Doc 10036-C/1176 C-Min. 201/1-7

Montréal Canada

ICAO

International Civil Aviation Organization

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

Montréal, 24 February — 10 March 2014

SUMMARY MINUTES WITH SUBJECT INDEX

2014

(i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FIRST MEETING ......................................................................................... 1

Opening of the Session .................................................................................................................. 3 Minute of silence and condolences ................................................................................................ 3 Welcome to new Representative on the Council ........................................................................... 3 Schedule for consideration of items during the 201st Session of the Council ............................... 3 Report on the Evaluation of Results Based Management at ICAO –

ICAO Performance Management Project ......................................................................... 4 Revenue-Generating Activities Policy ........................................................................................... 6 Proposal for ICAO Council review of salaries ............................................................................ 11 Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Policy and Administrative Subjects ............. 12 Review of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) — Appointment

of Members of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) ....................... 14 2013 Report on the activities of the Evaluation and Audit Office (EAO) ................................... 21 Any other business ....................................................................................................................... 23

Appointment of Members on the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) .......................... 23 Membership of the Air Transport and Technical Co-operation Committees ................. 23 Appointment of a Member on the Human Resources Committee .................................. 23 Appointment of a Member of the Joint Support Committee and Alternate on

the Air Transport, Finance and Unlawful Interference Committees .................. 23 Appointment of new Members on the Committee on Aviation Environmental

Protection (CAEP) ............................................................................................. 23 Public Key Directory (PKD) Membership ..................................................................... 24 Request from the European Union (EU) to participate as Observer in closed

meetings of the Council on aviation security ..................................................... 24 Request from Airports Council International (ACI) to participate as Observer in

closed meetings of the Council on safety and security ...................................... 24 Council Retreat ............................................................................................................... 24 70th Anniversary of the Chicago Convention ................................................................. 25

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING (CLOSED) .................................................................. 27 Adoption of Amendment 14 to Annex 17 .................................................................................... 29 Aviation security risk overview ................................................................................................... 30

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING (OPEN) ....................................................................... 33 Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Security & Facilitation ................................ 35 Progress report on the implementation of the Universal Security Audit Programme —

Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) transition plan .................................. 39 Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Economic development of air transport ...... 46 Voluntary Air Transport Fund ..................................................................................................... 48

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE THIRD MEETING ...................................................................................... 53 Minute of silence and condolences ............................................................................................... 55 Environmental protection — Recent developments in other United Nations bodies

and international organizations ....................................................................................... 56 Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Environmental protection ............................ 56 Establishment of the Environment Advisory Group (EAG) ........................................................ 62 Secretary General’s Mid-term Report to the Council .................................................................. 67

Page

(ii)

Report of ANC — Review of the Report of the Twenty-fourth Meeting of the Dangerous Goods Panel (DGP/24) (Montréal, 28 October to 8 November 2013) ........................... 68

Report of ANC — Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission — Fifth Edition ... 69

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING (OPEN) ...................................................................... 71 Items for consideration on Order of Business for the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Meetings ............. 73 Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Safety and air navigation capacity

and efficiency .................................................................................................................. 74 Progress report on the implementation of the ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit

Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP-CMA) ................................... 76 Safety Week — Air Navigation Presentations ............................................................................. 79 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 172 to Annex 1 ..................................................... 81 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 38 to Annex 6, Part I ............................................ 82 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 33 to Annex 6, Part II ........................................... 83 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 19 to Annex 6, Part III .......................................... 83 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 58 to Annex 4 ....................................................... 84 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 6 to Annex 14, Volume II ..................................... 84 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 38 to Annex 15 ..................................................... 85 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 89 to Annex 10 ..................................................... 85 Report of ANC—– Adoption of Amendment 11 to Annex 16, Volume I .................................... 86 Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 8 to Annex 16, Volume II ...................................... 87 Assessment of Annex Amendments ............................................................................................ 87 Report of ANC — ANC Work Programme for 196th Session .................................................... 88 Any other business ....................................................................................................................... 90

Dr. Assad Kotaite ............................................................................................................ 90 Universal Security Audit Programme — Continuous Monitoring Approach

(USAP-CMA) .................................................................................................... 90 Air Cargo and Mail Security ........................................................................................... 90

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING (CLOSED) .................................................................. 91 Appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau ............................... 93

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FIFTH MEETING (CLOSED) ..................................................................... 97

Appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau ............................... 99 Progress report of the Monitoring and Assistance Review Board (MARB) .............................. 103

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FIFTH MEETING (OPEN) ....................................................................... 109 Report of the Implementation Support and Development — Security (ISD-SEC) Programme 111 Annual Report to Council on Regional Offices’ activities during 2013 and

work programmes for 2014 ........................................................................................... 112 Report on Technical Co-operation Programme Development ................................................... 115 Assistance to States and related matters .................................................................................... 120 Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Legal subjects .............................................. 122 Any other business ..................................................................................................................... 123

Restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat .......................................................................... 123 Addition of a new item to the Council’s Work Programme for the 201st Session ....... 123 Progress report on the implementation of the Universal Security Audit Programme —

Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) transition plan ................... 123

Page

(iii)

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SIXTH MEETING .................................................................................... 125 International Women’s Day 2014 .............................................................................................. 127 Request of the Aviation Working Group (AWG) for inclusion in the List of international

organizations that may be invited to attend suitable ICAO meetings ........................... 128 Review of the ICAO policy formulation process ....................................................................... 129 Annual Report of the Ethics Officer .......................................................................................... 139 Report of HRC — Review of Reports of the Joint Inspection Unit entitled “Review of

Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” and “Staff Recruitment in United Nations System Organizations” ..................................... 142

Regional groupings for equitable geographical representation purposes at ICAO .................... 143 Report of RHCC — Report on the deliberations of the Committee on Relations

with the Host Country ................................................................................................... 144 Establishment of “Friends of the Council” ................................................................................ 148 Report of WGGE — Consideration of Directives for Panels of ICAO ..................................... 149

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SEVENTH MEETING (OPEN) .................................................................. 151 Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 ................................................................................................ 153 Report of the WGGE — Consideration of Consideration of Directives for Panels of ICAO ..... 156 Restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat ........................................................................................ 158 Conditions for granting continuing appointments at ICAO ....................................................... 167 Work programme of the Council and its Committees for the 202nd Session ............................ 169 Any other business ..................................................................................................................... 171

Appointment of a Member on the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) ....................... 171 Membership on the Air Transport, Finance and Technical Co-operation

Committees (ATC, FIC, TCC) ........................................................................ 172 C-WP/14129 — Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled

“Review of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems in United Nations organizations” ......................................................................... 172

C-WP/14128 — Financial situation of the Organization .............................................. 172 C-WP/14127 — Report on activities during the recess ................................................ 172 C-WP/14130 — Report of the JIU entitled “Staff-Management relations in

the United Nations specialized agencies and common system” ...................... 172 Farewell to Council Representative .............................................................................. 172 Closing of the 201st Session ......................................................................................... 172

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SEVENTH MEETING (CLOSED) .............................................................. 175 Appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau .............................. 177 Any other business ..................................................................................................................... 177

Freedom of overflight over the high seas and air defense identification zones (ADIZs) ............................................................................................................ 177

SUBJECT INDEX TO THE SUMMARY MINUTES

OF THE 201ST SESSION ............................................................................................................... 183 LIST OF WORKING PAPERS CONSIDERED ............................................................................................... 187

- 1 - C-MIN 201/1

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FIRST MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MONDAY, 24 FEBRUARY 2014, AT 1430 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E. A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M. E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Mr. P. Olowski (Alt.) — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. T.M.B. Kabli — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. P. de Moraes Jardim (Alt.) Mr. A. Rebouças (Alt.) Mr. M. Delisle (Alt.) Mr. E.Z. Sepúlveda (Alt.) Mr. Chunyu Ding (Alt.) Mr. M. Millefert (Alt.) Mr. D. Chakravarti (Alt.) Mr. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mrs. H. Jansson Saxe (Alt.) Mr. Hwang, S.-Y. (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. D.V. Subbotin (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Brazil ― Canada ― Chile ― China ― France ― India ― Japan ― Mexico ― Norway ― Republic of Korea ― Republic of Korea ― Russian Federation

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Dr. Fang Liu Mr. I. Galán Mr. B. Djibo Mr. R. Bhalla Mr. J. Augustin Mr. J. Marriott Mr. O. Myard Mr. J. Weich Ms. H. Jackson Dr. T. Hasegawa Mr. M. Romero Ms. M. Weinstein Mr. M. Leitgab Mr. A. Larcos

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― D/ADB ― D/TCB ― D/ATB ― C/FIN ― A/D/LEB ― C/AVSEC ― C/EAO ― DD/HR-ADB ― EAO ― C/RGA ― C/CSG ― LEB ― ADADB ― ACC

C-MIN 201/1 - 2 -

Representatives to ICAO Afghanistan Colombia Cuba Ecuador Greece Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Mozambique Peru Turkey

- 3 - C-MIN 201/1

Opening of the Session 1. The President of the Council welcomed Council Representatives to the opening of the 201st Session. In doing so, he thanked the Government of Canada for hosting Council Representatives on an official visit to Ottawa in the preceding week. In this connection, the Representative of Canada was specifically thanked on behalf of the Council for his role in helping to facilitate the visit. Minute of silence and condolences 2. The Council observed a minute of silence in memory of Mr. Nelson Mandela, the former President of South Africa, who passed away on 5 December 2013. It was noted that, on behalf of the Council and the ICAO Secretariat, the former President of the Council and the Secretary General had sent a letter of condolence to the Government of South Africa. Welcome to new Representative on the Council 3. The President of the Council as w ell as all Council Representatives extended a w arm welcome to Mr. Martins Emeka Nwafor, the newly-appointed Representative of Nigeria. Subject No. 13: Work programmes of the Council and its subsidiary bodies

Schedule for consideration of items during the 201st Session of the Council

4. The Council noted the meeting schedule for the 201st Session presented in the President’s memorandum PRES RK/2253 dated 29 November 2013, on the understanding that:

• the meeting of the Council that had been scheduled for Friday, 14 M arch 2014, would be cancelled in order to enable the Council to undertake a working visit to Mexico City from 14 to 21 March 2014.

5. The Council also noted the schedule for the consideration of items during the 201st Session of the Council as set out in the President’s memorandum PRES OBA/2263 dated 3 February 2014, subject to the following changes:

• the Human Resources Committee (HRC) would present an oral report on i ts consideration of the JIU Reports entitled “Review of Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” and “Staff recruitment in United Nations system organizations: A comparative analysis and benchmarking framework: overview”, and;

• during the current session of the Council and subsequent to the informal briefing of the Council that was scheduled for Tuesday, 25 February 2014, the Secretary General would present, for Council consideration, a working paper on the proposed restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat.

6. Separately, in response to a question from the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) concerning the proposed restructure of the ICAO Secretariat, the Secretary General confirmed that this item would be added to the work programme for the 201st Session and as a result a

C-MIN 201/1 - 4 -

working paper would shortly be circulated so that formal consideration of this item by the Council could be scheduled in the course of the current Session. Subject No. 13: Work programmes of the Council and its subsidiary bodies Subject No. 18.14: Other finance matters for consideration by the Council

Report on the Evaluation of Results Based Management at ICAO ICAO Performance Management Project

7. At the proposal of the President of the Council, it was agreed that these two items would be considered together by the Council. 8. In introducing both items, the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico), indicated that in relation to the Report on the Evaluation of Results Based Management, the Finance Committee (FIC) at its first meeting on 22 January 2014, had considered this item. During that meeting, the Chief, Evaluation and Internal Audit Office (C/EAO), had presented an outline of initiatives taken by the Organization over the past decade to move towards effective results-based management (RBM) as well as shortcomings and priority areas where further progress could be made. The report of C/EAO had made five recommendations aimed at strengthening RBM at ICAO, relating to performance management, training and strategic planning. 9. The FIC had commended the Secretariat on the quality of the report from C/EAO. However, the FIC had also noted with concern the disconnect between the budget and business planning, the former of which should take into account the evolving needs and risks faced by the Organization. The FIC reiterated that the Business Plan already serves to highlight emerging needs to the Council, although without the costing of new activities. Committee members had supported the recommendations made in the report, noting that two out of five were fully accepted by management, out of which one was being addressed under the ICAO Performance Management Project. Committee members recognised that this was a long-term project and requested that the Secretariat elaborate a more detailed plan and timeline, noting that the deadlines for implementation are currently set for the end of 2015. Finally, the FIC had stressed that all the stakeholders involved, including the governing body and senior management, needed to demonstrate their full commitment to RBM in order to ensure effective implementation in bringing about a cultural change throughout the Organization. 10. With regard to the ICAO Performance Management Project, the Chairperson of the Finance Committee, indicated that this was also dealt with at the same FIC meeting on 22 January 2014. The FIC had noted that the information on this item presented an overview of performance management at ICAO. It highlighted the history of performance management, the activities taken up to date, and what would constitute a Corporate Performance Management (CPM) System. The information presented also outlined the next steps that should be undertaken by the ICAO Secretariat in this regard. The Committee took note of the information presented and conferred importance on this endeavour, while agreeing with the next steps. The FIC had noted that this initiative would represent a management change, which would require commitment on the part of the Council, the Secretary General, Directors and Senior Managers in order for it to succeed. The FIC had also requested that the Secretariat provide a detailed timetable of the Performance Management project for 2014 and 2015, to be posted on the Council website. 11. The Representative of the United Arab Emirates endorsed efforts to adopt a results-based management approach in ICAO and in particular, the recommendations of C/EAO in this regard. In particular, the recommendation aimed at strengthening the strategic planning function at ICAO should be

- 5 - C-MIN 201/1

supported. She noted that this was a typical strategic planning process based on collecting information and implementation efforts could be supplemented by using SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, threats) and PEST (political, economic, social and technological) analyses. Both represented useful strategic planning tools in order to identify strategic priorities and goals, which themselves would transform into major initiatives. Therefore, the UAE strongly supported using such management analysis tools. 12. In relation to the recommendation to introduce system changes to performance planning and management at ICAO, the Representative of the United Arab Emirates observed that this represented an important link to individual performance in achieving programmatic and organizational objectives. In this connection, she was of the view that this would represent an important initiative, since without this level of accountability of employee performance, it would be difficult to achieve Organizational objectives. 13. In relation to the overall quality of the reports presented on these two items, the Representative of Spain commended the Secretariat for the frank and credible nature of the content, which clearly indicated the existing gaps and deficiencies in ICAO. In this connection, he was certainly grateful for the openness of the manner in which ICAO management had approached this discussion. The Representative observed that since the recommendations related to the culture of the Organization, it probably would require some time before the benefits of changes were noted. Therefore, it would be useful to have a more detailed plan that clearly indicated the timelines of this approach. He also endorsed the intervention of the United Arab Emirates as regards to the recommendations pertaining to the strengthening of the strategic planning function through the use of a variety of management analysis tools. 14. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) likewise endorsed the intervention of the United Arab Emirates particularly as regards to the recommendations on the strategic planning function and the introduction of system changes to performance planning and management at ICAO. 15. The Secretary General indicated that in relation to the recommendation related to the strategic planning function, he was prepared to take into account the interventions of Council Representatives when moving forward with the results-based management approach. However, in relation to the separate recommendation relating to linkages between individual performance and the achievement of Organizational objectives, he remained unconvinced. The Secretary General stressed that in ICAO, accountability was not at the individual level but rather at the level of a Section or Branch. Therefore, it was not possible to link Organizational outcomes to an individual’s performance or to hold individual staff members accountable in this context. In relation to the ICAO performance management project, the Secretary General also noted that a detailed timetable had already been posted on the Council website. 16. In concluding the discussion on these two items, the President of the Council observed that the option of performing a triennial SWOT analysis was worth further consideration if it could be linked to a rolling business plan. He noted that the Council would return to consider the issues of results-based management and the performance management project at future sessions so the Council would continue to have an opportunity to consider various related options in this regard.

C-MIN 201/1 - 6 -

Subject 18.14: Other finance matters for consideration by Council

Revenue-Generating Activities Policy 17. This subject was documented for Council consideration in C-WP/14122 presented by the Secretary General, and a related oral report thereon by the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (FIC), which contained a revised Appendix to replace the proposed policy on revenue-generating activities contained in C-WP/14122. 18. In introducing the item, the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico) indicated that at its meeting on 22 January 2014, the Finance Committee (FIC) had considered the draft Revenue-Generating Activities Policy. In its consideration of this item the FIC had made several recommendations for amendments to the policy. It was suggested to add, inter alia, that the cost-recovery principle would apply for charges to National Delegations and for training activities to Member States; that all personnel in substantial functions in the regular programme should not be paid from the Ancillary Revenue Generation Fund (ARGF); and that financial results should be audited annually and be subject to review for risk management purposes. 19. The FIC had also suggested that the Council be more involved in the governance of revenue-generating activities, including the budget and business plan, but refrain from micro-managing revenue-generating activities. It was highlighted by the Committee that the valuable brand of ICAO required adequate protection that would have to be included in the policy to mitigate the reputational risk to the Organization. It was also recognized that revenue-generating activities were important for the Organization and the potential should be maximized. 20. The FIC had also discussed the scope of revenue-generating activities in particular when involving the private sector and the general public, as well as t he status of the Commissariat and revenue-generating aspects of training activities. The Secretariat confirmed that the ARGF, its revenue target and main activities were already embedded in the Organization’s budget and were subject to the Financial Regulations of the Organization. 21. In conclusion, the Committee agreed that a revised draft policy, as amended by the Secretariat, would be reviewed and endorsed by the Chairperson of the Finance Committee. The text of the revised draft policy was attached to the Chairperson’s oral report for the consideration by the Council. The Chairperson of the FIC thus recommended to the Council to approve the Policy on Revenue-Generating Activities, as amended with proposals made by the Committee. 22. The Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania thanked the Secretariat for the policy, which he believed would provide overall direction and guidance to ICAO on revenue generation for the Organization. In this connection, the governing principles for such activities were important in ensuring the best results. In relation to the Appendix of C-WP/14122, the Representative expressed concern that the oversight function being proposed for the Revenue Generation Governance Committee (RGC) might not be practicable since the activities of the RGC also needed to be monitored. It was important therefore that any oversight function be carried out by the Council. He also indicated that the RGC should be maintained as a Committee as opposed to a Board, which was one suggestion alluded to by the FIC. The Representative also expressed support for proposals to strengthen the protection of the ICAO Brand, which was an issue of intellectual property. It was important that the pursuit of revenue generation should not be undertaken if it meant an adverse impact on the image of ICAO.

- 7 - C-MIN 201/1

23. The President of the Council thanked the Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania for his intervention and took the opportunity to remind the Council that the draft policy that was the subject of Council’s consideration was the revised policy attached to the oral report from the Chairperson of the Finance Committee. 24. The Representative of Spain thanked the Secretariat for the draft policy and in doing so, observed that it would represent an additional and useful policy for the Organization once it was being implemented. In relation to paragraph 4.3 of the policy, which dealt with governance principles, the Representative proposed that the word “endorsement” be added to the end of the first sentence so that it would read: “The budget and business plan for the ARGF for the following year shall be presented to the Council in the Autumn session for its review and endorsement”, which would help to strengthen the role of the Council in this regard. 25. Separately, the Representative also proposed that in paragraph 4.5, the subparagraph “c) Approve the implementation of new business opportunities and projects”, be deleted since in any case the proposed Revenue Generation Governance Board (RGGB) had a role in approving the budget and business plan for the ARGF, which was contained in paragraph 4.5, subparagraph b). Since the business plan should in any case contain all new initiatives, this also meant that subparagraph c) was not necessary. 26. In relation to the proposal to amend paragraph 4.3 so as to include the word “endorsement”, the Secretary General accepted this point although he expressed the view that “review” in any case implied “endorsement” in this context. In relation to the proposal to delete subparagraph c) of paragraph 4.5, he requested further clarification from the Council on the reasoning for such a deletion. 27. The Secretary General also took the opportunity to elaborate on the role of the RGGB in seeking new business opportunities and projects. This would mean that before approving the implementation of any new projects, a business case would have to be made. Although he appreciated that the Council may wish to examine all business opportunities under consideration, this might be quite cumbersome whereby new business opportunities were constantly being brought to the Council. Although it was important that Council was informed of any new business opportunities, it was also important to keep in mind that any delays in their implementation could potentially be quite costly. The Secretary General also reminded the Council that it would be necessary for such activities to produce $15 million for the budget, which would not be an easy task, so it would therefore be essential to proceed with a process that was as practical as possible. 28. The Representative of Germany took the opportunity to reiterate that when the FIC considered recommendations for amendments to the policy, there had not been unanimous agreement among the members on additional options. In relation to paragraph 6.6 of the policy, which stated that “The ARGF shall fund posts that are related to revenue-generating activities which serve to promote the implementation of the Organization’s Strategic Objectives and to carry out related Programme Support”, the Representative sought confirmation that this could not be interpreted as meaning that all other posts that are currently funded by the ARGF would now need to be funded by the regular budget. 29. In response, the Secretary General confirmed that within the current budget a certain number of posts, which are of a substantial nature, are currently funded from the ARGF. It was also important to note that it was not possible to change the budget that had been adopted by the Assembly. Nevertheless, he was of the view that something that should be considered for the next triennium budget was that all posts of a substantial nature should be funded from within the regular budget while the total amount that the ARGF contributed to the budget could be equally augmented. That would mean that the

C-MIN 201/1 - 8 -

assessments of the States would not need to change. In any case, this was an item for consideration for the next budget. 30. The Representative of the Russian Federation expressed support for adding the word “endorsement” to paragraph 4.3 since this would serve to strengthen the role of the Council in regard to the ARGF. In relation to the tasks of the RGGB and specifically paragraph 4.5, s ubparagraph c), he proposed additional text be added so that it would read: “c) Approve recommendations to the Council on the implementation of new business opportunities and projects”, which would help to clarify the role of the Board vis-à-vis new business opportunities. The Representative also proposed that the first sentence of paragraph 3 f) be amended so that it would read: “Revenue-generating activities shall be pursued in a transparent way and may be conducted in cooperation with Member States…” since the use of the words “in cooperation” would facilitate a better explanation of the context of the approach that ought to be followed. 31. The President of the Council agreed that paragraph 4.3 would be amended with the inclusion of the word “endorsement” as proposed by the Representative of Spain and supported by other Representatives so there would be no further need for subsequent interventions to refer to this. In relation to paragraph 4.5, he expressed the view that although the budget came to the Council for approval, the business plan was a chapeau document. In this context, there were practical considerations on whether, how, and with what frequency to present new business opportunities for consideration. He asked the Council to keep these practical considerations in mind. 32. In relation to instances where the endorsement of ICAO was sought for different activities, the Representative of Italy questioned what criteria would be used in order to determine which endorsements were attributed in accordance with the principles outlined in paragraph 3 of the policy. He expressed the view that the text currently appearing in this regard in 3 f) and g) was somewhat vague and therefore, more work might be required on the elaboration of the criteria to apply for the endorsement by ICAO of activities undertaken by public or private companies or non-governmental organizations. 33. On a related theme, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) sought clarification in relation to the intellectual property aspects of the policy and the use of the ICAO Brand by third-party entities. He stressed the need to protect the ICAO Brand and reputation. 34. In relation to paragraph 4.5 of the policy, the Secretary General agreed that subparagraph c) could be deleted especially since the budget and the business plan would in any case be submitted for review and endorsement by the Council in accordance with paragraph 4.3. In response to the interventions concerning paragraphs 3 f) and g) of the policy, the Secretary General indicated that he would welcome input from Representatives that would strengthen the protection of intellectual property and the ICAO Brand. He took the opportunity to indicate that in relation to the latter, there were established procedures within ICAO, which served to provide a m easure of protection. Nevertheless, additional recommendations from Council Representatives that could improve existing processes would be welcomed. 35. The Representative of Australia indicated that she shared similar concerns as other Council Representatives with regards to protecting the ICAO Brand and in particular, the use of the logo. She reminded the Council that it had recently agreed to a new policy on training and endorsement, and although in that connection there had not been much focus on the specific subject of endorsement, it had nonetheless been agreed to in that policy that any endorsements or proposals for endorsements would come to the Council for approval. The Representative was of the view that there was some overlap

- 9 - C-MIN 201/1

between the two policies and that further detail might be required in this area, including consideration of options to strengthen protection of the logo. 36. In summarizing the amendments that had thus far been agreed to by the Council, the President of the Council indicated that the first part of paragraph 3 f), would be amended to now read: “Revenue-generating activities shall be pursued in a transparent way and may be conducted in cooperation with Member States…”, as suggested by the Russian Federation. In paragraph 4.3, the first sentence would be amended so that it now read: “The budget and business plan for the ARGF for the following year shall be presented to the Council in the Autumn session for its review and endorsement”. In paragraph 4.5, subparagraph c) would now be deleted. 37. In relation to the question of whether the review body should be a Board or a Committee, the President of the Council indicated that since this issue was discussed at length in the FIC, he proposed that it be retained as a Board since it would be structured within the Secretariat and would also help to avoid confusion with Committees of the Council. In relation to the ICAO Brand and intellectual property issues, the President of the Council acknowledged that this would require further elaboration but he proposed that this exercise be undertaken separately. His proposed option was for the existing documentation and policies to be circulated for consideration and should a more formal review be required, this would certainly be possible. 38. The Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico) emphasized that there already existed several subparagraphs in paragraph 3 of the draft policy that pertained directly to the ICAO Brand and the need to protect the Organization’s image and reputation. Likewise, paragraph 5 covered training aspects of the policy. He noted however, that the separate existing policies on the use of the ICAO Brand, as well as on training had not been properly reviewed by the Council and in this context it might therefore be opportune to do so. ICAO needed clear policies on the use of the Brand and on training so perhaps the Council could review the existing policy documents to make sure that everything was consistent. In relation to proposed amendments to paragraph 3 f ), the Representative agreed that coordinating revenue-generating activities with all entities listed would certainly be possible. 39. In considering the overall perspective of the Policy on R evenue-Generating Activities, the Representative of Malaysia observed that when dealing with commercial operations, there was always a business risk, which was why the governance oversight and responsibility aspect could potentially represent an additional workload for the Council. He proposed the possibility of Council examining the whole process of all business undertakings, with a view to outsourcing these so as to reduce these requirements on the Council, where the necessary technical expertise on such matters was not always present and where perhaps it was not the most efficient use of Council’s time. In contrast, outsourcing such activities to those experts who had the more appropriate technical skills was one option to consider. In this context, he also expressed a concern that ICAO was moving more and more into business enterprise ventures. 40. The President of the Council agreed that it was important to find the right balance in these activities but noted that paragraph 3 b) of the policy seemed to have found the right terminology in emphasizing that revenue generation was not to be considered as an objective on its own. 41. Likewise, the Secretary General shared the concerns of the Representative of Malaysia that neither the Council nor the Secretariat had any great expertise in commercial activities. On the other hand he observed that it was the Council that had requested that additional funding be obtained from other activities to supplement the regular budget. In the current budgetary scenario, this required obtaining an

C-MIN 201/1 - 10 -

additional $15 million from such activities. However, in order to obtain a surplus of $15 million, it was necessary to generate much more in order to cover the costs of staff involved in such activities. According to the current scenario, achieving a $15 million surplus would require generating $45 million for the triennium. He accepted that this might lead to speculation as to whether this was efficient or not, but the reality was that a greater amount would need to be generated in order to produce a gain of $15 million. 42. By way of elaborating on the revenue-generating activities being undertaken, the Secretary General noted that the required $15 million surplus could not be generated by renting out the conference facilities alone and required pursuing other options. Until now, the main source of revenue had been the sale of publications, but this had been in decline for some years for several reasons, including reduced demand for paper documentation. He also noted that it also remained difficult to defend ICAO copyright, which represented an additional issue in this regard. In the circumstances, it was necessary to find new business opportunities. Outsourcing some of the revenue-generating activities might be an option but a business case would need to be made for each possibility in order to determine whether it was indeed worthwhile. In any case, it was apparent that it would not be possible to outsource all of the activities that ICAO currently undertakes. He recalled that an earlier consideration of the ICAO printing activities in this context had demonstrated this same dilemma. Nevertheless, it remained up to Council if it wished to outsource more of these activities or continue with a separate policy on revenue-generating activities. He recognised that there were disadvantages with the policy, which put constraints on the Secretariat but that ultimately this was a matter for the Council to decide. 43. The Representative of the Russian Federation sought additional confirmation that paragraph 3 f) was intended to apply to all the entities listed, including Member States, international organizations, national and international non-governmental organizations, the private sector and the general public. He also took the opportunity to express concern at greater use of outsourcing options, and in this regard, stressed that the Council should refrain from taking any risky measures, particularly given the need to protect the ICAO logo. The Representative acknowledged that revenue from saleable ICAO publications had been falling but it was important to find a balanced approach in undertaking any new activities especially in ensuring that these did not exceed the mandate of the Organization. 44. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) expressed support for the Council to be given the opportunity to review existing practices with regard to the use of the ICAO Brand. It would be important for the Council to approve any related policies especially as it was only the Council that was in a position to protect the logo, the Brand, and intellectual property. In this context, it might be necessary to strengthen the policy and eliminate any apparent deficiencies. 45. In relation to the Secretary General’s earlier intervention, the Representative of Malaysia agreed that in this context there was an ongoing concern about the revenue-generating activities as well as the need to protect the ICAO Brand and the Organization’s image, He suggested that one approach to deal with these concerns and in finding the right balance might be to outsource some of the activities to protect the basis of a fixed revenue while at the same time ensure that ICAO was not involved in activities that might pose a risk to the Organization. He acknowledged that this was not a new proposal, but something adopted in other United Nations agencies, which had also recommended to outsource some of their activities. The outsourcing approach for some activities could certainly be undertaken in addition to the existing policy on revenue generation. Therefore, this was something that could be explored further. In response, the Secretary General confirmed that some revenue-generating activities were indeed currently outsourced.

