WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION
ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA SANTÉ
REGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC BUREAU RÉGIONAL DU PACIFIQUE OCCIDENTAL
REGIONAL COMMITTEE Sixty-third session Hanoi, Viet Nam 24–28 September 2012 Provisional agenda item 13
WPR/RC63/8 20 August 2012 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOMINATION OF THE REGIONAL DIRECTOR: CODE OF CONDUCT
The Regional Committee for the Western Pacific, at its sixty-second session, considered a report by the Legal Counsel elaborating relevant issues and challenges underpinning a possible code of conduct to improve the fairness and transparency of the process for the nomination of the Regional Director, including a draft code of conduct. During the discussions, most representatives agreed that the draft code contained many elements that would allow for a more transparent nomination process, but also agreed that the matter required further consideration. The Regional Committee requested the Secretariat to revise the draft code taking into account the committee’s comments, to make the revised text available electronically to Member States for further consideration, and to prepare a revised draft code for consideration at the sixty-third session of the Regional Committee. The attached annex contains the revised draft of a code of conduct, which takes into account issues raised by Member States during the electronic consultation. The Regional Committee is requested to review the revised draft code of conduct provided in the Annex, with a view towards its adoption.
WPR/RC63/8 page 2 1. INTRODUCTION
During its fifty-ninth session, a proposal was submitted to the Regional Committee for possible ways to improve the fairness of the procedure for the nomination of the Regional Director as laid down in Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedures of the Regional Committee for the Western Pacific. The Secretariat was asked to prepare a report on ways to improve the procedure, one option being a code of conduct on expected behaviour by Member States in the Region during the nomination process. The Regional Committee at its sixtieth session considered the options presented and supported the ideas of an interview process and a code of conduct. The Secretariat was asked to submit proposals for candidate interviews and to suggest how a code of conduct might be drawn up. At its sixty-first session, the Regional Committee considered the report by the Legal Counsel containing the proposals for an interview process and a code of conduct for the process of nomination of the Regional Director. At that same session, the Regional Committee adopted a resolution related to the shortlisting and interviewing of candidates for the post of Regional Director and amended its Rules of Procedure accordingly (resolution WPR/RC61.R3). The Regional Committee also expressed interest in developing a regional code of conduct as a means of improving the fairness, openness and transparency of the nomination process, with particular regard to campaign activities, and asked the Secretariat to prepare a report on the issue of a code of conduct.
2. MOST RECENT DEVELOPMENTS
At its sixty-second session, the Regional Committee considered a report by the Legal Counsel that elaborated on relevant issues and challenges underpinning a possible code of conduct. The report contained more detailed information on precedents for such codes, their legal nature and scope, and possible content of a code of conduct. A draft code was annexed to the document in order to enable the Regional Committee to discuss more concretely its implications (see WPR/RC62/9).
WPR/RC63/8 page 3 During the discussions, most representatives agreed that the draft code contained many elements that would allow for a more transparent nomination process. At the same time, there was general agreement that the matter required further consideration. While the Regional Committee agreed that the section on funding raised substantial problems and should be deleted, it discussed other aspects of the draft code of conduct without, however, reaching a final conclusion. Several representatives at the sixty-second session of the Regional Committee suggested that there should be a clearer focus on
transparency throughout the code, that a merit-based approach to the selection of the Regional Director should be maintained, that a pilot test of a possible code should be conducted and the code subsequently be refined, that names and curricula vitae of nominees should be made available electronically in all three official languages, and that grants or aid funding from nominating countries to other Member States over the previous two years should be fully disclosed. At the same time, some representatives argued that the proposal to avoid meetings of candidates with individual Member States was not realistic and that the overall implementation of the code might be difficult since sovereign prerogatives dictated foreign policy and influenced the nature of campaign activities. The Regional Committee requested the Secretariat to revise the draft code taking into account the Regional Committee's comments, to make the revised text available to Member States electronically for further consideration and submission of amendments, and to prepare a revised draft code for consideration at the Regional Committee's sixty-third session. Following the sixty-second session of the Regional Committee, a version of the draft code of conduct, edited in order to reflect the discussions during that session, was sent to Member States for further comments. The edited draft was also made available via an online consultation platform established to continue dialogue on the code of conduct until 15 January 2012. After this comment period, the Secretariat revised the draft code in light of comments received and prepared it for consideration, with a view to its possible adoption at the sixtythird session of the Regional Committee in September 2012. The revised draft code is attached to this document (see Annex) with the changes by Member States made visible for easier reference of the Regional Committee.
WPR/RC63/8 page 4
3. CONCLUSION
The Regional Committee may wish to discuss the revised draft code of conduct provided in the annex, with a view to its adoption. It should be underscored in this
connection that this would be the first-ever code of conduct on the election of an official in the United Nations system, and perhaps among all international organizations.
