs, et comme plusieurs autres délégations l'ont déjà mentionné, nous considérons important que la CEE fournisse une déclaration de compétences plus précise que celle qui a été soumise récemment. Nous estimons en effet légitime que les Etats Membres de la FAO soient bien informés des champs de compétences de la Communauté et de ceux de ses Etats Membres dans les domaines spécifiques traités par la FAO.

Enfin, il apparaît qu'une adhésion de la CEE à la FAO pourrait avoir un effet, comme le Représentant des Etats-Unis l'a mentionné, sur de nombreux accords internationaux, compte tenu du fait qu'une clause figurant fréquemment dans de tels accords, et connue sous le nom de "clause de Vienne", stipule que ceux-ci sont ouverts aux membres de l'ONU et de ses institutions spécialisées. Il serait utile que la CEE confirme sa volonté de ne pas se prévaloir de la clause de Vienne dans le cas d'une adhésion de sa part à la FAO.

En terminant, j'aimerais souligner qu'à la lumière des progrès très appréciables accomplis dans l'examen de la demande de la CEE depuis plusieurs mois, la délégation du Canada présume qu'il devrait être possible de clarifier les quelques questions qui demeurent en suspens. Il nous apparaît que les discussions d'un Groupe de travail informel pourraient faciliter la tâche du présent Conseil à cet égard.

Raphaël RABE (Madagascar): Ma délégation voudrait d'abord féliciter M. l'Ambassadeur Poulides, Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, pour la présentation très claire du sujet. Elle associe M. Moore, et la délégation des Pays-Bas, à ses félicitations.

Lors de la quatre-vingt-dix-huitième session du Conseil de la FAO, la délégation de Madagascar a fait part de la décision du Gouvernement malgache d'appuyer chaleureusement l'adhésion de la CEE à la FAO. Actuellement, nous nous félicitons de l'état d'avancement très satisfaisant de l'étude de la question par les différents protagonistes, j'ai nommé le CQCJ, le Secrétariat et la CEE. Les documents produits sont de valeur et permettent de ce fait de prendre des décisions en toute connaissance de cause.

Les points de litige, si je peux m'exprimer ainsi, ont fait l'objet d'examens approfondis, et des positions d'entente semblent avoir été trouvées, sinon pour la totalité de ces points, du moins pour la plupart d'entre eux.

Ma délégation voudrait noter avec satisfaction que l'équilibre institutionnel de la FAO sera préservé, que l'entrée de la CEE à la FAO n'apportera aucun vote supplémentaire à ses Etats Membres, n'apportera aucun avantage à ses Etats ni à la CEE par rapport aux autres membres de la FAO. Il y aura exercice alternatif des droits et obligations par la CEE et ses Etats.

Nous notons que la CEE prendra la parole à la place de ses Etats Membres et exprimera leur voix dans les domaines pour lesquels elle a reçu une compétence exclusive.

Le document CL 98/INF.8, qui vient de nous être distribué, donne les précisions afférentes, mais nous pensons nous aussi qu'une déclaration officielle doit être faite, et une telle déclaration doit également être faite chaque fois qu'il y a changement de compétences. En cas de compétences simultanées, la CEE ou ses Etats Membres indique avant toute réunion de l'Organisation qui exercera le droit de vote en ce qui concerne les questions inscrites à l'ordre du jour de la réunion. Pour la prise de parole, il faudra également que la CEE et ses Etats donnent des précisions sur les délégations qui prendront la parole et respectent les déclarations qui seront faites avant l'ouverture de chaque réunion. Il est bien entendu que la CEE ne pourra pas être membre des comités restreints. Elle ne votera pas le budget et ne participera pas aux élections.

Le document CL 99/27-Sup.l contient des propositions très intéressantes qui méritent toute notre attention. Nous souscrivons en tout cas aux amendements qui devront être apportés au texte.

Nous nous félicitons que le Directeur général et les autorités compétentes de la CEE aient déjà conclu un arrangement-cadre portant organisation des relations mutuelles dé coopération. Nous encourageons l'élaboration et la conclusion de tels documents, notamment dans des domaines tels que la contribution de la CEE dans le financement des activités de l'Organisation.

Nous souhaitons que cette contribution de la CEE à la FAO se fera en supplément des contributions substantielles qu'elle assure déjà dans les pays, dans les régions et dans d'autres institutions du système des Nations Unies qui appuient le développement dans nos pays.

Enfin, ma délégation est favorable à la conclusion du processus d'adhésion de la CEE à la FAO dans les délais les meilleurs.

Sra. Martha C. VAZQUEZ VAZQUEZ (México): Muchas gracias, señor Presidente. La delegación mexicana ha seguido con detenimiento los avances del asunto que se refiere al posible ingreso de la Comunidad Económica Europea a la FAO.

Su eventual ingreso a la Organización plantea, como se ha venido señalando en distintos foros y a lo largo del debate en el seno de este Consejo, una situación compleja con importantes y trascendentes derivaciones.

Todas las precisiones que ha proporcionado la Comunidad a los países integrantes del Consejo de la FAO, así como los documentos preparados por la Secretaría en relación con el tema, son sumamente útiles y parecen orientados correctamente hacia la búsqueda de una solución definitiva al planteamiento.

Toda esta documentación, si bien dilucida algunos aspectos sobre las modalidades de ingreso de la Comunidad, no aclara del todo varios puntos relevantes. Por una parte, el estudio sobre las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica, elaborado por la Universidad de Cambridge (documento CL 99/21), concluye que sólo la CEE reuniría los criterios fijados por el Consejo para ser admitida como miembro de la Organización; por otra, las propuestas de enmienda a los Textos Fundamentales planteadas por el Comité de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos en su último período de sesiones reflejan algunas dudas respecto a las eventuales características de adhesión, en particular las siguientes:

Primera: La competencia que los Estados delegan a las Organizaciones de Integración Regional.

Segunda: La participación de éstas en los órganos de composición restringida de la Organización.

Tercera: Las modalidades de votación, que plantearían excepciones no suficientemente aclaradas.

También y como se ha señalado anteriormente, la decisión que eventualmente se tome sobre el particular en la FAO sentará un precedente para todo el sistema de las Naciones Unidas, por lo que incluso sería conveniente formular consultas a otras instancias de la Organización. Parecería entonces conveniente evitar la precipitación del proceso.

Habrá de tomarse también en consideración que las representaciones de diversos Estados Miembros de la FAO, en particular los países del Grupo de los 77, no hemos tenido todavía el suficiente soporte legal para analizar un caso que a todas luces indica que las propuestas de enmienda a los Textos Constitucionales que se plantean en esta ocasión requieren de un amplio debate y de un detallado análisis, incluso en las capitales de los Estados Miembros.