- 11 - C-MIN 201/1

46. In concluding consideration of this item, the Council agreed to amend paragraph 3 f) of the Appendix so that the first sentence would now read: “Revenue-generating activities shall be pursued in a transparent way and may be conducted in cooperation with Member States, international organizations, national and international non-governmental organizations, the private sector and general public”. 47. The Council further agreed to amend paragraph 4.3 of the Appendix so that the first sentence would now read: “The budget and business plan for the ARGF for the following year shall be presented to the Council in the Autumn session for its review and endorsement”. 48. In addition, in paragraph 4.5 of the Appendix, the Council agreed to delete: “c) Approve the implementation of new business opportunities and projects”. 49. It was also understood that the existing procedures related to the use of the ICAO brand by other entities would be circulated for consideration and that a formal Council discussion of this issue would be arranged at a subsequent Council session if it was considered to be warranted. 50. In taking the action indicated in the executive summary of C-WP/14122 and as recommended in the oral report by the Chairperson of the FIC, the Council, subject to the amendments indicated in the preceding paragraphs above, approved the Policy on Revenue-Generating Activities as contained in the attachment to the oral report by the Chairperson of the Finance Committee. Subject No. 18.14: Other finance matters for consideration by Council

Proposal for ICAO Council review of salaries 51. The Council considered C-WP/14132 presented by the United States, and a related oral report thereon by the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (FIC). 52. In introducing the item, the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico), outlined how the working paper that had been presented by the United States, provided background information on the rising salary levels in the United Nations system. The FIC had reviewed the item, which led it to agree with the proposals contained in the working paper and recommend that the Council follow the proposed course of action that had been indicated. 53. The Representative of the United States expressed his appreciation to the Finance Committee for the thorough manner in which this item had been reviewed and for their support for the proposed course of action to be followed. 54. In taking the action indicated in the executive summary of C-WP/14132, the Council requested the Secretary General to convey to the United Nations General Assembly and to the International Civil Service Commission (ICSC) the views of the ICAO Council that rising staff costs are having a considerable impact on the financial sustainability of the Organization and requesting the ICSC to study the impact of their recommendations on the budgets of common system organizations, particularly within the context of their ongoing comprehensive compensation review, before recommending further system-wide increases.

C-MIN 201/1 - 12 -

Subject No. 24.3: Action on Assembly resolutions and decisions

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Policy and Administrative Subjects 55. The Council considered this subject on the basis of: C-WP/14094, in which the Secretary General proposed actions required to implement the resolutions adopted and decisions taken by the 38th Session of the Assembly relating to policy and administrative subjects considered by the Executive Committee and the Administrative Commission; an oral report by the Finance Committee (FIC) on those Assembly resolutions relating to financial and administrative matters; an oral report by the Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC) on the technical cooperation-related issues emanating from the Executive Committee; an oral report from the Human Resources Committee (HRC) on human resources items considered by the Executive Committee; and an oral report from the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) on issues arising from Assembly Resolution A38-11. 56. In presenting his report, the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico), indicated that the Finance Committee (FIC) had reviewed those items contained in the working paper that directly related to financial issues. In this connection, the FIC had accepted and approved the proposed actions in respect to Assembly Resolutions A38-22 to A38-30. 57. In presenting her report, the Chairperson of the Human Resources Committee (Representative of the United Arab Emirates), outlined how at its first meeting on 30 J anuary 2014, the Human Resources Committee (HRC) had considered the working paper and in particular the proposed actions with regard to human resources matters, which were presented in Appendix A-5 and A-6 of the paper. The Committee recommended to the Council that it request the Secretariat to: a) establish a link between the Organization’s performance management system, and the business plan and budget, as well as the ICAO Knowledge Shared Network (IKSN), with the staff performance management system; and, b) develop concrete timelines for implementation of each activity on human resources matters on a quarterly basis, as opposed to a yearly target. 58. In presenting his report, the Chairperson of the Technical Co-operation Committee (Representative of Malaysia), indicated that during its meeting, the Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC) had considered the technical co-operation related issues of C-WP/14094, which presented on page 5 of its Appendix an update on t he actions taken or to be taken by the Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB) to implement the decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly. 59. The TCC had noted that a marketing plan has been developed within the framework of the TCB Management Plan for 2014-2016. The objective of the marketing plan was to promote an effective outreach programme to raise the awareness of States, the private sector and donors to the advantages of having recourse to ICAO for the implementation of projects in the civil aviation field. In this regard, the TCC understood that a Civil Aviation Symposium would take place in September 2014, with the participation of States, air navigation service providers, air transport operators, equipment suppliers, financing institutions and other stakeholders. 60. In acknowledging the importance attached by the Council to the ICAO Technical Assistance Programme, the TCC had enquired as to the existence of a Secretariat resource mobilization strategic plan to generate the required financial resources for technical assistance projects. It had been clarified that although such a plan was not available, a Project Review Committee was responsible for selecting technical assistance projects to be funded by the Safety Fund (SAFE), in accordance with the

- 13 - C-MIN 201/1

priorities and funding criteria approved by the Council, and that an internal quality assurance mechanism had been put in place under the auspices of the Air Navigation Bureau and Air Transport Bureau. It was recalled, in this regard, that the TCB executes only a small fraction of the Organization's programmes of technical assistance, which are under the Regular Programme's purview at Headquarters and Regional Offices. The Committee requested that target dates for implementation of proposed actions in the Action Plan be always determined with the greatest precision. It was acknowledged, however, that as f ar as technical cooperation issues are concerned, certain actions are of a recurrent nature, representing ongoing activities of the Bureau. In conclusion, the Committee had recommended that the Council approve the proposed technical cooperation-related actions outlined on page 5 of the Appendix to C-WP/14094. 61. In presenting his report, the Chairperson of the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (Representative of China), outlined how at its meeting on 30 J anuary 2014, t he Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE), had reviewed C-WP/14094. The WGGE had noted, in relation to the proposed action on A 38-11: “Formulation and implementation of SARPs, PANS and notification of differences”, that the attention of the Secretariat should be drawn to the need to continually ensure consistency in practices and that proposals are in line with the consultation process for the development of new SARPs. 62. In considering proposals to enhance the development and implementation of SARPs and the global plans (GANP and GASP), the WGGE had noted the need for the Council to periodically focus its attention on reports from PIRGs, RASGs, and the Regional Offices, TCB and the AFI plan, among others. The WGGE recommended that the Council consider allocating time for discussion of these reports, with the Regional Directors present, as part of the activities during the Aviation Safety Week held during the first session of the Council each year. The WGGE did not recommend any changes to the working paper. 63. In responding to some of the issues raised in the various preceding oral reports, the Secretary General indicated that he agreed with the recommendations of the WGGE concerning the SARPs as well as the need to allocate time at future Council sessions for consideration of reports from the PIRGs, RASGs, the Regional Offices, TCB, and on the AFI plan. 64. In relation to the two recommendations contained in the HRC oral report, the Secretary General stated that he could not agree to these since they would be impractical to implement. In doing so, he noted that he had recently presented a list of all the reports that are submitted to the Council, together with a list of recommendations in terms of allowing the Council to concentrate on more substantial or strategic issues. Specifically in relation to the recommendation to develop concrete timelines for the implementation of each activity on human resources matters on a quarterly basis, as opposed to a yearly target, he perceived that this would, in practical terms, represent a considerable additional burden. 65. In relation to the oral report from the WGGE and specific recommendations related to SARPs as referred to in Resolution A38-11, it was noted by the Council that the Secretariat should continually ensure consistency in practices and that proposals were in line with the consultation process for the development of new SARPs. The Council also agreed with the recommendation of the WGGE that time would be allocated at future sessions for consideration of reports, inter alia, from the PIRGs, RASGs, the Regional Offices, TCB, and on the AFI plan. 66. Finally, in taking the action recommended in the oral reports presented by the respective Chairpersons, the Council approved the proposed actions outlined in the Appendix to C-WP/14094 in

C-MIN 201/1 - 14 -

order to effectively respond to the implementation of the resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly relating to policy and administrative subjects. Subject No. 13: Work programmes of Council and its subsidiary bodies

Review of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) Appointment of Members of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC)

67. At the proposal of the President of the Council, it was agreed that these two items would be considered together by the Council. 68. The Council had for consideration: C-WP/14131, in which the Secretary General presented a r eview of the results achieved by the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) in 2013, and C-WP/14095 concerning the process for soliciting qualified applicants to fill vacancies on the EAAC. In addition, the Council reviewed oral reports from both the Chairpersons of the Finance Committee (FIC) and the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE), in relation to these items and which assessed the value added of the work carried out by the EAAC. 69. In presenting his report, the Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico), indicated that the Finance Committee (FIC), had considered the two related working papers on the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee together (C-WP/14131 and C-WP/14095). The FIC was unanimous in agreeing that the EAAC had carried out useful work over the last three years and that it should be maintained. In addition, several members supported the proposal that Mr Jonathan Moor be requested to continue as the Chair. A proposal by one member that in future recommendations made by the EAAC and periodic updates on actions taken should be presented to the Council in tabular form was also endorsed. 70. The FIC was in agreement that the membership of the EAAC should be reduced to make it more practical and to reduce costs. Two alternatives were suggested: either a membership of three with a quorum of three, or a membership of five with a quorum of three. Since a membership of five would provide more flexibility and ensure a wider geographical representation, the consensus was that the latter option should be recommended. 71. Regarding the issue of how to finance the travel costs of EAAC members, the FIC was divided. A number of members favoured the proposal that ICAO should finance these costs from the regular programme budget in order to facilitate geographical representation and to ensure the right expertise. This option was reinforced by the argument for reducing the membership in that costs could also be minimized by, for example, reducing the number of physical meetings and increasing the number of virtual meetings held each year. However, other Committee members expressed caution in agreeing to pay for travel costs from the regular programme budget on the basis that this might set a precedent for payments of travel costs of members of other committees and technical groups, and because of the lack of funds identified for this purpose in the current budget. On the other hand, Committee members agreed that a more stable source of funding for travel costs of EAAC members should be identified for the future. A hybrid solution was suggested by one committee member, whereby there could be two categories of nominations: those where the nominating state agreed to provide financial support; and those requiring financial assistance from ICAO.

- 15 - C-MIN 201/1

72. Taking into account the views and opinions expressed by the Committee members, the Chairman of the FIC pointed out that all members had recognized the importance of the work undertaken by the EAAC and therefore, the Committee had decided to recommend to the Council in favour of the continuity of the EAAC as well as the continuation of Mr Jonathan Moor as its Chair. Bearing in mind that the Committee had already gained enough experience and its work may be considered more regular, it was suggested that face-to-face meetings be reduced and the number of virtual meetings be increased. Likewise, the Committee agreed to recommend to the Council, considering the experience gained in the last three years, that the membership be reduced to five with a quorum of three members. Additionally, the Committee agreed that periodic updates on actions taken by the EAAC be presented to the Council in a tabular format. 73. Finally, the Chair of the FIC took note of the difficulty of finding stable funding within the regular programme budget for travel expenses by EAAC members and therefore, the Committee had recommended maintaining the status quo on this issue and examining it again in three years in light of the EAAC results. On the same occasion, the hybrid proposal that had been considered by the FIC might also be reviewed. Regarding the appointment of EAAC members, the FIC agreed with proposals 3.1 a) and b) as outlined in C-WP/14095 but rejected option c) on the grounds that EAAC members should be appointed from the government sector.

74. In presenting his report, the Chairperson of the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (Representative of China), indicated that the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) had reviewed working paper C-WP/14131. The WGGE noted that the working paper had already been discussed in the Finance Committee and accordingly there was no need to reopen the debate on several issues. With regard to the terms of reference of the EAAC, the WGGE noted the information provided by the Secretariat that the FIC had recommended that the membership of the EAAC be reduced from seven to five. The WGGE recommended that the terms of reference of the EAAC did not need to be amended at this time since they already allowed for a reduction in membership to five. 75. In elaborating further on the information presented by the respective Chairpersons, the Chief, Evaluation and Internal Audit Office (C/EAO) outlined difficulties that potentially could arise in relation to the proposals from the Finance Committee. For instance, he observed that although there was support for Mr Jonathan Moor to continue as Chair of the EAAC, the question of how to finance his travel remained open. It was possible that the United Kingdom might opt to provide the funding but this clearly remained unresolved. C/EAO also questioned the reasoning for reducing the number of members and the number of meetings if ICAO was not in any case intending to finance the costs involved. If ICAO were providing the funding then it might have been in a stronger position to reduce the size of the EAAC in order to reduce the costs. Finally, C/EAO also noted that it might prove problematic to expect Member States to nominate candidates for the EAAC when general questions concerning the geographic distribution of the membership and the basis for selection also remained unresolved. 76. For the benefit of Representatives, the President of the Council summarized the recommendations of the Finance Committee as b eing: a) that the EAAC should continue; b) that Mr. Jonathan Moor should continue as Chair; c) that the membership of the EAAC be reduced to five with a quorum of three; d) that the status quo on the issue of funding be maintained for the time being on the understanding that the process could be reviewed again in three years in light of the EAAC results; e) that the number of face-to-face meetings be reduced while the number of remote or virtual meetings be increased; and f) that periodic updates on actions taken by the EAAC be presented to the Council in a tabular form.

C-MIN 201/1 - 16 -

77. The Representative of Australia indicated that she supported the essence of the oral reports from the Chairpersons of the FIC and the WGGE, with the exception of the issue concerning the financing. She had the opportunity of attending the FIC meeting and had followed the discussions very carefully. In doing so, it was her observation that this issue could be compared to the ongoing challenges that airlines have in justifying the resources required to support safety committees. In her experience it was the case whenever airlines wished to reduce budget costs, that safety committees were often easy targets since it was difficult to justify the resources required by quantifying accidents that did not happen. In the same vein, an advisory committee such as the EAAC, served an important function and was considered to represent best practice in organizations in both the public and private sectors. A good advisory committee such as the EAAC had the potential to reduce both financial and reputational risks within an organization in the same way that a safety committee had the potential to reduce the number and severity of aviation accidents. In that context, the Representative of Australia observed that during the Committee discussions on the issue of the future funding of the EAAC, there had been no clear majority on maintaining the status quo whereby the out-of-pocket expenses of EAAC members were not covered. 78. The Representative of Australia acknowledged that there existed good cost-based arguments for reducing the size of the EAAC and the number of face-to-face meetings, which if adopted, would help to strengthen the case for ICAO agreeing to cover travel and accommodation costs. By doing this, the Representative anticipated that the Council would have a greater likelihood of attracting quality candidates to the EAAC, while at the same time achieving broader geographic representation as well as the ongoing commitment and consistency in the important work of providing independent advice to the Council. This in turn would enable the Council to better fulfil its stewardship role on behalf of the ICAO Member States. The option of paying travel and accommodation expenses was also consistent with practices followed by other entities within the United Nations system, which have similar Committees. 79. In relation to a hybrid solution that had been proposed by the Representative of Japan during the Committee’s consideration of this issue, the Representative of Australia acknowledged that while this was well-intended, it was possibly flawed since it might not achieve with any great certainty the purported benefits especially if there were less certainty with constantly changing membership arrangements and the inherent bias toward those Member States that had an ability to pay. 80. In welcoming the oral reports from the Chairpersons of the FIC and the WGGE, the Representative of India indicated his support for reducing the size of the EAAC to five members and also for the continuation of Mr Jonathan Moor as Chairman. He also expressed his support for the proposal to hold more EAAC meetings using videoconferencing options as a way of reducing travel costs. Given the ongoing tight budget scenario, the Representative of India was more generally supportive of the notion that countries that could afford to fund the travel costs of their EAAC member, should continue to do so, while for countries that were unable to do so, consideration could be given to extending some support especially in selective circumstances where the EAAC would benefit from the input of a potential member. One related option might be for the WGGE to be requested to consider which countries and what potential EAAC member qualifications could be captured by this selective approach. 81. In relation to the continuing service of Mr Jonathan Moor as Chairman of the EAAC, the Representative of the United Kingdom took the opportunity to inform the Council that Mr Moor had recently moved onto a different post. Nevertheless, the Representative undertook to discuss directly with Mr Moor in the near future the option of the latter continuing with the EAAC. As far as the composition of the Committee was concerned, the Representative would have preferred an even smaller Committee but he acknowledged that there had been insufficient support for that option.

- 17 - C-MIN 201/1

82. In the course of its consideration of the EAAC, the Representative recalled that the FIC had discussed the travel cost issue at length and that there had not been any clear consensus on this particular point. He considered that the EAAC should be treated as a special case since it was composed of technical experts whose speciality was often directly related to the various ICAO Strategic Objectives. In this connection, it was often easier for a Member State to provide experts for such Committee work especially where it was perceived that there was a direct benefit accruing to the Member State, and not just to ICAO in doing so. In the same vein, a Member State would be less likely to provide technical experts to assist the work of a Committee where there was no clear linkage with the benefit to that particular Member State or where there was a cost factor to take into account, even though there might be a reputational reward involved. 83. The Representative proposed that another possible option for the Council to consider would be for ICAO to refund expenses for a limited time, such as for one cycle of the Committee, i.e. three years, with the aim of determining whether this would represent a positive development in the functioning of the EAAC. Since this would enable the Council to review the question again at the end of the three-year cycle, it would not be setting a precedent for future years. 84. The President of the Council encouraged the Council to, as far as possible, consider accepting the recommendations contained in the FIC oral report since this was in part the raison d’être of having Committees. In principle, he would rather see Representatives refrain from restating positions that had already been outlined during the Committee’s consideration of an issue. Given time constraints he did not believe that the Council was making the most efficient use of its time if Representatives merely repeated positions that had already been aired during the Committee phase. 85. In referring to the conclusions drawn by the FIC, the Representative of Spain welcomed the recognition for the invaluable work carried out by the EAAC and support for the continuation of the Committee’s existence. He was of the view that there should be fewer members on the EAAC as well as fewer meetings, and therefore willing to accept the recommendations of the FIC as pertaining to a membership of five. In regard to the funding issue, the Representative cautioned against setting any new precedents especially if there was now to be only one face-to-face meeting in Montreal per year, which of itself should not represent too onerous a financial burden for the nominating Member State. In conclusion, the Representative was pleased to endorse the recommendations of the FIC. 86. The Representative of Norway acknowledged the importance of the EAAC and the need for its continued existence. In principle, he expressed support for the recommendation to reduce the size of the membership to five with a quorum of three although this might depend on the financial support available to the Committee. This was especially pertinent if Committee members were expected to cover their own expenses. The Representative was aware that large corporations and organizations covered the costs of independent auditors so on this basis, it would not be inappropriate for ICAO to do likewise. He was cognizant of the budgetary constraints facing ICAO, but in order to attract and motivate suitable candidates from all Member States, he favoured the option of covering the travel costs from the regular programme budget or a specially earmarked fund for this purpose if that were at all possible. 87. In relation to the travel costs involved with the work of the EAAC, the Representative of Burkina Faso sought further information on the approximate costs involved if five Committee members were to be covered for these expenses. If other organizations follow this model and if ICAO was in a position to cover the costs involved, he would support the provision of funds for such a purpose since it would also provide a measure of independence for the EAAC. He observed that if the whole financial burden was imposed on the nominating Member State, then the outcome of the work of the EAAC might

C-MIN 201/1 - 18 -

be different so it therefore might prove worthwhile for ICAO to consider covering the travel expenses involved if only for an initial three-year period with the option to be reviewed at the end of the period. 88. In responding to some of the points raised thus far in the discussion, the Secretary General indicated that at the outset what was important would be the need to arrive at a unanimous decision on continuing the existence of the EAAC. Once this was agreed, then it would not in his view make a significant difference as to whether the Committee comprised of seven or five members. If the Council wanted ICAO to cover the travel costs involved and in light of the carryover in the budget from 2013, it would be possible to do s o for one or two meetings for both 2014 and 2015. T hereafter, the situation would need to be reviewed in order to determine whether it would be possible to continue in this manner. 89. The Representative of Cameroon welcomed the oral reports from the FIC and the WGGE and he also thanked the Secretariat for the additional information thus far provided. He expressed support for the continuation of the EAAC given the valuable role it played and also for the continuation of Mr Moor as the Chairman of the Committee. In relation to the composition of the EAAC, the Representative favoured a w ider geographic representation, while in relation to the costs involved, he would support a proposal for ICAO to cover the travel expenses of Committee members. 90. In relation to the option of changing the existing arrangement on the reimbursement of travel costs of the EAAC members, the Representative of Germany cautioned that to do s o might undermine the independence of the Committee, which was one of the reasons for originally establishing the current practice of relying on the nominating Member State to cover expenses associated with the membership. In this connection, it had not been adequately demonstrated that the lack of travel funds had thus far prevented the EAAC from meeting and there could possibly have been other reasons that had given rise to this situation such as organizational factors. 91. The Representative expressed concern that ICAO did not currently have explicit budgetary provision for the purpose of covering EAAC travel costs and it would be setting a dangerous precedent for the Council to be adjusting a budget that had only just been adopted by the Assembly. Given the context of recent discussions on the budget, which had focussed on deliverables and the need to cut back on programmes and staffing levels while achieving efficiencies, he found it incongruous for the Council to be considering the possibility of paying for the Committee’s travel costs. He did not wish to micromanage the Secretariat on such matters but rather relied on the staff to make the correct decision in this regard. Therefore, if the Secretariat was of the view that the EAAC travel costs could be covered within the budget, he would accept that on the proviso that this did not result in an overrun of the total budget. If this course of action were pursued however, he undertook to take careful note of each and every incremental adjustment to the budget and propose that the overall excess impact on the budget at the end of 2015 be deducted from the assessments of Member States for the next triennium, which would in turn serve to demonstrate that ICAO had more than sufficient funds to undertake its programmes within a zero nominal growth framework. 92. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) joined other Representatives in supporting the recommendation for the retention of the EAAC. In principle, as regards the issue of funding the Committee’s activities, he would support the option of ICAO possibly covering the travelling expenses for one or two meetings per year. In the meantime, the Committee could consider alternative viable options for the financing of expenses and the situation could thus be evaluated once again in two years’ time.

- 19 - C-MIN 201/1

93. The Representative of Portugal expressed support for proposals to reduce the size of the EAAC membership to five. In this connection, she noted that according to a 2010 report from the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU), experience had shown that a limited number of members was advisable and that a group should reflect the mix of skills and competencies. A membership of five would also enable the possibility of adequate geographical representation with appropriate skills. 94. In relation to the issue of independence, which had also been mentioned by the Representative of Germany, the JIU had in its report (JIU/REP/2010/5 refers), indicated that the independence of the audit oversight committees and its members should be ensured by its charter and by having all members externally appointed by and reporting directly to the legislative governing body at each organization. In her view therefore, the independence of the EAAC would not be compromised if ICAO were to cover the travel expenses of members. Nevertheless, the Representative concurred with the Representative of Germany in that the Council had an obligation to be conscious of any impact on the budget. Since the option raised by the Secretary General for ICAO to cover travel expenses would apply only for 2014 and 2015, it would allow the Council to review the situation again in 2015. It was almost certainly the case that the financial support of ICAO in relation to covering the travel expenses for all members would enable more members from more diverse regions to participate in the EAAC activities. 95. In relation to financing of travel expenses by EAAC members, the Representative of Japan stated that he had previously proposed a hybrid solution that could serve as a compromise between the two opposing opinions on this matter. The hybrid solution would also potentially help to overcome the concern that there would be fewer nominations if the travel expenses were not covered. Essentially, this option required that any undertaking for ICAO to absorb the travel expenses should be taken into account as part of the consideration of the budget for the next triennium commencing in 2017. In the meantime, for the current triennium, the travel expenses could be covered using the savings achieved in the Secretariat. For the next triennium however, if it was agreed to cover the travel expenses of EAAC members, then the Council would have to commit to compensating for these amounts through budgetary reductions in other areas of the Secretariat. Although the Representative indicated that he was not in a position to decide that such costs should be a priority issue in the context of the next triennium budgetary discussions, he nevertheless sought an assurance that should ICAO cover the travel expenses of EAAC members, that this item would be discussed again in the context of the next triennium budget discussions in which increasing costs as part of the Secretariat budget remained an important consideration. 96. The Representative of Canada expressed his support for the option of covering the travel expenses of EAAC members for this triennium on a trial basis only. 97. The Chairperson of the Finance Committee (Representative of Mexico) indicated that he had closely followed the discussions on this item and he was somewhat surprised that a number of aspects had been reopened for debate in the Council even though it had also been the case that the FIC had itself been divided on the issue of how to finance the travel expenses of EAAC members. He cautioned that if the Council wished to cover the travel expenses of EAAC members then it would need to be mindful of the possible precedent that was being set. In any case there was a danger in assigning recourses to an activity, which although important, did not of itself reflect the main activity of the Organization. 98. It is true that the EAAC had carried out some valuable work, so he urged the Council to consider compromise options that had been raised by other Representatives. He was however concerned at options to cover the expenses of only some members since this would necessitate an appeal to developed countries to be even more generous than usual when designating experts and to finance the costs themselves, while using the resources of the Organization to cover the cost of others. Of course, the

C-MIN 201/1 - 20 -

Council should also avoid any options that potentially could limit the range of candidates such as if they were primarily from developed countries. 99. The Representative of the United Kingdom stated that he in no way wished to question the value of the report from the FIC by having reopened for discussion a number of aspects of the item that had already been accepted. Indeed, it had been entirely correct for the FIC to present a single proposal for consideration by the Council. In this way, he wished to assure the Chair of the FIC that his previous intervention should in no way be construed as a criticism of the content of the FIC report. 100. In relation to the hybrid option proposed by the Representative of Japan, he could see a variant of this solution that might overcome the objections raised other Representatives. In this case, the Council might find itself in a situation where there were more applicants for the EAAC than there were available places. If applicants were being asked at the outset to indicate whether they would be able to finance themselves or whether they would require to be funded, then this could potentially lead to a situation where in choosing between candidates, those that were not self-funding would not be chosen. Therefore, it would be difficult to avoid the suspicion, even if that were wrong, that candidates that were not self-funding were not being chosen. This would clearly put developing countries at a disadvantage, and was potentially invidious in terms of the functioning of the EAAC. Therefore, an alternative proposal might be that funding be made available for all members but there should be a strong encouragement to those States providing members to cover those travel costs if they were able to do so, although they should not be obligated to reveal this at the outset. This option would be in keeping with the spirit in which ICAO operated in other areas whereby some States provide voluntary contributions for areas of activity that they think are particularly valuable. 101. In relation to the general theme of developed and developing countries, the President of the Council urged the Council to avoid this distinction because in his view all Member States of ICAO participate equally in the Organization and occasionally he had observed that some developing countries sent large delegations to ICAO events, which suggested that this was not a particularly good indicator for arriving at conclusions on issues such as this. 102. While acknowledging the budget constraints facing ICAO, the Representative of the Russian Federation favoured finding a compromise solution that could also be reflected in the State Letter that was to be issued to all Member States inviting nominations for the EAAC. He also agreed with the proposal referred to in previous interventions by other Representatives that regardless of its decision, the Council could always subsequently review whatever option it chose in the context of considering the budget for the next triennium. This should be done as early as possible since the replies to the State Letter would provide a good indicator of whether States were in a position to cover travel expenses or not. Therefore, in the course of the next triennium and since this carried budgetary implications, this item could be considered first by the FIC and later by the Council, which should then be in a better position to decide on whether the travel expenses should be covered by the Organization. 103. In conclusion, in relation to C-WP.14131, and in light of the oral reports from the FIC and the WGGE, the Council agreed:

a) to the continuation of the EAAC, as well as to the continuation of Mr. Jonathan Moor as its Chairperson, the latter being premised on the understanding that he would be nominated once again for this role;

- 21 - C-MIN 201/1

b) that the membership of the EAAC be reduced from seven to five, with a quorum to be set at three;

c) that the number of physical meetings of the EAAC be reduced and the number of virtual meetings be increased, and that the periodic updates on actions taken by the EAAC be presented to the Council in tabular form in future; and

d) that, for the time being, the status quo be maintained with regard to the reimbursement of travel expenses incurred by EAAC Members, so that the nominating State would continue to finance all travel expenses associated with attendance at EAAC meetings, with the understanding that subject to the response to the call for nominations (considered in the following item), this issue could be reviewed again at a later date and other options for the reimbursement of expenses would be considered.

