Secretariat Accountability is the Fundamental Issue for Member States

By Lydia Swart
18 December 2007

An Interview with Mr. Rajat Saha, Chairman of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions.

PDF Version

In January 2008, Rajat Saha will report back for duty at the foreign ministry in New Delhi, after serving three years on the Fifth Committee and nine years on the ACABQ (Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions). For almost two and a half years, he served as its Chairman, taking over from Vladimir Kuznetsov who was found guilty of money laundering. Regretfully, the reputation of the ACABQ did suffer for a while, Saha admits, though there was also recognition that an individual’s behavior did not represent a collective failure of the ACABQ.

The UN’s 192 Member States heavily rely on the in-depth analysis that the ACABQ provides on all budgetary issues. Saha estimates that only approximately five percent of its advice ends up amended. Its 16 members represent the various geographical regions and are elected by the General Assembly for a period of three years and may be reappointed for subsequent terms. As so many of its members first serve on behalf of their countries as delegates in the GA’s Fifth Committee – where divisions and differences in priorities between the North and South are very apparent – I asked Saha whether they don’t bring rather specific political attitudes and perceptions to their new job on the ACABQ. In other words, has the ACABQ not become more politicized over the years by picking so many of its members from within the Fifth Committee? From Saha’s perspective, the ACABQ is not overly politicized. In 95% of the cases, he estimates, there is no political interference. All in all, he is quite pleased with the consensus process. New ACABQ members, he admits, may take up to a year to grow into their role, realizing that they do not represent a particular country or grouping of Member States anymore. He added that successfully imparting on new members that their role is to frame highly technical questions on very complex issues, has been one of the most satisfying aspects of his role as Chairman. Without exception, he feels, each member significantly grows in his or her role as independent expert.

The late issuance of reports by the Secretary General has a serious impact on the work of the ACABQ, Saha believes. It forces the ACABQ now and then to rush its work which may result in mistakes. It also causes the ACABQ to regularly have to work during weekends. Not only do the ‘author departments’ – the departments in the UN Secretariat from which the reports originate - produce their reports late, the internal discussions that follow are “too open-ended.” Too many actors within the Secretariat feel they need to contribute to the final version of reports. Member States have repeatedly indicated that the late issuance of reports is of great concern, but, according to Saha, unless there are sanctions against those who delay the reports, he does not expect much improvement.

Stressing that he is speaking in his personal capacity, Saha admits that the Secretary General is being given more and more tasks by the General Assembly and Security Council. And importantly, when resolutions are passed, they are not accompanied with the required resources. “Money does not come up front.” On the other hand, the Secretariat is continuing its business as usual. It responds to the new tasks by demanding additional posts and other resources. But unless the Secretariat improves its business processes and institutes some real change, things are unlikely to improve. Member States are now expecting considerable improvement in the way the UN does its business: better efficiency, more transparency, less fragmentation, more cohesiveness. Accountability is the fundamental issue and incentives or sanctions will need to be put in place in order to change things.

Issues of accountability are being dealt with by the Office of Internal Oversight Services, Joint Inspection Unit and Board of Auditors. And the newly instituted Independent Audit Advisory Committee is expected to play an important part in reviewing the work of these bodies, hopefully resulting in something “different than business as usual.” Saha feels that these bodies should come up with good ideas and suggestions to improve the way the UN Secretariat operates. Stressing that the ACABQ is an advisory, and not an audit body, Saha feels that the ACABQ has been able to draw conclusions or inferences from the work of these bodies, resulting in pertinent questions which probably should have been noted by them in the first place. For instance, the rate and durations of vacancies in various UN departments is very significant. Why ask for new positions if you have so many vacancies that remain open for such a long time? And positions opened by retirement are known well in advance – why does it take so long to fill them? Also, why have the travel budgets in many departments exceeded the estimated amounts? Can some travel be avoided by more tele-conferencing or electronic communication? When the OIOS will start to ask such questions, “the Secretariat will wake up.”

The most irritation and dissatisfaction felt by the Chairman is caused by lack of mobility of UN staff. Too many staff members in New York enjoy a “cushy” job compared to those in the field and mobility should be better institutionalized and done in a “less opaque,” much more transparent way, to avoid perceptions of unfairness. Reform of Human Resources Management, Saha indicates, will hopefully come up at the second resumed session in May and mobility is expected to be on the agenda.