En virtud de lo anterior, la delegación mexicana piensa que este asunto debe seguir siendo discutido hasta en tanto no se deluciden todos los interrogantes jurídicos, administrativos, técnicos y prácticos, de tal modo que proporcione seguridad sobre el estatuto y los derechos de los miembros de la Organización, particularmente de los Estados.

Arpád SZABO (Czechoslovakia): I have the honour to take the floor on behalf of the Czechoslovak delegation.

When discussing questions relating to the activities of the CCLM, the Czechoslovak delegation is in a somewhat specific position due to the fact that our representative has the opportunity to participate in the activities of this Committee. It is also for this reason that we have only

a few remarks to add at present to the report submitted by the CCLM. Besides, we highly appreciate the considerable amount of work carried out by the Secretariat since the last session of the Committee as well as the introduction of this item.

Our delegation's approach to the discussed problems is based on the fact that the question of possible membership of Regional Economic Integration Organizations in FAO has received on the whole political support on the part of FAO Council members. The same can be stated to our mind as far as the particular request of the EEC is conçerned, which my country also considers positively. Encouraging in this respect is also the outcome of consultations with legal offices of other organizations of the UN system. Naturally, we share from the very beginning the point of view that this, which is within the UN specialized agencies system an unprecedented step, is to be taken in a thoughtful and legally irreproachable manner. Although the 56th Session of the CCLM resulted in substantial progress and since then the Secretariat managed to make further substantial steps toward harmonizing the positions on several unsettled questions, there certainly remain some problems to be still solved and for which the adoption of relevant decisions by the FAO Council and consequently by the next General Conference is indispensable.

The submitted documents prove that there exists a relatively undubious consensus as far as the greater part of the possible Basic Texts amendments are concerned.

In regard to the alternative variants submitted by the CCLM as well as by the Director-General of FAO after his discussions with the representatives of the EEC, we share the opinion that these are proposals by no means contradictory. They are aimed at finding an optimal solution through common harmonized efforts. The Czechoslovak delegation firmly believes that, provided that sufficient negotiation flexibility is demonstrated by all parties concerned, it will be possible to arrive at an optimal solution of the problems in question quite soon.

The work done by the CCLM, the Secretariat, as well as by the Council, set necessary prerequisites for establishing an appropriate legal and institutional framework for Regional Economic Integration Organizations meeting the criteria of the kind which FAO is considering. This framework enables these organizations to become, as the case may be, FAO members, provided that the relevant political decision is taken. Czechoslovakia is prepared within the scope of its possibilities to contribute to finding the optimal solution in benefit both for FAO and its Member States.

Björn WULF (Sweden): On this item on the agenda I have the honour to speak on behalf of Finland, Norway and Sweden.

We have listened with great attention to the various interventions on this item. The issue at hand is of special importance, and it has to be dealt with in a broader perspective. We are for the first time facing a situation where a Regional Economic Integration Organization could become a member of a specialized agency in the UN system. This new arrangement may set a precedent whose far-reaching implications are difficult to foresee at this point in time.

A series of technical discussions have been held over a period of almost two years between the FAO Secretariat and the EEC, at present the only identifiable example of a regional economic integration organization meeting the criteria set out by the FAO Council. We recognize that the EEC is unique among regional organizations in that its member states have transferred to it exclusive competence in certain areas within, in this case, the purview of FAO. Therefore, in our view these discussions are justified. We note that the FAO Secretariat and the EEC with joint efforts have made substantial progress in their discussions on this delicate matter. We encourage continued cooperation between those two parties toward a common position which would help solve the outstanding issues. Consequently, in our view, the Council could endorse that the process of considering the possible amendments to the Constitution be continued by the CCLM. Thereafter, the Council and the Conference could consider the matter in their session in November.

Sra. Hilda GABARDINI (Argentina): Mi delegación ha escuchado con gran atención e interés las numerosas intervenciones formuladas, que son una clara demostración de la importancia que la cuestión del ingreso de las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica, y particularmente la CEE, tienen para el futuro de la FAO. Asimismo, en no pocas de ellas se han hecho notar las implicaciones que se derivarán de este precedente para todo el sistema de Naciones Unidas.

Como fuera expresado en otra oportunidad por el señor Director General, el interés demostrado por la CEE en ser parte de nuestra Organización constituye una demostración de la relevancia, vigencia y vitalidad del mandato de la FAO. La Argentina aprecia y valora ese interés y no tiene dudas de que la CEE podría efectuar importantes aportes a los problemas que ocupan a la Organización. Para que ello sea posible, estamos convencidos de que debe cristalizar un consenso, producirse un acuerdo entre los Estados Miembros respecto de las modalidades de ingreso y participación de las ORIE. No nos cabe duda de que esto es una aspiración de la propia CEE, así como de sus Estados Miembros; para lograrlo, no deben escatimarse todos los esfuerzos que sean necesarios, y en ello debemos empeñarnos todos.

En tal sentido, hemos escuchado a varias delegaciones de Estados Miembros - entre otras, las delegaciones de Estados Unidos, Brasil, Malasia, Nicaragua, Australia, Japón, Canadá y México - plantear dudas e interrogantes y emitir opiniones y sugerencias. Muchas de ellas hacen a cuestiones sustanciales que imprescindiblemente deben ser resueltas. Mi delegación se une a aquellas que expresaron su preferencia por que la admisión de las organizaciones como miembros sea prevista en un texto separado del Artículo II.2 vigente, respecto de los Estados. Estimamos que esta fórmula reflejaría mejor la naturaleza sui generis del Estatuto de miembro de las ORIE que el 98° Consejo acordó debería otorgárseles. Válidas e importantes razones que justifican una solución de este tipo han sido expresadas, y a ellas nos remitimos.

Asimismo, mi delegación comparte la preocupación puesta de manifiesto en esta sala acerca de que la Comunidad presente una declaración oficial que contenga una lista exhaustiva de las competencias exclusivas que ejercería en los diversos ámbitos de actividad de la FAO. Estimamos que ello debería

hacerse con una muy razonable antelación, que consideramos no debería ser menor de seis meses respecto de la fecha de admisión. Parece evidente, entonces, a esta altura, que varias cuestiones merecerían una elaboración más precisa.

Creemos que debe atenderse la inquietud de los Estados Miembros que han solicitado la profundización de los estudios, de los cuales podrían surgir nuevas alternativas o modalidades que permitieran en su momento la adopción de decisiones por consenso.

Ali AL-MAHRUG (Libya) (Original language Arabic): In the name of God the Compassionate and the Merciful, I would like to thank you. I have the honour to speak before this august assembly for a second time on behalf of the Union of the Arab Maghreb countries. Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya have studied with care and attention the report of the 56th Session of the CCLM. Our delegations have also examined various reports submitted to us by the Director-General in 99/27 and Sup.l as well as the document presented by the EEC, 99/INF.18.