104. In taking the action recommended by the Finance Committee in relation to C-WP/14095, the Council decided to:

a) authorize the President to send a letter to States of current EAAC members asking them to consider re-nominating their candidate for a further term in order to ensure some continuity in membership; and

b) request the Secretary General to issue a S tate Letter similar to the one issued on 18 March 2011 (O4/8-11/1) and encourage Member States to forward a copy to their relevant audit institutions.

Subject No. 13: Work programmes of Council and its subsidiary bodies

2013 Report on the activities of the Evaluation and Audit Office (EAO) 105. This item was presented by the Chief, Evaluation and Internal Audit Office (C/EAO), who in his introductory remarks observed that the past year had seen significant changes at EAO resulting from the enhancement of resources in response to recommendations from the EAAC. As a r esult, the number of Professional-level posts in EAO had doubled with an additional Internal Auditor as well as an additional Evaluation Officer. The administrative processes of functions in EAO, including the focal point activities, had also been streamlined along with the introduction of new planning and monitoring tools, all of which had led to a positive impact on the output of EAO. 106. C/EAO recalled that in his previous report a year ago it had been noted that the EAO had only completed two audit reports, two investigations and no evaluation report, which was clearly an unsatisfactory outcome. In contrast, the outlook was much more positive for 2013, with the completion of five audit reports and one evaluation report. As soon as t he action plans were finalized, these reports would be issued. In addition, three other reports were produced to summarize the research carried out and lessons learned from the evaluations that had already commenced but which were subsequently either postponed or aborted. In addition, it was indicated that one investigation had been undertaken at the request of the Secretary General. 107. In accordance with the established policy, once all completed internal audit reports had been finalized, they would be made available to Council Representatives to consult on a read-only basis

C-MIN 201/1 - 22 -

following receipt of a written request addressed to C/EAO. This would enable the Council to gain a more complete understanding of the audit findings and recommendations as well as the actions that the Secretariat had agreed to in order to address the issues and opportunities that had been identified. 108. In relation to audit recommendations, which help to identify audit control weaknesses and inefficiencies, C/EAO recalled that these were intended to generate improvements to existing processes as well as to achieve savings in the Organization. He also reminded the Council that evaluation reports are posted on the Council website. As for the numerous JIU reports that had required attention during the past year, EAO had coordinated input for 21 reviews, which were currently at various stages of completion. The EAO also continued to be the focal point for the External Auditor, and in this connection, provided logistical support to the External Auditor’s team, coordinating the preparation of Secretariat action plans to implement the External Auditor recommendations, and following up on the status of outstanding recommendations. 109. In response to a question from the Representative of Mexico concerning the audit of staff related sick leave absences and the high commutation cost of accrued annual leave upon staff termination, the Secretary General indicated that he was currently holding consultations with the ICAO Staff Association over these matters. He explained that every year ICAO staff are obliged to take at least 15 working days of their 30 days of entitlement of annual leave, which meant that after a number of years of service the number of annual leave days could accumulate significantly. There was a maximum ceiling of 90 days accumulation and when staff left ICAO at the end of their service they could opt to be paid for up to 60 days of leave, which essentially represents about three months of salary. 110. In his discussions with the Staff Association, the Secretary General was proposing that one way to deal with the cost factor was to require staff to take more annual leave every year in order to reduce the cumulative leave amount and to reduce the number of days payable by the Organization to the staff member upon termination of service. In relation to the sick leave issue that was identified as a result of the audit, the Secretary General was proposing to raise this as well in his discussions with the Staff Association with the aim of reducing the overall cost to the Organization. T he Secretary General intended to conduct this process while respecting staff rights and existing practices within the United Nations system. 111. In response to a request from the Representative of India concerning the audit of travel management and administration and the ongoing need for ICAO to achieve savings in relation to travel, the President of the Council undertook that the Secretary General would provide further information on this subject in due course. 112. In conclusion, the Council noted information paper C-WP/14096, in which the Secretary General transmitted the report on a ctivities undertaken by the Evaluation and Audit Office (EAO) in 2013, together with comments of the Chief, Evaluation and Audit Office (C/EAO) on internal audit and evaluation reports completed during the year. It was undertaken that comments made by the Council during the consideration of this item would be taken into account by the Secretary General and C/EAO.

- 23 - C-MIN 201/1

Any other business Subject No. 6.3: Election of Chairmen and Members of subsidiary bodies of the Council

Appointment of Members on the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) 113. In the absence of comments by 24 January 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 13 January 2014, Mr. Antonio Marcio Ferreira Crespo, nominated by Brazil, has been appointed as a new Member of the ANC, replacing Mr. Manoel Araújo da Costa Júnior with effect from 24 February 2014. 114. Also, in the absence of comments by 31 January 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 27 January 2014, Mr. Claude Hurley, nominated by Canada, has been appointed as a new Member of the ANC, replacing Mr. James Inglis Dow with effect from 1 February 2014.

Membership of the Air Transport and Technical Co-operation Committees 115. As per the e-mail message from the President of Council dated 21 J anuary 2014, Mr. Hilary K. Kioko, Representative of Kenya on the Council, has joined as a Member of the Air Transport Committee (ATC) and the Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC), and Mr. Mohamednur Adan will continue to serve as his Alternate.

Appointment of a Member on the Human Resources Committee 116. In the absence of comments by 24 January 2014 to the e-mail message from the President of the Council dated 21 January 2014, Council agreed to waive the requirement of Paragraph 2 of Appendix E to the Rules of Procedure for the Council with respect to election by secret ballot, and appointed Mr. Engelbert Zoa Etundi, Representative of Cameroon on the Council, as Member of the Human Resources Committee.

Appointment of a Member of the Joint Support Committee and Alternate on the Air Transport, Finance and Unlawful Interference Committees

117. In the absence of comments by 31 January 2014 to the e-mail message from the President of the Council dated 23 January 2014, Council agreed to waive the requirement of Paragraph 2 of Appendix E to the Rules of Procedure for the Council with respect to election by secret ballot, and appointed Mr. Maxime Millefert, Alternate Representative of France on the Council, as Member of the Joint Support Committee and Alternate to Mr. Olivier Caron, Representative of France on the Council, on the Air Transport, Finance and Unlawful Interference Committees. Subject No. 50 Questions relating to the environment

Appointment of new Members on the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) 118. In the absence of comments by 17 January 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 20 December 2013, Mr. Daisuke Umezawa has been appointed as the new CAEP Member from Japan to replace Mr. Yasuo Ishii with effect from 18 January 2014.

C-MIN 201/1 - 24 -

119. Also, in the absence of comments by 17 January 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 15 January 2014, Mrs. Catherine Marthe has been appointed as the new CAEP Member from Switzerland to replace Mr. Urs Ziegler with effect from 18 January 2014 until April 2014, at which time Mr. Ziegler will resume his role as CAEP Member for Switzerland. Subject No. 15.4 Facilitation

Public Key Directory (PKD) Membership 120. In the absence of comments by 31 January 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 25 January 2014, Dr. Eckart Brauer, Senior Officer, Federal Ministry of the Interior (Germany) and Mr. Ahmed Nasser Al Raisi, General Director of Central Operations, Ministry of Interior (United Arab Emirates) have been re-appointed as Members of the PKD Board for three-year terms. 121. In addition, Ms. Elizabeth Brown, Director of Business Assurance Section, Passport Office (Australia) has been appointed as a Member of the PKD Board to replace Mr. Adeel Khan until November 2016. Subject No. 10 ICAO relations with the United Nations, the specialized agencies and

other international organizations

Request from the European Union (EU) to participate as Observer in closed meetings of the Council on aviation security

122. In the absence of comments by 6 February 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 8 January 2014, Mr. Christopher Ross, Head of Office, Office of the European Union (EU) in Montréal, has been invited, in accordance with Rules 32 a) and 38 of the Rules of Procedure for the Council (Doc 7559), to participate as Observer on behalf of the EU during the current (201st) Council’s consideration, in closed session, of all items related to aviation security.

Request from Airports Council International (ACI) to participate as Observer in closed meetings of the Council on safety and security

123. In the absence of comments by 6 February 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 14 January 2014, Mr. Michael Rossell, Representative of Airports Council International (ACI) in Montréal, has been invited, in accordance with Rules 32 a) and 38 of the Rules of Procedure for the Council (Doc 7559), to participate as Observer on behalf of ACI during the current (201st) Council’s consideration, in closed session, of all items related to safety and security. Subject No. 13: Work Programmes of Council and its subsidiary bodies

Council Retreat 124. A two-day off-site Council Retreat is scheduled to take place from 13 to 14 June 2014 at the Fairmont Le Château Montebello in Quebec, the main objective of which will be to review the Council’s leadership role in enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of ICAO. A planning group consisting of the Representatives of Australia, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Burkina Faso, Canada, Portugal, United Arab Emirates and the Chairperson of the Working Group on G overnance and Efficiency (China) has been established to oversee the programme for this event.

- 25 - C-MIN 201/1

Subject No. 27: Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention)

70th Anniversary of the Chicago Convention 125. Preliminary discussions have taken place with the United States with a view to exploring the possibility of holding a special session of the Council in Chicago in conjunction with the 70th Anniversary of the signing of the Chicago Convention. In the same vein, discussions are also currently under way with Canada with a view to hosting related celebratory activities in Montréal. More detailed information on these and other related matters, including the establishment of an ICAO Museum, will be shared with the Council in due course as further details are confirmed. 126. In relation to the penultimate item of Any other business, concerning the foreshadowed Council Retreat, the President of the Council indicated that during informal consultations with various Council Representatives, this proposal had received a p ositive response. The main objective of the Council Retreat would be to review the Council’s leadership role in enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of ICAO. The participants would include all Council Representatives, Resident Representatives to ICAO, the President of the ANC, members of the ANC Planning Team, the Secretary General and senior management, including Regional Directors. The President also proposed to invite the heads of the International Air Transport Association (IATA), Airports Council International (ACI), and specific industry representatives such as Bombardier. With their participation at the Retreat, the President was considering the possibility of convening an informal briefing on the state of the aviation industry. Additional information on the Council Retreat, including accommodations details and the logistics, would be provided to Council Representatives in the near future. 127. In relation to the 70th Anniversary of the Chicago Convention, the President indicated that planning had already commenced with regard to proposed celebratory activities and initial contacts had been established with representatives of the United States with a view to hosting a special session of the Council in Chicago. In addition, the President was scheduled to shortly hold discussions with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada, the Deputy Minister of International Relations of Quebec, and the Mayor of Montréal, to propose a related event to be held in Montréal, to which it was envisaged that senior officials from ICAO Member States as well as locally-based international aviation organizations, would be invited. 128. In the context of the 70th Anniversary of the Chicago Convention, the President was also proposing the establishment of an ICAO museum at which relevant historical documentation would be available for a special display highlighting the 70th Anniversary and the role of the Convention in air transport growth and progress. In this respect, the President was intending to request that Member States and other organizations consider donating to ICAO items that could be displayed in the museum. 129. Separately, the President indicated that ICAO would be considering joining IATA, CANSO, ACI and other relevant external stakeholders in supporting a publication to celebrate 100 years of commercial aviation that would also feature important ICAO related developments supporting effective commercial civil aviation operations. Plans were also under way for a two or three-part editorial feature to be sent to external aviation publications and the media outlets later in 2014 that would highlight the history of aviation in the context of ICAO milestones. This would also be published in the ICAO Journal in one of the editions due in 2014. In the context of the 70th Anniversary celebrations, the President also invited the Council to put forward any other proposals that would be appropriate for celebrating this historic anniversary. 130. The meeting adjourned at 1730 hours.

- 27 - C-MIN 201/2 (Closed)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, WEDNESDAY, 26 FEBRUARY 2014, AT 1000 HOURS)

CLOSED MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. E. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E. A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M.E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Mr. P. Olowski (Alt.) — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. A. Rebouças (Alt.) Mr. P. de Moreas Jardim (Alt.) Mr. M. Delisle (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. Hwang, S.-Y. (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Brazil ― Canada ― Japan ― Mexico ― Republic of Korea ― Republic of Korea

Mr. D. Azema Mr. B. Djibo Mr. J. Marriott Mrs. N. Abdennebi Mr. A. Quiroz Mr. S. Berti Mr. A. Djojonegoro Mr. A. Doazan Mr. A. Larcos Miss S. Black

— DC/OSG ― D/ATB ― C/AVSEC ― C/EAP ― C/ASA ― C/SFP ― SFP ― SFP ― ACC ― Précis-writer

C-MIN 201/2 (Closed) - 28 -

Representatives to ICAO Afghanistan Colombia Cuba Ecuador Greece Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Morocco Mozambique Peru Turkey

Airports Council International (ACI) European Union (EU)

- 29 - C-MIN 201/2 (Closed)

Subject No. 52: Unlawful interference with international civil aviation and its facilities

Adoption of Amendment 14 to Annex 17 1. The Council had for consideration: C-WP/14092 Restricted, in which the Secretary General presented the results of the consultation with States on proposals to amend Annex 17 — Security and set forth proposed Amendment 14, which incorporated changes made by the Secretariat in light of comments received to State letter AS 8/2.1-13/58 Confidential dated 2 July 2013; and an oral report thereon by the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC), which had reviewed the paper at its First Meeting of the current session on 29 January 2014. 2. The UIC supported the Amendment 14 proposals, which strengthened Annex 17 a nd addressed matters such as unpredictability, landside security, and cyber threats. The Committee had emphasized the merits of including an impact analysis and implementation plan when proposing new amendments so that decisions made by both the Council and States would be more fully informed. The UIC had been advised that the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) would consider this matter during its Twenty-fifth Meeting, to be held in Montréal from 17 to 21 March 2014. 3. A Committee Member had suggested that proposed new Recommended Practice 4.9.2 was overly prescriptive. However, another Member had underscored the flexibility inherent in the proposal and the practical effect should States choose to apply it, and had pointed out that the matter of flexibility could be given further consideration should there be a proposal in the future to convert this Recommended Practice to a Standard. 4. With regard to concerns about the quality of translation of Amendment 14, i t had been noted that all language versions would be carefully reviewed and corrected, as necessary, by the Language and Publications Branch (LPB) prior to dissemination. Furthermore, the Secretariat had suggested an amendment to the revised Foreword to Annex 17 contained in Appendix E to the paper, whereby the word “controls” would be replaced with the word “measures” so that the text would read as follows: “This amendment includes a definition of unpredictability in relation to the implementation of security measures.”.

5. The UIC recommended the adoption of Amendment 14, w ith an applicability date of 14 November 2014, s ubject to this amendment. It was noted that the proposed editorial changes to Amendment 14 received from the Representative of France in response to the President’s memorandum PRES OBA/2269 dated 12 February 2014 would be taken into account by the Secretariat in finalizing the text of Amendment 14 to Annex 17. 6. In the absence of comments, the Council, by 33 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (three Representatives being absent), adopted, as Amendment 14 t o Annex 17, with an applicability date of 14 November 2014, the Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) as contained in Appendix C to C-WP/14092 Restricted. In addition, the Council approved the draft Resolution of Adoption set forth in Appendix D to the paper, subject to the insertion of the date of adoption of 26 February 2014 in Operative Clause 1 thereof. As part of the amendment, the Council also approved the revised Foreword to Annex 17 as contained in Appendix E, subject to the replacement of the word “controls” with the word “measures”. It was noted that during its upcoming Twenty-fifth Meeting (Montréal, 17-21 March 2014) the AVSECP would consider the need for inclusion of an impact analysis and implementation plan when proposing new amendments to Annex 17.

C-MIN 201/2 (Closed) - 30 -

Aviation security risk overview 7. The Secretary General presented the following oral report giving an overview of the current security risks faced by international civil aviation: “I am pleased to provide the Council with this overview of the current security risks faced by international civil aviation. During 2013, the Secretariat recorded seven acts of unlawful interference. These included three facility attacks, one sabotage, one seizure of a helicopter and two other acts, including an armed assault on an air cargo terminal. “Of particular note was a facility attack during which a lone gunman opened fire at a passenger screening checkpoint at Los Angeles International Airport, killing one person and injuring six. In another incident, several explosive devices made with dry ice were assembled inside a terminal by two airport employees; despite the detonation of one device, no injuries resulted. “For further information on the incidents and other occurrences recorded in 2013, I invite Council Members to log into the Acts of Unlawful Interference (AUI) database on the ICAO secure portal. The Secretariat remains at your disposal should you need assistance in gaining access to the site. “As you know, ICAO recently developed a living document known as the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS). The RCS was recently updated by the Aviation Security Panel and contains the latest threat information; the document has been posted on the ICAO-NET under ‘Publications’ and ‘Others’. “In its latest assessment, the RCS highlights recent developments in terrorist activities and identifies a number of threats that could pose a significant risk to the security of aviation operations. “The introduction of improvised explosive devices (IED) in the aviation environment remains the terrorist’s weapon of choice and presents a h igh risk to civil aviation. It is believed that innovation in the concealment of IEDs, and the materials used to make them, could ultimately circumvent current aviation security measures and technology, both on passenger and cargo aircraft. We can be confident, however, that the latest amendments to Annex 17 and ICAO’s efforts to ensure compliance with aviation security provisions are important steps towards closing gaps in the aviation security policy framework and its implementation. The Symposium on Innovation in Aviation Security, to be held in October 2014, will certainly assist States and industry alike in defining the screening technology of the future, including equipment to better detect the concealment of all types of explosives. “While there has been no Man-Portable Air Defence Systems (MANPADS) attack against civil aviation since 2007, the threat posed by MANPADS has increased in certain regions of the world as a result of conflict, political changes and advanced weapons capabilities. Proliferation and availability of MANPADS has expanded as w ell as the regions in which they may be used. A significant recent development is that MANPADS are no longer solely a threat in conflict zones but should be considered an emerging threat in neighbouring regions. “As evidenced by the shooting incident at Los Angeles International Airport, as well as a foiled plot to drive a vehicle-based IED into a terminal at Wichita Mid-Continent Airport, the public areas of airports remain attractive targets. These incidents follow the 2011 bombing at Moscow Domodedovo Airport and the 2012 a ttack on a tourist bus outside the airport in Burgas, Bulgaria. The Secretariat reiterates the importance of landside security measures as required by Annex 17.

- 31 - C-MIN 201/2 (Closed)

“The Wichita incident constitutes a brutal reminder that the insider threat is a real concern, and that compliance with applicable Annex 17 provisions is paramount. According to information at hand, the alleged perpetrator was a radicalized technician working at the airport who attempted to open a security gate with his airport ID in order to drive a vehicle packed with explosives onto the airport tarmac. “Similarly, cyber security is a matter of great current interest, and a number of States and international organizations have taken initiatives to reduce the associated risk. Although the impact that cyber attacks would have on the aviation system are not yet well understood, the RCS indicates that catastrophic consequences could result. It also observes that terrorists are exhibiting heightened interest in exploiting this perceived vulnerability, as they did previously with air cargo. We take this emerging threat seriously, and I have requested the Secretariat to develop a cyber risk strategy in collaboration with key stakeholders. Meanwhile, Amendment 14 to Annex 17 is set to strengthen cyber security measures. “I wish to remind the Council that the information provided in this report is a partial indicator of the threat environment facing civil aviation. A detailed picture of the global threat, including a risk assessment table, can be found in the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS). “Finally, the Council should recall that ICAO is not in a position to collect, receive or assess classified security intelligence or information protected by administrative or judicial processes. Through their offices, however, the members and observers of the AVSEC Panel are aware of this broad information and its relevance to the development of security measures, and take this into account when making recommendations to the Council.”. 8. In providing supplementary information, the Secretary General noted that the said Symposium on Innovation in Aviation Security would be convened at ICAO Headquarters in Montréal from 21 to 23 October 2014. He emphasized that it would offer States and industry an opportunity to further address existing and emerging aviation security challenges, including those posed by IEDs, MANPADS, insider threats and cyber attacks, and to determine and define requirements for future screening technology. 9. The Secretary General reminded Representatives that the information provided to them in oral reports on aviation security risks, and the data contained in the Acts of Unlawful Interference (AUI) database and the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS) relied on the availability of information. He underscored the important obligation of States to provide ICAO with pertinent information concerning any act of unlawful interference. Summaries of the information collected were entered in the database for the benefit of the Secretariat and Member States wishing to develop their own short- or long-term analyses. The secure website facilitated research by maintaining yearly results dating from 1981, with trends updated automatically and displayed in the form of graphs and a detailed table.

10. The Secretary General reiterated that the record of acts of unlawful interference and other occurrences was an important, but partial, indicator of the threat environment facing civil aviation. ICAO was not in a position to collect, receive or assess classified security intelligence or information protected by administrative or judicial processes. However, the Members of the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP), through their offices, had an awareness of that broader set of information which was relevant to the development of security measures and took the information into account in their recommendations to the Council and the Secretariat.

C-MIN 201/2 (Closed) - 32 -

11. There being no comments, the Council noted the Secretary General’s oral report, as well as the supplementary information which he had provided. Representatives were invited to consult the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS) on the ICAO-Net for a detailed picture of the global threat environment, and the Acts of Unlawful Interference (AUI) database on the ICAO secure portal for further information on acts of unlawful interference and other occurrences which had been recorded in 2013. 12. The Council reconvened in open session at 1020 hours to consider the remaining items on its order of business.

- 33 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SECOND MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, WEDNESDAY, 26 FEBRUARY 2014, AT 1020 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. E. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E.A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M.E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Mr. P. Olowski (Alt.) — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. A. Rebouças (Alt.) Mr. P. de Moreas Jardim (Alt.) Mr. M. Delisle (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. Hwang, S.-Y. (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Brazil ― Canada ― Japan ― Mexico ― Republic of Korea ― Republic of Korea

Mr. D. Azema Mr. B. Djibo Mr. J. Marriott Mrs. N. Abdennebi Mr. A. Quiroz Mr. S. Berti Mr. B. Verhaegen Mr. A. Djojonegoro Mr. A. Doazan Mr. A. Larcos Miss S. Black

— DC/OSG ― D/ATB ― C/AVSEC ― C/EAP ― C/ASA ― C/SFP ― SELO ― SFP ― SFP ― ACC ― Précis-writer

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 34 -

Representatives to ICAO Afghanistan Colombia Cuba Ecuador Greece Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Morocco Mozambique Peru Turkey

Airports Council International (ACI) European Union (EU)

- 35 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

Subject No. 24.3: Action on Assembly resolutions and decisions Subject No. 52: Unlawful interference with international civil aviation and its facilities

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Security & Facilitation 1. The Council considered this subject on the basis of: C-WP/14091, in which the Secretary General proposed actions to implement Assembly Resolutions A38-15 and A38-16 and relevant Assembly decisions relating to security and facilitation; and oral reports thereon by the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC) and the Air Transport Committee (ATC). 2. The UIC had considered C-WP/14091 during its First Meeting of the current session on 29 January 2014. While expressing support for the actions proposed in the paper, the Committee had noted that the lead and supporting entities indicated therein could be clarified. For example, it had been suggested that references to ICAO “assisting” the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) might instead be replaced with phrases such as “Council to direct” the AVSECP. The UIC had been advised that, while the paper had originally been developed from a Secretariat perspective, the roles of various entities would be more clearly described in reporting on the progress pertaining to the implementation of actions.

3. With reference to the action proposed in Appendix A for Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix C (Implementation of technical security measures), Section A, paragraph 1, the UIC had agreed that the text should be amended to read: “Assist the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) in ensuring that the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS) is kept up-to-date.” It had also been suggested that that activity should be reflected as an ongoing activity throughout the triennium.

4. The Secretariat had taken note of all other comments, including the need to provide greater precision on implementation dates, and indicate the relevant Council session when action items were expected to be completed, for inclusion in the future in working papers on A ssembly resolutions and decisions.

5. The UIC recommended that the Council endorse the proposed actions contained in C-WP/14091, taking into account the Committee’s views.

6. The ATC had reviewed the said paper at its First Meeting of the current session on 23 January 2014. In considering the proposed actions contained in the Appendix to C-WP/14091, support had been expressed for the following proposals to improve the format and presentation: a) clarify Resolution cross-references by including the Resolution number, chapter, and title; b) link proposed action to the Organization’s Business Plan and Budget; c) provide specific target dates and timelines with references to the Committee/Council session and ensure the target date allowed time for implementation; and d) provide progress reports on ongoing work. The ATC had noted that the format complied with the standard format used for all working papers pertaining to Assembly Resolutions and decisions and that its suggestions would be taken into consideration when next undertaking such an exercise. The ATC had agreed that the proposed actions outlined in the Appendix effectively responds to the Resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly. 7. The Council noted that: both Committees agreed to the actions proposed in Appendices A (Security) and B (Facilitation) to C-WP/14091; and that their proposals to improve the format and presentation of those actions had been noted by the Secretariat for future papers on the implementation of the said resolutions and decisions in the field of security and facilitation.

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 36 -

8. Drawing attention to Appendix B, the Representative of Singapore averred that the proposed action “Consider the commonalities of objectives between facilitation and the protection of the interests of air transport users and consider the appropriate restructuring of Annex 9 if necessary” should not be included in the Work Programme for the FAL Programme (2014-2016). In underscoring that ICAO’s work relating to consumer protection was based primarily on the air transport platform, he noted that the Air Transport Regulation Panel (ATRP) would discuss that issue at its forthcoming meeting (Montréal, 26 to 30 May 2014). Indicating that it was therefore premature to include the said proposed action in the FALP’s Work Programme, the Representative of Singapore emphasized that that would prejudge the outcome of the ATRP’s deliberations on the need to restructure Annex 9 — Facilitation. Underscoring that it might also cause unnecessary confusion and complications for the two panels, he suggested that the proposed action be removed from the FALP’s Work Programme as outlined in Appendix B.