As to the new system of Administration of Justice, Saha believes that no amount of money or efforts of restructuring the internal system of justice will lead to a better structure unless the basic Staff Rules and Regulations are reviewed. With substantial improvement on rules and regulations, he believes, 50% of the cases will “disappear,” especially those dealing with grievances about hiring and promotions. As to the question of whether daily workers should also have recourse to the new system of internal justice – a view promoted by the G77 – Saha said that anyone working for the UN should have some recourse to justice, but that he imagines that with a proper contract, few cases would actually exist.

While walking back from his offices to the Vienna Café in the UN’s basement, Saha openly wondered how his chairmanship has been perceived by Member States. From the many smiles and nods he received on the way, one would guess he is well-regarded. None of these, however, came from Secretariat staff, as far as I could tell.


AttachmentSize
saha interview.pdf21.48 KB

Latest Updates

The Council on Foreign Relations posts video talk on Security Council Reform
On 11 January 2012 the Council on Foreign Relations posted a video talk by Stewart M. Patrick on Security Council Reform, entitled “UN Security Council Reform: Is it Time?”. Click here to watch the video talk on the CFR website

Meeting on General Assembly Revitalization 1 December 2011
By Mie Hansen, 5 January 2012
On 1 December 2011 the General Assembly met to discuss Agenda Item 120: Implementation of the Resolutions of the United Nations and Agenda Item 121: Revitalization of the Work of the General Assembly.
This article provides an overview of the debate.

Former consultant with the Center for UN Reform Education wins prestigious award
By Thomas Colerick, 13 December 2011

Meeting in the General Assembly on Security Council Reform, 8 and 9 November 2011
By Mie Hansen, 7 December 2011
On 8 and 9 November 2011 the 51st and 52nd plenary meetings of the 66th General Assembly session were held with a discussion of Agenda Item 122: Question of equitable representation on and increase in the membership of the Security Council and related matters. This article gives an overview of the debate and the statements made during the meetings, as well as an update on the developments in regard to Security Council reform leading up to the debate.

The 2011 Annual Report of the Human Rights Council
By Thomas Colerick, 8 November 2011
The 2011 Annual Report of the Council is now available.

Highlights of the Human Rights Council’s 18th Regular session
By Thomas Colerick, 11 October 2011

New report on the Human Rights Council’s fifth year
By Thomas Colerick, 4 October 2011

The Human Rights Council’s 18th Session (12-30 September 2011)
By Thomas Colerick, 28 September 2011

Update on Revitalization of the General Assembly: A RECAP OF DEVELOPMENTS DURING THE 65th GA SESSION
By Mie Hansen, 27 September 2011
Even before heads of state from around the world gathered last week at UN headquarters in New York for the opening of the 66th annual session of the UN General Assembly, the world’s main deliberative body, continuation of the ongoing negotiations to make the Assembly more effective, efficient and relevant were assured for yet another year. Member States have been discussing the “Revitalization of the General Assembly” for the past twenty years, but according to some critics only minor improvements have been made, leaving deep-seated reforms untouched. Even though all Member States seem to agree that reform of the Assembly is vital, recent developments confirm that it is still very difficult to reach an agreement on what should be done.

Chronology: The Human Rights Council – elections, sessions and important developments
By Thomas Colerick, 23 September 2011
As the Center for UN Reform Education once again will be covering the Human Rights Council more systematically, this chronology of the Council is provided. It includes elections, selected sessions and major developments and takes the reader from the Council’s birth in 2006 to today where the Council is currently holding its 18th Session in Geneva, Switzerland.



Panel on Improving Security Council Working Methods
On 23 June 2011, The Center for UN Reform Education held a panel discussion on “Improving the Working Methods of the Security Council”. The basis for the discussion was the most recent version of the S5 draft proposal on Reforming the Working Methods of the Security Council.



Qatar hosts workshop on Security Council Reform
On 12 & 13 May 2011, Qatar hosted a workshop on Security Council Reform in Doha. Lydia Swart of the Center was invited and she shared ten observations on this key reform process.

