(from "Chairman's Report of the Fifty-First Annual Meeting")
New Zealand noted that it had originally sponsored the idea of the review, and it shared the Secretariat's disappointment in the lack of guidance provided by the review while at the same time stating that it felt the tasks the review had proposed for the Secretary were excessive. New Zealand also noted that it had sponsored the idea of the Advisory Committee, and in its original conception it would have acted more as a supervisory, or executive committee, which could have served the role envisaged by the Consultants when they suggest more supervision of the Secretariat. New Zealand praised the Secretary for creativity in working on the review's recommendations.
22.1.1 Secretariat information exchange and publication systems
There was an exchange of views in the Finance and Administration Committee on
current practices for reporting Commission meetings.
Denmark praised the value of the Chairman's Report of the Annual Meeting in
almost its current form, asking only that it be changed to include resolutions
that were voted down as well.
This statement triggered a discussion about the time, cost, and relative value
of the Chairman's Report as well as the Verbatim Record of the Annual Meeting.
There was unanimous praise for the Chairman's Report, and agreement that it should remain in its present form. The Verbatim Record, however, had fewer defenders. The Finance and Administration Committee considered the time and cost associated with the record and compared it with the report's utility and concluded that it was not cost-effective. The Secretary confirmed that the audio tapes of the meeting would remain available in the event of any disagreement about what had been decided, and would be sent to Contracting Governments at their request at no cost. The public would be able to purchase a copy of the tapes at a little above cost.
22.1.2 Meeting management and Agenda
There was general support in the Finance and Administration Committee for the
recommendations for more proactive chairing, Agenda time-tabling, and
discussion of issues in only one forum, subject to the comments below.
The Chairman of the Commission pointed out that once a resolution is passed it remains in effect in subsequent years unless contradicted by another resolution.
On the suggestion that the IWC make recommendations instead of resolutions on certain subjects, Australia proposed changing the word 'recommendations' to 'decisions'. The Secretary strongly supported the idea as a way to avoid the long discussions that sometimes occur on preambular texts, and that direct action within house can be taken by decision. Resolutions must remain, however, as they have the standing to be transmitted externally. The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee concluded that there was general support for these proposals; however, it would be important for decisions to be clearly identified as such.
22.1.3 Structure, duration, and frequency of the annual IWC and
intersessional meetings
The Advisory Committee had concluded that the Technical Committee was
redundant.
Denmark, the UK and Norway agreed.
The Chairman of the Finance and Administration concluded that there was
general support for this view.
22.1.4 Improving the Commission's interaction with the Scientific
Committee
A paper presented by the UK proposed that either a new working group or the
Technical Committee should review the Scientific Committee's report in detail
and advise the Commission on all aspects of the Committee's work including
priorities for research.
The Chairman of the Scientific Committee commented on the UK proposal, pointing to the following paragraph from the Scientific Committee's report:
A number of comments were made on this proposal. Concern was expressed that
the proposal might result in the Committee's report being filtered before
being received by the Commission.
Some members suggested that adding an extra layer between the Committee and
the Commission might hinder rather than improve communication between the
Committee and the Commission.
The Chairman of the Scientific Committee noted the difficulty already
experienced in completing the Committee's report in time for the plenary
session.
The UK proposal would inevitably make this even more difficult.
The USA stated the need to be able to give direction to the Scientific Committee in the Plenary when the report of the Scientific Committee is presented. The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee concluded that there was not sufficient support for the proposal to move forward.
22.1.5 A restructured Finance and Administration Committee
The Advisory Committee suggested the designation of a Budgetary Sub-Committee
of the Finance and Administration Committee, made up of a small number of
members to carry out a review of expenditure, forward budgets and scale of
financial contributions.
This would allow the full Finance and Administration Committee to endorse
relatively quickly the findings of the Budgetary Sub-Committee and then to
deal with all other issues referred to it.
New Zealand asked whether this could be a proper role for the Advisory Committee (as originally conceived), but the Chairman of the Commission stated his reluctance to give more work to the IWC's principals. A consensus was quickly reached that the idea for a Budgetary Sub-Committee, on a trial basis, would be recommended to the Commission.
22.1.6 Need for Annual Meetings
The Finance and Administration Committee then focused on whether the
Commission needed to meet annually.
A number of views were expressed.
Norway stated that Annual Meetings will be necessary if the Commission resumes
the management of commercial whaling.
In the same vein, Japan questioned if any need for Annual Meetings exists if
the IWC does not wish to resume the management of commercial whaling.
Denmark noted that many issues remain to be resolved, such as the RMS.
The UK asked to whom the Scientific Committee would report in off-years.