9. Recalling that the said proposed action was included in the Report of the Executive Committee (cf. A38-WP/419, paragraph 25.12), which had been approved by the Plenary, the Director of the Air Transport Bureau (D/ATB) suggested that it be retained so that discussion of that issue could commence without any unnecessary delay. In underscoring that the proposed action only called for consideration of the commonalities of objectives between facilitation and consumer protection and the restructuring of Annex 9, he stressed that the FALP’s discussion of those issues would not pre-empt any decisions by the Council. 10. Noting, from Appendix A, that the only action proposed to implement Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix D, “Action of States concerned with an act of unlawful interference” was the provision of an annual oral report to the Council on Aviation Security Risk Overview, including threat and vulnerability information, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) emphasized that States might also need some guidance, such as information on best practices, in deciding on what measures to take in response to an act of unlawful interference. In further observing that the actions proposed to implement Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix C, “Implementation of technical security measures” did not include any reference to assistance to States, such as workshops and training that would help them in meeting technical challenges, he sought clarification. 11. Responding to the first point raised by the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), the Chief of the Aviation Security Branch (C/AVSEC) emphasized that, in addition to the yearly Aviation Security Risk Overview, Council was immediately informed whenever a significant act of unlawful interference occurred that had come to the Secretariat’s attention in order for that information to be disseminated as quickly as possible. Whenever a suspected act of unlawful interference or other form of threat arose that was immediate in nature and of a sufficient degree of severity, it was the practice to transmit to States not only information on the threat, but also guidance material in the form of recommendations on how to respond. The Secretariat would continue with that practice while efforts were made to develop more robust and long-lasting guidance material. Underscoring that the Secretariat was always at the disposal of Representatives to receive information regarding specific challenges which their States were facing in connection with an act of unlawful interference, C/AVSEC stressed that it would do its very best to provide information that could help overcome those challenges. 12. In noting that the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS) provided all of the necessary guidance on the various types of risks and corresponding mitigation measures, the President of the Council emphasized the importance of keeping the RCS up-to-date so that it would address new and emerging risks.

13. With reference to the second point raised by the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), C/AVSEC underscored that, consistent with the increased profile of facilitation under ICAO’s

- 37 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

new Security & Facilitation Strategic Objective, the Secretariat was conducting seminars on facilitation more frequently. He recalled, in this regard, the two recent ICAO Regional Facilitation (FAL) Seminars held in Nairobi, Kenya, from 18 to 21 February 2014 and in Cairo, Egypt, from 24 to 27 February 2014, which had covered regions in Africa and the Middle East. Noting from the intervention by the said Representative that there might very well be a similar interest in holding such a seminar in South America, C/AVSEC indicated that that would be taken into account in planning the future programme of ICAO Regional FAL seminars. Such a seminar would be in addition to the assistance provided by the Secretariat regarding the Machine Readable Travel Documents (MRTDs) aspect of facilitation. Recalling that two regional seminars on MRTDs and Traveller Identification Management were conducted annually, C/AVSEC indicated that in 2014, they would take place in Tashkent, Uzbekistan from 8 to 10 April 2014, and in Madrid, Spain, from 25 to 27 June 2014. 14. The Representative of the Dominican Republic endorsed the actions proposed in the paper, as well as those recommended by the UIC and the ATC in their oral reports. In voicing satisfaction that one of the proposed actions in Appendix B was the development of a model roadmap for implementation of e-Passports [cf. A38-WP/431 (16.21)], he noted that, despite the excellent work being done by ICAO in the field of e-Passports, the Dominican Republic still had some doubts as to how to proceed. The envisaged model roadmap would assist it in implementing e-Passports.

15. In response to a question raised by the Representative of Nicaragua regarding the action proposed in Appendix A to implement Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix A, “General policy” [“Issue a State letter encouraging contributions to the ICAO Comprehensive Aviation Security Strategy (ICASS)], C/AVSEC noted that through the generous contributions of ICAO Member States, whether financial or in-kind, the Organization was in a position to extend aviation security assistance far beyond the constraints of the Regular Budget. In particular, the Secretariat was actively assisting States in meeting their aviation security-related obligations throughout the Americas, Africa, Eastern Europe and the Asia and Pacific region. Such work required both financial and human resources, for which reason the Secretariat strongly encouraged ICAO Member States to continue to be generous. As the Secretariat considered that, in the interests of transparency and good governance, it was best to make an appeal for contributions based on the needs as they are seen at the time and on a plan of future activities, specifics regarding the level of contributions would be provided in the envisaged State letter on the ICASS. 16. The Representative of the United Kingdom suggested that the said State letter not only solicit contributions to the ICASS but also highlight ICAO’s achievements arising from past contributions, in order to give greater encouragement to ICAO Member States to contribute. 17. Referring to the action proposed in Appendix A to implement Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix G, “Principles of international cooperation in aviation security” (“… present for AVSECP/25 consideration a draft Action Plan to promote … recognition of equivalent security measures”), the Representative of India stressed that while the general principles of cooperation and security were accepted in bilateral/multilateral air services agreements, there were several security measures for which it was necessary to have a template for acceptance, particularly for the deployment of in-flight security officers on aircraft. He enquired whether the development of such a template was envisaged.

18. C/AVSEC clarified that, at the present time, the intention was to respect the wishes of the High-level Conference on Aviation Security (HLCAS) (Montréal, 12 to 14 S eptember 2012) and the subsequent 38th Session of the Assembly and explore the extent to which bilateral and multilateral air services agreements could be rendered more effective as secu rity instruments through the possible

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 38 -

introduction of the concept of recognition of equivalent security measures and through focus on security outcomes. He understood the point made by the Representative of India that in many cases precision in requirements was valuable to aviation security. C/AVSEC recalled, however, that it had been repeatedly emphasized, at the highest levels, that it was necessary to: support the sustainability of civil aviation by exploring possibilities to recognize the equivalency of security measures, and thereby introduce greater efficiency without impairing the effectiveness of security measures; and apply the same perspective to the focus on security outcomes, with less precision as to the ways in which those outcomes were achieved. It was hoped that, by reviewing the existing standard text of air services agreements and guidance material contained in ICAO’s Aviation Security Manual (Doc 8973), the Organization might be able to offer a model that provided a new and better platform to support States.

19. The Representative of the Russian Federation noted that the upcoming Diplomatic Conference to adopt the proposed draft text of the Protocol to the Tokyo Convention of 1963, to be held in Montréal from 26 March to 4 April 2014, would address the issue of the deployment of in-flight security officers on aircraft. 20. Referring to the action proposed in Appendix A for Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix C (Implementation of technical security measures), Section A, paragraph 1, the Representative of France emphasized the need for the updating of the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS) to remain within the established framework. In particular, the Working Group on Threat and Risk (WGTR) of the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) should not be requested to provide an analysis of the threats and risks in a given region, which it was not in a position to do. That was not the mandate of the WGTR. Moreover, the Working Group did not have the capability to conduct such an analysis. Recalling clarifications that had been provided during the UIC’s review of C-WP/14091, the Representative of France emphasized that the role of the WGTR was to assist the AVSECP in the updating of the RCS by proposing the introduction therein of new threats and risks for the Panel’s consideration.

21. The above comments and suggestions were noted. 22. The Council agreed to the UIC’s suggestions that the action proposed in Appendix A for Assembly Resolution A38-15, Appendix C (Implementation of technical security measures), Section A, paragraph 1, be amended to read “Assist the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) in ensuring that the ICAO Global Risk Context Statement (RCS) is kept up-to-date; …” and that the associated timeframe/target date for implementation be changed from “3Q/2014” to “throughout the triennium” to reflect that it was an ongoing activity.

23. It was also agreed that, as suggested by the Representative of the Russian Federation, an additional action be included in Appendix A for the implementation of the Assembly’s decision regarding the ICAO Point of Contact (PoC) Network [cf. A38-WP/417 (13.28)] relating to the development of updated guidance material to facilitate States’ use of the PoC Network. The corresponding timeframe/target date was the fourth quarter of 2014 (4Q/2014).

24. Subject to the above-mentioned amendments, the Council approved the actions proposed in Appendices A and B to C-WP/14091, as recommended by the UIC and the ATC, in order to effectively implement the resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly in the field of security and facilitation.

- 39 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

Subject No. 52.1: Universal Security Audit Programme

Progress report on the implementation of the Universal Security Audit Programme — Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) transition plan

25. The Council had for consideration: C-WP/14093 [with Revision No. 1 ( French and Spanish only)], in which the Secretary General presented a progress report on the implementation of the USAP-CMA transition plan, as well as a draft generic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the conduct of USAP-CMA activities to be signed between ICAO and all Member States; and an oral report thereon by the Committee on U nlawful Interference (UIC), which had reviewed the paper at its First Meeting of the current session on 29 January 2014. 26. The UIC had thanked the Secretariat for the paper and had been generally satisfied with its content and the progress made in carrying out the transition. The Committee had been advised that the software being developed for the USAP-CMA would be used exclusively by ICAO auditors, unlike that used by the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA), which was also used by States. The UIC had also been advised that USAP-CMA seminars would be conducted in all regions during the transitional year of 2014, in order to prepare States for the full implementation of the new approach beginning in early 2015.

27. With regard to the MoU, some Committee Members had requested further clarification relating to the wording and impact of certain paragraphs; however, the UIC had recognized the importance of not delaying the transition to the USAP-CMA. Paragraph 5 of the MoU required States to complete and maintain up-to-date Compliance Checklists, although the frequency of such updates was not specified. The Committee had been advised that the completion and submission of Compliance Checklists should be governed by the rules applicable to the filing of differences under Article 38 of the Chicago Convention.

28. The UIC had discussed the implications of paragraph 18 of the MoU relating to the language of USAP-CMA activities. In order to adhere to the UN principle of multilingualism, it had been proposed that the Council consider whether the paragraph should be modified to highlight the equivalence of all ICAO working languages when it comes to the conduct of USAP-CMA activities, or whether no reference should be made to any specific languages. In that regard, the Secretariat had reminded the Committee that the text used in the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU concerning this matter was almost identical to that used in the USOAP-CMA MoU, which had been approved by the Council in March 2011 (192/8). Moreover, the Secretariat had advised the UIC that any move to conduct USAP-CMA activities in languages other than those specified would result in substantial costs, and would delay the launching of the USAP-CMA. Some Committee Members had suggested exploring this issue in terms of cost implications and adherence to basic principles of international organizations. It had also been noted that the final text of the MoU would be the subject of a bilateral agreement between ICAO and a particular State.

29. With regard to paragraph 22 (c) of the draft generic MoU, the UIC had discussed the obligation of States to bear the cost of intra-State transportation during CMA activities. The Committee had been advised that this requirement was included in both the previous USAP MoU and in the current USOAP-CMA MoU, both of which had been approved by the Council (167/8 and 192/8, respectively). It had been clarified that paragraph 22(c) referred only to short-distance transportation within a given State, and that any significant costs in this respect would be discussed with States when necessary.

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 40 -

30. Concerns had been expressed regarding the protection of aviation security-related information, as addressed in paragraphs 32, 34 and 35 of the draft generic MoU, notably the security of information posted on the USAP secure website. In particular, in paragraph 32 of the draft generic MoU, it had been suggested to include in the non-confidential audit activity summary, which included the names of audited States and the names of visited airports together with the level of implementation of the critical elements of an aviation security oversight system by State, an indication of compliance by State with Annex 17 Standards. Views had been expressed that that information could be used by terrorist groups for identification of “weak points” in the global aviation security system. Concerns had also been expressed with regard to the protection level of the USAP secure website from unauthorized access.

31. In this respect, the UIC had been advised by the Secretariat that information posted on the USAP secure website consisted entirely of aggregated data of a general nature, and would not allow for the identification of specific vulnerabilities in any Member State. In addition, discussions were under way with the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) Section on the effectiveness of existing security measures and the identification of options for improved information security.

32. With regard to the procedure for the sharing of unresolved Significant Security Concerns (SSeCs) with all Member States, described in paragraph 34 of the draft generic MoU, the Chairperson of the UIC had recalled that currently ICAO sent the information related to differences with Annex 17 SARPs in sealed envelopes. He had suggested amending the last sentence of paragraph 34 by replacing the words “the USAP secure website” with the words “a co nfidential communication” so as to read as follows: “… unresolved SSeCs being made available to all Member States through a confidential communication until resolved.”. The Secretariat had clarified that only the names of States with unresolved SSeCs were shared through the USAP secure website, without providing any additional information on the nature of the SSeCs. Furthermore, the wording of paragraph 34 in the proposed MoU was directly derived from the SSeC mechanism approved by the Council (189/3), and was identical to the text in the existing USAP MoU that had been in use for the past six years. 33. The UIC recommended that the Council endorse the work conducted to date in developing the USAP-CMA. It also recommended that the Council consider the views expressed by the Committee and approve the amended draft generic MoU for signature by ICAO and all Member States. 34. Recalling that many of the issues raised in the UIC’s oral report had been considered previously by the Council when it had approved (192/8) the generic USOAP CMA MoU, the Representative of Mexico indicated that he did not wish to re-open discussion thereof given that the said MoU was working effectively. In endorsing the action proposed in the executive summary of the paper, he highlighted the importance of protecting the USAP secure website. Referring to the proposal to amend paragraph 34 of the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU, the Representative of Mexico noted that, while he did not have a preference regarding the means used to notify ICAO Member States of unresolved SSeCs, he questioned whether the suggested confidential communication would better safeguard the information than notifying them through the USAP secure website.

35. The Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania expressed appreciation for the progress made thus far in the transition to the USAP-CMA, and voiced support for the UIC’s oral report. Noting, from paragraph 5 of the draft generic MoU, that the Compliance Checklists contained information

- 41 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

on State’s compliance with Annex 17 Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), he voiced concern that non-compliance with the Recommended Practices would be treated as a d eficiency and thus have implications for the audited State.

36. While aware that paragraph 34 of the draft generic MoU relating to the submission of a corrective action plan was derived directly from the SSeC mechanism approved by the Council (189/3), the Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania expressed concern over the phrase “within the timeframe prescribed by ICAO, but not later than 15 calendar days following the receipt … of the written notification from ICAO” in the first sentence. He queried whether the said timeframe varied from State to State. In the negative, the Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania proposed that the timeframe be specified in paragraph 34 to avoid any subjectivity. Drawing attention to the second sentence, which referred to the satisfactory implementation of the corrective action and notification thereof to ICAO “within the prescribed timeframe”, he enquired whether the latter was the same 15 calendar days cited in the first sentence. In seeking clarification, the Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania averred that a timeframe of less than 15 calendar days would be too short a period for the satisfactory correction of some SSeCs.

37. In responding to the question raised regarding paragraph 5 of the draft generic MoU, the Chief of the Aviation Security Branch (C/AVSEC) noted that the provision of information relating to continuous monitoring activities was intended to produce a comprehensive snapshot of the relevant aviation security situation of a State. The Secretariat had found, in its ten years’ of experience with auditing activities, that that was best accomplished when both compliance with Standards and observation of Recommended Practices were verified. The intention of USAP-CMA activities was, however, to focus on compliance with Standards. Nevertheless, the Secretariat considered that, as a matter of good practice in the conduct of continuous monitoring activities, it was beneficial for States that there be opportunity to reflect on the implementation of Recommended Practices and to provide guidance, if necessary, to support States in their efforts to implement the latter. C/AVSEC stressed that while continuous monitoring activities and reports thereon focused on Standards, it was the Secretariat’s understanding that States generally appreciated constructive feedback from ICAO on their implementation of Recommended Practices.

38. Referring to paragraph 34 of the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU, C/AVSEC noted that it was consistent with the text used in the generic USOAP CMA MoU. Moreover, the SSeC mechanism on which it was based had been functioning effectively since its approval by the Council (189/3) and subsequent implementation some three years ago. C/AVSEC clarified that the confirmation of identified SSeCs occurred not at the time of the audit but at a subsequent meeting of the SSeC Committee at ICAO Headquarters.

39. In recalling that in a n umber of cases States had taken the necessary corrective action within the 15 calendar day timeframe envisaged in paragraph 34, C/AVSEC observed that some corrective actions had been straightforward, involving administrative measures, whereas other corrective actions had been more extensive and had involved significant construction activity, acquisition and deployment of equipment, and training of staff. It had thus been demonstrated that much corrective action could be taken within the 15 calendar day timeframe. C/AVSEC further noted that very often there were intermediate measures which could be taken to reduce the level of risk while a longer-term solution was developed and implemented. 40. To the concern expressed that paragraph 34 c ould introduce inconsistency in the application, by ICAO, of the said timeframe, C/AVSEC indicated that the Secretariat wished to have the possibility of having corrective action taken more quickly than in 15 calendar days in the case of an

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 42 -

extremely grave SSeC. He underscored, however, that the 15 calendar day timeframe had been observed since the inception of the SSeC mechanism. There had been no inconsistency in the timeframe’s application and the SSeC mechanism had functioned with great success in the interests of ICAO and international civil aviation.

41. The Representative of South Africa suggested that paragraph 34 be amended to reflect the above clarification by C/AVSEC.

42. In sharing the concerns expressed by the Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania regarding arbitrariness in the establishment of the timeframe for the submission of corrective action plans, the Representative of India stressed that there should likewise be no arbitrariness in the identification of SSeCs, or of Significant Safety Concerns (SSCs). It was necessary to be consistent when applying the respective criteria for determining SSeCs and SSCs. The Representative of India averred that either there should be an element of negotiation with the audited State, where the latter acquiesced that it had a SSeC or SSC, or a very high degree of transparency.

43. Responding to a query by the President of the Council, C/AVSEC confirmed that the said 15 calendar day timeframe was for the provision by the audited State of its corrective action plan to resolve its SSeCs. In noting that the timeframe for the implementation of the corrective plan would depend upon the type of security concerns and action required for their rectification, the President of the Council affirmed that that was a reasonable approach. He nonetheless requested that the points raised by the Representatives of the United Republic of Tanzania and India be taken into consideration by the Secretariat. The Chairperson of the UIC supported such action. 44. Sharing the concern expressed by the Representative of Mexico regarding the proposal to amend paragraph 34, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) averred that it would be more appropriate to continue notifying unresolved SSeCs through the USAP secure website in light of the risks involved in notifying them through a confidential communication. He underscored the need to evaluate the proposal and choose the best and safest method to notify such information.

45. The Chairperson of the UIC clarified that the term “confidential communication” included electronic means of communication. He recalled that concerns had been expressed by Committee Members that the current level of protection of information on the USAP secure website was insufficient. It had been noted that discussions were being held with ICT to improve the situation.

46. In then speaking in his capacity as Representative of the Russian Federation, he drew attention to paragraph 18 of the draft generic MoU on the languages to be used for USAP-CMA activities and noted that Operative Clause 1 of Assembly Resolution A37-25 (ICAO Policy on the language services) “Reaffirms that multilingualism is one of the fundamental principles to achieve goals of ICAO as t he specialized UN agency;”. The Representative of the Russian Federation recalled that, while all Representatives fully understood the practical limitations associated with conducting USAP-CMA activities in all of the Organization’s working languages, a proposal had been made during the UIC’s meeting to amend the first sentence of paragraph 18 by replacing the reference to English, French and Spanish with the phrase “in the working languages of ICAO, if practicable”. He underscored that this proposed wording would encourage the training by ICAO of national auditors in the various regions and thus benefit the entire international civil aviation community.

47. The Representative of the Russian Federation recalled, in this context, that in March 2011, when the Council had reviewed the draft USOAP CMA MoU (C-WP/13673; 192/2 and 192/8), he had also

- 43 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

highlighted Assembly Resolution A37-25 and had suggested that paragraph 17 thereof be amended to indicate that USOAP CMA on-site activities would be conducted “as far as practicable in one of the working languages of ICAO, as requested by the State”.

48. The Representative of the Russian Federation underscored that at issue was not the financial implications of conducting USAP-CMA activities in the Organization’s various working languages but rather the fundamental principles to which ICAO should adhere in carrying out those activities. If it were a question of financial implications, then the easiest solution would be to indicate in paragraph 18 of the draft generic MoU that USAP-CMA activities would be conducted only in English.

49. In concluding, the Representative of the Russian Federation again called upon the Council to adhere to the fundamental principles set forth in Assembly Resolution A37-25 and other relevant Assembly Resolutions, which were supported by the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA), in order to serve the interests of the international civil aviation community. 50. While aware that conducting the USAP-CMA activities in all of ICAO’s working languages would give rise to difficulties, the Representative of China considered that the current text of paragraph 18 contradicted Assembly Resolution A37-25 and had a discriminatory connotation with regard to certain of those working languages. He therefore suggested that the first sentence of that paragraph be amended to read as follows: “USAP-CMA activities will be conducted in the official languages of ICAO (if applicable)”. Sharing this view, the Representative of the Russian Federation endorsed the proposed amendment to paragraph 18.

51. Drawing attention to the UIC’s oral report, the President of the Council noted that paragraph 18 of the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU was almost identical to the corresponding paragraph of the generic USOAP CMA MoU. He queried what consequential effects an amendment to paragraph 18 would have on existing MoUs concluded by the Organization which used the same language. That being said, ICAO’s language policy had been well addressed during the Assembly. While the points raised by the Representatives of the Russian Federation and China were valid in that regard, it would be difficult for the Council to engage in a drafting exercise to amend paragraph 18 in view of the time implications and the fact that the UIC had been unable to reach agreement on modifying that paragraph. 52. C/AVSEC assured Representatives that it was the practice of the Secretariat to be as flexible as possible in the informal languages of conducting USAP activities and to make available an audit team member who was familiar with Russian, Arabic or Chinese. That practice had proved successful in the conduct of many USAP audits. C/AVSEC cautioned, however, that moving from that informal means of facilitating the conclusion of successful audits, which had served the Organization well for many years, to conducting USAP-CMA activities in all six ICAO working languages would necessitate an estimated additional CAD 2 million to CAD 3 million over the triennium in order to fund experts who were proficient in those languages, provide the audit tools in all six languages and cover additional related expenses. That was a substantial amount which had a bearing on the Council’s deliberations.

53. The Representative of South Africa emphasized that the generic MoU would be sent to States not merely to sign but to negotiate the terms thereof with ICAO, as had previously been done by his State. He stressed that the generic MoU should reflect the approved policy and not re-determine it. Maintaining that the language in which USAP-CMA activities were conducted should be the subject of negotiation between the audited State and ICAO, the Representative of South Africa suggested that paragraph 18 be amended so as to not refer to any languages.

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 44 -

54. The Representative of the United Kingdom agreed with the comments made by C/AVSEC and the President of the Council regarding the relationship between the generic USOAP CMA MoU and the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU. Referring to the issues raised by the Representatives of the United Republic of Tanzania and India, he emphasized the need to look beyond the text and to examine the context in which the USAP work was being carried out. With regard to paragraph 5 and the issue of the USAP audits taking into account Annex 17 Recommended Practices, the Representative of the United Kingdom recalled that the Assembly had repeatedly requested that ICAO take an approach to security which was based more on results and less on the fine details of compliance with the minutiae of individual Annex 17 Standards. Observing that the USAP-CMA was very much a part of that approach, he underscored that it constituted an attempt to obtain a broader picture of the results of the effectiveness of a State’s compliance. If affirming that verifying compliance with Annex 17 Recommended Practices was a sen sible way of obtaining the whole picture, the Representative of the United Kingdom noted that any non-compliance with Annex 17 Standards could then be seen in the context of the audited State’s overall efforts. It was a much more results-based approach and one that would make it easier for a State to comply with the 15 calendar day timeframe for the submission of its corrective action plan. 55. Recalling his previous experiences as both an auditor requesting corrective action plans from audited States and as an officer required to develop and implement an audited State’s corrective action plan, the Representative of the United Kingdom stressed that, in his latter capacity, his initial corrective action had taken place within 15 minutes, not 15 days, following the receipt of the written SSeC notification from ICAO. Observing that in a well-conducted audit process, where corrective action was required, all of the stages involved negotiations regarding what measures to take within what timescale, he maintained that it was unnecessary to specify in the draft generic MoU the details of actions which were decided between the USAP auditors and the audited State. It was normal to have such negotiations to build flexibility. Based on his experience as both an auditor and an officer required to take corrective action, the Representative of the United Kingdom did not find the text of paragraph 34 to be a cause for concern. He considered that specifying a 15 calendar day timeframe for the provision of a corrective action plan provided a certain degree of clarity. In stressing that its practical application in an effective audit process should be simple and follow good audit practice generally, the Representative of the United Kingdom expressed the hope that paragraph 34 would not be amended in any way. 56. Averring that there was still room to improve paragraph 34 o f the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU, the Representative of Australia noted that there were different interpretations of the first two sentences. Observing that paragraph 34 was included under Section IV – USAP-CMA Activities – Reporting, she emphasized that it not only described the process for resolving SSeCs and the communications between ICAO and the audited State, but also described the point at which ICAO determines whether or not to notify all ICAO Member States of unresolved SSeCs so that the latter could take their own decisions on how to deal with them. The Representative of Australia suggested that the first sentence of paragraph 34 be amended to clarify that reference was being made to the corrective action plan, as explained by C/AVSEC in paragraph 43 above.

57. Noting that the reference to “the prescribed timeframe” in the second sentence of paragraph 34 could be construed to be the same as “the timeframe prescribed by ICAO” indicated in the first sentence, the President of the Council suggested that the Secretariat consider amending the second sentence by replacing the word “the” with the word “a” so as to read “Failure by State [abbreviated name] to implement satisfactory corrective action and to notify such action to ICAO within a prescribed timeframe …”. The Representative of Libya supported this proposed change.

- 45 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

58. Although the Representative of Norway had no difficulty in understanding paragraph 34 in its present form and was prepared to approve the entire draft generic USAP-CMA MoU as presented in the Appendix to C-WP/14093, he would have no problem accepting the President’s proposal as it was not a substantive change and was intended only to clarify the text.

59. While the Representative of Norway had been prepared, from the outset, to accept paragraph 18 in the form presented, in light of the discussion he now wondered whether that paragraph was necessary given the fact that there already existed an ICAO language policy. Deleting the paragraph in its entirety would be a pragmatic solution whereby the USAP-CMA on-site activities would be conducted in accordance with the said language policy based on the resources available in ICAO. This would avoid the imposition of substantial new costs to the Organization as referred to by C/AVSEC. However, if the Council wished to amend paragraph 18, then the Representative of Norway would suggest that the first sentence be deleted and that the second sentence be amended by deleting the words “remaining three” so as to read as follows: “In the case of on-site activities, if the language of correspondence of the State with ICAO is one of the ICAO working languages, every effort will be made to ensure that at least one team member participating in the activity has command of the ICAO working language of the State concerned.”. The Representatives of Libya and the Russian Federation voiced support for this proposed amendment. 60. Noting that he was a former USAP auditor, the Representative of Cameroon stressed that paragraph 18 of the draft generic MoU should be retained in its present form as audited States needed to know the languages in which the on-site activities would take place. Furthermore, if the languages were not specified in the MoU the necessary funding for USAP auditors proficient in all of ICAO’s working languages might not be allocated. In agreeing with the Representative of Australia on the need to clarify the first sentence of paragraph 34, the Representative of Cameroon indicated that if it was the State’s corrective action plan that was to be provided to ICAO within the 15 calendar day timeframe, then he could accept that paragraph in the form presented. Emphasizing that the same paragraph was successfully used in the USAP MoU and the USOAP CMA MoU, he cautioned against further complicating matters.