In deference to your appeal, we shall make a general statement and will not dwell on the legal matters. The UMA countries, at the last session of the Council in November 1990, expressed their satisfaction at the request of the EEC to become a member of the FAO. At that time, our countries requested the Secretariat to carry out a further study of the legal aspects involved so as to enable the Council to take the matter up. We have no problems with accepting the accession of the EEC to the FAO. The CCLM examined the matter at its 56th Session on the basis of a study which appears in document 99/21. It has laid down the criteria upon which we could base ourselves in order to accept accession of REIOs to the FAO. On the basis of the informátion we have received so far, the EEC would appear to be the only organization to meet the criteria of conditions listed, because it is the only REIO which enjoys a transfer of some exclusive competences from its member countries in certain areas within the purview of the FAO. In this context the delegations of the Union of the Arab Maghreb support in particular the following criteria:

1. the organization should be intergovernmental;

2. the member states of the organization should be located in the same geographical region;

3. the organization should have as an objective the integration of economic activities of its member states.

We consider that these criteria open the door to other REIOs in order to accede to the FAO once they meet the conditions.

It is on this basis that we think it necessary that amendments be made to the Basic Texts of the FAO, where a special chapter should be included to deal with Regional Economic Integration Organizations. On the basis of these amendments all the other Regional Economic Integration Organizations may become members of the FAO if they so desire.

We believe that the principle of "the alternative exercise of rights and obligations" must also prevail. In other words, the exercise of membership rights must be the prerogative either of the Regional Economic Integration Organizations or their member countries. With respect to Regional Economic Integration Organizations' participation in restricted bodies of FAO, they should not be allowed to participate in such restricted bodies.

Morocco, Tunisia and Algeria feel that the EEC's request for accession deserves careful examination given the great importance that the EEC has for our organization and the hope that in this way the EEC will be able to consolidate and increase its support to development projects of benefit to FAO and in particular its developing member states. This would be in line with the declaration made by the representative of the EEC to the FAO.

We also note with satisfaction, that the Director-General in his opening statement, stressed that the EEC's accession to the FAO would constitute an extra financial contribution for field programmes. The EEC has also expressed its willingness to participate in the field activities of the FAO. In this way we hope that the possible participation of the EEC will breathe new life into FAO activities.

Manuel Amante DA ROSA (Cap-Vert): Ma délégation a suivi avec une attention particulière la question de l'adhésion à la FAO des organisations d'intégration économique régionale. Mon gouvernement apprécie les efforts entrepris, à l'aide d'études détaillées, pour trouver une formule générale qui s'appliquerait à ces organisations, et notamment à la Communauté européenne. Le dialogue constructif établi entre le Secrétariat et la Commission économique européennè traduit d'ores et déjà, dans ses résultats, la volonté de la Communauté de devenir membre de la FAO et de participer comme les autres membres à ses activités, dans le respect des Textes fondamentaux de l'Organisation et sans porter atteinte à l'équilibre de sa structure.

A ce propos, il convient de féliciter le Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques pour le travail qu'il a transmis au Conseil. Nous estimons qu'il nous appartient, aujourd'hui, de prendre la décision d'approuver les amendements proposés et de les transmettre à la Conférence en vue de rendre possible l'adhésion de la Communauté européenne en tant que membre de la FAO lors de la Conférence de novembre 1991. Mon gouvernement y est favorable et ses relations avec la Communauté l'y encouragent. Nous estimons que la FAO ne peut que bénéficier d'un nouveau partenariat avec la Communauté dont tous les membres assurent régulièrement plus du tiers de son financement.

Nous recevons favorablement les amendements proposés, en particulier le concept de l'exercice alternatif des droits de l'organisation régionale et de ses Etats Membres ainsi que les amendements spécifiques destinés à donner plein effet à ce concept. Nous pensons que les propositions de compromis présentées dans le document CL 97/27 protège de manière satisfaisante lés intérêts de l'Organisation. Nous recommandons, dès lors, que le Conseil propose ces amendements à la vingt et unième session de la Conférence générale en novembre prochain. S'il n'était pas possible au Conseil de parvenir à un accord sur tous les passages entre parenthèses,

nous aimerions que le texte soit soumis tel quel à la Conférence et que l'on demande, entre-temps, au Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques d'examiner encore ces passages entre parenthèses et, si nécessaire, de donner son avis sur cette question à la centième session du Conseil.

Sra. Mercedes FERMIN GOMEZ (Venezuela): A estas alturas, lo más sensato sería que no interviniese, pero el hacerlo es una obligación para quien está inscrito en un debate. Y vamos a comenzar diciendo que hemos estudiado con mucha atención el informe de la Comisión de Asuntos Constitucionales y Jurídicos, que agradecemos por su claridad; el documento CL 99/27, que contiene el informe complementario del Director General, así como el estudio de las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica.

Todo ello, además de las numerosas intervenciones que hemos escucbado en este debate, nos confirma que todavía este problema de la admisión de las Comunidades Europeas a la FAO está planteando una serie de dudas respecto a las modalidades de ingreso y enmiendas que reflejan muchas dudas sobre las competencias, la participación alternativa y otros aspectos de su posible ingreso en la FAO.

Por esa razón, nos limitaríamos, para la brevedad de nuestra intervención, a plantear algunas dudas que tenemos con relación a las competencias y que están escritas en el párrafo 17 del informe del Consejo de Asuntos Constitucionales y Juridicos. La calidad de miembro de la FAO de Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica tendría que ser aplicable a cualquier Organización Regional de Integración Económica a la que se hubiera transferido la competencia de ámbitos de actividad de la FAO, lo cual satisface nuestra pregunta en la primera reunión que tuvimos al respecto en cuanto a qué organizaciones similares, si no idénticas, a la CEE, como las que existen en América Latina, pudieran aspirar también a ser miembros de la FAO, lo cual vendría a confirmarse si se efectuara la admisión de la FAO. Esta calidad de miembro tendria que reflejar el carácter alternativo en el ejercicio de los derechos como miembro, con lo cual estamos perfectamente de acuerdo.

Las respectivas competencias de una Organización Regional de Integración Económica y de sus estados miembros, tendrían que definirse de manera precisa y completa, que hasta ahora es lo que nos falta; y lo que pedimos a la CEE es que, de acuerdo con lo solicitado por uno de los miembros que me ha precedido en el uso de la palabra, presente una lista completa de todas sus calidades.

En la parte cuarta, habría que estudiar con carácter urgente una enmienda al Artículo XIV de la Constitución a fin de permitir la participación de organizaciones regionales y de integración económica en acuerdos concertados, a tenor de dicho artículo.

Finalmente, señor Presidente, el señalamiento que hace el CACJ teniendo presente el requisito establecido por el Consejo de la FAO de que cualesquiera disposiciones que se adoptaren deberían ser aplicables a todas las Organizaciones Regionales de Integración Económica, y no sólo a la CEE.

