EU Statement – UN General Assembly 6th Committee: Administration of Justice at the UN

– CHECK AGAINST DELIVERY –

Thank you Chair,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States.

The Candidate Countries North Macedonia*,Montenegro*, Serbia*, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina* and Georgia, as well as Armenia and Monaco align themselves with this statement.

We thank the Secretary-General, the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services, and the Internal Justice Council for their reports. We also thank them and all those involved in the system of administration of justice at the UN for their dedication and continued efforts to improve its functioning.

The latest reports indicate that the system has reached a certain level of maturity, with constant progress over the years, which we commend, while noting that certain challenges persist. As the Organization navigates significant change - including the liquidity crisis, UN80 reforms, and evolving workforce needs - we must ensure the system is equipped to meet these challenges effectively.

In this vein, we would like to offer a few observations, as regards, respectively, the formal system, the informal system, as well as certain general points.

First, as regards the formal system, the data (86 per cent of management evaluation requests did not proceed to the Dispute Tribunal) confirms that the management evaluation function continues to play a key role in providing resolution to staff members and demonstrates the value of addressing disputes early in the process. In this respect, we commend the important role of the Office of Staff Legal Assistance (OSLA) in providing advice and serving as an effective filter mechanism (with 89 per cent of cases concluded without recourse to the formal system). We support OSLA’s launch of a client satisfaction survey, and its efforts to strengthen the voluntary supplemental funding mechanism.

However, we note that applications to the Dispute Tribunal focus primarily on appointment-related matters (37 per cent) and separations from service (20 per cent). With ongoing reforms potentially increasing separations, the system must be prepared for possible increases in caseload and continue in its efforts to improve case management.

Access to justice for all categories of personnel remains a priority for the European Union. While we welcome the regularization of the pilot project enabling affiliate personnel to access the Ombudsman’s services – whose relevance is confirmed by the 16 per cent increase in cases in 2024 –, access to the formal justice system for non-staff personnel remains limited. We continue to advocate for exploring how to improve remedies offered to non-staff personnel, particularly their access to the formal justice system, while taking into account budgetary constraints.

As regards reinstatement and compensation, we take note of the information provided and of the practical challenges in implementing reinstatement orders, particularly when significant time has elapsed between separation and final judgment. It is important to reflect on how to address the possible increase in such cases in light of the ongoing and expected increase in separations from service.

Second, as regards specifically the informal system, we reiterate our full support to the continued promotion and expansion of the “informal first” approach. As confirmed by high satisfaction survey results, the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services plays an essential role in fostering early resolution of workplace conflicts, and we commend the continued outreach efforts to raise awareness of this approach throughout the Organization. As noted in the report, unresolved workplace conflict carries substantial costs: diminished productivity, employee disengagement, elevated stress, significant diversion of time and reputational harm. Investment in informal conflict resolution therefore represents not only a commitment to personnel welfare, but also sound organizational management. As the UN navigates through organizational change, the ombudsman and mediation function is increasingly critical. We therefore support expanding this approach, strengthening regional presence for equitable access - particularly in remote and hardship duty stations - and enhancing collaboration across the UN system.

Third, we would like to provide a few general observations.

We note with serious concern the significant increase in complaints related to racism or discrimination based on race, ethnicity or nationality (from 20 in 2020 to 81 in 2024 – with investigations rising from 7 to 23). It is important to understand whether this reflects a deteriorating context or increased awareness of available tools to address such unacceptable conduct. We echo the Ombudsman’s call for creating a safe environment for discussing racial discrimination without fear of repercussion. It would be useful to assess this data alongside protection against retaliation, as ensuring misconduct can be reported without fear is essential to fostering integrity, transparency and accountability. We welcome activities to address racism and support the Anti-Racism Office’s work. 

We appreciate continued multilingualism efforts, particularly the Appeals Tribunal’s oral pronouncements in Arabic, English and French in 2024, and the Ombudsman’s increased services in Arabic. We invite the Secretariat to further explore the use of technology to facilitate multilingualism and reduce costs, in line with the recommendations of the United Nations Strategic Framework on Multilingualism, adopted in 2024.

We thank the Secretary-General for the proposals for establishing a single database for collecting and analyzing data from various justice system mechanisms, entities, funds and programmes. Improved data collection and analysis capabilities would enhance the ability to monitor trends and make evidence-based improvements to the system. We note that the single repository system seems the most desirable in qualitative terms, followed by the scaled-down repository system. However, the concrete feasibility of these proposals, in light of their cost implications, needs to be carefully assessed by the Fifth Committee.

Finally, as noted in the report of the Internal Justice Council, the proposals currently being considered for budgetary and organizational changes could have an impact on the system of administration of justice, which could have fewer resources to deal with potentially increased cases from separations and changing conditions. In future reports, it would be important to have more comprehensive information on the evolution of – and recourse to – the system in the context of the overall UN80 reforms and how the system is being prepared to address the challenges and uncertainties ahead.

To conclude, we express our appreciation for the continued efforts to improve the administration of justice system at the UN and encourage all relevant actors to pursue their endeavours to improve the dispute resolution mechanisms, while addressing the root causes of disputes proactively. 

A well-functioning, accessible, and adequately resourced system of administration of justice is essential not only for protecting individual rights and the well-being of the personnel, but also for the reputation of the Organization and its ability to fulfil its mandate effectively. 

We remain committed to supporting these objectives and to working constructively with all Member States and stakeholders to achieve them.

Thank you.

* North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania and Bosnia and Herzegovina continue to be part of the Stabilisation and Association Process.