61. Referring to paragraph 5 of the draft generic MoU, the Representative of Cameroon underscored that it was difficult to restrict audits to compliance with Standards as that would not necessarily reveal all of the security-related deficiencies. He maintained that compliance with Recommended Practices and even relevant security procedures should also be audited so as to properly identify all deficiencies. In questioning the use of the word “generic” in describing the MoU, the Representative of Cameroon observed that only the name of the audited State remained to be inserted. No other element could be changed once the MoU was approved by the Council. He affirmed that States should not be allowed to negotiate specific conditions in their MoU with ICAO. 62. The Representative of France indicated that, in light of the clarifications provided by the Secretariat during the UIC’s meeting in response to points raised by his delegation regarding paragraph 22(c) of the draft generic MoU (cf. paragraph 29 above), it had agreed that the latter be submitted to the Council in the form presented in C-WP/14093. On that basis, the Representative of France was in a position to now approve the proposed draft generic MoU.

63. In highlighting that some classified information might be provided by States during their USAP-CMA audits, the Representative of France stressed the need to ensure that specific practical measures were taken to adequately protect such information during its transmission. 64. The Representative of the United Kingdom suggested that some of the USAP auditors give a short presentation on the USAP-CMA audit process to interested Council Representatives in order to

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 46 -

resolve the various issues which had been raised. Any significant concerns expressed during that presentation which might necessitate a future change to the generic MoU could be discussed in detail.

65. The Representative of South Africa cautioned that a multiplicity of interpretations of paragraph 34 would lead to difficulties in its practical implementation. He emphasized that the failure to detect a problem with the text of that provision in the past should not impede highlighting that problem when it was detected. Furthermore, the fact that the draft USAP-CMA MoU was generic did not mean to say that it must be exactly the same as the generic USOAP CMA MoU. The Representative of South Africa averred that any change now made to the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU would not affect any of the existing MoUs. 66. While he understood the challenges posed by paragraphs 18 and 34 of the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU, and while he himself considered that some slight amendments could be made to those paragraphs to further clarify them, the President of the Council expressed concern that if the Council started to redraft them at this stage it would delay the transition to the USAP-CMA. He emphasized that, in order to move forward with that transition, the Council should agree to the text of the draft generic MoU as set forth in the Appendix to C-WP/14093. In so doing, the Council would ensure consistency and continuity in its work, given that the draft generic USAP-CMA MoU was based on the generic USAP MoU and USOAP CMA MoU which the Council had previously approved and which had worked well over time. 67. In taking the action then proposed by the President of the Council in light of the views expressed by the UIC, and the comments made and clarifications provided during the discussion, the Council:

a) endorsed the work conducted to date in developing the USAP-CMA, as recommended

by the UIC;

b) approved the said draft generic MoU for the conduct of USAP-CMA activities for signature by ICAO and all Member States as set forth in the Appendix to the paper, it being noted that the Representative of the Russian Federation abstained for the reasons which he had cited ; and

c) requested the Secretariat to provide the UIC with a b riefing on the conduct of

USAP-CMA activities at the Committee’s next meeting during the 202nd Session, on the understanding that interested Council Representatives were welcome to attend that meeting.

Subject No. 15: Subjects relating to air transport Subject No. 24.3: Action on Assembly resolutions and decisions

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Economic development of air transport 68. The Council considered this subject on the basis of: C-WP/14089, in which the Secretary General proposed actions to implement Assembly Resolution A38-14 and relevant Assembly decisions relating to the economic development of air transport; and an oral report thereon by the Air Transport Committee (ATC), which had reviewed the paper at its First Meeting of the current session on 23 January 2014. 69. During consideration of the proposed actions contained in the Appendix to the paper, support had been expressed for the following proposals to improve its format and presentation: a) clarify

- 47 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

Resolution cross-references by including the Resolution number, chapter, and title; b) link proposed action to the Organization’s Business Plan and Budget; c) provide specific target dates and timelines with references to the Committee/Council session and ensure the target date allowed time for implementation; and d) provide progress reports on ongoing work. The ATC had noted that the format complied with the standard format used for all working papers pertaining to Assembly Resolutions and decisions and that its suggestions would be submitted to the appropriate authority for consideration when next undertaking such an exercise.

70. ATC Members had also presented comments and suggestions regarding specific tasks, including the need to update existing ICAO policy guidance such as the Policy and Guidance Material on the Economic Regulation of International Air Transport (Doc 9587), and the need to accelerate the work to be undertaken with respect to statistics and forecasting deliverables, as well as that of aviation data in general.

71. In response to queries regarding the target dates of some tasks, the Committee had noted that following consideration of several of the tasks listed in the action plan at the upcoming meetings of the Aviation Data and Analysis Panel (ADAP) and Air Transport Regulation Panel (ATRP) a more accurate timeline therefor would be available.

72. The ATC had agreed that the proposed actions outlined in the Appendix to C-WP/14089 effectively responded to the Resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly in the field of the economic development of air transport.

73. The Representative of Norway supported the ATC’s proposals to enhance the paper’s format and presentation, in particular proposals a), b) and c). Reiterating the concern that he had expressed during the Committee’s review of C-WP/14089 that too many timeframes/target dates were just before the 39th Session of the Assembly in 2016 and that the Council would consequently be overburdened, he emphasized the need to provide the Council with progress reports on the implementation of the various actions and to afford it sufficient time in which to discuss proposals well in advance of the next Assembly. 74. Drawing attention to the subject “Economic regulation of international air transport”, proposed action 5 (Assistance to States in the liberalization process), paragraph b), the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) underscored that Assembly Resolution A38-14, Appendix A, Section II, Operative Clause 10, specified that the Council, in developing an international agreement to liberalize air carrier ownership and control, was to take into consideration, inter alia, the effects on all stakeholders. This was not, however, reflected in the proposed action.

75. In noting this concern, the Chief of the Economic Analysis and Policy Section (C/EAP) indicated that, for the sake of clarity and conciseness, the said proposed action contained only a summary of the said Operative Clause 10.

76. Averring that the 2016 timeframe/target date for the development of the above-mentioned international agreement was too distant, the Representative of Poland underscored that it was a priority for the European Union (EU) and for ICAO. He recalled, in this regard, that the development of an international agreement to liberalize air carrier ownership and control had been accorded high priority (A) in the Council’s action plan to implement the recommendations of the Sixth Worldwide Air Transport Conference (ATConf/6), which had been endorsed by the 38th Session of the Assembly (P/6; A38-WP/56 Revision No. 1, Appendix C, item 6). In noting that the said paragraph 5 (Assistance to States in the liberalization process) did not include any proposed action to develop tools to provide an exchange forum

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 48 -

for States to promote more compatible regulatory approaches in international air transport, the Representative of Poland emphasized that that was a priority for both the EU and the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), as well as for ICAO. Such action had also been accorded high priority (A) in the Council’s said action plan and had been endorsed by the Assembly (P/6; A38-WP/56 Revision No. 1, Appendix C, item 3). 77. The Director of the Air Transport Bureau (D/ATB) indicated that many actions were still pending due to the complexity of the work involved and the lack of clarity regarding the use of the budgetary resources approved by the Assembly. He underscored that the establishment of the envisaged Voluntary Air Transport Fund (TRAF) and immediate action by States to contribute thereto would facilitate the financing of pending actions and expedite priority work. 78. With reference to the subject “Aviation data/statistics forecasting, planning and economic analyses” (cf. A38-WP/408), it was agreed to amend the timeframe/target date for the implementation of proposed action b) by deleting the phrase “, according to availability of resources”, in light of a proposal made earlier by the Representative of Norway during that ATC’s consideration of C-WP/14089 and repeated by the Representatives of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Norway during the present meeting. Having noted, from the executive summary of the paper, that the proposed actions would be funded by resources available in the Regular Budget and/or through voluntary contributions, the Representative of Norway had considered, and still considered, that it was incorrect to indicate that only the implementation of proposed action b) was subject to the availability of resources.

79. In noting that some of the said proposed actions set forth in the Appendix to the paper were targeted for completion in 2016, the Council emphasized the need to undertake and implement them earlier so as to afford the Council sufficient time in which to review the reports thereon and to prepare its related report to the 39th Session of the Assembly in September/October 2016. This should be taken into account by the ADAP and the ATRP when they consider several of the proposed actions listed in the Appendix to C-WP/14089 during their upcoming meetings. The Council recommended, in this context, that as suggested by the Representative of France, the ATRP consider establishing a sub-group to carry out the envisaged work relating to consumer protection (cf. A38-14, Appendix A, Section I “Economic regulation of international air transport”, proposed action 2).

80. It was understood that the ATC’s proposals to improve the format and presentation of the proposed actions contained in the Appendix to C-WP/14089 had been noted by the Secretariat for future papers on the implementation of the said resolution and decisions. 81. Subject to the amendment recorded in paragraph 78 above, the Council approved the actions proposed in the Appendix to C-WP/14089 in order to effectively respond to the resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly in the field of the economic development of air transport. Subject No. 18.14: Other finance matters for consideration by Council

Voluntary Air Transport Fund

82. The Council had for consideration C-WP/14100, in which the Secretary General presented a proposal for the creation of a Voluntary Air Transport Fund (TRAF) whose main purpose would be to foster the development of a sound and economically-viable civil aviation system. The TRAF would be funded from voluntary contributions solicited from Member States, international organizations and public and private entities associated with international civil aviation. The Appendix to the paper set forth

- 49 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

proposed tasks to be undertaken using the TRAF. It was recalled that the Council had previously approved Recommendation 1.1/1 g) of the 2013 Sixth Worldwide Air Transport Conference (ATConf/6) on t he establishment of such a fund, as well as the Secretary General’s proposed follow-up action (C-WP/14044, Appendices B and C; 199/9). 83. Drawing attention to the proposed task d) set forth in the Appendix, the Representative of Argentina enquired as to the TRAF-funded activities which would be carried out by ICAO to promote and assist with the ratification of the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air (1999 Montréal Convention). He recalled that, through the Regular Programme Budget, State letters encouraging States to become parties to the various international air law instruments were issued and administrative packages to assist States in that regard were made available. The Representative of Argentina queried whether it would be appropriate to expand task d) to include the ratification of other international air law instruments which had not yet achieved universal acceptance.

84. The Director of the Air Transport Bureau (D/ATB) clarified that task d) made specific reference to the 1999 Montréal Convention as the aviation industry had very strongly indicated that its ratification by ICAO Member States was a priority. He noted that task d) encompassed the planning, execution and funding of all necessary action to attain a comprehensive level of acceptance thereof. Underscoring, however, that there should not be any negative discrimination, D/ATB indicated that other international air law instruments and activities of interest to Member States and the aviation industry could be included in that task, provided that the necessary funding was available through the TRAF.

85. Referring to paragraph 4.1 of the paper, the Representative of Spain noted that while he agreed that the TRAF should support projects which remained unfunded through the Regular Programme Budget, he considered that it should not support projects which were underfunded. TRAF-funded projects should be self-contained and separate from the Regular Programme. They should not be partially funded by the Regular Programme Budget. Moreover, the TRAF should not be utilized to supplement budgetary allocations for Regular Programme projects. The Representative of Spain therefore suggested that the second sentence of paragraph 4.1 be amended by deleting the reference to projects that remained underfunded through the Regular Programme Budget.

86. Underscoring that transparency was very important in ensuring the proper administration of the TRAF, the Representative of Spain further suggested that, in addition to providing information about projects on the TRAF website, an e-mail or some other form of notification be sent to Representatives whenever a new project was launched. In that manner, it would not be necessary for Representatives to wait to consult the said website or the annual report on TRAF activities. Referring to proposed task c) in the Appendix to the paper, the Representative of Spain stressed the need to take into account the concept of fair competition in considering air transport liberalization. 87. In response to these comments, the Secretary General suggested, and the Council agreed, to amend the second sentence of paragraph 4.1 of C-WP/14100 to read “TRAF is expected to support projects that are not funded through the Regular Programme Budget, …”. In concurring that Representatives should be notified of every progress achieved through the TRAF, the Secretary General confirmed that an e-mail could be issued whenever a new project was launched, in addition to the envisaged comprehensive annual TRAF reports and regular progress reports.

88. D/ATB indicated that the concept of fair competition could be covered under task c) if there were sufficient TRAF funds available therefor.

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 50 -

89. Recalling that the main purpose of the TRAF was to foster the development of a sound and economically-viable civil aviation system, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) emphasized that ICAO had been established specifically to achieve that end, as reflected in Article 44 (Objectives) of the Chicago Convention. While maintaining that the tasks listed in the Appendix to the paper were functions of the Organization and should therefore be funded through the Regular Programme Budget, he understood that the proposal to create the TRAF was being presented as a viable alternative in light of the reduction in ATB’s budgetary allocations. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) noted, in this context, that a proposal presented by the United Arab Emirates to ATConf/6 [cf. WP/33, paragraph 5.1 c)] for the establishment by ICAO of such a voluntary air transport fund had been supported by many States and had led to the adoption of Recommendation 1.1/1 g) (“ICAO should establish an air transport fund in order to seek voluntary contributions from Member States with a view to enhancing the work of the Organization in this field …”). In voicing support for the creation of the TRAF, he emphasized the need for the Council to bear in mind, when considering the draft Regular Programme Budget for the 2017-2018-2019 triennium, that the funds allocated to ATB should not be further reduced. 90. Sharing this view, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) stressed the need to be cautious in preparing the Budget for the next triennium so as to avoid creating a crisis in the future. While supporting the establishment of the TRAF to foster the development of air transport, he agreed with the Representative of Spain that its funds should not be used to supplement underfunded Regular Programme projects and that funds from the Regular Programme Budget should not be used to partially finance TRAF tasks. 91. In noting that there were two types of contributions to the TRAF, general contributions and specified contributions, the Representative of Portugal sought clarification regarding: the projects to be funded using general contributions; the projects which could be funded using specified contributions; and how the TRAF related to the Organization’s Business Plan, the level of funds to be raised and the resource mobilization strategy for the TRAF, which was to be operated in accordance with the ICAO Policy on Establishment and Management of Voluntary Funds.

92. The Representative of Germany emphasized that, although his State was in favour of voluntary contributions to ICAO, as a matter of general budget principle, it had reservations regarding the establishment of voluntary funds, reservations which had already been raised on a number of occasions. It was necessary to ensure that the number of voluntary funds, their administration and overall size were kept within the limits vis-à-vis the Regular Programme Budget, and that the priorities established by the latter were maintained. The ICAO Policy on Establishment and Management of Voluntary Funds seemed to take those concerns into account.

93. Noting that his State disagreed with the statement made in paragraph 1.1 of the paper regarding the apparent need for extra-budgetary contributions to carry out the Organization’s established work programme, the Representative of Germany underscored that it was its firm belief that the current Regular Programme Budget was sufficient for the execution of the tasks listed in the Appendix. Given the size of ICAO’s Budget for the 2014-2015-2016 triennium, Germany considered that, if any additional funds were required, then they would probably be incremental and could be found, and absorbed, by the Regular Programme Budget. That being said, Germany did not oppose the proposed establishment of the TRAF as it was fully aware of the discussions that had taken place during ATConf/6 and the 38th Session of the Assembly regarding such a voluntary air transport fund.

94. Referring to the comments made by the Representative of Argentina regarding task d) in the Appendix, the Representative of Mexico noted that whenever the President of the Council and the

- 51 - C-MIN 201/2 (Open)

Secretary General went on mission to States, the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB) provided them with lists of international air law instruments to which the States concerned had not yet become parties so that they could raise the issue during their visits. Recalling that State letters on the status of the various international air law instruments were also issued, he affirmed that those actions were sufficient.

95. In sharing the views expressed by the Representative of Spain regarding paragraph 4.1 of the paper, the Representative of Mexico indicated that, despite the Secretary General’s proposed amendment, he still had concerns as he believed that, in principle, any project or activity in the Regular Programme Budget should be fully-funded by the latter; otherwise, problems might arise for ICAO in implementing the International Public Sector Accounting Standards (IPSAS). He emphasized that the TRAF should only be used to fund new and unforeseen projects or activities which were not included in the Regular Programme Budget.

96. While supporting the proposed establishment of the TRAF, the Representative of the Russian Federation shared the concerns voiced by the Representatives of Mexico and Germany. In also endorsing the comments made by the Representative of Spain regarding transparency in the administration of the TRAF, he enquired whether the terms of reference of that Fund would be discussed by the Council in greater detail. Observing that C-WP/14100 only gave a general outline of the TRAF, the Representative of the Russian Federation underscored that it did not provide sufficient information to enable his Government to take a decision regarding its participation in the Fund. He recalled, in this context, that the Council had reviewed the terms of reference of the Safety Fund (SAFE) (cf. C-WP/13661, Appendix B; 191/2). Further to an additional query by the Representative of the Russian Federation, it was noted that information regarding the SAFE was available on the ICAO-Net and the ICAO Public website under “Strategic Objectives”, “Safety”, “Implementation”, “Safety Collaborative Network (SCAN)”, “Related Links”. 97. Responding to concerns expressed, the Secretary General reiterated that TRAF funds would be totally distinct from the Regular Programme Budget and the programmes financed by the latter. He underscored that the Organization’s various Voluntary Funds represented only a small portion of its overall Budget. While the Secretary General would welcome the establishment of any new Voluntary Fund such as the TRAF, the voluntary contributions made thereto should not divert attention away from the priorities established by the Regular Programme Budget and should be commensurate with the importance of the TRAF tasks.

98. The Secretary General recalled that the Council had reviewed the terms of reference of the SAFE in light of the latter’s relationship with the International Financial Facility for Aviation Safety (IFFAS) and the possible transfer of funds from the IFFAS, upon its dissolution, to the SAFE. In underscoring that C-WP/14100 gave a clear indication as to how TRAF funds would be used, he noted that the Appendix thereto contained a list of proposed tasks, which would be expanded to include additional tasks requested by States making specified contributions. While, in the spirit of transparency, the Secretary General could provide the Council with terms of reference for the TRAF, he failed to see what added benefit could be derived therefrom.

99. The Representative of Poland emphasized that the TRAF should be constructed and managed in such a way as to ensure that non-contributing and contributing States had equal status and that TRAF-funded projects, particularly those funded with specified contributions, did not engage ICAO resources in such a way as to harm or delay projects funded under the Regular Programme Budget.

C-MIN 201/2 (Open) - 52 -

100. The Representative of Australia shared some of the concerns expressed by the Representatives of Germany and Poland regarding the risk that contributing States would promote their own particular agenda by earmarking their contributions for certain projects, thereby according them a greater priority than the projects funded through the Regular Programme Budget and delaying the latter’s implementation. 101. Questioning whether task c) should be included in the Appendix to the paper, the Representative of India noted that the two basic liberalization-related issues to be addressed, namely the granting of freedoms of the air and air carrier ownership and control, should be dealt with as part of ATB’s normal work, through the Regular Programme Budget, and not as part of a task funded through voluntary contributions to the TRAF. 102. In response, the Secretary General suggested, and the Council agreed, to amend proposed task c) by inserting the words “any other” before the word “important” so that it would read “study and develop guidance on any other important issues that may arise as liberalization progresses”. 103. In view of comments made by the Representative of Poland, the Council further agreed that the TRAF should be constructed and managed in such a way as to ensure that those States which made voluntary contributions thereto were not accorded special privileges vis-à-vis the operation of the Fund and that TRAF-funded projects, in particular, those funded with specified contributions, did not engage ICAO resources in such a way as to delay or otherwise impede the implementation of activities funded under the Regular Programme Budget. 104. In taking the action set forth in the executive summary of C-WP/14100, as amended by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, the Council:

a) agreed to the establishment of a Voluntary Air Transport Fund (TRAF) as described in

paragraphs 3 to 6 of the paper, as amended in paragraphs 87 and 102 above;

b) agreed that the TRAF would be operated on the basis of the criteria set forth in the ICAO Policy on Establishment and Management of Voluntary Funds and would be managed in accordance with The ICAO Financial Regulations (Doc 7515), Financial Regulation 7.1, taking into account paragraph 103 above;

c) agreed to the proposed tasks to be undertaken using the voluntary contributions made to the TRAF as set forth in the Appendix to the paper and amended in paragraph 102 above; and

d) requested the Secretary General to provide regular progress reports on the benefits

achieved through the use of the TRAF, as well as comprehensive annual reports on TRAF activities, and to promptly notify Representatives of the launching of new TRAF-funded projects.

105. The meeting adjourned at 1300 hours.

- 53 - C-MIN 201/3

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE THIRD MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, FRIDAY, 28 FEBRUARY 2014, AT 1000 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E.A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M.E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. T.M.B. Kabli — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: *Mr. F. Zizi, President, ANC Mr. A. Rebouças (Alt.) Mr. P. de Moreas Jardim (Alt.) Mr. M. Delisle (Alt.) Mr. C. Hurley (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Brazil ― Canada ― Canada ― Japan ― Mexico ― Republic of Korea ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Dr. Fang Liu Mr. B. Djibo Mr. R. Bhalla *Mr. J. Augustin Mr. T. Tanaka Ms. S. Brand *Dr. K. Rooney Mr. A. Larcos Miss S. Black

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― D/ADB ― D/ATB ― C/FIN ― A/D/LEB ― ENV ― ENV ― C/DGS ― ACC ― Précis-writer

*Part-time

C-MIN 201/3 - 54 -

Representatives to ICAO Afghanistan Ecuador Ethiopia Greece Iran (Islamic Republic of) Morocco Mozambique Peru Turkey Airports Council International (ACI) European Union (EU)

- 55 - C-MIN 201/3

Minute of silence and condolences 1. The President of the Council pronounced the following statement regarding the demise of Dr. Assad Kotaite, President Emeritus of the Council, in Montréal on 27 February 2014, at the age of 89: “It is with profound sadness that we learnt early this morning of the passing away of Dr. Assad Kotaite, President Emeritus of the Council. “Dr. Kotaite was Secretary General of ICAO from 1 August 1970 until 1 August 1976 when he became President of the Council of ICAO. He retired on 31 July 2006, having served for 53 years the international civil aviation community, the last 30 of which were as President of the Council. “Dr. Kotaite’s prestigious career with ICAO began in 1953 when he was appointed to the Organization’s Legal Committee, a post he held until 1970. During that period, he also represented his country of Lebanon on the Council of ICAO and at all sessions of the ICAO Assembly. “Throughout his career, Dr. Kotaite provided unfailing leadership in promoting optimum cooperation between ICAO Member States and members of the world aviation community. Most noteworthy on the diplomatic front was his success in maintaining open the airspace in many strategic parts of the world. “Aviation safety has always been Dr. Kotaite’s top priority at ICAO. He spearheaded the creation of the ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme and the Global Aviation Safety Plan. This has led to a widening of ICAO’s influence and the use of more internationally-agreed safety standards. “Dr. Kotaite’s immense contribution to the orderly evolution of global air transport earned him worldwide respect and admiration. He was decorated by many States and received a n umber of honorary university degrees. Shortly after his retirement, Dr. Kotaite became the first-ever President Emeritus of the ICAO Council, an honorary designation bestowed upon him by the Organization’s governing body. Most recently, in 2013, he was awarded the 40th Edward Warner Award, the highest honour in the world of civil aviation, in recognition of his eminent contribution to the development of international civil aviation, most notably in the field of diplomacy and conciliation. He was one of the most respected international leaders of our time. “On behalf of the Council and the Secretariat of ICAO, the Secretary General and I sent a letter of condolence to his wife, Monique, expressing our deepest sympathy. “Information on funeral arrangements will be communicated to you as soon as they have been finalized.

“May his gentle soul rest in perfect peace.”. 2. The Council then observed a minute of silence in memory of Dr. Kotaite. The Secretary General indicated that, on behalf of the Council, as well as on behalf of the Secretariat, who had also been very close to Dr. Kotaite, he and the President of the Council would send flowers for the funeral service. 3. It was noted that an Electronic Bulletin (EB 2014/10 dated 28 February 2014) and a Press release announcing the demise of Dr. Kotaite were being issued, as well as a President`s memorandum

C-MIN 201/3 - 56 -

(PRES OBA/2276 dated 28 February 2014) which also provided information on funeral and visitation arrangements. Note was also taken of a suggestion by t he Representative of China that a webpage be created on the ICAO public website dedicated to condolences to Dr. Kotaite in view of the latter’s immense and lasting contribution to ICAO and the safe and sustainable development of international air transport. 4. In the course of the ensuing discussion, all Representatives expressed their deep sorrow, and that of their national administrations, at the demise of the President Emeritus, Dr. Kotaite. In recalling that Dr. Kotaite had once quoted Victor Hugo when he had said that the forest trembles when one of its greatest trees falls, the First Vice-President, the Representative of Spain, underscored that the Council had just heard a great crash in the woods and would be shaken by it for many years to come. Subject No. 50: Questions relating to the environment

Environmental protection — Recent developments in other United Nations bodies and international organizations

5. The Council noted information paper C-WP/14070 on this subject, in which the Secretary General reported on the outcome of the 19th Session of the Conference of the Parties (COP19) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), held in conjunction with the 9th Session of the Conference of the Parties serving as t he Meeting of the Parties to the Kyoto Protocol (CMP9) (Warsaw, Poland, 11-23 November 2013). No specific decision had been taken on how to address emissions from international aviation. The Secretary General had reiterated that ICAO continues to provide updates to the UNFCCC process and closely follows-up if, and how, the issues related to international aviation will be incorporated into the 2015 UNFCCC agreement. He had also stressed that, pursuant to paragraph 30 of Assembly Resolution A38-18, ICAO and its Member States should continue to express a clear concern, through the UNFCCC process, on the use of international aviation as a potential source for the mobilization of revenue for climate finance to the other sectors, in order to ensure that international aviation would not be targeted as a source of such revenue in a disproportionate manner Subject No. 24.3: Action on Assembly resolutions and decisions Subject No. 50: Questions relating to the environment

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Environmental protection 6. This subject was considered by the Council on the basis of C-WP/14101, in which the Secretary General proposed actions to implement Assembly Resolutions A38-17 and A38-18 and relevant decisions by the 38th Session of the Assembly relating to environmental protection. The proposed actions contained in Appendix A to the paper included technical work on a ircraft noise and local air quality emissions arising from Assembly Resolution A38-17, which was largely covered by the work of the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP). Appendix A also included proposed actions on international aviation and climate change arising from Assembly Resolution A38-18, such as those related to States’ Action Plans, assistance to States and sustainable alternative fuels for aviation. Appendix B contained proposed actions on the development of a global MBM scheme in response to paragraphs 18 to 24 of Assembly Resolution A38-18. 7. In light of points raised during the informal briefing on e nvironmental issues on 31 January 2014 regarding the development of a global MBM scheme, the Secretary General suggested that the following changes be made to Appendix B to C-WP/14101:

- 57 - C-MIN 201/3

• the proposed action for A38-18, paragraph 19 a), would be amended by deleting the word “three” from the phrase “the three possible options for a global MBM scheme” in order to be consistent with the text of the Resolution, and the description of the options; and

• the third bullet of the Governing Structure on a Global MBM Scheme would be amended by deleting the reference to the participation by the International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) in the development of draft strawman proposals for a global MBM scheme.

