▾

External sources (not reviewed)

[...] were bribed to produce false evidence and testimonies, [...] [...]

(27) In order to avoid a possible overlap between the definition of “organ of an international organization” and that of “agent of an international organization”, the latter phrase only covers persons or entities which do not come within the definition under subparagraph (c).

Furthermore, the same sources stated that among the surrendered combatants of Rwandan nationality, 11 provided false testimonies about RDF involvement in their recruitment because they were tortured by the FARDC.

Reportedly, the charges underlying Mr. Salim’s and Mr. Omar’s detention were based on a false confession which they had been forced to sign under the threat of force and alleged acts of torture and ill-treatment.

One delegation suggested three priorities that the secretariat could adopt: (a) optimizing resource utilization to avoid duplication; (b) paying attention to countries with special needs, especially the Pacific island countries; and (c) promoting substantial cooperation among disaster-prone countries in prevention, preparedness and post-disaster reconstruction.

[...] [...] manageable components and overlapping the design and construction [...]

[...] repeating the irrelevant hypothesis and clichés invented [...] [...]

[...] duplication of category 2 institutes with other United Nations-affiliated institutes and centres, the need to invite [...] [...]

The exchange of information, knowledge and experience among and between capacity-building providers and beneficiaries, as well as cooperation and coordination of donor and provider programmes, is necessary for the effective delivery of initiatives, the reduction of costly duplication as well as for ensuring their sustained outcomes at all levels.

And, as the word “likewise” in [...] [...]

[...] [...] and institutional overlapping, as well as negative [...]

[...] of the above key assumptions would not cause the [...] [...]

Apart from considering the views expressed in each submission and whether in principle at least the author was for or against an OPS or did not indicate either way, we took careful note of such points as: (a) whether the submission was from an individual or a group; (b) whether it was an ordinary letter or a pre-printed form; (c) if in support of the OPS, whether such support was qualified or unqualified, and if the former, to what extent; and (d) if the submissions opposed the OPS, whether it did so in principle or in respect of individual recommendations in the paper.

A few participants, however pointed to a danger that the term “quality education” tended to become too broad complicating any assessment of outcomes or measurement of results, and that an agreed-to definition was warranted.

It was also suggested that FAO should undertake technical work in the following five priority areas to assist States and RFMOs implement resolutions 61/105 and 64/72 and the FAO Guidelines: (i) improving and expanding application of the criteria for the identification of VMEs beyond corals, sponges, seamounts and hydrothermal vents; (ii) developing guidance on impact mitigation measures and best practices for developing and applying encounter protocols relevant to VMEs, particularly by RFMOs; (iii) developing guidance on what and how information should be collected to implement measures for managing fishery impacts on VMEs; (iv) defining certain terms that could clarify implementation of the FAO Guidelines; and (v) developing guidance on best practices for conducting assessments.

After discussion, the Working Group agreed that the questions for further consideration on that matter would include (A/CN.9/717, para. 143): (i) whether a provision on protection of the integrity of the arbitral process should be in the form of a general formulation or should contain specific instances that were meant to be specifically addressed; (ii) the interplay between the protection of the integrity of the arbitral process and the provisions in the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules already dealing with that issue; and (iii) how to determine the threshold for a limitation to transparency based on the ground of the need to protect integrity of the arbitral process.

[...] formula was a fair assumption for the reimbursement [...] [...]

In this connection, the Committee reiterates its concern about the flexible interpretation of the guidelines for the use of funds appropriated for general temporary assistance, which are intended to be used for the temporary replacement of staff on extended sick leave or maternity leave or the engagement of additional staff during peak workload periods, and not to finance de facto regular budget posts that are of a continuing nature (see, inter alia, A/50/7/Add.2).

In accordance with article 11 of the Rules and Regulations, claims are eligible for inclusion in the Register if: (a) the claimant is a natural or legal person; (b) the claimant has substantially met the technical requirements for submitting a claim; (c) the claim is within the jurisdiction of the Register of Damage; (d) the claimant has established a legal interest in the claimed damage; (e) the claimed damage is material; (f) the claimant has established a causal link between the claimed damage and the construction of the Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory; (g) the claimed damage was in fact sustained; (h) the documents and assertions in support of the claim are substantially consistent; and (i) the claim has been established prima facie, based on the information and documents submitted by the claimant, giving the claimant the benefit of the doubt in appropriate cases and bearing in mind the varying circumstances with regard to title and residency status of claimants.