Passing the Buck, But Not the Bucks

The revision of Resolution 88 on the implementation of processing charges for satellite network filings and related administrative procedures has been left in abeyance pending consultations of the Chairman of Committee 6 with the Chairman of Committee 5 and the Chairman of the Conference to determine the best approach on the matter. An attempt to revise this Resolution, which was adopted in Minneapolis in 1998, hit a snag in Committee 6 this morning when some countries pointed out that some of the issues raised during the discussion were outside the remit of the Committee.

Resolution 88 decided to implement processing charges for satellite network filings for all satellite filings submitted to the Radiocommunication Bureau after 7 November 1998. At the time of that decision, the methodology, charges and dates of payment were not yet determined. That same resolution requested the Council at it special session during the 1998 Plenipotentiary Conference and the 1999 regular session to adopt the costing methodology as well as the schedule of charges along with the dates when such payments would be required. 

Council in 1999 adopted a methodology (Decision 482) that comprised a flat-fee component and variable-fee component, which is dependent on the number of pages for the publication. These payments were required after the publication of the filing by the Bureau, but due to the backlog in the processing of filings, such payments were effectively delayed some two to three years after their submission. Council in 2001 modified Decision 482 so that the flat-fee component for filings received after 1 January 2002 would be required within six months of the date of receipt of the invoice which would be sent out after the receipt of the filing. This decision created an inequitable situation in which a filing submitted before 1 January 2002 would have some two to three years to make the payment, whereas, a filing submitted after 1 January 2002 would only have some months to make the payment.

One of the proposals at Marrakesh tabled by a group of European countries is to modify Resolution 88 to instruct the Council to rectify this inequity by requiring the invoices to be sent out soon after this plenipotentiary conference and asking the payment of the flat-fee component within a period of [six] months after the receipt of the invoice for all filings subject to cost-recovery. Some consider this as a decision with retroactive effect. The proponents of the proposal do not however consider such a decision as having retroactive effect as the decision by PP-98 in Resolution 88 was such that all filings submitted after 7 November 1998 were subject to these charges with the methodology, amount of the fees and the payment dates not yet decided.

It was also proposed that the Resolution be revised to apply the full cost allocation methodology, as the methodology adopted by the Council in 1999 for the processing charges did not include all costs associated with the processing. Another outstanding issue is the decision to be made by the Marrakesh Plenipotentiary Conference on the date of implementation of the measures approved by WRC-2000 relating to the consequences of non-payment.

The matter will be taken up again following the results of the on-going consultations by the chairmen of the two substantive committees and the chairman of the Conference.

Sharing the Burden

A European Common Proposal to amend Articles 28 of the Constitution on the finances of the Union and Article 33 of the Convention on Finances to allow participants other than Member States to share in defraying the expenses of the regional radiocommunication conferences was noted and forwarded to Committee 5.

They seek to make it clear that the expenses incurred by the regional radiocommunication conferences are not at the exclusive charge of Member States if other entities or organizations are participating in the meeting. The proposed amendment would require that "Sector Members (except when attending a conference or assembly of their respective Sector) which participate in a plenipotentiary conference, in a conference, assembly or meeting of a Sector of the Union, or in a world conference on international telecommunications, will be sharing the expenses of the conferences, assemblies and meetings in which they participate.

A Practical Contributory Solution

The Secretary-General asked delegates to accept this as a practical solution to a thorny financial and legal problem. Germany, Sweden and Australia questioned the constitutional interpretation. Committee 6 expects it will be in a position to announce the definitive upper limit for the contributory unit by the middle of Thursday (10 October). The Chairman told delegates they could then be in a position to announce their contributions on Friday, if they so choose, but the deadline would be on Tuesday.

Support for Palestinian Authority

Shall it End?

Resolutions Approved by Committee 6

The New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD) receives wholehearted support

Committee 6 endorsed a resolution on NEPAD — a new African initiative based on a common vision and a firm and shared conviction of African leaders, that they have a pressing duty to eradicate poverty in the continent and to place their countries, both individually and collectively, on a path of sustainable growth and development and thus halt the marginalization of the continent in the globalization processes. NEPAD also defines the relationships between Africa and the international community. 

Already, NEPAD is providing a common African platform from which to engage the international community in a dynamic partnership that holds real prospects for creating a better life for all. It has been endorsed widely by global and regional organizations, including the United Nations, the European Union, the World Bank and the third ITU World Telecommunication Development Conference (WTDC-02), held in Istanbul in March 2002. The resolution adopted today is broader than that endorsed at WTDC-02 to engage ITU in the NEPAD initiative.

Assistance to Yugoslavia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Afghanistan 

Committee 6 also approved draft resolutions calling on ITU and its membership to provide assistance and support to: the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for rebuilding its public broadcasting and telecommunication systems; Bosnia and Herzegovina for rebuilding its telecommunication network; and the Government of Afghanistan for reconstructing its telecommunication system. The financial implications will be worked out in the Committee later.

Decisions of WTDC-02

Presenting Document 34 on the decisions of the World Telecommunication Development Conference (click here), delegates were reminded to keep in mind the appropriations to be made available by Council.

World Radiocommunication Conference Process

The European proposal to require that administrations include some indication of the resource and financial implications of each proposed WRC agenda item, was dubbed an excellent concept by some delegations. A drafting group was set up under the leadership of Poland to reconcile the views expressed in Committee 6 and develop the modus operandi given the position adopted by developing countries. They expressed the view that it would be difficult to implement such a concept without any clear guidelines or assistance. Other modifications to Resolution 80 were approved (see proposal EUR/10/13 in this document.

Rotating Council Seats

A recommendation by the Islamic Republic of Iran urging Member States to voluntarily rotate Council seats on a regional or sub-regional basis was passed. Spain thought the recommendation unnecessary as the principle of rotation is already practised in some regions (e.g. the Nordic countries). New Zealand suggested the Council elections last week demonstrated how difficult it is for smaller administrations to find their way on to the Council, and supported this ‘voluntary’ proposal.

Flexible Management

A split developed between those supporting the need for flexibility to meet the needs of industry and those concerned with eroding rights for Member States when it comes to standardization. Venezuela was the most vocal proponent of the latter, while Germany reminded delegates that ITU is contribution- driven and needs to give flexibility to the standardization process if it wants to continue to be attractive to industry. France, Canada, UK, Japan, the Netherlands and Uganda all reinforced the need to move at industrial speed or risk losing its relevance to competing standardization bodies. However, Italy believes the proposal is not necessary as the Accelerated Approval Process and work of Telecommunication Standardization Advisory Groups is successfully addressing these concerns. Discussion will continue.