8. The Representative of China expressed appreciation and support for these suggested changes, which, inter alia, aligned the text of the said proposed action with that contained in paragraph 19 a) of A38-18. The Representative of the Russian Federation also endorsed the modifications. 9. While the Representative of Japan did not intend to oppose the proposed changes, he recalled that the Council had already “recognized that the results of the qualitative and quantitative analysis of the three options for a global MBM scheme evaluated by the Secretariat with the support of the Experts demonstrated that all three options were technically feasible and had the capacity to contribute to achieving ICAO’s environmental goals, and acknowledged the technical advantages and disadvantages of the three options” which had emerged during the last triennium [cf. C-WP/13894; C-DEC 197/6, paragraph 2 a)]. While Member States had had the opportunity to present other possible options for evaluation, no proposals had been put forward. The Representative of Japan believed that it was of the greatest importance for the Council to not move backwards and reopen discussion on items which had already been determined. 10. In sharing this view, the Representative of Mexico reiterated that the work which had already been done to develop a global MBM scheme and which served as a basis for future work should not be discarded. While he could agree to not mentioning specific options in the said proposed action at this time so as to not preclude potential alternatives, he reiterated that none had been proposed during the last two years. 11. The Secretary General underscored that, while it was factually correct to state that there were three possible options for a g lobal MBM scheme and that they were technically feasible, it was necessary to respect the text of paragraph 19 a) of A38-18 (“the possible options for a global MBM scheme”) which had been adopted by the Assembly subsequent to the Council’s said deliberations. The Representative of Spain agreed that the text of A38-18 prevailed in the development of a global MBM scheme. 12. In the absence of further comments thereon, the Council agreed to the Secretary General’s above-mentioned suggestions to amend the proposed action for A38-18, paragraph 19 a), and the third bullet of the Governing Structure on a Global MBM Scheme in Appendix B. 13. Under general comments, the Representative of Singapore stressed the need for the proposed actions in Appendices A and B to address all of the elements of the various paragraphs of A38-17 and A38-18 to ensure that all required actions would be taken. He cited, as an example, the proposed action in Appendix A for A38-18, paragraph 9, on the review of the medium-term global aspirational goal. Observing that the proposed action was only to assess global CO2 emissions trends for the period of 2010 to 2050, he averred that it was clearly insufficient to meet the requirements of paragraph 9. It was necessary to

C-MIN 201/3 - 58 -

also analyze the impact of carbon neutral growth (CNG) from 2020, in particular, its impact on developing States. Such analysis would be a critical input to the development of a global MBM scheme. 14. The Representative of Singapore gave, as another example, the proposed action in Appendix A for A38-18, paragraph 17, on the review of the de minimis, including the de minimis threshold of MBMs mentioned in paragraph 16 b). Recalling that the review was to take into account the specific circumstances of States and potential impacts on the international aviation industry and markets, he emphasized the need for the proposed action to go beyond analyzing the effects of the different de minimis thresholds to national or regional MBMs for international aviation and to specifically recommend an acceptable threshold or a range of thresholds to the 39th Session of the Assembly that would not cause significant market distortions. That analysis and recommendation would likewise have an impact on the development of a global MBM scheme.

15. The Representatives of Spain, the Russian Federation, Malaysia, Argentina and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) endorsed these comments.

16. Observing that some proposed actions omitted the reference to developing States and their special circumstances contained in the corresponding paragraphs of Assembly Resolution A38-18, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) emphasized the importance of taking into consideration the special circumstances of States, whether in the context of both developed and developing States or in the context of only developing States.

17. The Secretary General confirmed that the texts of the proposed actions in Appendices A and B would be reviewed and aligned, as necessary, with those of the corresponding paragraphs of Assembly Resolutions A38-17 and A38-18 to avoid any discrepancies and to ensure that the required actions on issues such as the review of the medium-term global aspirational goal, and the review of the de minimis threshold of MBMs, inter alia, would be taken into account. 18. In addition, and in response to general comments made by the Representative of Malaysia regarding the format and presentation of the proposed actions, the Secretary General indicated that the actions in Appendix A could be reorganized in a matrix format according to the five key areas of work requested by the Assembly for future reports on implementation (global aspirational goals; States’ Action Plans; assistance to States; MBMs; and sustainable alternative fuels for aviation). 19. During the ensuing page-by-page review of Appendix A, the Representative of Spain sought clarification regarding the timeframe for implementing the action proposed for A38-17, Appendix A, General, paragraph 5. The Chief of the Environment Branch (C/ENV) clarified that the timeframe for the proposed establishment of a set of environmental indicators was “ongoing” as t he CAEP’s Working Group 2 (Airports and Operations) had commenced work thereon during the last triennium. While work on some of the indicators would be finalized in time for the Tenth Meeting of the CAEP (CAEP/10) in February 2016, work on the other indicators would continue thereafter.

20. Responding to a further query by the Representative of Spain regarding the proposed action b) for A38-17, Appendix F, paragraph 4, C/ENV indicated that land-use planning and management would be promoted through the regional environmental seminars which would commence in April 2014, as well as through the web.

21. Drawing attention to the proposed action for paragraph 17.2.18 of A38-WP/429, the Representative of India confirmed that his Government would make available the resources required for the

- 59 - C-MIN 201/3

further study of the issue of night curfews and requested that the related terms of reference be provided. The President of the Council expressed appreciation for the Government of India’s support in addressing this issue. 22. The Council agreed to the following additional changes to Appendix A:

• as suggested by the Representative of India, the proposed action for A38-17,

Appendix B, paragraph 11, “Emissions impact scenarios”, would be expanded to refer to a harmonized data platform on which further predictions/regressions could be made to give a quantitative assessment of the future environmental impact of aviation emissions;

• as suggested by the Representative of India, the proposed action for A38-18, paragraph 9, “Review of the medium-term global aspirational goal”, would be amended to be aligned with the Resolution text;

• as suggested by the Representatives of Argentina and India, the proposed action for

A38-18, paragraph 10, “Feasibility of a long-term global aspirational goal”, would be amended to be aligned with the Resolution text, which made reference to, inter alia, the impact on growth as well as costs in all countries, especially developing countries;

• as suggested by the Representatives of Argentina and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), the proposed action c) for A38-18, paragraph 31, “Assistance to States”, would be amended to reflect that it was an immediate priority and that work had already commenced. The President of the Council emphasized that the timeframe/target date for implementation, early 2016, should be advanced, if possible;

• as suggested by the Representative of Argentina, the proposed action for A38-18, paragraph 33 e ), “CO2 Standard”, would be amended to reflect the two separate actions and corresponding timeframes/target dates for implementation as contained in the Resolution text.

23. In drawing attention to proposed action b) for A38-18, paragraph 19 a) in Appendix B relating to the “distribution of environmental objective”, the Representative of China stressed that it should be consistent with paragraphs 6 and 7 of the said Resolution. Recalling that, in paragraph 6, the Assembly “Agrees that the goals mentioned in paragraph 5 above would not attribute specific obligations to individual States”, he underscored that the said goals would therefore not attribute any environmental objective. The Representative of China noted that in paragraph 7, t he Assembly “Also resolves that, without any attribution of specific obligations to individual States, ICAO and its Member States with relevant organizations will work together …”. Reiterating the need for proposed action b) to be in strict conformity with A38-18, the Representative of China averred that it was too early to distribute the environmental objective. He observed that while there were different opinions regarding a global MBM scheme, there was a common goal of developing such a scheme through the envisaged Council Environment Advisory Group (EAG) and the Council. The Representative of China suggested that Appendix B, which constituted the Action Plan for the development of a global MBM scheme, be considered by the Council in conjunction with the EAG so that common efforts could be made.

C-MIN 201/3 - 60 -

24. The Representative of Spain agreed that the EAG should review Appendix B and suggest to the Council any changes which might become necessary in the future.

25. The Representative of India averred that if the proposed actions in Appendix B were flexible and would be reviewed by the EAG as the paramount advisory body to the Council thereon, then the Council should accept them without further discussing the specifics. 26. Maintaining that the non-attribution of specific obligations to individual States was a prerequisite for a global MBM scheme, the Representative of Mexico sought clarification regarding the “distribution of environmental objective”.

27. The Representative of the Russian Federation suggested that the action proposed in the executive summary of the paper be expanded to include: an expression of appreciation by the Council for the preparation of the paper, in particular the Action Plan for the development of a global MBM scheme in Appendix B thereto; and a request that the EAG review the Action Plan and report thereon to the Council regarding any changes.

28. C/ENV noted that in any MBM it was necessary to distribute the volume of CO2 emissions which were to be offset. She recalled that the last Assembly had recognized that the distribution should be made taking into account special circumstances and respective capabilities (SCRC). This was reflected in proposed action b) for A38-18, paragraph 19 a). C/ENV clarified that it was not the Organization’s entire environmental goal that would be considered but rather the objective of a global MBM scheme. Furthermore, that objective would not necessarily have to be distributed to States. It could be distributed to operators and in any other way that the global MBM scheme defined. 29. The Representative of the United States voiced appreciation for the proposed Action Plan in Appendix B and expressed support for the suggested approach. He recalled, in this regard, that a strawman proposal was widely-used in the United States in order to rapidly develop and mature a concept. The Representative of the United States affirmed that it would enable a proposal with design elements to be tabled for discussion, which the Council, supported by the EAG and the CAEP, could then improve through an iterative process. In agreeing that the first strawman proposal should be developed by the Secretary General, he indicated that it should be very simple and contain only the most basic elements, which could then be built upon through careful assessment, analysis and refinement.

30. In expressing pleasure at the rapid establishment of the CAEP’s Global MBM Technical Task Force (GMTF), the Representative of the United States emphasized that, as there was very little time in which to develop a global MBM scheme, it was important to commence the related technical work. It was also important that States be involved therein, and he encouraged their participation. The United States was committed to the said technical work and was pleased to be hosting the GMTF’s upcoming first meeting. 31. In the course of the page-by-page review of Appendix B, the Council agreed, with regard to proposed action b) for A38-18, paragraph 19 a), to leave the issue of the “distribution of environmental objective” to the envisaged EAG, which should consider it taking into account the non-attribution of specific obligations to individual States for achieving the global aspirational goal of carbon neutral growth from 2020. 32. With respect to the MBM Global Aviation Dialogues (GLADs), referred to in, inter alia, the proposed action for A38-18, paragraph 19 b) , and the ICAO Roadmap for a Global MBM Scheme attached to Appendix B, the Representative of the Russian Federation averred that the timeframe for those

- 61 - C-MIN 201/3

meetings (May 2014 and May 2015) was unrealistic and should be reviewed. In particular, it would be premature to attempt to orient the international aviation community through the conduct of MBM-GLADs before the Council had established a clear framework for the development of a global MBM scheme. 33. Agreeing, the Representative of India suggested that the issue of the timing of the MBM-GLADs be referred to the EAG. He advocated holding all of the MBM-GLADs at ICAO Headquarters in Montréal so as to afford the EAG Members and other Council Representatives and observers every opportunity to attend, even if those meetings were convened on a region-wide basis. The Representative of India maintained that this would reduce the possibility of regional divisions.

34. In concurring that May 2014 w as too early to start holding the MBM-GLADs, the Secretary General indicated that the EAG should be requested to consider the timing, format and site(s) of the MBM-GLADs and to report thereon to the Council. Observing that there were both advantages and disadvantages to holding the MBM-GLADs at ICAO Headquarters, the Secretary General noted that dissensions could arise regardless of the site. 35. While observing that Representatives had agreed that a dialogue on a regional basis was necessary, the President of the Council indicated that he had a concern with holding regional MBM-GLADs in Montréal as had been suggested. While understanding the reason behind that proposal, he considered that it was necessary to examine the costs, convenience and complications associated with holding the MBM-GLADs at ICAO Headquarters as they might be such as to prevent the achievement of the desired results. The President of the Council looked to the EAG to further consider the matter and advise the Council.

36. Reiterating the importance of weighing the advantages and disadvantages of convening the MBM-GLADs at ICAO Headquarters or in the regions, the Representative of Mexico accepted the President’s recommendation, as did the Representatives of the United Kingdom and Burkina Faso. Underscoring the need for the MBM-GLADs to take into account the interests of all ICAO Member States and not solely those which would be represented by those Council Representatives who were EAG Members, the Representative of the United Kingdom emphasized the importance of ensuring the maximum participation therein of Member States, including those which were distant from Montréal. The Representative of Burkina Faso affirmed that the Member States and the regions would appreciate having some of the MBM-GLADs convened at the regional level.

37. The Council agreed that it was premature to commence holding the MBM-GLADs in May 2014. It was intended to refer the issues of the timing, format and site(s) of the MBM-GLADs to the EAG for consideration and report to the Council, taking into account the costs, convenience and complications associated with holding the MBM-GLADs in Montréal. The President of the Council emphasized the need to balance the convenience of EAG Members (Council Representatives stationed in Montréal) with that of Delegations of Member States from the various regions.

38. Observing that similar issues were raised in several different parts of A38-17 and A38-18, the President of the Council also highlighted the need to streamline those Assembly Resolutions when updating them prior to their presentation to the next Assembly for adoption. 39. In then taking the action indicated in the executive summary of C-WP/14101, as amended by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, the Council:

C-MIN 201/3 - 62 -

a) expressed appreciation to the Secretariat for preparing the paper, in particular, Appendix B which constituted the Action Plan for the development of a global MBM scheme; and

b) approved, in principle, the proposed actions outlined in Appendices A and B thereto, as amended in paragraphs 12, 17 and 22 above, in order to effectively respond to the resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly in the field of environmental protection.

40. It was noted that the said Action Plan for the development of a global MBM scheme (Appendix B to C-WP/14101) was a dynamic document and that the envisaged EAG, as it proceeds with the development of a global MBM scheme, could propose any necessary modifications to the Action Plan for the Council’s consideration. Subject No. 50: Questions relating to the environment

Establishment of the Environment Advisory Group (EAG) 41. The Council considered C-WP/14102, in which the President of the Council proposed the mandate, tasks, composition and working methods of the Council Environment Advisory Group (EAG), whose establishment it had approved, in principle, during the previous session. Pursuant to the Council’s earlier decision (C-WP/14087; 200/4), the paper had been prepared with the assistance of the Secretary General and in consultation with several Council Representatives, taking into account the Action Plan to develop a global MBM scheme (C-WP/14101, Appendix B), discussed under the previous item. 42. In light of the points raised during the Council’s informal briefing on environmental issues on 31 January 2014, the President of the Council suggested the following changes to the paper: that in paragraph 1.1, t he phrase “the implementation of Assembly Resolution A38-18” be replaced with the phrase “the development of a global MBM scheme” so that the EAG’s mandate would be specific to the work on a global MBM scheme; and that a new paragraph 3.3 be inserted which would read “Each EAG Member may be assisted by an advisor in the meeting room. Advisors will not have an official status within the meeting deliberations.”. Subsequent paragraphs were to be renumbered accordingly.

43. Reiterating his State’s support for the establishment of the EAG, the Representative of Canada noted that it welcomed the proposed modification to the Group’s mandate to enable it to focus on the development of a global MBM scheme. Canada also supported the innovative approach of using strawman proposals for such a scheme, which it considered to be most appropriate in the circumstances. The Representative of Canada implored the Council to embark on this project with a sense of common purpose and with a focus on delivering results.

44. While agreeing to the said changes to the paper, the Representative of the Russian Federation suggested that paragraph 1.1 thereof be further amended by replacing the word “oversee” with the word “direct” and restructuring it to read “The Environment Advisory Group (EAG) is to direct, in accordance with the instructions of the Council, all the work related to the development of a global MBM scheme …”. As an alternative, the Representative of China suggested that the word “oversee” be replaced with the word “administer”. 45. Indicating that he did not wish to introduce words that would create confusion regarding the EAG’s role, as a body of the Council, to guide and oversee the said work, and the Council’s role, as the

- 63 - C-MIN 201/3

governing body of the Organization, to assume responsibility for that work and take decisions thereon, the President of the Council affirmed that the word “oversee” was the best word to describe the EAG’s role. The Representatives of Norway, the United Kingdom and France agreed.

46. The Representative of Australia noted that her State, like Canada, welcomed the creation of the EAG. Her State also welcomed the said proposed changes to the paper which had resulted from the President’s various consultations and which, in large part, addressed some of its concerns. Australia sincerely hoped that the EAG would work constructively to support the important work that had to be carried out in the lead up to the next Assembly in 2016.

47. Australia considered that it was important that the aviation industry, in particular, the International Air Transport Association (IATA), have more certainty with regard to its involvement in the EAG. It was of the view that it would be appropriate for IATA to be represented at all EAG meetings as a permanent observer and that Section 3 ( Composition) of the paper should be amended accordingly. Australia noted, in this regard, that IATA was likely to be at the forefront of any possible global MBM scheme and, significantly, could provide important perspectives on the practicality and impacts of the various proposals. Australia would not wish to create inefficiencies in the development of a global MBM scheme by wasting timely opportunities to seek IATA’s views and advice. It considered that other industry groups’ participation could remain on a n “as-needed” basis as indicated in paragraph 3.4 (formerly paragraph 3.3).

48. While aware that there were both advantages and disadvantages to convening the MBM Global Aviation Dialogues (GLADs) in the regions, Australia, on balance, was of the view that it would be better to hold them there than at ICAO Headquarters in Montréal. It wished to highlight, in this regard, one benefit that had not been cited previously, namely, a reduction in the environmental impact of the meetings as a result of decreased travel. Australia sought clarification as to whether or not Council Representatives and representatives of the aviation industry who were attending EAG meetings as o bservers could participate in the same way as was provided in the Rules of Procedure for Standing Committees of the Council (Doc 8146).

49. In endorsing the recommendation that IATA be granted permanent observer status at EAG meetings, the Representative of the Russian Federation recalled that in the original proposal to establish an EAG (C-WP/14087 presented by Brazil, China, India and the Russian Federation; 200/4) provision had been made for participation, as required, by representatives of industry, airlines, airports, non-governmental organizations and other bodies, as observers (cf. paragraph 2.3). IATA was first and foremost among the industry representatives. With regard to the site of the MBM-GLADs, the Representative of the Russian Federation advocated convening some at ICAO Headquarters and some in the regions. 50. To an additional point raised by the Representative of the Russian Federation, the Secretary General clarified that there were no parallel processes at this stage for the development of a global MBM scheme. The Council had requested the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) to undertake certain studies relating thereto. The CAEP, in turn, had subsequently created the Global MBM Technical Task Force (GMTF) to make progress on technical aspects of two design elements of a global MBM scheme: eligibility criteria for carbon credits; and a monitoring, reporting and verification (MRV) system. The First Meeting of the GMTF would take place in Washington, D.C. from 4 to 7 March 2014. The Secretary General noted that the outcome of the CAEP’s said technical work, including that of the GMTF, would be presented to the EAG as one of the contributions to the development of a global MBM scheme. Once the EAG had reviewed that input, it would make recommendations thereon to the Council.

C-MIN 201/3 - 64 -

51. Observing that the development of a global MBM scheme was a political issue, the Representative of the Russian Federation emphasized the need, at this initial stage, to establish a political platform which would enable the achievement of global consensus. Only then would it be possible to determine what types of technical studies would need to be conducted for the implementation of that political platform. Noting that the CAEP would be carrying out those studies, the Representative of the Russian Federation stressed the importance of that Committee working expeditiously and in a streamlined manner. Recalling the experience which the Council had gained in this field over the past two triennia, he underscored that the options which had been developed for a global MBM scheme (cf. C-WP/13894; 197/6; Doc 10018 – Report of the Assessment of Market-based Measures) had been found to be technically feasible but not appropriate for achieving global consensus.

52. The Representative of Mexico noted, from the informal briefing on environmental issues which had taken place on 31 January 2014, that advisors would not have the capability to represent absent Members at EAG meetings but would be allowed to take the floor on an exceptional basis. While not wishing to be overly prescriptive, the Representative of Mexico suggested, in light of past experience, that the applicable rules of procedure be mentioned in the paper so as to clarify the role of advisors. Referring to the point raised by the Representative of Australia regarding the participation of observers in EAG meetings, he maintained that the EAG was an ad hoc group and therefore should not necessarily be subject to the same rules of procedure as other, more formal Standing Committees of the Council, namely, those set forth in Doc 8146. The Representative of Mexico underscored that while inputs from observers would be welcome, the latter should intervene only at the invitation of the Chairperson of the EAG. Observers should not have the right to vote, move or second motions or amendments. The Representative of Mexico could agree to the participation of observers in EAG meetings on this basis. 53. In emphasizing the importance of establishing the EAG now, as a first step, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) noted that any changes to the manner in which the Group functioned could be made as they became necessary in the course of its work. With regard to the EAG’s status as an ad hoc group, he agreed with the Representative of Mexico that it should not be subject to the same strict rules of procedure as Standing Committees of the Council. The EAG should instead have flexible rules of procedure.

54. Drawing attention to paragraph 2.1 c) of the paper, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) underscored that it should be amended in light of the Council’s earlier agreement that it was premature to commence holding the MBM-GLADs in May 2014 and the stated intention to refer the issues of the timing, format and site(s) of those meetings to the EAG for consideration and report to the Council, taking into account the costs, convenience and complications associated with convening them in Montréal (cf. paragraph 37 above). Observing that each region had its own particularities, he averred that it would be useful to conduct regional MBM-GLADs so as to obtain a clear picture of each region’s issues and experiences. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) recalled that the convening of a series of regional aviation security conferences in 2011 and 2012 prior to the High-level Conference on Aviation Security (HLCAS) had not only been instrumental in clarifying the regions’ perspectives but had also resulted in cost-savings for participants. Emphasizing that the travel costs and visa requirements made it expensive and complicated for South American delegates to attend meetings at ICAO Headquarters, he stressed that it would be more practical to hold the MBM-GLADs in the regions. 55. In view of the Council`s aforesaid earlier agreement, the President of the Council suggested that related paragraph 2.1 c) of the paper be amended by deleting the phrase “to be held in all regions in 2014 a nd 2015”. He noted that some of the MBM-GLADs might nonetheless be convened in 2014.

- 65 - C-MIN 201/3

56. In concurring that it was very difficult for delegates from the various regions to attend regional meetings at ICAO Headquarters in Montréal, unless they received assistance, the President of the Council indicated that, in his view, regional meetings should be held in the regions and global meetings should be held at ICAO Headquarters. The envisaged High-level Climate Conference, tentatively scheduled to take place in May 2016, should thus be held at ICAO Headquarters and not in the regions. The MBM-GLADs should be organized by, and held under the auspices of, the ICAO Regional Offices.

57. Referring to the comments made regarding the participation of advisors in EAG meetings, the President of the Council underscored that the EAG was a Council body comprised of Council Representatives. While the latter could be accompanied by their advisors, and receive their advice, it would be the Council Representatives who would take the floor at the Group’s meetings; otherwise, the Council would risk losing control of the process of developing a global MBM scheme.

58. Voicing support for the establishment of the EAG, the Representative of the United States noted that that was a critical step given the short period of time available for developing a global MBM scheme. He looked forward to learning the details of the Group’s membership and encouraged its convening before the end of the Council session. Agreeing that the EAG should be composed of Council Representatives, the Representative of the United States underscored that they should be supported by advisors having access to the same information and meetings as the Group’s Members. Affirming that participation of the aviation industry in EAG meetings was also critical, he concurred that IATA should be represented by an observer, with access by non-governmental organizations to the Group’s meetings as appropriate. The Representative of the United States agreed that the rules of procedure of the EAG need not strictly follow those of Standing Committees of the Council and that there should be a flexible approach to advisors and observers. Expressing concern that the work of the EAG as described in the paper was too broad, he stressed that it should focus solely on t he development of a global MBM scheme. The Representative of the United States maintained that adding tasks such as considering, and providing input on the plans for workshops would divide the EAG’s attention unnecessarily. 59. The Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) endorsed the comments made by the Representatives of Australia and the Russian Federation regarding the participation of observers in EAG meetings. In sharing the views expressed by the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) regarding the convening of the MBM-GLADs in the regions, he suggested that use be made of modern technologies and that real-time virtual meetings be held, such as those held by Members of the Andean Community of Nations.

60. The Representative of India expressed satisfaction that the proposal to establish the EAG which had been originally put forward by Brazil, China, the Russian Federation and his State during the previous Council session (C-WP/14087; 200/4) was now bearing fruit. Referring to the proposed amendment to the EAG’s mandate (cf. paragraph 1.1), he voiced preference for deleting the words “all the” as in his view the development of a global MBM scheme could not be bereft of the other developments required to implement Assembly Resolution A38-18. In endorsing the proposal to amend paragraph 2.1 c), the Representative of India indicated that the modalities of holding the MBM-GLADs, including the excellent suggestion by the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) of virtual meetings, and other arrangements could be progressed by the EAG.

61. Reiterating that IATA’s participation in EAG meetings was essential, the Representative of India agreed that it should be granted permanent observer status as it was the airlines which would have to implement whatever decisions were made by ICAO and its Member States. IATA’s involvement would

C-MIN 201/3 - 66 -

thus assist the process. He nonetheless advised against its participation in the first EAG meeting as the latter would only deal with administrative matters, such as the election of the Chairperson and the agenda. IATA should participate from the second EAG meeting onwards, when matters of substance would be discussed. The Representative of India did not consider it necessary to amend paragraph 3.4 (formerly paragraph 3.3) to refer to IATA’s participation as it was generally understood that it should attend EAG meetings as an observer. He concurred that the EAG’s first meeting should be convened as soon as t he Group was constituted and the Secretary was designated by the Secretary General.

62. The Representative of Spain suggested that action paragraph b) of the executive summary of the paper be amended accordingly to request the President of the Council to convene the Group’s first meeting during the current session. While aware that the EAG would take into account the inputs received from other groups, he underscored that it should focus on the development of a global MBM scheme in order to be effective. Observing that the MBM-GLADs were basically consultations and exchanges of information with and among States, the Representative of Spain emphasized that they should be open to participation by all interested States, and not solely by those in the region concerned, and that the dialogue should be global, where all views would be taken into account. He considered that it would be wrong to crystallize regional positions. Averring that the Council was not faced with the dilemma of deciding whether or not to hold the MBM-GLADs at ICAO Headquarters or in the regions, the Representative of Spain maintained that it was possible for it to convene the MBM-GLADs in the regions without them being regional in nature.

63. In querying whether the Representative of Australia had referred to IATA or the Air Transport Action Group (ATAG), the Representative of Spain indicated that he would have no difficulty in accepting either as observers to the EAG meetings. He noted that it would be for the Chairperson of the EAG to decide whether or not to give the floor to observers during the Group’s discussions. The Representative of Spain emphasized that the EAG should be dynamic and have rules of procedure which were more flexible than those of the Standing Committees of the Council so that the Group could, inter alia, hold meetings whenever it wished. 64. While having no objection to holding the MBM-GLADs in the regions, the Representative of China underscored that the objective was to achieve compromise on a global scale. He thus shared the views expressed by the Representative of Spain that those meetings should be open to participation by all interested States and not solely to those in the region concerned. The Representative of China recalled, in this context, paragraph 19 b) of Assembly Resolution A38-18, in which the Council, with the support of Member States, was requested to “organize seminars, workshops on a global scheme for international aviation participated by officials and experts of Member States as well as relevant organizations;”. 65. In also supporting the comments made by the Representative of Spain regarding the convening of the MBM-GLADs in the regions with participation open to States outside the regions concerned, the Representative of the United Kingdom noted that the regional aviation security conferences which had taken place prior to the HLCAS had set a very good precedent. He agreed with the Representative of India that it might not be necessary to specify the manner in which the aviation industry would participate in EAG meetings if there was a clear sense that the latter would need to participate fully therein. Underscoring that the EAG would be unable to carry out its tasks without the participation of the aviation industry, the Representative of the United Kingdom indicated that the exact form of that participation could be determined once the EAG had commenced its work.

66. The Representative of France stressed the importance of flexibility so as to enable other representatives of the aviation industry to participate in the EAG’s meetings.

- 67 - C-MIN 201/3

67. In summarizing the discussion regarding the EAG’s mandate, the President of the Council indicated that while the Group was to oversee all the work related to the development of a global MBM scheme, there would be other activities associated therewith which would be considered by the Group. Noting that paragraph 2.1 of the paper referred to tasks requested by the Council, including the “initial tasks” listed in sub-paragraphs a) to c), he indicated that the paragraph provided sufficient flexibility to enable the Council to assign the EAG’s additional tasks as work to develop a global MBM scheme progressed.

68. The Council agreed to the President’s proposals that paragraph 1.1 of the paper be amended by replacing the phrase “the implementation of Assembly Resolution A38-18” with the phrase “the development of a global MBM scheme”, and that a new paragraph 3.3 be inserted which would read as follows: “Each EAG Member may be assisted by an advisor in the meeting room. Advisors will not have an official status within the meeting deliberations.”.