Por tanto, y como los numerosos oradores han insistido en estos mismos puntos, que nosotros consideramos como necesarios, no queremos alargar nuestra intervención, sino manifestar nuestro posible acuerdo con que la admisión de la CEE se haga, una vez que se haya presentado el problema al próximo Consejo y que se pueda llevar a la Conferencia que en todo caso sería el Organo autorizado para tomar una decisión al respecto.

Oscar MAS HKRRKRA (Costa Rica): En primer lugar, señor Presidente, debo manifestar que como país perteneciente a la subregión centroamericana, y tal como lo fue anunciado por el señor Embajador de Nicaragua, quien habló en nombre de Centroamérica, Costa Rica apoya, en principio, la entrada de la Comunidad Económica Europea a la FAO, como miembro sui generis y que no se opone a que se enmienden los Textos Fundamentales de la FAO que deban serlo.

A lo largo de las intervenciones que han sido hechas esta tarde queda bastante claro que numerosas delegaciones opinan que el proyecto en cuestión parece aún prematuro, pues no pocos aspectos de los documentos que nos han sido presentados para estudio no están todavía suficientemente claros. Me refiero en particular a los problemas de competencias simultáneas que son aún confusos, a pesar de las numerosas reuniones a las que hemos asistido y donde se ha tratado de explicar la mecánica de estos procedimientos de participación.

No quisiéramos abundar en otras reservas que ya han sido suficientemente explicadas. Por esto, señor Presidente, nuestra delegación apoya una idea ya expresada por una autoridad aquí presente: la de un Grupo de Trabajo que pudiera dedicarse al estudio pormenorizado de las condiciones de entrada en la FAO de la Comunidad Económica Europea, de manera que esa entrada sea hecha con la transparencia jurídica que sería de desear.

Tengamos en cuenta, señor Presidente, que en este asunto se están sentando precedentes y abriendo vías que serán en el futuro utilizadas de nuevo. Este trabajo de equipo nos daría unos elementos de juicio que permitirían tomar en la próxima Conferencia de noviembre una decisión con pleno conocimiento de causa.

Una vez dicho lo anterior, señor Presidente, mi delegación quisiera expresar su criterio de que el ejemplo de la Comunidad Económica Europea tendrá probablemente un efecto multiplicador altamente benéfico en todo el mundo, más específicamente, ojalá, en los países de América Latina que quisiéramos ver cada vez más unidos.

En efecto, el hecho de que un conjunto de países que fueron en un pasado no muy lejano el escenario de sangrientas guerras fraticidas, y así durante siglos y milenios, exhiban ante el mundo el proyecto de marchar juntos hacia una integración económica, política y humana cada vez más completa, es un hecho destinado, eso creemos, a servir de ejemplo y estímulo a otras regiones del mundo, dentro de las cuales quisiéramos estar los centroamericanos de manera muy especial.

En definitiva, señor Presidente, nuestro criterio es, como lo he dicho, afirmativo, con las reservas señaladas, que mucho desearíamos que fueran debidamente tenidas en cuenta.

Daniel Yoman KONAN (Côte d'Ivoire): Le gouvernement de mon pays exprime son avis favorable à la demande d'adhésion de la Communauté économique européenne au sein de la FAO en qualité de membre, et appuie les propositions d'amendements du Directeur général à l'Acte constitutif de l'Organisation pour rendre effective cette grande première.

Il s'agirait en effet, en cas d'accord de notre part et de la part de la Conférence plus tard, d'une innovation juridique au sein du système des Nations Unies, mais je crois que cela représenterait aussi une des conséquences du transfert exclusif de compétences des Etats Membres de la CEE en faveur de la Commission dans des domaines bien précis.

C'est donc une des suites d'un long processus où la supranationalité a pris réellement le pas sur les intérêts nationaux respectifs des Etats, et cette mutation a, je le pense, valeur d'exemple.

Là où les choses ne sont pas claires, c'est-à-dire en cas de compétence partagée ou simultanée, la CEE devra nous dire en toute clarté ce quelle décide de faire, qui fait quoi, pour que dès le départ des réunions il n'y ait pour ainsi dire aucune ambiguité possible.

Notre point de vue favorable, en même temps qu'il est le reflet des bonnes relations de coopération qui existent entre la CEE et mon pays, et de façon générale entre la Communauté et les ACP, ce point de vue, dis-je, voudrait également être l'expression d'un espoir que le Conseil, fort de l'expérience que nous sommes en train de vivre, assouplisse les critères que nous avons nous-mêmes définis afin de permettre l'adhésion future d'autres organisations de coopération régionales, et notamment les nôtres, qui auraient bien sûr reçu transfert de compétences de la part des Etats dans les domaines liés à l'agriculture et à l'alimentation.

J'attire l'attention de ce Conseil sur cette éventuelle adhésion qui, de toutes les façons, ne serait pas totalement comparable à celle d'un Etat, puisque, pour les domaines communautaires, la CEE continuera de conserver son statut actuel d'observateur. Je veux parler par exemple du vote du budget ou des élections à des postes au sein des organes subsidiaires, etc. Ce sont là des limitations importantes qu'il fallait relever.

Nous sommes ici en présence non seulement d'une tentative d'innovation juridique que le bureau juridique de New York, semble-t-il, ne désapprouve pas, mais aussi - et vous nous avez sollicités dans ce sens - c'est aussi pour expriraer un point de vue politique. C'est pourquoi nous espérons que cette prise de position politique devrait entrainer des effets de synergie entre la CEE et la FAO pour un accroissement des financements vers tous les pays en développement, en augmentant par exemple les fonds extra-budgétaires destinés à mettre en oeuvre plus de projets de développement dans nos régions. Sinon l'adhésion n'aurait pas apporté ce que nous en attendons.

La lecture des documents et les présentations qui ont été faites par le Président du CQCJ et Monsieur Moore laissent encore subsister des zones d'ombre. C'est pourquoi nous partageons avec d'autres l'idée de lever au préalable ces zones d'ombre avec la CEE en vue de la présentation à la lOlème session du Conseil d'un libellé définitif.

J'ai exprimé là le point de vue favorable de la Côte d'Ivoire sur cette importante question.

LE PRESIDENT: Vous avez parlé de la lOlème session du Conseil, nous en sommes à la 99ème session et la lOOème session aura lieu au mois de novembre. Ne s'agit-il pas plutôt de la lOOème session?

Daniel Yoman KONAN (Côte d'Ivoire): Il s'agit en effet de la lOOème session mais il y a une erreur dans les documents où l'on parle de la lOlème session.

LE PRESIDENT: Heureusement que vous avez relevé cette erreur qui se trouve effectivement dans certains documents.

