Sixth Committee (Legal) — 71st session
Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its forty-ninth session (Agenda item 76)
- Authority: resolution 70/115
Documentation
- A/71/17 — Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its forty-ninth session
Summary of work
Background (source: A/71/100)
The General Assembly established the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) at its twenty-first session, in 1966, to promote the progressive harmonization and unification of the law of international trade, and requested the Commission to submit an annual report to the Assembly (resolution 2205 (XXI)). The Commission began its work in 1968. It originally consisted of 29 Member States representing the various geographic regions and the principal legal systems of the world. At its twenty-eighth and fifty-seventh sessions, respectively, the General Assembly increased the membership of the Commission from 29 to 36 States (resolution 3108 (XXVIII)) and from 36 to 60 States (resolution 57/20).
For the current composition of the Commission, see decisions 67/406 and 70/405 A, B and C.
At its seventieth session, the General Assembly endorsed the efforts and initiatives of the Commission, as the core legal body within the United Nations system in the field of international trade law. It requested the Secretary-General to establish and operate through the Secretariat of the Commission the repository of published information under the Rules on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration, in accordance with article 8 of the Rules, initially as a pilot project until the end of 2016, to be funded entirely by voluntary contributions. The Assembly took note with interest of the decisions taken by the Commission with regard to its future work and the progress made by the Commission in its work in several areas (resolution 70/115).
Consideration at the seventy-first session
The Sixth Committee considered the item at its 11th, 12th, 19th and 24th meetings, on 10, 11, 20 and 27 October 2016 (A/C.6/71/SR.11, 12, 19 and 24). For its consideration of the item, the Committee had before it the report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its forty-ninth session (A/71/17).
At the 11th meeting, on 10 October, the Chair of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law at its forty-ninth session introduced the report of the Commission on the work of its forty-ninth session (A/71/17).
Statements were made by the representatives of Dominican Republic (on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC)), Honduras, Singapore, Peru, Canada [in English], Austria, Japan, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Israel, El Salvador, Thailand, the United States of America, the Republic of Korea, Ecuador, India, Belarus, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Cameroon.The United Nations Legal Counsel also made a statement.
In their general comments, delegations expressed support for the work of UNCITRAL and commended it for the progress made during its forty-ninth session. They also stressed the Commission’s key role in the development and harmonization of international trade law. Some delegations observed that the success of UNCITRAL was linked to its structure, composition and inclusive working methods, which resulted in widely accepted texts.
Several delegations looked forward to the Commission’s upcoming 50th anniversary and congratulated UNCITRAL for its work over the past five decades. The Commission’s decision to hold a Congress in 2017 to mark the anniversary was considered a timely opportunity by some delegations to take stock of past efforts and explore future areas of work. While the Commission was encouraged to carefully consider the outcome of the Congress in establishing its future work programme, it was also urged to proceed cautiously in light of possible sensitivities with regard to some of the proposed topics.
Delegations noted the progress made in the various working groups. They drew attention to the important work done by Working Group I on micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises, with some delegations stressing the need to reduce legal difficulties faced by such enterprises throughout their life-cycle. The importance of considering the theme of ‘societies’ from a legal and commercial perspective, taking into account the realities of developing countries, was also underlined.
Concerning Working Group II (dispute settlement), the finalization of the UNCITRAL Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings was welcomed. While some delegations expressed support for a convention for the enforcement of international commercial settlement agreements resulting from conciliation, currently under development, the lack of consensus concerning the need for such a convention was also noted.
Regarding the topic online dispute resolutions (Working Group III), delegations welcomed the completion of the Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution, which they considered would likely be useful for all States, and particularly for developing countries and countries with economies in transition.
In the area of electronic commerce under the consideration of Working Group IV, some delegations drew attention to the relevance of the work carried out, especially the draft model law on electronic transferable records currently under consideration.
Some delegations welcomed the work undertaken by Working Group V (insolvency law), in particular in the field of cross-border insolvency law, which they considered to be an area of great importance. In this context, it was considered essential to ensure that the work of UNCITRAL was coordinated with that of the Hague Conference on Private International Law in order to avoid incompatibility between future texts.
Concerning the Commission’s work under Working Group VI (security interests), delegations welcomed the conclusion of the Model Law on Secured Transactions, which they considered would stimulate access to credit under predictable, equitable and efficient conditions, also transnationally, and in particular for micro-, small- and medium-sized enterprises. Furthermore, the importance of this instrument for developing countries was underlined by several delegations. Some delegations encouraged States to make use of this instrument for modernizing their respective domestic laws, and delegations generally encouraged the Working Group to complete and submit the draft Guide to Enactment of this Model Law in a timely fashion.