WPR/RC63/8 page 5 ANNEX Draft Code of Conduct for the Nomination of the Regional Director of the Western Pacific Region of the World Health Organization∗
By resolution WPR/RC50.R8, the Regional Committee inter alia affirmed that "campaigns for elective office in the Western Pacific Region should be open and fair, and based on the merits of the individual candidates". In resolution WPR/RC61.R3, the Regional Committee also pointed to its intention to improve the fairness of the process for the nomination of the Regional Director. The Regional Committee requested the Legal Counsel to elaborate further on a possible code of conduct on the nomination of the Regional Director. This Code of Conduct (Code) aims at promoting an open, fair, equitable and transparent process for the nomination of the Regional Director of the Western Pacific Region (WPR) of the World Health Organization (WHO). In seeking to improve the overall process, this Code addresses a number of areas , including the submission of proposals and the the conduct of electoral campaigns by Member States and candidates, as well as funding and financing matters. The Code is a political understanding reached by the Member States of the Western Pacific Region (Member States). It recommends desirable behaviour by Member States and candidates with regard to the nomination of the Regional Director to increase the fairness, openness and transparency of the process and thus its legitimacy, as well as the legitimacy and acceptance of its outcome. As such, the Code is not legally binding, but Member States and candidates are expected to honour its contents. A. General Requirements I. Basic Principles The whole nomination process as well as electoral campaign activities related to it should be guided by the following principles that further the legitimacy of the process and of its result: Fairness Equity Transparency Good Faith Dignity, Mutual Respect and Moderation, Non-Discrimination, and Merit-based.
∗
The “strikethrough” text sections of the draft code of conduct have been deleted following the comments from Member States during the sixty-second session of the WHO Regional Committee for the Western Pacific. Text highlighted in yellow represents proposed revisions/deletions by Member States following electronic consultations.
WPR/RC63/8 page 6 Annex II. Authority of the Regional Committee and its Rules of Procedure 1. Member States accept the authority of the Regional Committee for the Western Pacific (Regional Committee) to conduct the nomination of the Regional Director in accordance with its Rules of Procedure and relevant resolutions of the Regional Committee. 2. Member States which propose persons for the post of Regional Director have the right to promote their candidature. The same applies to candidates with regard to their own candidature. In the exercise of that right, Member States and candidates should abide by all rules governing the nomination of the Regional Director contained in the Rules of Procedure of the Regional Committee as well as in relevant resolutions and decisions of the Regional Committee. III. Responsibilities 1. It is the responsibility of Member States and candidates to observe and respect this Code. 2. Member States acknowledge that the process of nomination of the Regional Director should be fair, open, transparent, equitable and based on the merits of the individual candidates. They should make this Code publicly known and easily accessible.
B. Requirements concerning the different steps of the nomination process I. Submission of proposals When proposing the name of one or more persons for the post of Regional Director, Member States will be requested by the Director-General to submit the necessary particulars of each person's qualifications and experience using the standard form annexed to this Code, in order to improve the comparability of the merits and qualifications of candidates against the criteria adopted by the Regional Committee with resolution WPR/RC50.R8.
II. Electoral campaign 1. This Code applies to electoral activities related to the nomination of the Regional Director whenever they take place until the nomination by the Regional Committee. [New Zealand] 1. All Member States and candidates should encourage and promote communication and cooperation among one another during the entire nomination process. Member States and candidates should act in good faith bearing in mind the shared objectives of promoting equity, openness, transparency and fairness throughout the nomination process. 2. Member States and candidates should refer to one another with respect; no Member State or candidate should at any time disrupt or impede the campaign activities of other candidates. Nor should any Member State or any candidate make any oral or written statements or other representations that could be deemed slanderous or libellous. 2bis. All Member States and candidates should disclose their campaign activities (e.g. hosting of meetings, workshops, visits). Information disclosed will be posted on a dedicated page of the web site of the Regional Office. [Australia]
WPR/RC63/8 page 7 Annex 3. Member States and candidates should refrain from improperly influencing the nomination process, by, for example, granting or accepting financial or other benefits as a quid pro quo for the support of a candidate, or by promising such benefits. 4. Member States and candidates should not make promises or commitments in favour of, or accept instructions from, any person or entity, public or private, when that could undermine, or be perceived as undermining, the integrity of the nomination process. 5. Member States that have proposed a candidate should facilitate meetings between their candidate and other Member States, if so requested. Wherever possible, meetings between candidates and Member States should be arranged on the occasion of conferences or other events involving Member States of the Region rather than through bilateral visits. 5bis. Member States nominating candidates for the post of Regional Director should consider disclosing grants or aid funding for the previous two years in order to ensure full transparency and mutual confidence among Member States. [New Zealand] 6. Travel by candidates to Member States to promote their candidature should be limited in order to avoid excessive expenditure, which could lead to inequality among Member States and candidates. In this connection, Member States and candidates should consider using as much as possible existing mechanisms (regional committees, Executive Board, World Health Assembly) for meetings and other promotional activities linked to the electoral campaign. [Japan] 7. Candidates, whether internal or external, should not combine their official travel with campaigning activities. Electoral promotion or propaganda under the guise of technical meetings or similar events should be avoided. [Option a: Australia] 7. Candidates, whether internal or external, should not combine their official travel with campaigning activities. 7bis. Electoral promotion or propaganda under the guise of technical meetings or similar events, such as workshops, should be avoided. [Option b: New Zealand] 7. Candidates, whether internal or external, should not combine their official travel with campaigning activities. Electoral promotion or propaganda under the guise of technical meetings or similar events should be avoided. 8. After the Director-General has dispatched the names and particulars of candidates to Member States in accordance with the third paragraph of Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure, he/she will open on the web site of WHO a password-protected question-and- answer web forum open to all Member States and the candidates who request to participate in such a forum.