Tadeusz STROJWAS (Poland): The delegation of Poland presented its view on the matter under discussion last November during the 98th Session of the FAO Council. We recognize the complex nature of the matter under review as expressed by many speakers before my delegation has taken th'e floor. Precisely for that, and in the context of the substantial debate, we want to express our high appreciation of the documentation provided by the FAO Secretariat for this matter, and for the initiatives that the Secretariat has undertaken that led to the elaboration of this rich documentation.

Accordingly we accept the view that the EEC is at present unique among Regional Economic Integration Organizations in that its members have transferred to it exclusive competence in certain areas within the purview of the FAO. In view of the discussions that have already taken place between the FAO and the EEC on the subject matter and which have been described in detail in the documents I referred to above, the delegation of Poland has the honour to reiterate its support to the EEC application for membership of FAO. Logically we pronounce ourselves for seriously considering the possible amendment of the FAO Constitution, so as to enable the EEC to accede to the FAO on the basis of member status commensurate with its powers.

Vanrob ISARANKURA (Thailand): Thank you Mr Chairman for giving me the floor at this late stage. Like several delegations, the Thai delegation also supports the full participation of the EEC in FAO activities in the area which its member states have transferred exclusive competence.

However, after listening to all distinguished delegates who spoke before me, it seems to tny delegation that we need more time to study this item. But before you conclude, my delegation would like to recall that at the

last session, this Council reviewed the desirability of amending Article XIV of the FAO Constitution in order to allow participation by Regional Economic Integration Organizations in agreements concluded thereunder, and we agreed that the amendment of this Article should be carried out as soon as possible.

Therefore my delegation fully supports the view as expressed by the delegation of Australia and supported by the delegation of Japan, concerning the amendment of the Article XIV since we believe it is a more urgent matter.

Concerning the eligibility criteria for membership of the Regional Economic Integration Organizations by the distinguished delegate from Malaysia, we think we need only say for eligibility that should that organization be a Member Nation of FAO, that organization can apply for membership of the FAO.

Waleed A. ELKHEREIJI (Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of) (Original language Arabic): I will be brief since I am the penultimate speaker.

At the outset I would like to extend my thanks to the Secretariat of the Organization for the sound preparation of these documents under discussion. Furthermore, I would like to extend my thanks to Ambassador Poulides and also to Mr Moore for their presentation on this item under discussion.

The delegation of the Kingdom of Saudia Arabia does not oppose in principle the idea of accepting the membership of the EEC to this Organization FAO, namely with member status as opposed to the present situation, i.e. observer. However, as we have already stated during the session of this Council, we do believe that this opportunity should be given to all other Regional Economic Integration Organizations. We should not lay down exclusive criteria as referred to in these documents.

We do believe that we need further details concerning the scope of competence transferred to the EEC from the national governments. We are fully confident that the membership of the EEC in FAO would give this Organization a strong impetus toward further progress, and therefore, we do hope that the Secretariat of the Organization will make all necessary arrangements and undertake the appropriate studies so that this issue will be submitted to the upcoming session of the Council, and hence to the General Conference next November so that the final decision will be taken during that General Conference.

LE PRESIDENT: Les organisations intégrées économiques régionales autres que la CEE qui remplissent les conditions juridiques voulues seront admissibles au même titre. Cela n'exclut donc pas les autres organisations d'intégration économique régionale.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Gracias al CACJ presidido con singular competencia y dinamismo por nuestro distinguido colega y amigo, Embajador Fotis Poulides, de Chipre, e integrado por colegas sobresalientes. En su

declaración de esta tarde nuestro querido amigo Gerald Moore, conciencia jurídica de nuestra Organización, confirmó los amplios conocimientos que tiene en el dominio que afortunadamente se le ha confiado.

Los Representantes de Colombia pensamos también que la Secretaría ha procedido con prudencia y ha profundizado en todos los sectores relacionados con este asunto. Hemos asistido a un debate, aparente o realmente, controvertido, pero al final tenemos la impresión de que la distancia que separa a las distintas posiciones no es muy grande, sino que más bien siguen haciendo falta aclaraciones y definiciones suficientes. Claro que todo esto se ha desarrollado así porque se trata de un asunto nuevo, complejo, trascendente, y cuyas consecuencias podrán proyectarse inclusive más allá del ámbito de la FAO. A ese respecto, nos tranquiliza el hecho de que todos los Asesores Jurídicos de las Naciones Unidas y de otras importantes Agencias hayan manifestado, en general, que el curso de los debates sobre este tema en el seno de la FAO no causa particulares preocupaciones a sus Organizaciones.

Por su parte, la CEE ha venido demostrando flexibilidad y comprensión, podríamos decir, un poco relativas. Posiblemente todavía no suficientes. Frente a algunos puntos que han surgido en las discusiones y en nuevos contactos con la FAO, la CEE ha aceptado algunas de las recomendaciones del CACJ. Las modalidades en cuanto al derecho y alcance del voto, limitadas siémpre al número de Estados Miembros están ya definidas y aceptadas. Está casi claro también, que el Estado Miembro aceptado bajo las condiciones que estamos definiendo no podrá ser elegido para ser parte de los órganos de composición restringida. Para plasmar este acuerdo, se han hecho esfuerzos y el último aparece en el documento CL 99/27-Supl.l, en referencia con el Artículo II.5 de la Constitución, que el nuevo texto dice al final que serán órganos de composición restringida especificados en el Reglamento General aprobado por la Conferencia. No obstante, este esfuerzo y esta evolución, a juicio de los representantes de Colombia, aún ese texto deja ciertas ambigüedades o por lo menos algunas inquietudes, por ejemplo, órganos restringidos son: Comité de Redacción, Grupos de Trabajo, Grupos de Contacto, pero sobre todo el Comité de Resoluciones de la Conferencia, que es un órgano de composición restringida que no está incorporado a los Textos Básicos de la Organización, porque el Comité de Resoluciones viene funcionando desde el 18° período de sesiones de la Conferencia en 1975, pero no forma parte de los Textos Básicos. Esto no es grave, son sólo observaciones marginales con el propósito de estimular evoluciones progresivas.

Otro punto de inquietud que parece también estar casi aclarado, usamos el "casi" porque estamos tratando de esgrimir argumentos que puedan inducir al Dr. Moore a nuevas fórmulas que conduzcan al consenso, como ha dicho la colega de Argentina. No estamos legislando con el nombre propio. No se trata solo de la CEE, la Organización que a titulo pleno podrá entrar a ser miembro de la FAO exclusivamente. Esta oportunidad la tendrá cualquier otra Organización Regional que llegare a cumplir con los requisitos que vamos a establecer.