New Zealand suggested that the Secretary make a list of the range of issues likely to impact on the decision on Annual Meetings and to report on this next year. The Secretary said that he would prepare a draft document and circulate it during the year so the Commission could be ready for action at the next meeting. The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee noted that there was general support for New Zealand's proposal.
22.1.7 Strategic and financial planning
The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee noted that the
Advisory Committee had felt that implementation of the recommendations in this
area was a matter for the Secretary.
If the Commission was not satisfied with his or her performance, the contract
would not be renewed.
This view was endorsed by the Finance and Administration Committee.
22.2 Recruitment of New Secretary
At a meeting of Commissioners held during the 50th Annual Meeting
in Muscat, Oman in May 1998, it was agreed that the Advisory Committee would
handle the matters associated with the advertising and recruitment processes
entailed in the appointment of the new Secretary to the Commission.
Oman asked how the list of candidates was to be narrowed, and the Chairman of the Commission replied that the Advisory Committee would reduce the short-list to be presented to the Commission to three names in order of preference, after interviewing about eight. The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee noted that Commissioners would make the final selection, prompting a question from Antigua and Barbuda concerning the role of the Chairman of the Scientific Committee in the process. A short debate ensued, which ended when the Chairman of the Commission slated that the decision is a function solely of the Commission.
The subsequent discussion focused on the content of the advertisement for the Secretary's job and the application procedure. Delegates debated the various characteristics they felt would make for an effective Secretary of the Commission and had different views concerning the wording of the solicitation and the application procedure. New Zealand, Australia and a number of other nations felt that the application process should be kept confidential to protect applicants and that there be a suggestion of accountability in the job description. To that end, the words 'in confidence' should be added to the advertisement, as well as a direction to address applications to the Chairman himself, instead of simply the IWC.
New Zealand urged that the Secretary be employed under a formal performance-related contract and that this would be capable of supervision either by the Chairman of the Commission and/or the Advisory Committee. There was some discussion as to whether such a contract was capable of adequate supervision. Finally, it was agreed that the supporting material should include reference to a contract and that this would be phrased to include a performance-related contract if that is considered appropriate. The second paragraph of the job description was therefore amended to read 'The appointment will be for an initial contract period of three years with the possibility of prolongation ... The point on the scale will be determined by qualifications and experience. The contract would be reviewed after the initial three-year period.'
Austria asked whether the Secretary's job justified D1 on the UN scale, and the Chairman of the Commission replied that if the Commission wants the best it must pay for the best. He also said the Secretary's salary level was a reflection of the prestige of the organisation.
Austria also asked why only persons from member states can apply for this post as this is unusual within several other conventions. The Secretary responded that this restriction follows the procedures of IMO (International Maritime Organisation), the major UN organisation based in the UK, which is used by the IWC Secretariat for guidance in administrative matters.
The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee concluded that there was general agreement on the recommended procedure and advertisement, subject to the minor amendments detailed above.
In the Commission, Japan pointed out that in the UN appointments are usually for three years, renewable for two terms, whereas the present Secretary has a permanent appointment. It argued for a one year trial period in the first three-year term.
The Chairman of the Commission indicated that the Advisory Committee will work out these details.
Monaco remarked on the qualification that only persons from IWC member states could apply. IMO has more than 100 countries represented and the IWC should seek the best talents and not have this restriction, but the Chairman noted that this idea was not supported.
22.3 Guidelines for Opening Statements from observers
At the 50th Annual Meeting, the Commissioners requested that the
Secretary draft guidelines for Opening Statements by observers.
In response, the Secretary offered the following proposal:
The content of Opening Statements shall be relevant to matters under
consideration by the Commission, and shall be in the form of views and
comments made to the Commission in general rather than directed to any
individual or group of Contracting Governments.
Opening Statements may be submitted by Observer organisations which will be
included in the official documentation of the Annual or other Meeting
concerned.
They shall be presented in the format and the quantities determined by the
Secretariat for meeting documentation.
He also offered an alternative solution to the problem, which is adopted from a suggestion in the Administrative Review:
Consideration should be given to not including NGO Opening Statements within
the Commission's official issued set.
The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee commented that the key issue was whether the Opening Statements of observers were included in the official documentation of the IWC. Dominica preferred the alternative solution, saying official documents should reflect the positions of governments. Antigua and Barbuda agreed. Australia disagreed; as the organisation allowed observers to participate in the meeting, their participation should be acknowledged as long as it is clear that the statements are made by observers. The USA agreed with Australia, saying the IWC had a long history of allowing NGOs to make statements.
