▾

External sources (not reviewed)

[...] compelled to give real answers and not just platitudes.

However, the majority of Member States responding to the questionnaire did not express any opinion on this issue.

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

Slovakia would do its outmost to meet the requirements, but asked for understanding if it did not always respond on time.

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.

[...] [...] consideration and answer questions from members.

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.

In response to a question regarding the current [...] [...]

Despite such challenges, there were many important accomplishments, including: (a) responding to the majority of the claims brought to the Office, including the provision of summary advice (206 instances), to clients in more than 80 countries; (b) closure or resolution of 54 per cent of the 938 cases filed with the Office of Staff Legal Assistance during the year; (c) a high success rate before the Dispute Tribunal; (d) undertaking outreach to staff in the field; and (e) the development of relationships with internal and external partners, including United Nations staff unions and associations, staff-at-large, the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services, the legal offices of the Secretariat and United Nations agencies, funds and programmes, law offices providing pro bono legal counsel, schools and universities.