De las intervenciones que se han hecho y que los representantes de Colombia compartimos en general, concluimos que nosotros sentimos profundo respeto por el luminoso criterio, que a través del canal de la Mancha, un

prestigioso centro universitario de Cambridge ha proyectado hacia Roma, pero pensamos que ese documento es apenas una elucubración técnico-económico-intelectual de sola validez catedrática, que no sienta ninguna jurisprudencia, ni ahora ni en el futuro, que no tiene alcance vinculante en el seno de la FAO y que ese estudio podría ser al máximo un amplio marco de consideraciones dentro del cual los representantes de gobiernos soberamos en el seno de esta Organización, y no en Cambridge, vamos a decidir en el porvenir, qué estados han reunido las condiciones para, que al igual que la CEE, puedan entrar a ser miembros de la FAO.

Nosotros compartimos la opinión que a ese respecto expresó la distinguida Embajadora de Malasia y el colega de Filipinas sobre la esperanza de que la ASEAN una importante organización regional de esa región importante del mundo pueda también entrar a ser parte de la FAO y claro que Colombia, y supongo que los demás miembros latinoamericanos y del Caribe también. Confiamos que en un futuro, ojalá no muy lejano, la OEA, el IICA y el SELA puedan igualmente entrar a ser parte de la FAO.

En el convencimiento de que de estas observaciones que estamos planteando son apenas marginales y no afectan al fondo del problema. A juicio de los representantes de Colombia la dificultad fundamental pendiente reside en las competencias simultáneas. El último documento de información para el Consejo suministrado por la CEE (CL 99/INF/18) aún contiene ambigùedades que, en caso de no definirse clara y especificamente, podrían generar una serie de discusiones inconvenientes, con el agravante de que serían discusiones que podrían tener carácter casi permanente en todas las reuniones. Y decimos esto porque parece que está demostrado que en un 70 u 80 por ciento existe el caso de las competencias comunes entre la Comunidad y los Estados Miembros.

Reconocemos que la CEE viene haciendo esfuerzos adicionales. El Gobierno de Colombia tiene confianza en la seriedad y en la buena fe con que la CEE ha actuado en todo este proceso. Por eso podriamos nosotros aceptar el último esfuerzo de conciliación que se hace en el documento CL 99/INF/18. Sin embargo, vamos a hacer algunas consideraciones sobre este asunto de las competencias simultáneas, porque pretendemos contribuir con algunos aportes que puedan tener ponderado carácter constructivo.

Como ha dicho el Embajador de Costa Rica, los representantes de Colombia pensamos que los textos definitivos de enmiendas que apruebe la Conferencia deberán ser juridicamente claros, completamente transparentes en su significado y en su aplicación. Hay un párrafo en el documento CL 99/INF/18 que está redactado con mucha habilidad, pero que no alcanza a aclarar los hechos. Dice que "para garantizar que los Estados Miembros de la FAO sepan con certeza en cualquier momento qué entidad, es decir, la Comunidad o sus Estados Miembros, o ambos, ejercerá la responsabilidad en una determinada cuestión, la Comunidad y sus Estados Miembros se comprometerán a presentar por adelantado esta información a la Organización, en relación con cualquier cuestión específica que deba examinarse en una reunión."

Nosotros pensamos con toda sinceridad que no será conveniente para la Organización, ni para la CEE, ni para los representantes de gobiernos que participamos en esas reuniones que en cada ocasión haya una larga y prolongada discusión sobre las competencias entre la Comunidad y sus Estados Miembros que participan en las respectivas reuniones.

Una larga, aunque modesta experiencia, podria permitirnos citar un solo caso: cuando haya una reunión del Comité de Problemas de Productos Básicos o de algunos de sus Organos Auxiliares, donde se tratan los problemas del comercio, es elemental que surjan argumentos delicados y sensibles que puedan afectar la participación ambigua de la Comunidad o de sus Estados Miembros. Estamos diciendo esto porque tenemos la esperanza fundada y sincera de que la CEE haga esfuerzos para solucionar esta cuestión, y a lo mejor parece que no pudiera ser imposible. Hoy han dado un buen ejemplo. El primer orador sobre este debate, fue nuestro distinguido colega y amigo Fritz Prillevitz de los Países Bajos y ningún otro miembro de la CEE ha intervenido, ni la CEE misma tampoco. Algo más, tomamos nota con cuidado y con satisfacción de que el colega sueco, quien suele hablar en nombre de los cuatro países nórdicos, excluyó de su declaración a Dinamarca, el único país nórdico miembro de la Comunidad Económica Europea. Entonces no es tan grave para la Comunidad limitarse a un solo vocero. A este respecto, el colega de lós Estados Unidos planteó una cuestión que puede ser importante y que la Comunidad debe tener en cuenta y es el hecho de que si los estados participan en un debate, la Comunidad, como lo hace ahora, puede después participar como observador.

Los Representantes de Colombia nos hemos hecho la pregunta ¿porqué la CEE desea entrar a la FAO en condición de miembro pleno? La CEE es la fuerza económica más poderosa del mundo. En la primera carta que mandaron al Director General y que fue citada por el colega Prillevitz de los Países Bajos, la Comunidad manifestaba que esa condición le permitiría "participar de manera más satisfactoria en los trabajos de la Organización". Luego, en el acuerdo marco que todos conocemos se dice que la FAO y la CEE tienen la firme intención de reforzar su cooperación en los sectores de la agricultura y de la alimentación. Entonces, nuestra respuesta a esa pregunta tiene que ser la de que la condición de miembro abrirá canales más idóneos para que la CEE pueda estrechar y fortalecer sus relaciones de trabajo con la FAO, para que la CEE pueda ofrecer de manera más amplia y eficaz a la FAO, y desde luego a sus Estados Miembros las experiencias y los conocimientos que a través de tantos años ha acumulado esa importante Cómunidad. Si como pensamos, esa interpretación es la sola aceptable y corresponde a la realidad, el ingreso de la CEE como miembro de la FAO sólo podrá representar beneficios para todos los Estados Miembros, particularmente para todos los países en desarrollo, cuya asistencia y servicío es el objetivo básico de la FAO. Pero claro que, como dijo el distinguido embajador Robelo de Nicaragua en nombre de los países centroamericanos y Panamá, nosotros esperamos que la CEE al entrar a ser parte de una Organización como la FAO, universal, con carácter multilateral, tendrá que extender su asistencia a todos los países en desarrollo, sin que esto quiera decir que reduzca la asistencta y cooperación que ya viene ofreciendo a algunos de esos países. Dentro de ese orden de ideas nos complace que el acuerdo marco establezca que la FAO y la CEE desarrollarán su cooperación en la identificación, preparación y ejecución de los Proyectos de Cooperación Técnica. Confiamos entonces y les rogamos a los representantes de la CEE en esta sala, que tomen nota y transmitan a Bruselas, que los recursos que la CEE aportará a la FAO para proyectos de desarrollo no estarán sometidos a ningún vinculo ni tendrán carácter discriminatório, y la Organización podrá utilizar esos recursos dentro del amplio marco multïiateral de su asistencia a todos los países en desarrollo.