WPR/RC63/8 page 8 Annex 9. After the Director-General has dispatched the names and particulars of candidates to Member States in accordance with the third paragraph of Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure, the Regional Office will post on its web site information on all candidates who so request including their curricula vitae and other particulars of their qualification and experience as received from Member States, as well as their contact information. The web site will also provide links to individual web sites of candidates upon request. Each candidate is responsible for setting up and financing his/her own web site. The Regional Office will also post on its web site, at the time referred to in the first paragraph of Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure of the Regional Committee, information on the nomination process and the applicable rules and decisions.
III. Funding 1. In order to improve the equitable and fair nature of the nomination process, a fund to facilitate campaign by candidates from least-developed countries shall be established as a Trust Fund under the Financial Regulations and Rules of WHO. 2. The Fund could be financed by: Option A: voluntary assessed contributions from Member States based on the scale of assessment adopted by the Health Assembly; Option B: voluntary contributions by Member States Option C: voluntary contributions by Member States that are upper-middle-income or high-income countries. 3. The Regional Committee will adopt criteria concerning the eligibility for financial support, and may fix a ceiling for each candidate financed from the Fund depending on the availability of resources. The Director-General will authorize disbursements from the Fund in accordance with the criteria and process approved by the Regional Committee. 4. Eligible candidates may request support from the Fund for the purpose of presenting their vision and programmes and promote their candidature through travel, promotional publications or other activities that should conform to the principles and provisions of this Code. 5. Candidates who benefit from the fund shall report to the Director-General on how they have used the funds received. Such information will be publicized by appropriate means and will be reported to the Regional Committee as part of the financial report.
IV. Nomination 1. The nomination of the Regional Director is conducted in private meetings of the Regional Committee in accordance with Rule 51 of the Rules of Procedure. Attendance at the private meetings is prescribed by the Director-General and limited to essential Secretariat staff besides Member States. As a matter of principle in order to preserve the serenity of the proceedings, [New Zealand] candidates should not attend those meetings even if they form part of the delegation of their country. The votes in the private meeting are conducted by secret ballot. The results of the ballots should not be disclosed by Member States. 2. Member States should abide strictly by the Rules of Procedure and other applicable resolutions and respect the integrity, legitimacy and dignity of the proceedings. As such, they should avoid
WPR/RC63/8 page 9 Annex behaviours and actions, both inside and outside the conference room where the nomination takes place, which could be perceived as aiming at influencing its outcome. 3. Member States should respect the confidentiality of the proceedings and the secrecy of the votes. In particular, they should refrain from communicating or broadcasting the proceedings during the private meetings through electronic devices. 4. In view of the secret nature of the vote for the nomination of the Regional Director, Member States should refrain from publicly announcing in advance their intention to vote for a particular candidate. [New Zealand ]
V. Internal candidates 1. WHO staff members, including the incumbent Regional Director, who are proposed for the post of Regional Director are subject to the obligations contained in the WHO Staff Regulations and Rules, as well as to the guidance that may be issued from time to time by the Director-General. 2. WHO staff members who are proposed for the post of Regional Director must observe the highest standard of ethical conduct and strive to avoid any appearance of impropriety. WHO staff members must clearly separate their WHO functions from their candidacy and avoid any overlap, or perception of overlap, between campaign activities and their work for WHO. They also have to avoid any perception of conflict of interest. 3. WHO staff members are subject to the authority of the Regional Director and the Director-General, in accordance with the applicable regulations and rules, in case of allegations of breach of their duties with regard to their campaign activities. 4. The Regional Committee may suggest that Director-General consider applying Staff Rule 650 concerning special leave with or without pay to staff members who have been proposed for the post of Regional Director.
WPR/RC63/8 page 10 Annex
Standard Form for the Proposal of Names of Persons for Nomination of the Regional Director of the Western Pacific Region of the World Health Organization 1. Please provide details of the qualifications and characteristics of the person proposed by your Government with regard to the criteria contained in Resolution WPR/RC50.R8, para. 2: a) a strong technical and public health background and extensive experience in international health
___________________________________________________________________ b) competency in organizational management
___________________________________________________________________ c) evidence of public health leadership
___________________________________________________________________ d) sensitivity to cultural, social and political differences
___________________________________________________________________ e) a strong commitment to the work of WHO
___________________________________________________________________