HYDE UNITED NATIONS REFORM ACT OF 2005

“I would simply suggest that [withholding dues] ought to be the last step taken rather than the first.” - Former House Speaker, Newt Gingrich, Co-Chair of the USIP Task Force on UN Reform

On June 17, 2005, despite opposition from the Bush Administration, UN officials, civil society groups, and a bipartisan panel studying UN reform, the House passed the Hyde UN Reform Act, a flawed and reckless piece of legislation, by a vote of 221 to 184.

The Hyde legislation lays out some much-needed and visionary changes that will help the UN become a more effective institution in the 21st century. However, while the goal of the Hyde bill is laudable, the methods it employs will be ineffective and counterproductive. By mandating 40 reforms – and threatening to withhold 50 percent of U.S. dues to the UN if 32 of the 40 are not implemented in one to two years – it sets the benchmark at an impossible height. In fact, many of the reforms would require the consent of all 191 UN Member States; this is setting up the UN to fail and would certainly lead to withholding of dues. As a result, this bill would hinder, not help the effort to achieve important reforms at the UN.

Breakdown of the Bill

Budget Reform

H.R. 2745 calls for a shift in the funding schedules for over a dozen UN programs from a regular assessed budget to voluntarily funding. Beginning in 2008 ,the bill withholds $100 million a year in U.S. contributions to the UN until 18 UN programs change from a “assessed” to “voluntary” budget.

As many as 17 organizational programs would see their funding cut in half if the change is not made.

Affected organizational programs include those dealing with:

- economic and social affairs;
- least-developed countries;
- landlocked developing countries and small island developing states;
- the new partnership for Africa's development;
- trade and development;
- environment;
- human settlements;
- crime prevention and criminal justice;
- international drug control;
- special regional offices for Europe, Asia and the Pacific, Latin America and the Caribbean, and Western Asia;
- refugees; and
- Palestinian relief efforts.

Funding from these programs would be transferred to “eligible organizational programs,” which the Hyde bill defines as programs relating to internal oversight, human rights, and humanitarian assistance.

H.R. 2745 mandates 20 percent cuts in Public Affairs, General Assembly, and conference services budgets for fiscal year 2006 and 25 percent cuts for fiscal year 2007. These funds will also be redirected to the “eligible organizational programs.” The President, through the UN Ambassador, would be required to withhold U.S. support for the UN budget if these reductions are not implemented by 2008.

According to the Hyde bill, the UN would also have to stay within its two-year budget limit, as agreed by the General Assembly, unless an increase – which cannot exceed 10 percent – is approved by all Member States in the General Assembly.

Finally, if Hyde becomes law, the UN and each of its specialized agencies would be forced to assign specific ‘sunset’ dates for all new programs approved by the General Assembly. A 'sunset' date is specific date for a program's termination.

Failure of the UN to adopt any of the above reforms will trigger a 50 percent withholding of U.S. contributions to the UN.

In addition, the Hyde bill mandates reforms for 13 specialized agencies, including:

- Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO);
- International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA);
- International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO);
- International Maritime Organization (IMO);
- International Telecommunication Union;
- United Nations Education, Social, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO);
- UN International Industrial Development Organization;
- Universal Postal Union;
- World Health Organization (WHO);
- World Meteorological Organization (WMO); and
- World Intellectual Property Organization.

Specifically, these agencies are required to develop a standardized method for evaluating the relevance and effectiveness of their programs. It should be noted that all of these specialized agencies are affiliated with the UN but not under the UN’s authority. Rather than recognizing this essential difference, the Hyde bill neglects the reality of the system and holds the UN accountable for reforming specialized agencies beyond its purview. Since it has no direct control over how these agencies operate, the UN would be helpless in the face of the demands set forth in Hyde. Still, any failure to implement reforms at the specialized agencies would result in the withholding of 50 percent of U.S. dues to the UN.