Estamos llegando al final de nuestra intervención y quisiéramos tener el optimismo de ser constructivos, aunque sea minimamente. Como ya dijimos, compartimos lo que ha dicho la representante de Argentina. Creo que no sólo es el anhelo, sino la esperanza de deseo común de que este asunto se resuelva dentro de un espíritu de consenso y de compromiso.

Antes de hacer algunas propuestas alternativas a la suya y de aprobar también la suya sobre creación del Grupo de Trabajo, queremos reiterar aquí, por instrucciones del Gobierno de Colombia, el principio básico de que los representantes de Colombia en este Consejo consideramos que, después de que se aclaren debidamente todos los asuntos planteados, la Conferencia de 1991, después de 3 años de haberse cumplido este proceso debe tomar una decisión sobre este asunto. Proponemos entonces, que a la luz del párrafo 3 del Artículo XX de la Constitución, este Consejo decida transmitir a la Conferencia proyectos de enmiendas a la Constitución y al Reglamento General y que pida al Director General, de acuerdo con lo que dispone el párrafo 4 que esos textos sean distribuidos con los 120 días de anticipación reglamentarios a todos los Estados Miembros y Miembros Asociados.

Pero claro que al volver a la necesidad del consenso, podríamos apoyar su propuesta de que se creara un Grupo de Trabajo, pero también podríamos acaso pensar, y parece que habria tiempo suficiente, en que el CACJ, que preside con tanta competencia el Embajador Poulides, el CACJ complementado con un latinoamericano, porque inexplicable y desafortunadamente nuestra región no forma parte del CACJ, celebrara una sesión especial entre hoy y mañana, para que con base en las últimas propuestas de compromiso que se han hecho en el documento CL 99/27-Sup.l, se trataran de lograr textos que pudieran recoger el consenso de los miembros del Consejo. Si eso no fuere posible, nosotros insistiríamos de todas maneras en nuestra propuesta, en que se distribuyan los proyectos de textos de enmiendas y pediríamos entonces, si ahora el CACJ o el Grupo de Trabajo no lo lograren, que entre hoy y el Consejo de noviembre el CACJ haga una nueva revisión, aporte un esfuerzo renovado, para lograr presentar al Consejo de noviembre inmediatamente antes de la Conferencia, textos sin corchetes.

EL PRESIDENTE: Estimado Embajador, deho decir que Ud. ha puesto la cuestión principal, que me parece de una importancia muy grande, porque se debe contestar a esa cuestión. Pero no quiero entrar. Hay un documento, un intercambio de cartas, un acuerdo entre la FAO y la Comisión de la Comunidad Europea. Creo que este documento está a disposición de todos. Me parece que sería interesante que todos puedan tener conocimiento del intercambio de cartas entre el Sr. Delors y el Director General de la FAO. Es un elemento de apreciación y creo que este documento está a la disposición de todos en la entrada de la Sala.

Vamos después de las dos últimas intervenciones a hacer una proposición.

Juan NUIRY SANCHEZ (Cuba): Sobre este tema, uno debe intentar ser lo suficientemente preciso para ser claro y, en lo possible, breve, en busca de soluciones; más aún, a estas horas del debate. Por lo particular del tema, sin duda constituye el punto de más expectativa del Consejo. Nuestra

delegación ha leído detenidamente los documentos presentados por la Secretaría y aprecia la labor realizada por el CACJ y la Asesoría de la FAO, que conocemos ha trabajado en la búsqueda de una fórmula viable para la entrada de la Comunidad Económica Europea como miembro de la FAO. Para no repetir, nos sumamos a lo que justamente fue expresado por el Embajador Bula Hoyos, por el Embajador Poulides y por el Dr. Moore.

En principio, nuestra delegación no está en contra de la solicitud de la Comunidad de adhesión a la FAO, por las características específicas que esta Organización de Integración Económica tiene en los campos de la agricultura y la alimentación. Son otras nuestras preocupaciones, que tienen que ver con la integración y el mecanismo multilateral y de equilibrio de la organización de la FAO, fundamentalmente con su política hacia los países en vías de desarrollo. Como es lógico, se desprende que resulta necesario crear un preciso mecanismo jurídico y de funciones. Hemos asistido en días anteriores a un sinfín de reuniones, unas veces públicas y otras privadas, y ocurre que en cuantas más reuniones uno participa, cuando le evacúan más interrogantes, surgen otras más. Y esto es lógico, todo lo nuevo es así, pero esto no puede ser infinito.

Como lo han referido otras distinguidas delegaciones y como igualmente lo ha enfocado la Secretaría, nos gustaría que las decisiones que aquí se tomen no sean precipitadas. Por ello, valorando el interés que ha presentado la Comunidad y también la FAO en buscar soluciones, opinamos que deben ser tomadas una serie de medidas y deben ser aclaradas las dudas con relación a los derechos y deberes, así como su lista de competencias, la cual debe ser conocida antes de cualquier decisión.

Finalmente, hemos observado que el debate ha sido amplio. Nadie ha asumido posiciones excluyentes; la mayoria han sido flexibles, pero, lógicamente, existen preocupaciones, preocupaciones a las que nos sumamos bajo los mismos principios, teniendo en cuenta que necesariamente se tendrán que modificar los Textos Básicos de la FAO, así como que se sentará precedente en el sistema de Naciones Unidas y que esto conlleva un matiz que podríamos calificarlo de histórico y que contraemos todos. Pero lo que sí está claro es que esta decisión es competencia nuestra, la cual no podemos transferir o delegar, asumiendo claramente nuestras posiciones y responsabilidades, tal como fue planteado por la Argentina, bajo un espíritu de consenso y compromiso.

Muhammad Saleem KHAN (Pakistan): Pakistan recognizes the positive benefits of the possible accession of the EEC to membership of FAO, and so is in favour of the proposed sui generis form of membership under examination for the EEC. We note that some changes would be necessary to the recommendations ensuing from the CCLM in its report and the supplementary proposals from the FAO Secretariat, in deference to the different views expressed in the context of various areas, such as those of concurrent competence, during the current deliberations of the FAO Council. It may be possible to work toward a consensus through perhaps a regionally represented working group of the 99th Council as was mentioned by the delegate of the United States, and more recently by the distinguished Ambassador of Colombia.

Pakistan feels that the Council at its preceding sessions in its best judgement decided on an open and sui generis form of membership of FAO for a broader category of REIOs, and hopes that changes would be brought about in the qualification criteria for REIOs to join FAO in consonance with the findings of the Cambridge Study of a range of REIOs to enable other eligible REIOs to join FAO as members, if they so desire. Pakistan is closely linked in an important REIO with Turkey and the Islamic Republic of Iran, the Economic Coordination Organization, or ECO, and would certainly like to see an opportunity become available to such a REIO at some conceivably future stage when this REIO graduates to a comparative level of competence which would qualify it under the established criteria to becorae a member organization of the FAO.