Concerning future work, several delegations expressed support for addressing the question of reform of the investor-State dispute settlement system. In particular, some delegations underlined what they considered to be transparency problems in the current system. In this regard, the Commission was encouraged to continue reviewing how to best carry forward the Secretariat’s study on whether the Mauritius Convention on Transparency in Treaty-based Investor-State Arbitration could serve as model for further reforms in this field. The view was also expressed that the discussions concerning public-private partnerships were of great importance and support was voiced for considering issues related to cloud computing as well as the elaboration of a code of conduct for arbitrators in investment arbitration.
Several delegations stressed the important role of the Commission in strengthening the rule of law in the field of international trade law. They also emphasized the relevance of the Commission’s work with regard to the implementation of the goals established by the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and in particular goal 16.
Some delegations highlighted the importance of providing technical assistance to States, upon their request, and expressed support for the Commission’s work in this area. The need to further strengthen such assistance was nevertheless recognized. The efforts of the UNCITRAL Regional Centre for Asia and the Pacific in providing technical assistance and awareness of the Commission’s work were welcomed and the Republic of Korea confirmed its intention to continue to support the operation of the Centre for an additional five-year period. The hope was expressed that a similar regional presence would be established in Africa.
Concerning the Commission’s methods of work, the importance of all States contributing to the efforts of the working groups was underlined. Some delegations reiterated their view that challenges to codify international trade law were increasing with new technological developments and diversification of business activities and encouraged the Commission to follow these dynamics as close as possible. While the Commission was commended for its coordination efforts, which avoided unnecessary duplication of work, it was also suggested that objective criteria be developed in respect of cooperation with external organizations.
Some delegations reiterated their support for the existing rotation between New York and Vienna for meetings of the Commission and its working groups, which facilitated participation by developing countries and allowed for a wider participation. It was stressed that the budgetary constraints of the Organization should not negatively impact the Commission’s work.
Action taken by the Sixth Committee
At the 19th meeting, on 20 October, the representative of Austria, on behalf of Algeria, Argentina, Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Croatia, Cyprus, Czechia, Denmark, El Salvador, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Mauritius, the Netherlands, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Serbia, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America, subsequently joined by Australia, Ireland, New Zealand, the Russian Federation, Singapore and Switzerland, introduced a draft resolution entitled “Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its forty-ninth session” (A/C.6/71/L.10).
At the 24th meeting, on 27 October, Belgium, Israel, the Republic of Moldova and Ukraine joined in sponsoring the draft resolution. At the same meeting, the Committee adopted draft resolution A/C.6/71/L.10 without a vote.
Under the terms of the draft resolution, the General Assembly would, inter alia, commend the Commission for the finalization and adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Secured Transactions, the 2016 UNCITRAL Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings and the Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution. It would also take note with interest of the decisions taken by the Commission as regards its future work and the progress made by the Commission in its work in several areas.
At the 19th meeting, on 20 October, the representative of Austria introduced three draft resolutions on behalf of the Bureau, entitled “Model Law on Secured Transactions of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law” (A/C.6/71/L.11), “2016 Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law” (A/C.6/71/L.12), and “Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law” (A/C.6/71/L.13).
At its 24th meeting, on 27 October, the Committee adopted the three draft resolutions (A/C.6/71/L.11, A/C.6/71/L.12 and A/C.6/71/L.13) without a vote.
Under the terms of the draft resolution on the UNCITRAL Model Law on Secured Transactions (A/C.6/71/L.11), the General Assembly would, inter alia, recommend that all States give favourable consideration to the Model Law when revising or adopting legislation relevant to secured transactions.
Under the terms of the draft resolution on the 2016 UNCITRAL Notes on Organizing Arbitral Proceedings (A/C.6/71/L.12), the General Assembly would, inter alia, recommend the use of the 2016 Notes, including by parties to arbitration, arbitral tribunals and arbitral institutions, as well as for academic and training purposes with respect to international commercial dispute settlement.
Under the terms of the draft resolution on the Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution (A/C.6/71/L.13), the General Assembly would, inter alia, recommend that all States and other stakeholders use the Technical Notes in designing and implementing online dispute resolution systems for cross-border commercial transactions.
Subsequent action taken by the General Assembly
This agenda item will be considered at the seventy-second session (2017).
Related links