Accountability

One of the key provisions in the Hyde bill mandates new accountability mechanisms in the UN system. To that end, Hyde mandates the creation of an Independent Oversight Board (IOB), an independent entity not funded from the UN’s regular budget, whose primary mission would be oversight of the UN’s current internal investigative body, the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). In fact, IOB would have the authority to direct the OIOS to “initiate, abandon, or modify, the scope of an investigation.” H.R. 2745 also requires the IOB to conduct a thorough review of the Independent Inquiry Committee’s (IIC) final report into the oil-for-food scandal.

H.R. 2745 gives the OIOS the authority to initiate any investigations necessary into mismanagement and misconduct. Also, the OIOS would establish procedures for providing “whistle-blower” status and employment protection for all employees of the United Nations.

The bill would also establish a United Nations Office of Ethics (UNOE), an independent entity not funded by the UN’s regular budget that would implement an annual financial disclosure process for the UN and specialized agency staff as well as all consultants hired by the organization. This information would be made available to the public, including salaries and other payments, pension payments and buyouts, and travel and per diem expenses for these employees.

Hyde also enumerates specific ethics rules that UNOE would be required to enforce. One such regulation prohibits UN employees from discussing internal UN operations or decisions with someone who is not an official employee of the UN or a working member of the media without filing a report of such contact and making it available to Member States. This, in effect, would exclude, or vastly inhibit, the participation of civil society and NGOs in the UN system. The open relationship between UN officials and NGOs is vital to the UN’s ability to agree on effective policy. UN officials need the expertise of policy professionals and, conversely, NGOs need access to UN officials in order to understand, implement, and explain UN policy and operations to their supporters and partners.

H.R. 2745 would also create a Chief Operating Officer (COO) who would report to the Secretary-General. “The COO shall be responsible for formulating general policies and programs for the United Nations in consultation with the Secretary-General and in consultation with the Security Council and the General Assembly,” the legislation states. The COO would be tasked with overseeing the day-to-day operations at the United Nations.

H.R. 2745 would require the Secretary-General to waive immunity for any UN official who is either under investigation for or charged with a “serious criminal offense.” What constitutes a ”serious criminal offense” is left unspecified.

Finally, the Hyde legislation requires certification that the UN has cooperated with the oil-for-food investigation. Specifically it calls on the Secretary-General to release (upon request by the Member States) all UN documents that either directly or indirectly concern the oil-for-food program to any Member State’s ”law enforcement authority,” such as the U.S. Department of Justice, or ”national legislative authority,” such as Congress . It should be noted that Secretary-General Kofi Annan has already secured the release of all documents requested by the Volcker Commission’s inquiry into oil-for-food. In fact, the Independent Inquiry Commission (IIC) has already released all internal UN audit reports on the oil-for-food scandal to Congress. Also, Mark Malloch Brown, Chief of Staff to Secretary General Kofi Annan, has already testified before Congress and promised the UN’s complete cooperation.

Failure of the UN to create the IOB and UNOE, and ensure they are both independent entities with separate budget authority would result in the withholding of 50 percent of U.S. contributions to the UN. The IOB’s authority to recommend the annual budgets for OIOS is also a mandated reform that, if not fulfilled, would also trigger withholding.

The remaining reform proposals must also be implemented, however, Section 601 (a)(3)(A) of the Hyde legislation stipulates that if the Secretary of State certifies that 32 of 40 reforms called for in 11 of the Act’s certifications have been implemented in the time allotted, the UN will be considered in ‘Substantial Compliance’ which would postpone the withholding of dues for one year to allow the remaining reforms to be considered, implemented, and certified.

Peacekeeping

The Hyde bill mandates the creation of a new office housed within the Department of Peacekeeping Operations, but independent of its budgetary authority and tasked with investigating, auditing, and monitoring peacekeeping operations. It also requires the establishment of ‘follow-up’ units to investigate and coordinate information regarding allegations of peacekeeper abuse and misconduct. However, the Hyde bill does not allocate any funds for these proposed reforms. Such unfunded mandates constitute implausible demands upon the UN. Coupled with the automatic trigger of withholding dues, they will clearly lead to further U.S. arrears to the UN.