LE PRESIDENT: Je voudrais faire une proposition. J'ai pris beaucoup de notes, j'ai écouté avec attention toutes les interventions et les innombrables questions qui ont été posées. Ces questions sont importantes et elles doivent recevoir une réponse claire. Je n'ai pas l'intention de vous faire part de mes sentiments pour le moment mais je crois que ce débat a été extrêmement utile; un certain nombre de pays se sont efforcés de pousser très loin leur analyse. Je crois que nous sommes tous d'accord sur le fait qu'il est impossible, dans cette instance, de trouver les réponses juridiques claires à un certain nombre de questions. Les questions de principe doivent recevoir une réponse précise. Si vous n'êtes pas très fatigués, je demanderai à M. Moore de donner, en quelques minutes les réponses à certaines questions.

Voici la proposition que je fais: demain, après la réunion à huis clos des chefs de délégation, nous pourrions demander à la délégation des Pays-Bas qui va assumer la présidence de la Communauté économique européenne, avec l'aide des compétences juridiques de la CEE, de grouper les questions qui ont été posées et d'y répondre d'une manière claire et précise. Il restera sans doute encore des zones d'ombre qui mériteront d'être éclairées, notamment en ce qui concerne les implications juridiques. Je proposerai, à ce moment-là, la constitution d'un groupe de travail élargi, sous la présidence, s'il le veut bien, de l'Ambassadeur de Chypre, notre ami Fotis Poulides, avec les membres du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques, qui font partie du Conseil, auxquels s'ajouteront les représentants des pays de certains continents absents, comme l'Amérique latine. Il y aura, bien sür, l'Ambassadeur Bula Hoyos, et je crois qu'il faudra un deuxième représentant de ce continent. Il serait utile qu'il y ait certains pays qui ont parlé au nom de groupes de pays, comme la Libye pour l'Union du Maghreb arabe, certains pays de l'ASEAN, comme le Japon qui a posé de nombreuses questions qui méritent de recevoir une réponse.

Je vous ferai donc une proposition et vous pourrez naturellement la modifier, éventuellement. Je la ferai demain matin lorsque les questions auront été groupées et qu'un certain nombre de réponses brèves, claires et précises auront été données. Je pense, en effet, qu'il ne faut pas répondre par des discours, par de longs commentaires et de longues dissertations, mais par des réponses extrêmement claires aux questions précises qui ont été posées, notamment en ce qui concerne les droits de vote, la participation, les possibilités d'élection, les rouages et les différents organes: Conférence, Conseil, Comité des questions constitutionnelles et

juridiques, Comité financier, Comité du Programme et autres comités et groupes ìntergouvernementaux. Il faut établir où se situerait la Communauté économique européenne dans cet ensemble. Toutes ces questions ont été posées, et elles doivent recevoir des réponses.

Fotis POULIDES (Président du Comité des questions constitutionnelles et juridiques): Pour que le Groupe de travail puisse travailler, il a besoin d'une certaine préparation, car trop d'opinions ont été émises. On peut composer ce Groupe de travail et commencer à travailler demain, mais nous ne ferons qu'échanger à nouveau des idées et perdre du temps, sans rien faire de concret.

Je crois qu'il faudrait attendre que le Conseil ait terminé ses travaux pour résumer les différentes opinións qui ont été émises. Ensuite, on pourra faire un Groupe de travail, un CQCG élargi qui se mettra à travailler sur des bases concrètes afin d'aboutir à une proposition qu'il présentera au Conseil. Je ne suis pas d'accord pour présider un Groupe de travail qui n'aura pas de matière concrète sur laquelle travailler.

LE PRESIDENT: Dans le processus que j'ai présenté, j'ai demandé à la délégation des Pays-Bas, en collaboration avec les représentants de la Communauté économique européenne, de grouper le maximum de questions et d'obtenir des réponses précises à ces questions. Nous n'avons pas encore fait de proposition définitive en ce qui concerne la réunion du Groupe de travail. Nous verrons à ce moment-là s'il faut le réunir et quand. L'avis du Conseil sera demandé et vous prendrez une décision demain, après avoir entendu les réponses aux questions, que je voudrais voir groupées le plus possible. Je crois qu'il faut bien expliquer le cheminement qui est en train de se produire, l'évolution qu'est appelée à connaître la Communauté économique européenne, comme d'autres organisations économiques régionales. Il nous appartient quand même de faire des propositions précises au Directeur général en fonction des travaux à venir mais le sujet ne sera certainement pas épuisé au Conseil. Il y aura la réunion formelle du CQCG, qui se tiendra en septembre ou octobre, si je ne m'abuse. Il y aura la centième session du Conseil. Tout cela en préparation de la Conférence.

Gonzalo BULA HOYOS (Colombia): Espero que el colega Prillevitz apoyará lo que voy a proponer. Hemos celebrado un largo debate y oímos la reacción preliminar del distinguido Presidente del CACJ. Creo que, a estas alturas, convendrá a todos, incluído el doctor Moore, que dispongamos por lo menos de esta noche y de las primeras horas de la mañana de mañana para analizar todo lo que hemos dicho aquí, reflexionar y cantar todos los argumentos. Por eso le propongo, muy humilde y respetuosamente, que levante la sesión.

F.C. PRILLEVITZ (Netherlands): I fully agree with the Ambassador of Colombia. We could finish the work today, but you intended to give the presidency of the European Community some homework, that I make categories of questions. But I think that we will answer the Council, or certain questions, after listening to Mr Moore. And if some questions have not been answered, because it is the right of the European Community to speak about

them, then we will give an answer according to what I said in my introduction, that I will give answers on behalf of the European Community. But also I ask for your permission for the representative of the European Commission to also answer because they have negotiated certain items with the Secretariat of FAO. So we will have a normal debate and finish it in Plenary first.

LE PRESIDENT: C'est exactement ce que je proposais. Je vais d'ailleurs lever la séance dans exactement une minute. Ecoutez-moi encore un peu: demain, M. Moore aura l'occasion de répondre à une série de questions. Mais il y a des questions qui n'ont pas été posées au Secrétariat de la FAO, mais plus particulièrement à la Communauté économique européenne; c'est elle qui doit y répondre. Je propose donc que, sous votre présidence, Monsieur le délégué des Pays-Bas, les personnes compétentes de la CEE répondent aux questions qui leur sont adressées.

The meeting rose at 20.15 hours
La séance est levée à 20 h 15
Se levanta la sesión a las 20.15 horas

Previous Page Top of Page Next Page