69. In addition, the Council agreed to the President’s proposals to amend paragraph 2.1 c) of the paper relating to the MBM-GLADs by deleting the phrase “to be held in all regions in 2014 and 2015”, and to amend paragraph 3.4 (formerly paragraph 3.3) on the participation of industry in EAG meetings be amended by deleting the phrase “, on an as-needed basis”. While noting all Representatives recognized the importance of participation by the airline industry (IATA) in the development of a global MBM scheme, the President of the Council emphasized the need for flexibility so as to enable the participation of other members of the aviation industry. It was understood that the latter would coordinate amongst themselves regarding their representation at EAG meetings, whether by IATA or ATAG or some other body. The Chairperson of the EAG would ensure their participation in the Group’s meetings. 70. In then taking the action proposed in the executive summary of C-WP/14102, as amended by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, Council:

a) formally approved the establishment of the Council Environment Advisory Group

(EAG) with the mandate, tasks, composition and working methods as described in paragraphs 1 t o 4 o f the paper, and amended in paragraphs 68 and 69 above, and confirmed that the EAG would effectively support the development of a global MBM scheme; and

b) requested the President of the Council to present the composition of the EAG, and convene the Group’s first meeting, during the current session.

Subject No. 4: Appointment of the Secretary General

Secretary General’s Mid-term Report to the Council 71. The Council noted information paper C-WP/14103, in which the Secretary General, in accordance with his Charter Letter dated 13 March 2012 from the President of the Council on behalf of the Council, presented a comprehensive mid-term report on his management results and the difficulties he had encountered in attaining the objectives, as w ell as on his plans to address the expectations and the challenges during the remainder of his mandate. It was understood that, in the spirit of transparency, the Secretary General would continue his practice of providing the Council with regular updates on the status of implementation of his actions. The President of the Council encouraged Representatives to continue to interact with the Secretariat regarding the implementation of the Organization’s programmes.

C-MIN 201/3 - 68 -

Subject No. 14.4.3: Panels

Report of ANC — Review of the Report of the Twenty-fourth Meeting of the Dangerous Goods Panel (DGP/24) (Montréal, 28 October to 8 November 2013)

72. The Council had for consideration C-WP/14106, in which the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) presented a summary of the results of its review of the Report of the DGP/24 Meeting. It was noted that the ANC had made a preliminary review of the proposals to amend Annex 18 — The Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air contained in Recommendations 1/1, 1 /2 and 5/2 and agreed that they should be referred to Member States and appropriate international organizations for consideration, together with the ANC’s own comments and proposals thereon. The ANC would conduct a detailed review of any comments received and would present its recommendations for action by the Council in due course. An editorial amendment to the action proposed in the executive summary of the paper was noted. 73. The Representative of the Russian Federation voiced support for Recommendations 2/1 and 3/1 of the DGP/24 Meeting on the amendment of the Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air, 2013-2014 edition (Doc 9284), and its Supplement (Doc 9284SU), and the proposed action thereon by the Council set forth in the Appendix to C-WP/14106. He noted, however, from paragraph 6.2 of the DGP/24 Report (Yellow cover), that Panel Members had expressed regret that interpretation services had been provided for only seventy per cent of the meeting, and that working papers provided in the languages of the meeting had lacked narrative text. The Representative of the Russian Federation indicated that, although the Secretariat had explained to him earlier that several understandings had been reached by the Council regarding optimization of the use of language services resources, he had been unable to find any Council decision relating thereto. It was his understanding that the current fourth edition of the Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission (Doc 7984) provided for full language services for panels of the ANC such as the DGP. These comments were noted. 74. In then taking the action recommended by the ANC in the executive summary of C-WP/14106, as amended by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, the Council:

a) took action on Recommendations 2/1 and 3/1 of the DGP/24 Meeting as proposed in

the Appendix to the paper, thereby approving the DGP’s recommended changes to the Technical Instructions for the Safe Transport of Dangerous Goods by Air, 2013-2014 edition (Doc 9284), and its Supplement (Doc 9284SU) for incorporation into the 2015-2016 edition of Doc 9284;

b) noted Recommendation 5/1 relating to amendments to the lithium battery provisions in the said Technical Instructions, on the understanding that the DGP would consider recommendations for further amendments thereto at its upcoming meeting (Montréal, 7-11 April 2014) and that the ANC would report thereon to the Council and propose action for its approval in due course;

c) noted the action taken by the ANC, under delegated authority, with respect to

Recommendation 4/1 [Amendment to the Emergency Response Guidance for Aircraft Incidents involving Dangerous Goods (Doc 9481)] as indicated in the said Appendix; and

- 69 - C-MIN 201/3

d) noted the action being taken by the ANC with regard to Recommendations 1/1, 1 /2 and 5/2 as outlined in paragraph 72 above and in paragraph 1 of the Appendix to C-WP/14106.

Report of ANC — Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission — Fifth Edition

75. The Council considered C-WP/14117, in which the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) presented a proposal for a fifth edition of the Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission (Doc 7984), pursuant to the decision taken by the Council during its earlier review of the recommendations of the Twelfth Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/12) (C-WP/13966; 198/6). The draft revised edition of Doc 7984 had been prepared by the ANC’s Ad Hoc Working Group on Modernization of Panels, in close coordination with the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB), and further developed by the ANC’s Ad Hoc Working Group on Procedural Matters and by informal, open meetings before being reviewed by the ANC. 76. It was recalled that as a result of its subsequent review of the proposed Directives for Panels of the Committee on Unlawful Interference (C-WP/13928; 199/1), the Council had decided to refer those Directives to the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) for its consideration, with a view to developing a single set of directives applicable to all panels of ICAO, notably, the panels of the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC), the Air Transport Committee (ATC) and the ANC. The WGGE had used the fourth edition of Doc 7984 as one of the bases for its analysis.

77. In welcoming the ANC’s excellent work, in support of the Secretariat, in revising Doc 7984, the Representative of Australia observed that much more rigour, transparency and structure had been introduced in the processes of ANC Panels in the new fifth edition. She voiced preference for approving the latter during the present meeting. Noting that there was a parallel review of panel directives underway in the WGGE using the current fourth edition of Doc 7984 as a basis, the Representative of Australia suggested that that Working Group update its analysis using the revised edition of Doc 7984. While aware that there might be some unique aspects in the way in which ATC and UIC panels were conducted, she considered that they could be recognized as exceptional items in a single set of directives for all ICAO panels.

78. In likewise commending the revised edition of Doc 7984, the Representative of the United Kingdom agreed that the Council should approve it now and not await the outcome of the WGGE’s analysis. Concurring that the new fifth edition could contribute to the WGGE’s said work, he indicated that it could be amended, if necessary, in light of the WGGE’s report on the results of its deliberations.

79. The Representative of the Russian Federation voiced support for the ANC’s report containing the proposed revised edition of Doc 7984. Agreeing that some parallel work on directives for panels was being done by the Commission and the WGGE, he suggested that, to avoid duplication of efforts and enhance efficiency, the Secretariat be requested to exchange information thereon internally. The President of the Council noted that that was a good lesson which had been learned from this process. 80. In then taking the action proposed by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, the Council:

a) expressed appreciation for the work done by the ANC in updating the Directives for

Panels of the Air Navigation Commission (Doc 7984) and approved, in principle, the new fifth edition thereof as set forth in the Appendix to C-WP/14117; and

C-MIN 201/3 - 70 -

b) noting that the WGGE would continue its said analysis on the basis of the fifth edition of Doc 7984 and would report to the Council on the outcome thereof, agreed to return to this issue to consider, with a view to approval, any consequential amendments to the Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission; if no such amendments were required, then the Council would formally approve Doc 7984 or, alternatively, delegate authority to the President of the Council to do so.

81. The meeting adjourned at 1300 hours.

- 71 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MONDAY, 3 MARCH 2014, AT 1430 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E. A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M. E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. T.M.B. Kabli — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. F. Zizi, President, ANC Mr. P. de Moraes Jardim (Alt.) Mr. R. Dick (Alt.) Mr. E.Z. Sepúlveda (Alt.) Mr. M. Millefert (Alt.) Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mrs. H. Jansson Saxe (Alt.) Mr. D.V. Subbotin (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Canada ― Chile ― France ― Italy ― Japan — Mexico ― Norway ― Russian Federation ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Mr. M. Fox Dr. A. Evans Mr. H. Gourdji Mr. R. Macfarlane Mr. A. Larcos

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― C/OPS ― C/MED ― C/CMO ― C/IIM ― ACC

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 72 -

Representatives to ICAO Afghanistan Cuba Ecuador Ethiopia European Union (EU) Ghana Greece Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lebanon Morocco Peru Turkey

- 73 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

Items for consideration on Order of Business for the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Meetings 1. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) sought clarification on the current format of the Order of Business that was being distributed for the current Council session. He observed that with the current format, which lists the items to be covered in three consecutive meetings of the Council, it was sometimes difficult to determine which items were to be dealt with in which meeting. He wondered whether for planning purposes it would assist Council Representatives if there were a clearer picture as to which items were to be considered at which specific Council meeting. 2. Separately, the Representative also observed that C-WP/14137, concerning the Restructure of the ICAO Secretariat, and which was currently scheduled for consideration either on Monday 10 March or Wednesday 12 March, had been listed as an information paper. Given the significance of the issues to be covered by this item and the need for the Council to review the proposals, he wondered whether this should not have been listed as a Council working paper instead of an information paper so that there was a requirement for the Council to formally take action on the subject. 3. In response to the first issue raised, the President of the Council noted that in relation to the items that had been listed on the Order of Business for Council consideration in the course of this week (C-O/B 201/2) during the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth meetings, all the documentation was already available with the exception of one oral report from the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency. In this connection, he considered that Council Representatives would have access to the necessary information for the items on C-O/B 201/2 to be considered at whichever meeting they were brought forward in the course of this week. He assured the Council that he had no intention of proceeding with consideration of any item unless all the relevant documentation had been issued. 4. The President also indicated that the current format for the Orders of Business was aimed at presenting a more complete overview of the items being brought forward in the course of a given week. While there were pros and cons in relation to the changes that had been introduced, he was minded to continue with the current format and to assess the value at the conclusion of the current session. 5. In relation to the second issue raised by the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), the Secretary General clarified that the issues to be covered by this paper (C-WP/14137) would only be addressing the issue of the restructure of certain Bureaux. The paper was not intended to cover any matters relating to the D-2 level position that he had referred to during the informal briefing of the Council, which had been conducted last week on 25 February 2014. 6. Given that the paper would cover issues related to the restructure of the Secretariat, the Representative of Mexico expressed support for the proposal of the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) in that C-WP/14137 should be presented as a formal Council working paper as opposed to an information paper. 7. In the same vein, the Representative of Spain also endorsed the proposal for C-WP/14137 to be presented as a formal Council working paper and not as an information paper. In this connection, he also observed that in accordance with the Chicago Convention, any proposals affecting the restructure of the ICAO Secretariat should be presented for Council consideration. 8. The Representative of the Russian Federation also supported the proposal for C-WP/14137 to be presented for consideration by the Council and not just as an information paper.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 74 -

9. Given the views expressed, the President of the Council agreed that C-WP/14137 would be thus presented as a formal Council working paper and not as an information paper. Subject No. 24.3: Action on Assembly Resolutions and Decisions

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Safety and air navigation capacity and efficiency 10. The Council had for consideration C-WP/14104, presented by the Secretary General, and a related oral report of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC). The Secretary General’s paper presented a report on a ctions arising from Assembly Resolutions A38-2 through A38-10 and A38-12, as w ell as relevant Assembly decisions on the subjects of aviation safety and air navigation capacity and efficiency. 11. In introducing the item, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) indicated that the working paper contained an intermediate analysis of the outcomes of the 38th Assembly Session and that the ANC was presently in the course of carrying out more detailed analysis on an integrated work programme and on the prioritization of the various work items. In this connection, C- WP/14104 was at this stage only an indication of the work being planned and further details would follow in due course following a more thorough analysis of the work programme. 12. In relation to the current work programme, the ANC was presently coordinating a database that embedded all tasks identified in the work programme and not only those that were dealt with at the 38th Assembly Session. In addition to the Assembly, this included all actions arising from the Air Navigation Conference as well as o ther significant events. The intention was that the coordinated work programme would help define associated processes for monitoring, reviewing and prioritizing purpose and would be considered in more detail by the ANC on 11 March 2014. 13. One of the crucial outcomes from the Assembly session was in relation to the GASP and the GANP, both of which were endorsed although the Assembly had not discussed the details of the Plans and the actions arising. What was essential for both the GANP and the GASP was the necessity of establishing a proper update mechanism that included consultation with Member States during this triennium. In this regard, he proposed that the first actions identified in the Appendix to C-WP/14104 should be revised and replaced by the new text contained in paragraph four of his oral report. 14. One other issue that P/ANC raised for Council’s consideration was in relation to the format of the working paper on the review of Assembly resolutions and decisions. The ANC had noted that the format of the working paper was not aligned with working papers on the outcomes of meetings, such as t he Twelfth Air Navigation Conference (AN-Conf/12). For instance, the right-hand column (column 4) of the working paper referred to “implementation” and yet what had been listed contained only the implementation of identified actions. This might be misleading and so P/ANC suggested that this column should be retitled in future as referring to action, or identified action instead of implementation, which would mean more or less the implementation of the SARPs in the various States. He also pointed out that on page A-8, in relation to the proposed action regarding system-wide information management (SWIM), the relevant Panel was currently in the process of being established. 15. The Representative of Spain welcomed the report from the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) and specifically the proposed new text in relation to the GASP and the GANP that had been contained in paragraph four of the oral report of P/ANC. In this connection, the Representative emphasized that it would be necessary to establish an adequate mechanism for updating the information and for the mechanism to include consultation with Member States. In relation to

- 75 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

suggestions to alter the current format for reporting on A ssembly resolutions and decisions, the Representative observed that the comments made in this regard by P/ANC could be applicable to all the Assembly resolutions and not just those pertaining to air navigation. This would be something to be taken into account when the Council considered similar documentation from the other Bureaux. 16. In relation to the various time frames contained in the Appendix to C-WP/14104, the Representative of Nigeria expressed concern that some of the required actions had been classed as “ongoing”. For instance, on page A-10 all four actions indicated in relation to “regional aviation research and development” were shown as “ongoing” and yet it might have been more helpful to outline what actions had specifically been undertaken until now instead of listing these as “ongoing”. 17. In response, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) confirmed that some actions on this item had indeed been undertaken prior to the adoption of the related Assembly resolution such as in relation to operational safety activities in Latin America. In this context, all regions were requested to identify their priorities and regional goals. 18. By way of additional clarification, the Director of the Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) explained that C-WP/14104 ought to be seen as a progress report. She indicated that later in the course of this meeting she would deliver a presentation that outlined how the various actions were part of the overall work programme, and how some activities were already under way well before the relevant Assembly resolutions were adopted. Specifically in relation to the item of “regional aviation research and development”, D/ANB noted however that this was a relatively low priority given that items such as the implementation of the existing SARPs required a much higher focus. 19. In response to a question from the Representative of Norway concerning the wording of the revised text relevant to the GASP and the GANP that was contained in his oral report, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) confirmed that in fact the wording on the second of the four items was identical to the text contained in the Appendix to C-WP/14104 but it had been included for purposes of completion since the four items listed came together as a related comprehensive package. It was in fact the text of the other items that was being amended. 20. The Representative of Australia agreed with the President of the Air Navigation Commission that one of the challenges before the Council was to find ways to improve the documentation so that there was a clearer connection between the actions being undertaken and the relevant Assembly resolutions. In her view the biggest challenge was to achieve an appropriate balance between issuing the required information as early as possible while ensuring the necessary level of detail. The Representative looked forward to the presentation that was to be shortly delivered by the Director, Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) as she hoped this would help to demonstrate that the ANC and the Secretariat had undertaken some useful work so this extra level of detail on the activities been carried out in pursuance of the Assembly resolutions and the related timelines, including priorities, would be welcome. 21. The President of the Council took the opportunity to remind Representatives that while the work programme, which was quite detailed, was not subject to Council approval, it was always available as a resource document for anyone that wished to consult it. In this connection, the Council had a responsibility to approve the related action plan, which was what was contained in C-WP/14104. 22. In response to a question from the Representative of Spain concerning some of the timelines contained in the Appendix to C-WP/14104, which referred to completion dates beyond the current triennium, such as 2018 for certification of air navigation service providers and certification of

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 76 -

aerodromes, both of which were significant in terms of aviation safety if they were left this far into the future, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) stated that it had to be recognized that the work programme contained several items that carried a completion date well into the future. He noted for instance that both the GANP and the GASP were based on a 15-year time frame. In this context, it was understandable that some actions would only be completed beyond the present triennium. P/ANC reminded the Council that the ANC had not yet undertaken a detailed prioritization exercise of all the tasks contained in the action plan to C-WP/14104, but that once completed this would offer a more accurate analysis of how best to undertake the requisite actions on all priorities. Specifically in relation to the two certification items, P/ANC acknowledged the need for these but indicated that there was also a requirement to achieve a balance within the overall demands of the work programme. 23. By way of additional clarification on this issue, the Director of the Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) explained that both certification items were rather divisive issues, especially in relation to the certification of new licensing requirements. The debate on this issue had been under way for some time and although the work programme proposed that this issue would be examined, it needed to be balanced against the costs of doing so. This was one of the factors leading to a longer timeline. There was also some community concern that the Assembly resolution was promoting action on only one particular aspect of this issue. With both of these items, it was necessary to consider the costs involved and what the implications would be of any action to be proposed. Nevertheless, no proper analysis had yet been undertaken so this initial outlook might alter once further studies had been completed. 24. It was also understood that in response to a separate point raised by the Representative of Spain, who indicated that in the Spanish language version of C-WP/14104, which reflected a time frame of “2085” for actions arising on the item “new licensing requirements”, that this was incorrect and that the correct time frame was actually “2018”, as outlined in the other language versions of the documentation. 25. In then taking the action proposed in C-WP/14104, taking into account the report of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC), the Council approved the proposed actions outlined in the Appendix to C-WP/14104, as amended in accordance with the proposals outlined by the President of the ANC in his oral report, in order to effectively respond to the implementation of the resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly. In doing so, the Council requested that all editorial amendments would be taken into account and reflected in the final documentation. Subject No. 14.5: Safety oversight Progress report on the implementation of the ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP-CMA) 26. The Council had for consideration C-WP/14105, presented by the Secretary General, and a related oral report of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC). The Secretary General provided a progress report on the activities of the USOAP undertaken since the full-scale implementation of the continuous monitoring approach (CMA), which had commenced in January 2013. 27. In introducing the item, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) acknowledged the good work that had thus far been carried out on t he USOAP-CMA. A number of initiatives were been pursued, including the transparency initiative related to Significant Safety Concerns (SSCs), results of which now appear on the public website. Likewise in relation to ICAO Coordinated Validation Missions (ICVMs), the ANC emphasized the importance of allocating the appropriate level of

- 77 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

resources to those areas that were most in need especially given that some States were no longer listed in the reports of the Monitoring and Assistance Review Board (MARB). 28. In relation to the applicability of protocol questions (PQs) to address safety management provisions and which were covered in paragraph 2.1.2 of C-WP/14105, P/ANC noted that there had been some modification that had enabled some States to go beyond the 60 per cent threshold. This might imply that PQs did not apply to States that were below the 60 per cent threshold but the ANC was of the view that protocol questions should apply to all States. 29. In relation to the ICVMs to be undertaken in 2014, P/ANC explained that it would be important to plan carefully for each ICVM within the context of the CMA programme by focusing resources where they were most needed. He recalled that one reason for this shift of emphasis was that it was not necessary to expend resources on States that were mature enough, but to direct the resources to those States most in need. 30. In relation to ICVMs the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) observed that these represented an invaluable part of the assistance provided to States. He recalled his own involvement with the mission that had been conducted to his own country in which the feedback provided to aviation authorities had been useful in correcting the identified deficiencies. In this context, he expressed some concern with the impression being given by the discussion of this item in the Appendix to C-WP/14105, which revealed that States that had been subject to an ICVM had increased their implementation rate from 55 per cent to 61 per cent. While this was to be welcomed, the Representative was concerned that there was still much room for improvement. He sought further information on what issues remained outstanding and what specifically had prevented States from achieving even better results. 31. Likewise, the Representative of Burkina Faso observed that there had been improvement in States that had been subject to an ICVM, which led him to conclude that these were invaluable for lifting States to a higher level of effective implementation. He particularly welcomed the fact that specific audit and ICVM results could now be viewed on the website and in this connection the Representative wanted to see S tates encouraged to make use of this online framework resource especially by way of facilitating their transition to resolving deficiencies. While acknowledging that budgetary constraints had led to a planned reduction in the number of ICVMs for 2014, he nevertheless expressed a hope that different measures could be applied to encourage States that needed to undertake actions to deal with identified deficiencies. 32. In response to the two preceding interventions, the Director of the Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) indicated that in relation to assistance to States, the ICAO Regional Offices represented a front-line resource especially when it came to SSCs. On the whole the Secretariat was aware of what activities were of the highest priorities and which risks were the most pressing that needed to be responded to. Although funding was limited, it was nevertheless being directed to areas where the need was the greatest. She took the opportunity to assure the Council that the different parts of the ICAO Secretariat, including in Headquarters and in the Regional Offices, were all working closely together to ensure that there was a correct alignment of necessary responses. In relation to the online framework, D/ANB noted that this had only come into fruition last year and that for the time being this was being slowly advanced to ensure that nothing is missed in terms of certification. It would be necessary to mature this process before anything further was put into place.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 78 -

33. As for the reasons why there would be fewer ICVMs in 2014, this was quite simply due to the expectation that it would not be necessary to conduct as m any this year. She stressed that the reduction in the number of ICVMs was not necessarily related to funding factors. The new online framework would also to a certain extent begin to address identified issues, which would mean that a full ICVM would not be so necessary. For example, if there was a State that was well on its way to making progress and which had developed a certain level of maturity, then it may just be a question of exchanging documents, which would suffice in this instance. Nevertheless, the Secretariat always retained the ICVM option especially if it perceived that there some concerns that needed to be addressed in a different way. D/ANB indicated that the initial expectation was for the new online framework to be used in a limited number of cases but it was hoped that this would expand in the future. 34. By way of additional clarification in relation to ICVMs, the Secretary General assured the Council that when it came to the conduct of ICVMs there were no budgetary constraints and in the finalization of the budget it was clearly understood that essential audit activity was not being reduced in any way. 35. The Representative of Spain welcomed the assurance given by the Secretary General that budgetary constraints would not be applied to ICVMs especially given their usefulness to States in promoting improvements and the adoption of certain requisite measures. Despite this, the Representative observed from the documentation that it was intended to conduct only 15 ICVMs in 2014, which was far fewer than in previous years. He surmised that if only 15 ICVMs were conducted per year in this current triennium that would mean only 45 for the three-year period. However, if one considered the issues faced by States listed by the MARB as warranting attention, this would amount to a considerable number. In this context it was important that ICVMs continue if progress was to be made on overcoming identified safety deficiencies. 36. The Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania endorsed the intervention made by the Representative of Burkina Faso in that the new online framework was to be welcomed as an additional resource to assist States in encouraging them to achieve progress on safety issues. In general though he was concerned that in relation to off-site validation activities, the documentation indicated that only two such activities had been conducted in 2013. Since these would represent a good substitute for enabling States to overcome their deficiencies, perhaps there needed to be more focus on helping States to have access to all the necessary information that would enable them to improve on their implementation rate. On the whole he welcomed the initiative of off-site validations and hoped that it would in the long term lead to more States making progress in resolving identified safety deficiencies. 37. By way of additional clarification in relation to the number of proposed ICVMs and specifically to the point raised by the Representative of Spain, the Secretary General explained that the documentation that had been submitted for consideration by the Assembly had contained a shaded figure on the number of ICVMs that was meant to have been subsequently corrected. He assured the Council that whenever there was a need for an ICVM to be undertaken, this would be done. There would be no budgetary constraints when it came to such matters and there were no cuts in any audit activities in the current budget. 38. The Representative of Australia emphasized that USOAP remained one of the flagship programmes that ICAO undertook even though alternative options such as the off-site validation initative were now under way. In this connection, it would be important to move towards a risk-based approach so that ICAO directs resources to those States that most need assistance in this area. On a separate matter, the Representative wondered whether it was necessary to reconsider the way in which the website

- 79 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

currently displayed information pertaining to SSCs. Her recent experience in attempting to access t his information had suggested that the website was not as easy to navigate as it could be in this regard. 39. In relation to the way information was currently displayed on the website, the Director of the Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) acknowledged that in the past the website had indeed not been easy to navigate. However, she indicated that since January the website had been totally revamped so as to improve accessibility and to make it easier for visitors to the website to more easily navigate to the information that was being sought. The USOAP results were for instance now more prominently displayed but more work might be necessary to explain the context on some of these results. 40. In summarising the discussion on this item, the President of the Council indicated that it was clear that significant progress had been achieved and he welcomed the interventions from Representatives. He noted that there was clear support for encouraging more States to consider options that were available to them, including that of an ICVM. The President also highlighted that the ANC had suggested that future reports on t his item include a reference to the USOAP Continuous Monitoring Manual. In addition, he noted that the Council was encouraging the Secretariat to plan for and conduct more off-site validation activities, conduct as many ICVMs as were necessary, and provide more training to civil aviation authority staff as required. 41. In conclusion, the Council noted the information contained in C-WP/14105. In doing so, it was understood that comments made by the Council would be taken into account by the Secretariat. Safety Week — Air Navigation Presentations 42. A presentation was delivered by the Director, Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) on Safety Week, which inter alia, provided an update on the priorities encompassed in the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) and the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP), as well as an outline of regional performance indicators, and details of the activities forming part of the impending Safety and Air Navigation work programme. 43. In doing so, D/ANB indicated that the information being provided as part of the Safety Week presentation would help to foreshadow some of the issues that were to be the focus of attention in the next few months and which could be shared with the Member States. 44. In relation to the GANP and the GASP, an outline was provided of the targets, priorities and reporting mechanism. In this context, D/ANB emphasized that it was important to be able to report against these plans in order to determine the progress being achieved. Harmonizing global outcomes with external partners such as IATA, ACI, and CANSO, was also an important element of this process. 45. In relation to the GANP, the inaugural report on the progress being achieved was due to be issued in April 2014 and it would contain an outline of best practices and a number of initiatives under way around the world as well as indicators that have been agreed upon with the PIRGs. The reports for both the GANP and the GASP would also contain a dashboard of indicators at the regional level, which harmonizes the language between the regions so that there is a consistency for comparative purposes. In this regard, it was also planned to introduce a new process for the update of the GANP and the GASP. The dashboard of indicators was already operational for Africa because this region was leading the way in terms of indicators, particularly the focus on the AFI plan and how that was helping to improve aviation safety in Africa.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 80 -

46. In relation to the GASP, it will be issued in an electronic format on alternate years from the Assembly session as a cost-saving measure but would continue in paper format in those years when an Assembly session was scheduled. Also under way but not yet fully aligned, were the Regional Safety Oversight Organizations (RSOOs) and the Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programmes (COSCAPs), which would require additional training on the GASP and the GANP. This work was being coordinated with the Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB) to ensure alignment with the targets and priorities of both global plans. 47. The priorities of the GASP and the GANP were now firmly embedded within the implementation plans of all Regional Offices, each of which was working with the relevant RASG and PIRG to fine-tune the work that was accomplished at the Air Navigation Conference and subsequently endorsed by the Assembly. This would mean that the terms of reference for the PIRGs and the RASGs would be modified to take this into account. 48. One issue that had required specific attention had been the approach to follow in the development of dashboard of indicators that had been developed for the global plans. In this instance, it had been a challenge to identify which grouping to use; whether it should be based on the PIRG, the RASG, the Regional Office, the United Nations regional groupings, or something entirely different. With each different option, there had been slightly different constructs so in the end it had been decided that the best approach was to include all the different options via a pull-down menu so that each user could use the regional grouping most pertinent to their needs. This tool might require additional work subject to feedback but it was important not to overwhelm States with information at this point, but rather to facilitate their focus on the priorities of the GASP and the GANP. 49. D/ANB noted that there had never been a time in history when there had been such a level of alignment between ICAO Headquarters and Regional Offices, but the level of cooperation and calibration had been so extensive that it had enabled this level of progress to have been made thus far. In this context of cooperation, it had also been agreed that a meeting of the regional leadership would be scheduled for February 2015, to take place in conjunction with the High-level Safety Conference (HLSC). D/ANB also reminded the Council that during the next session there would be report on the PIRGs and the RASGs, which might also incorporate additional information on the regional action plans that focused on the progress being achieved in the various regions. 50. In relation to the issue of implementation planning in the regions, D/ANB observed that there had been many reasons why progress had not been as ex tensive as it could have been. She acknowledged though that there were several measures that the Secretariat could undertake to assist the work in the regions, including when it came to Annex Amendments. One of the specific initiatives that was pending were the iKits, which were being developed from the point of view of the implementer. This would require an intensive effort from the Secretariat especially given the sheer volume of the items involved. In this connection, D/ANB invited interested Representatives to peruse the details of the complete air navigation work programme at the conclusion of the meeting, which provided more information on the terms of reference for the different work groups in an effort to align and harmonize their efforts. 51. Finally, D/ANB indicated that the Council had been provided with a new runway safety kit, which was a high-priority safety objective. She expressed appreciation to all the partners that had been involved in this project. She also alerted the Council to the forthcoming release of the performance indicators. In addition, it was noted that the Loss Of Control Inflight (LOCI) Symposium was scheduled for May 2014.