H.R. 2745 also requires the U.S. to prevent the expansion or creation of new peacekeeping missions unless specific reforms have been implemented in time.

These specific reforms include:
- adopting a binding, uniform code of conduct;
- training all personnel on the code;
- ensuring that all personnel have signed an oath on the code;
- creating an outreach program in all peacekeeping operations to explain the obligations of the code;
- creating a centralized database to track misconduct among personnel;
- obligating each Member State that contributes troops to aid victims of misconduct and demonstrate a mechanism for prosecuting its own troops for misconduct;
- establishing an independent OIOS investigation unit to monitor operations.

The United States is one of the 5 permanent members of the Security Council with the ability to veto the creation or expansion of peace operations. Should the UN fail to implement these reforms, section 601 would provide obligate the U.S. to halt the creation or expansion of any peacekeeping operations, even those that may be in our national interest. If such a provision becomes law, the UN’s Mission to Sudan could not be able to be expanded to include Darfur, and a potential new mission to Haiti could never be created.

Treaty Bodies

H.R. 2745 would require the U.S. to withhold a portion of its yearly UN dues that is equal in amount to the annual UN budget for any Treaty Body to which the U.S. is not a party. Confusing as it may be, this provision seems specifically designed to withhold funding from the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) Committee.

Peacebuilding Commission

The Hyde bill supports the creation of a Peacebuilding Commission. The new body should be a subsidiary of the Security Council and limited in. Its responsibilities would include developing and integrating country-specific and system-wide conflict prevention, post-conflict reconstruction, and long-term development policies as well as serving as the key coordinating body for the design and implementation of complex peacekeeping missions. The draft stipulates that the Commission would be funded and staffed from existing resources.

Human Rights Commission

If enacted, H.R. 2745 would require some much-needed reforms of the UN’s Commission of Human Rights. Under threat of dues cuts, it calls for the UN to implement new criteria for considering a State’s membership on any human rights body. Hyde dictates that all Member States that fail to uphold the values embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, are subject to sanctions by the Security Council, are under a Security-Council mandated investigation for human rights abuses, or are subject to country-specific – commonly referred to as ‘naming and shaming’ – resolutions would be precluded from any UN human rights body. Also, Hyde prohibits UN human rights bodies from having a standing agenda item relating only to one country or region. Failure of the UN to adopt any of the above reforms will trigger a 50 percent withholding of U.S. contributions to the UN.

Economic and Social Council

The Hyde bill would also mandate several reforms of the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), including abolishing secret voting in ECOSOC and setting high eligibility requirements for membership in the UN Commission on Human Rights immediately – even before it is reformed or replaced. Once again, if the UN does not implement any of these reforms by the 2008-2009 biennium budget allocation, the U.S. will withhold 50 percent of its contributions to the UN.

Democracy Fund

H.R. 2745 requires the establishment of a Democracy Fund at the UN. The Democracy Fund would be administered by Member States of the United Nations Democracy Caucus and would use its financial accounts to provide grants and in-kind assistance for emerging democracies. Hyde names two specific criteria for membership: states must be eligible to serve on a UN human rights body and must be determined by the Secretary of State to be emerging democracies or democracies in transition.

Hyde also states that it will be U.S. policy to pay for the Democracy Fund by transferring U.S. contributions from the regular assessed budget of the UN.

Certification by the Secretary of State that the above-mentioned reforms are in place is required or the U.S. will withhold dues.

Right Message, Wrong Method

We support the establishment of a Peacebuilding Commission, a new, credible, Human Rights Council, and a Democracy Fund - as do President Bush, Secretary-General Annan, and many UN Member States. But the chosen method of the Hyde bill is counterproductive to the goal of achieving these reforms. If Hyde becomes law, instead of engaging the UN in its reform process, the U.S. would adopt a “my way or the highway” approach. At a time when key reforms are already being implemented at the world body, and when the U.S. has a real opportunity to unite and lead Member States in the months leading up to September’s UN Millennium Summit, diplomacy and mutual respect, not bullying and cynicism, should govern our actions.
 

Updated June 23, 2005