To move the process along, Member States, the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiations, and/or the President of the General Assembly will need to provide leadership by proposing a timeline/trajectory for the negotiations and by formulating a compromise solution that can garner support from all factions.



S5 presents draft resolution on Improving the Working Methods of the Security Council
By Mie Hansen, 2 May 2011
On 14 April, 2011, the Small Five Group (S5), consisting of Costa Rica, Jordan, Liechtenstein, Singapore and Switzerland, presented a draft resolution for Improving the Working Methods of the Security Council. The resolution was presented under agenda item 115 of the General Assembly (GA) that deals with follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit. The S5 had presented its first draft resolution on the topic (A/60/L.49) in 2006 also as follow-up to the 2000/2005 Summits.

Update on Security Council Reform
By Mie Hansen, 5 April 2011
Since the Center’s latest update of 22 June 2010, Members States conducted text-based negotiations on 21 October 2010, 11 November 2010, 14 December 2010, and on 2 March 2011 in their efforts to reform the Security Council. Some countries apparently continue to slow down the negotiations, while others may push for a vote sooner rather than later.

Book Launch, The Group of 77: Perspectives on its Role in the UN General Assembly.
25 April 2011
Pictured from right to left: Center President William R. Pace, Minister Marcelo Suarez Salvia from Argentina (current G77 Chair), Ambassador Maged Abdelaziz of Egypt, Ambassador Herman Schaper of the Netherlands, and co-author Lydia Swart. For their remarks, click here: Minister Suarez, Ambassador Schaper, Ambassador Abdelaziz (pending) and Lydia Swart.





Text-based Negotiations in Full Swing
22 June 2010
On June 16th the negotiations on Security Council reform proceeded with the third meeting of the fifth round. The meeting aimed at getting member states to discuss specific language on the fourth “key issue”. Many countries seemed to have misunderstood the intention of the Chair, however, and restated their positions rather than making suggestions for specific changes to the document at hand.

Potentially Historic Text on Security Council Reform
By Jakob Lund, 13 May 2010
On May 10th, Zahir Tanin, the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on the question of equitable representation and increase in the membership of the Security Council and other matters related to the Security Council, sent out a long-awaited fax to all member states containing a “negotiation text”. The text and the annex can be accessed on the website of the PGA. The text includes the proposals sent by member states to Tanin's office since he opened the process of moving towards a text-based solution.

Open Debate on the Working Methods of the Security Council
By Jakob Silas Lund, 28 April 2010
On April 22nd, the Security Council’s Informal Working Group on Documentation and Other Procedural Issues held an open debate on the working methods of the Council. The debate raised some key questions that are relevant to the ongoing Security Council reform negotiations. Furthermore, to keep the issue of its working methods on the agenda of the Security Council is, in and of itself, an accomplishment.

A New Phase in Security Council Reform Has Started
10 February, 2010
On February 5th, the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, Ambassador Tanin of Afghanistan, sent out a letter to all member states with an attachment of sixty pages. The document (available here and here) includes all “substantive input” submitted by Member States to the Chair thus far in the fourth round of negotiations. This marks the beginning of the fifth round, which, for the first time, will be text-based.

Moving Towards Text-Based Negotiations?
By Jakob Silas Lund, 21 January 2010
The previous month was an eventful one in terms of the Security Council reform process. On December 23rd, a group of countries sent a letter to the Chair of the intergovernmental negotiations, Ambassador Tanin of Afghanistan, urging him to present a composite paper. Following that, Tanin received a number of other letters concerning the process and on January 14th he replied with his own letter to all member states. This all culminated in the latest round of negotiations on January 19th and 20th in which the consequences of the letter exchanges were discussed.

Pros and Cons of Security Council reform
By Jakob Silas Lund, 19 January 2010
Through extensive interviews with experts as well as current and former Ambassadors and diplomats who have been close to the reform process, this article outlines and analyzes the advantages and disadvantages of the components incorporated in the proposals currently on the table.

The Long and Winding Road
by Jakob Silas Lund, 11 December, 2009
On November 16th, the chair of the intergovernmental negotiations on Security Council reform, Ambassador Zahir Tanin of Afghanistan, sent a letter to all member states inviting them to the first meeting of the fourth round of negotiations. The negotiations ended up spanning over two days rather than the planned one-day session.