Statement by H.E. Ambassador UMETSU Shigeru, Deputy Permanent Representative of Japan to the United Nations, at the meeting of the AHWG under UN80

Mme. and Mr. Co-Chairs,
 
At the outset, I would like to thank USG Mr. Guy Ryder for his updates on this Secretariate’s effort, which was very useful. We express our sincere appreciation for the Co-Chairs’ efforts on the non-paper, which serves as a valuable foundation for our discussions on criteria and modalities.

As for criteria, while we had anticipated a zero draft for the criteria, we are keen to understand the future discussion direction and if such a draft is envisioned later.

From Japan's perspective, paragraph 24 of Resolution 80/251 – specifically, "inactive, duplicative or fully implemented" – offers a robust framework for establishing criteria.

The mandate review aims to identify duplication, using criteria as technical tools. The Secretariat's technical support is crucial for Member States to grasp the overall mandate landscape. We respectfully suggest the Secretariat could share criteria that it would use in reviews under paragraphs 18 and 24, and detailed information on posts and budgetary allocations for each mandate, enabling informed decisions by Member States.

We generally agree with the checklist approach proposed in the non-paper, especially items 1 to 4, as they align with paragraph 24, which I just mentioned.

We wish to offer some observations regarding the "options" part in the non-paper:

Firstly, regarding "a full, formal working group," we question if a permanent WG is the most efficient mechanism if its main role is solely reporting hub. We suggest introducing a corresponding indicator into the Mandate Registry as a possible alternative. Given past opposition in the Informal Ad-hoc WG, a clear explanation for essential tasks of a full, formal WG is needed for thorough discussion.

Secondly, we request clarification of the meaning of "find solutions before bringing them to the broader Assembly" in the third point.

Thirdly, concerning "the scope" in the fourth point, if it refers to paragraph 25 of Resolution 80/251, the SG’s advice is essential. However, concerning "modalities" we think that waiting for the SG's advice could affect the resolution's timeline, to which we are obliged to stick.

Japan continues to support the Co-Chairs and looks forward to achieving concrete results in this WG.

I thank you.