29 June 2001

FICSA Update No. 33 2001

    ICSC Adopts New Standards of Conduct

  • The subject of the Standards of Conduct for the International Civil Service has been a very controversial one. In 2000, the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) attempted to impose its own version upon the Organizations and sought - and received - the support of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in its struggle with the latter. However, the ink of the UNGA Resolution was not yet dry when the Chairman of the Commission, after consultation with representatives of the Organizations, requested a former international civil servant of high standing, Mr. Aamir Ali, to produce a new draft in more inspirational language and - we should add - in more decent English. Mr. Ali was also to take into account the views of all parties. There is no doubt that he succeeded in this task.

  • FICSA denounced in no ambiguous terms the past procedure and the waste of time, energy and money, including its membership’s moneys since it had participated in the initial tripartite - administrations, Commission’s secretariat and staff - working groups. FICSA also welcomed Mr. Ali’s draft and expressed willingness to support it in a spirit of compromise.

  • All in all, the discussions of the Commission were constructive. There was, however, some skirmish between the representative of the Administrative Committee on Co-ordination (ACC) and some Commissioners, and also between the FICSA delegation and the Chairman of the Commission when the latter, disregarding the principles of the standards in the making, made inappropriate comments on a member of the FICSA delegation and on the behaviour of staff representatives.

  • Some Commissioners were also keen to protect perceived national interests and eliminate any reference to a reciprocal obligation put on Member States, even where the obligation is enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations. It strained belief to hear, for instance, that it was perfectly legitimate for a Member State to lobby to promote the career of one of its nationals. On the other hand, with regard to the protection of confidential information, one Commissioner insisted on ensuring that the provision would not affect the ability of Member States and their representatives to request and receive information from the Secretariat, including unpublished information.

  • The salient points of the discussion were as follows:

    1. The enumeration of causes of discrimination ("race, gender, religion, colour, national or ethnic origin, marital status, sexual orientation, age, physical disability, political conviction or any distinguishing feature") was not accepted. This was to be expected, however.

    2. The draft stated that a staff member could only challenge an improper decision once it had been carried out. The adopted text says that "any challenge should not delay carrying out the instruction".

    3. On staff-management relations, the adopted text specifies that "management should facilitate this dialogue". There is also a reference to the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the international covenants on human rights, although to require that the special rights conferred upon staff representatives be exercised in a manner that is consistent with those instruments.

    4. On security and safety of the staff and their dependants, the responsibility of organizations to make sure that the health, well-being and lives of staff members would not be subject to undue risk is now qualified by a "without any discrimination whatsoever" applying to staff members. A statement that organizations should take measures to protect the safety and security of the staff members and that of their family members also replaces the previous, non-committing language (staff "have the right to expect that measures will be adopted...").

    5. Staff members would have better opportunities to participate in the life of their community. Whilst it is still prohibited to stand for or hold local or national political office, participation in community or civic activities is now permitted when this is "consistent with the oath of service in the United Nations system" (previously, only "non-partisan" activities were permitted).