Japan announced it could agree to the draft guidelines, but with the caveat that an observer's statement should be withdrawn if it does not comply with paragraph 2 of the guidelines. St Lucia asked whether the draft guidelines simply maintained the status quo, and the Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee replied that such was indeed the case. However, the guidelines were now codified. The Chairman stressed that if a statement does not conform to the guidelines, it is not accepted and does not form part of the official record. New Zealand added that the statement would be subject to ex post facto review if an objection is lodged. St Lucia then argued that the damage would already have been done. The Chairman closed the discussion by referring the matter to the Commission.
In the Commission, it was agreed to refer this matter to the Finance and Administration Committee to consider again next year.
22.4 Communications
22.4.1 General
Following a review last year, all standard communications to Commissioners and
Contracting Governments have been by electronic means (e-mail or fax), with a
hard copy following in the post.
All communications to the members of the Scientific Committee are now
conducted via e-mail alone.
In view of the lateness of the hour, the Chairman proposed that the scheduled review of the operation of these procedures be postponed until next year.
22.4.2 Between the Scientific Committee and the Commission
A paper produced by the Secretariat dealt with the identification of the
Commission origin of each Agenda Item considered by the Scientific Committee;
identification of future work priorities; and informal contact meetings on
specific topics.
Interventions in the Finance and Administration Committee centred on the last
topic, with delegates agreeing that in principle the idea of informal meetings
with Commissioners is a good one.
The Commission agreed to review these matters again next year.
22.5 Annual Meeting arrangements
At the 49th Annual Meeting the Commission decided that the Press
would be allowed access to the next meeting on the same basis as NGOs, given
access to documents, and charged a nominal fee equal to the costs of producing
the documents they require.
The Commission agreed that it would review the matter in light of experience
at the 50th Annual Meeting.
The Chairman of the Finance and Administration Committee suggested, however, that the matter would be best reviewed at the next meeting, when the Commission would have two years of experience with the procedure. This was agreed.
In the Commission, Japan proposed expansion of press access to the Commission meetings through video coverage of all plenary sessions, and for those after the opening, one or two representatives should be chosen by the host Government to provide video footage for all press companies. There was general support from Norway, USA, France, Switzerland, Solomon Islands, Denmark, Finland, Brazil, St Lucia, Italy and Chile. However, a number of points of detail were raised, including who pays the costs, the single language used, the question of copyright, editing, and avoidance of disruption. Japan thought that funding could come from the reserves instead of paying for research on the environment, while the Netherlands thought the question was press access, not the cost issue.
The Chairman thought there was general acceptance of the idea which was therefore forwarded to the Advisory Committee for transmission to the Finance and Administration Committee for consideration at the next meeting in Australia.
22.6 Observer status of Greenpeace
Japan introduced a document to the Commission setting out its version of a
protest action by Greenpeace activists who attached themselves to the mooring
lines of the research mother ship Nisshin-maru when it made an
emergency port call in Noumea, New Caledonia, following a fire.
The protesters also attached themselves to the anchor chain of a catcher boat
and entangled a chain round the propeller.
Japan requested that the Commission deny observer status to Greenpeace because
of these actions.
New Zealand had heard other versions of these events and France thought that Japan had dramatised the incident. There was no damage to the ship or persons, the demonstration ended spontaneously, was for publicity only and there was no disturbance to public order nor sabotage as such. It saw no justification to remove observer status from Greenpeace, nor to remove NGOs protecting whales, since there was no real threat to Japan.
The USA pointed out that this was a non-violent action far short of sabotage or terrorism by Greenpeace, which had offered assistance at the time of the fire. It thought it best to drop the proposal. The Netherlands spoke in similar vein, as did New Zealand, who commented that this was a minor affair and that more robust demonstrations had occurred in its own country. The UK regarded the incident as a peaceful demonstration, with no record of arrests or damage, so Greenpeace should not be excluded. Australia concurred.
Norway recalled that its vessels had been harassed by Greenpeace in the past and the Rainbow Warrior was in the North Sea now. Antigua and Barbuda asked how members could engage in debate without fear, and pointed out that trespass had occurred. Dominica agreed.
Japan responded that many irresponsible statements had been made. The actions had been against international and domestic laws, including trespass, and the vessels had been immobilised for days. It detailed a catalogue of numerous similar actions against whaling and fishing vessels and asked if such an NGO is still acceptable. St Lucia supported Japan, but the Chairman believed that a majority were against the proposal. Japan thought the evidence was simple, clear and transparent, but when the matter was put to the vote if was defeated, with 9 votes in favour, 22 against and 3 abstentions.
22.7 Action arising
In the Commission, in addition to noting the comments described above and
endorsing the decisions with respect to the individual items, the following
observations were made and conclusions drawn:
_