- 81 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 172 to Annex 1

52. The Council considered C-WP/14107, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 172 to Annex 1. The amendment proposal concerned: a) the upper age limit for pilots engaged in international commercial air transport operations; and b) the introduction of provisions regarding upset prevention and recovery training (UPRT) for aeroplane pilots including editorial changes to remove outdated provisions from the language proficiency requirements and an extension of the transitional measures related to the powered-lift category. 53. In the supplementary information provided to the Council, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC), indicated that this set of amendments dealt with the maximum age of pilots with the proposal that this be standardized at 65 years of age for both pilots and co-pilots. The corresponding part of these changes related to the loss of control and upset prevention and recovery training provisions, which are also embedded in the PANS training process in an effort to ensure consistency across the board. 54. P/ANC also indicated that the amendments under this item dealt with several minor aspects such as i ntroducing required editorial changes for language proficiency, as w ell as so me transitional powered-lift provisions. In relation to the Manual on Aeroplane Upset Prevention and Recovery Training, it was also noted that this had just been posted, which meant that all users could now have access to it for implementation purposes. 55. In response to a question from the Representative of Australia concerning the potential cost impact on airlines as a result of introducing a lower maximum age requirement if there are pilots in the system who already exceed the new age limit and if any consideration had been given to using a performance-based approach for this purpose, the Chief, Aviation Medicine Section (C/MED) explained that the primary focus of the new provisions pertaining to age was related to safety goals. It was noted that in relation to the co-pilot there was currently no protection for the age of the co-pilot flying into the airspace of another country with different requirements because current provisions only require recognition of licences that are issued in accordance with the Standards, not in accordance with the Recommended Practices. 56. In addition, C/MED observed that the aviation industry had not commented on the issue of the potential cost impact of the change of the age limitation for a co-pilot from a Recommendation to a Standard. Indeed, currently there were less than 10 per cent of States that specified age requirements for the co-pilot, in that co-pilots were allowed to be certificated or licensed over the age of 65. A s a proportion of the total though, it was understood that there were very few States in which there were many pilots over the age of 65. 57. In relation to attaining the same outcome using a performance-based approach, C/MED indicated that this probably would not be practical for the time being. One reason is that it was not possible to assess t he efficacy of different medical examination processes or other methods used to evaluate those individuals whose risk of incapacity was slowly increasing or whose performance might be deteriorating. This was especially relevant given that with increasing longevity it was known that the risk of incapacitation increases rapidly, while performance declines. Nevertheless, it was accepted that a performance-based approach would be desirable in the longer term.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 82 -

58. In response to a question from the Representative of South Africa concerning the global shortfall of pilots and how this was being addressed, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) indicated that he would be pleased to hold a discussion with the Council on this specific issue at greater length on a subsequent occasion. 59. In response to a question from the Representative of India concerning whether co-pilots would require re-training even in instances where they had previously served as commanders, the Chief, Flight Operations Section (C/OPS) confirmed that re-training would be necessary in all cases to ensure a suitable level of qualification for the duties to be performed. 60. At the conclusion of the discussion on this item, the Council by 34 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (two Representatives being absent), adopted as Amendment 172 to Annex I, the amendments to definitions and to Standards and Recommended Practices as contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14107. The Council also approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendments to Notes as contained in Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 1 as contained in Appendix C to the paper. 61. Following the vote, the Representative of Burkina Faso took the opportunity to inform the Council that although he had been obliged to be temporarily absent from the Council Chamber during the adoption of the Annex Amendment, he stated that his delegation was very much in favour of the proposals as contained in C-WP/14107. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 38 to Annex 6, Part I

62. The Council considered C-WP/14109, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 38 to Annex 6 – Operation of Aircraft, Part I – International Commercial Air Transport - Aeroplanes. The amendment proposal concerned: a) upset prevention and recovery training (UPRT); b) procedure design criteria and charting requirements to support performance-based navigation (PBN), as well as helicopter point-in-space (PinS) approach and departure operations; c) harmonization of provisions, electronic flight bags (EFBs), dangerous goods, heads-up displays (HUD) and visions systems, fuel use provisions; and d) flight recorders. 63. By way of introducing the item, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) indicated that along with the following two subsequent amendments, to be considered by the Council, this item concerned Annex 6. T he amendment dealt with various topics, the first of which outlined what needed to be included in the Annex 6 as it related to the upset prevention and recovery training. The second dealt with the procedure design criteria and charter requirements to support performance based navigation (PBN) as w ell as the point-in-space (PinS) approach and departure operations, while the third dealt with the harmonization of provisions on electronic flight bags (EFBs), head-up displays (HUD) and vision systems, as well as some fuel use provisions, and the fourth related to flight recorders. 64. P/ANC emphasized that the procedure design was done in such a way so as to improve the flexibility provided, in particular to helicopter operations. Regarding EFBs, the work that was being carried out in preparation for the future was primarily data and information sharing based. Thus, EFBs

- 83 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

remained an important objective in that although it was not necessarily just about minimizing the use of paper, there was also a need to ensure that all data was updated and on board when it was needed. Regarding HUDs and also enhance visualization systems, P/ANC highlighted that the amendments being presented represented a beginning of a focus on aspects of these issues that were raised at the Air Navigation Conference. These were important for airports and in relation to low-visibility procedures as well as for all-weather operations. Finally, in relation to flight recorders, P/ANC underscored that there had been some relaxation on some rules that affected the maintenance of flight recorders, which would lead to identifiable cost savings. 65. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 38 t o Annex 6, P art I, the amendments to definitions and to Standards and Recommended Practices as contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14109. The Council also approved, as p art of the said amendment, the amendment to Notes and attachments as co ntained in Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 6, Part I as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 33 to Annex 6, Part II

66. The Council considered C-WP/14110, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 33 to Annex 6 – Operation of Aircraft, Part II – International General Aviation – Aeroplanes. The amendment proposal concerned: a) procedure design criteria and charting requirements to support performance-based navigation (PBN) approach and departure operations; b) harmonization of provisions, electronic flight bags (EFBs), head-up displays (HUD) and visions systems, fuel use provisions; and c) flight recorders including underwater locating devices (ULD) requirements. 67. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 33 t o Annex 6, Part II, the amendments to definitions and to Standards and Recommended Practices as contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14110. The Council also approved, as p art of the said amendment, the amendment to Notes and attachments as contained in Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 6, Part II as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 19 to Annex 6, Part III

68. The Council considered C-WP/14111 and Corrigendum No. 1 (Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish only), which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 19 to Annex 6 – Operation of Aircraft, Part III – International Operations – Helicopters. The amendment proposal concerned: a) procedure design criteria and charting requirements to support performance-based navigation (PBN) as well as helicopter point-in-space (PinS) approach and departure operations; b) harmonization of provisions, electronic flight bags (EFBs), head-up displays (HUD) and visions systems, fuel use provisions; and c) flight recorders including underwater locating devices (ULD) requirements.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 84 -

69. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 19 to Annex 6, P art III, the amendments to definitions and to Standards and Recommended Practices as contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14111. The Council also approved, as p art of the said amendment, the amendment to Notes and attachments as co ntained to Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 6, Part III as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 58 to Annex 4

70. The Council considered C-WP/14108, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 58 to Annex 4 – Aeronautical Charts. The amendment proposal concerned procedure design criteria and charting requirements to support helicopter point-in-space (PinS) approach and departure operations. 71. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 58 to Annex 4, the amendments to definitions and to Standards and Recommended Practices as contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14108. The Council also approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and in addition, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 4 as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 6 to Annex 14, Volume II

72. The Council considered C-WP/14113, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 6 t o Annex 14 – Aerodromes, Volume II – Heliports. The amendment proposal concerned procedure design criteria and charting requirements to support helicopter point-in-space (PinS) approach and departure operations. 73. In response to a question from the Representative of France, concerning the possibility of confusion being created by the new definition that was introduced for this amendment as it related to the landing location for helicopters, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) indicated that although the amendment was attempting to provide helicopters with some flexibility in relation to the landing location, he accepted that the new wording might require additional revision for clarification purposes depending on feedback received. 74. In relation to the same issue, the Representative of Australia considered that the amendment was quite clear and that it certainly served the purpose of providing greater flexibility for helicopter landings. She did not consider that the definition would lead to any confusion and on this basis she was not convinced that the text would require any revision. 75. In response to a question from the Representative of Spain, concerning the measurement lengths indicated in Appendix 1 and whether this was consistent with the previous Annex amendments, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) explained that in one case t he amendments applied to the chart resolution, while in the other case the amendments related to the accuracy of the data

- 85 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

type, which are considered together but which are not identical. For the time being there was one measurement requirement related to the charting accuracy and another one for the data itself. 76. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 6 to Annex 14, Volume II, the amendments to definitions and to Standards as contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14113. The Council also approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendment to Notes as contained in Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 14, Volume II as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 38 to Annex 15

77. The Council considered C-WP/14114, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 38 to Annex 15 – Aeronautical Information Services. The amendment proposal concerned procedure design criteria and charting requirements to support performance-based navigation (PBN) as well as helicopter point-in-space (PinS) approach and departure operations. 78. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 38 to Annex 15, the amendments to Standards and Recommended Practices as co ntained in Appendix A to C-WP/14114. The Council also approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix B to the paper, and in addition, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword of Annex 15 as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 89 to Annex 10

79. The Council considered C-WP/14112, which presented a draft report for the adoption of Amendment 89 to Annex 10, Volumes I, II and IV. The amendment proposal to Volume I addressed a number of issues associated with technical requirements for global navigation satellite systems (GNSS). The amendment proposal to Volume II addressed issues related to automatic dependent surveillance – broadcast (ADS-B), controller-pilot data link communications (CPDLC) and in-trail procedure (ITP) to facilitate en-route climb and descent in oceanic and remote continental airspace. The amendment proposal to Volume IV addressed issues related to surveillance systems. 80. In introducing the item, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) explained how the amendment related to technical requirements for the global navigation satellite system (GNSS), as well as reflecting changes in the evolution of the global position system (GPS) and satellite-based augmentation system (SBAS) in terms of clarifying and correcting existing GNSS performance and signal quality monitoring requirements. 81. In relation to the Volume II amendments, it was also indicated by P/ANC that a number of changes related to use data link communications between pilots and controllers, and in-trail procedures to provide certain operational benefits. The Volume 4 changes related to the airborne collision avoidance system (ACAS) and automatic dependent surveillance-broadcast (ADS-B) operations systems, aimed at

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 86 -

increasing the situational awareness for both controllers and pilots. Various manuals had been updated to support this amendment. 82. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 89 to Annex 10, V olumes I, II and IV, the amendment to definitions and to Standards and Recommended Practices as contained in Appendices A, B, and C to C-WP/14112. The Council also approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendment to Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) in Appendix B, and Notes as contained in Appendices A, B, and C to the paper, and in addition, approved as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the attachment as contained in Appendix A to the paper. Moreover, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption in Appendix D to the paper and also approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendments to the Forewords of Annex 10, Volumes I, II, III, IV, and V, as contained in Appendix E to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 11 to Annex 16, Volume I

83. The Council considered C-WP/14115, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 11 to Annex 16 – Environmental Protection, Volume I – Aircraft Noise. The proposed amendments to Annex 16, V olume I, addressed technical issues arising from the ninth meeting of the Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP/9), which are associated with the development and application of Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) for aircraft noise certification. Other proposed amendments arose from the twelfth meeting of the Operations Panel Working Group of the Whole (OPSP/WG/WHL/12) concerning aircraft operating procedures for noise abatement. 84. In welcoming the work that had been undertaken by the CAEP and others on the forecast modelling that had supported the basis for the amendments being introduced in this item, the Representative of Portugal sought clarification in relation to the noise stringent standard for jet and turbo prop aeroplanes, which would be applied for aircraft type certification on or after 31 December 2017 and on or after 31 December 2020, either for the aeroplanes of less than 50 tonnes or heavier than 50 tonnes. Specifically, the Representative questioned how long it would take to go from the type certification of such aircraft until the entry into operation of the aircraft. Given that it would be necessary at that time when the new aircraft entered into service to establish a phase-out period for those aircrafts that did not comply with the new stringent standards, the Representative wondered whether any evaluation phase-out period had been foreseen for this scenario. 85. In response it was explained by the Secretariat that in terms of the amount of time required from the type certification until entry into service, it was not possible at this stage to determine this with great certainty but it was an issue that could be monitored. In relation to whether any evaluation phase-out period had been foreseen, this had not been part of the discussions to date in the context of this particular amendment. However, it was clarified that the intention of the amendment as pertains to noise levels of certain types of aircraft was aimed primarily at new aircraft to comply with the new certification standard. 86. In response to a point of clarification from the Representative of France concerning the text appearing in the French language version of C-WP/14115 as it appeared in Appendix A, page A-5, in relation to Chapter 4, I tem 2 “Subsonic Jet Aeroplanes with maximum certificated take-off mass less

- 87 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

than 55 000 kilograms” and its related application, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) confirmed the application of this part to aeroplanes within the mass category indicated. 87. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 11 to Annex 16, Volume I, the amendments to the definitions and Standards contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14115. The Council also approved, as part of Amendment 11 to Annex 16, Volume I, the amendments to the Notes and Attachments as contained in Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption to Annex 16, Volume I in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover, approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword to Annex 16, Volume I as contained in Appendix C to the paper. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Report of ANC — Adoption of Amendment 8 to Annex 16, Volume II

88. The Council considered C-WP/14116, which presented a proposal of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) for Amendment 8 to Annex 16 – Environmental Protection, Volume II – Aircraft Engine Emissions. The amendment proposals to Annex 16, Volume II updated the provisions regarding the stringency of emissions Standards and address technical issues arising from the application of demonstration schemes and related guidance for aircraft engine emissions certification. 89. The Council by 35 votes in favour, none against and no abstentions (one Representative being absent), adopted as Amendment 8 to Annex 16, Volume II, the amendments to the definitions and Standards contained in Appendix A to C-WP/14116. The Council also approved, as part of the Amendment 8 to Annex 16, Volume II, the amendments to the Attachments as contained in Appendix A to the paper. In addition, the Council approved the Resolution of Adoption to Annex 16, Volume II in Appendix B to the paper, and moreover, approved, as part of the said amendment, the amendment to the Foreword to Annex 16, Volume II as contained in Appendix C to the paper. 90. Following the vote for this and the preceding item, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) took the opportunity to inform the Council that although he had been obliged to be temporarily absent from the Council Chamber during the adoption of these two Annex Amendments, he stated that his delegation was very much in favour of the proposals as contained in C-WP/14115 and C-WP/14116. Subject No. 14.1.1: International Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs)

Assessment of Annex Amendments 91. Following the adoption of all Annex Amendments considered during the meeting, the Representative of Burkina Faso took the opportunity to draw attention to the related issue of negligible and minimal costs to States arising from the adoption of amendments. In this connection, he expressed the desire to receive further information on this aspect so that Member States did not lag behind in their compliance with all the amendments. The Representative observed that there existed a gap between the SARPs that were being amended, the level of amendments, and their implementation rate by Member States. Therefore, it was possible that some more detailed guidance could be provided so as t o assist States in applying the new provisions.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 88 -

92. In response, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) indicated that this was in fact an issue that had been considered by the ANC in its current session. In the course of its consideration the ANC had concluded that an impact assessment process should be adopted, in which a relatively simple questionnaire had been devised and would form the basis of the survey. P/ANC indicated that he would welcome some feedback from the Council on this proposed approach. Through this means it was expected that it would be possible to identify the difference between negligible and minimal although he observed that caution would need to be exercised when comparing the results on a global scale since there remained significant differences between individual countries. 93. Once the results from this survey were received, the Panels would be required to assess the results, including deliverables, by way of arriving at an impact assessment. Thereafter, the ANC would have an opportunity to analyse the results and depending on the assessment to consider options such as consultations with relevant States to clarify issues that required an additional focus. 94. P/ANC observed that it would be necessary to ensure that States contributed to the impact assessment for the process to succeed but the difficulty for the ANC would be that with more than 190 Member States, both the content and range of the final review would be an extensive undertaking. Nevertheless, the impact assessment process would enable a degree of understanding of the costs and benefits of the amendments from both the perspective of the State and of the industry. 95. The exercise would also be accompanied by an implementation task list, aimed at identifying the various steps that a State would have to undertake in order to implement a deliverable. This would resemble a checklist, but would be helpful in arriving at an understanding of the implementation path to be followed for every deliverable. In addition, it was intended that in future all working papers being presented to the Council that deal with Annex Amendments would be obliged to outline the relevant guidance material that would be required to be made available before the applicability of an amendment. 96. In supplementing the information provided by P/ANC on the latter point, the Director, Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) emphasized that the Secretariat had been well aware for some time of the need to ensure that guidance material was issued as early as p ossible. In addition, work was progressing on pr oviding the training associated with the guidance material at the same time, which would mean that the requisite resources would have to be committed at the start of the process. 97. D/ANB also indicated that the Secretariat would be undertaking some related initiatives in the context of the ICAO Journal by way of raising the level of awareness on the Annex Amendments. This would entail a sp ecial edition of the ICAO Journal, in which the Annex Amendments were highlighted coupled with the issuance of targeted media releases depending on the importance of the Annex Amendment, which would also help to raise the profile of some of the new provisions. Subject No. 13: Work programme of Council and its subsidiary bodies

Report of ANC — ANC work programme for 196th Session 98. The Council had for review C-WP/14119, in which the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) presented its proposed work programme for the 196th Session for approval, and its proposed work programmes for the 197th and 198th Sessions for information.

- 89 - C-MIN 201/4 (Open)

99. Observing that the proposed work programme contained a comprehensive range of items that the ANC was working on, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) indicated that at the time of issuance the document might not have contained all the necessary details on each item listed but that it nevertheless gave a good sense of the ANC priorities. He stated that the work programme was relatively accurate for the next session but that the information for the following two sessions was only indicative for the time being. P/ANC was confident that the work programme being presented for approval would help to increase the visibility of items that were being planned for consideration by the ANC at future sessions. 100. Concerning the proposed work programme activities in relation to the Safety Information Protection Task Force (SIPTF) and its level of coordination with the ANC Panels responsible for amendments related to Annexes 6, 13 and 19, the Representative of France emphasized the importance of ensuring that the ANC reviewed both the level and outcome of this coordination among the different Panels. Separately, in relation to the proposed timetable for the amendment to Annex 19, t he Representative observed that this would need to be a realistic timetable. Finally, the Representative requested that consideration be given to providing both the ANC and the Council with the report of the SIPTF once it was available. 101. By way of providing further background to the Safety Information Protection Task Force (SIPTF), the Director, Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) indicated that the SIPTF had been established as a result of the High-level Safety Conference (HLSC) of 2010, following which the terms of reference for the SIPTF were developed and approved by the ANC. The SIPTF had been reporting to the ANC and there would be no problem in providing copies of these reports to the Council. As for the outcomes from the SIPTF, it was indicated by D/ANB that there were a number of recommendations emanating from the task force with a particular focus on addressing the issues identified by the HLSC in 2010. In the near future the ANC would have the opportunity to consider a proposal from the SIPTF that had been fully coordinated on two separate occasions with the Panel responsible for Annex 19. As for recommendations pertaining to Annex 13, the Secretariat was intending to work directly with the relevant entities since there was no Panel for this Annex. Nevertheless, D/ANB assured the Council that all this work would be fully coordinated with the intention of addressing the issues identified by the HLSC in 2010 before the next such event. 102. In supplementing the information provided by D/ANB, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) agreed that all the information arising from the SIPTF should be shared as widely as possible with all relevant stakeholders. He noted that the SIPTF was a multidisciplinary group comprising of legal experts and investigators, which had striven to eliminate the differences of view between the judiciary and civil aviation authorities. In this connection, it would be important in the coming months to ensure that all those involved in this exercise were working towards the same goals at a consistent and harmonious pace. P/ANC acknowledged that while there might be differences of views about the details, what was important would be for States to be able to implement the various recommendations. 103. The Council then approved the ANC work programme for the 196th Session.

C-MIN 201/4 (Open) - 90 -

Any other business Subject No. 7: Organization and Personnel

Dr. Assad Kotaite 104. The Council was informed of the funeral arrangements and the coordination of messages of condolence with respect to the recent passing away of the Dr. Assad Kotaite, President Emeritus of the ICAO Council. Subject No. 52.1: Universal Security Audit Programme

Universal Security Audit Programme — Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) 105. It was understood that the Council would be provided with further information on the background to the drafting of the generic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the conduct of USAP-CMA activities to be signed between ICAO and Member States, which was previously discussed by both the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC) and the Council (C-DEC 201/2 and C-WP/14093 refer), with a view to determining whether this item warranted further consideration by the Council. Subject No. 52: Unlawful interference with international civil aviation and its facilities

Air Cargo and Mail Security 106. It was noted that subject to the views of the Council on the request by a Representative, an informal briefing involving external stakeholders and industry may be scheduled during the 202nd Session. 107. The Council then went into closed session at 1700 hours so as to consider the next item on the Order of Business C-O/B 201/2.

- 91 - C-MIN 201/4 (Closed)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FOURTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MONDAY, 3 MARCH 2014, AT 1700 HOURS)

CLOSED MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E. A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M. E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. T.M.B. Kabli — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. F. Zizi, President, ANC Mr. R. Dick (Alt.) Mr. E.Z. Sepúlveda (Alt.) Mr. M. Millefert (Alt.) Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mrs. H. Jansson Saxe (Alt.) Mr. D.V. Subbotin (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Canada ― Chile ― France ― Italy ― Japan ― Mexico ― Norway ― Russian Federation ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Dr. Fang Liu Mr. J. Marriott Mr. J. Weich Mrs. L.M. Comeau-Stuart Mrs. K. Balram Mr. M. Leitgab Mr. A. Larcos

— DC/OSG ― D/ADB ― C/AVSEC — DD/HR-ADB ― C/POD ― C/SEA — ADADB ― ACC

C-MIN 201/4 (Closed) - 92 -

Representatives to ICAO Afghanistan Cuba Ecuador Ethiopia European Union Ghana Greece Indonesia Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lebanon Morocco Peru Turkey

- 93 - C-MIN 201/4 (Closed)

Subject No. 7: Organization and personnel Appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB) 1. In her oral report on t his item, the Chairperson of the Human Resources Committee (Representative of the United Arab Emirates) indicated that this item had been the subject of consideration by the HRC at its meeting on 30 J anuary 2014. During the meeting, the Committee was apprised of the role of the HRC in the selection process for D-2 level positions as governed by Article IV, and Annex IV of The ICAO Service Code. In this context, the HRC was invited to review the selection reports of D-2 level posts to ensure that the shortlist of candidates met the selection criteria and that all those rejected by the process had been fairly treated. 2. The Secretariat had advised the HRC that the recruitment process for this post was first advertised in September 2011 but had been put on hold after the vacancy period had ended, since at that time the Secretary General was contemplating a restructuring of the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB) and so had designated an Acting Director for LEB in the interim. Recognizing the importance of the functions of legal services, external relations, protocol and host country coordination for the Organization, the Secretary General had subsequently decided to proceed with the appointment of the D/LEB position in November 2013. The Secretariat had further advised that for D-2 level posts, there was no stipulated requirement to re-advertise posts in the staff regulations or rules when a sel ection process for such a position was continued after a considerable amount of time had elapsed since the initial advertisement. It was noted that the decision to refer this item to the HRC for review in January 2014 had been taken by the Secretary General in the exercise of his discretionary authority, which is based on the powers that the Member States have conferred on the Secretary General as Chief Executive Officer for the management of ICAO human resources in accordance with The ICAO Service Code. 3. At the HRC meeting on 30 January 2014, the Secretariat had explained that the Secretary General was satisfied with the earlier process, which had provided him with a reasonable choice, and since the initial set of candidates subsequently confirmed their ongoing interest in the post, the process was continued. The Committee recognized that all of the candidates on the shortlist were suitable for the position. Some Committee members, however, expressed strong concerns over the length of time that had elapsed between the closing date of the vacancy notice and the evaluation and shortlisting of candidates. In this connection, some Committee members had requested that the position be re-advertised for ethical and reputational reasons, taking into account the recommendations of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) in relation to such matters. These members also believed that it would be beneficial if the Secretary General could first explain his motivation for continuing with the recruitment process for this post at the same time as when he had an opportunity to brief the Council on the overall restructuring of the Secretariat. 4. In contrast, other members of the Committee had expressed a desire to proceed with the recruitment process in accordance with the existing requirements while amendments to The ICAO Service Code and advice to the Secretary General to address this matter could be dealt with separately. It was also noted by some members that the rules, should they be changed, should not be applied retroactively to an ongoing process. Some members of the Committee were of the view that the Secretary General had the necessary authority to proceed with the process as Chief Executive Officer. Regardless of the outcome of the process however, it was agreed by the Committee that The ICAO Service Code ought to be amended to clearly stipulate the maximum duration of a recruitment process from the advertisement to recruitment stage for all posts. 5. In concluding her introductory comments, the Chairperson of the HRC, indicated that the Committee had decided to report on this item for consideration of the Council. In this context, it had been

C-MIN 201/4 (Closed) - 94 -

agreed that two options would be presented; the first option to re-advertise the post of D/LEB and to obtain a briefing on the restructuring of the Secretariat, (which had since been delivered and which had confirmed an overall restructuring of the Secretariat); and a second option to proceed with the recruitment process of the post according to the current provisions in The ICAO Service Code. 6. The Representative of Mexico welcomed the report and indicated his delegation’s support for the second option proposed by the Human Resources Committee, to proceed with the recruitment process for the D/LEB post in accordance with the provisions of The ICAO Service Code. 7. The Representative of India indicated his support for the first option outlined by the Human Resources Committee, to re-advertise the post given the significant time that had elapsed since the initial vacancy notice had appeared. In doing so, the Representative informed the Council that he had received instructions to support the selection of the candidate who was currently based in Africa, although at the same time he acknowledged that this was not under consideration at this stage. 8. The Representative expressed concern that following a d ecision to keep the selection process for this post on hold for around two-and-a-half years, it now appeared that an entirely different course of action was being proposed and implemented in the space of two-and-a-half weeks. He wondered what the reasons were for the sudden change and what reasoning had been used to justify this shift. If this related to an expression of sympathy for the acting incumbent of the post, then the Representative certainly appreciated the basis for that although he remained doubtful as to whether this represented best administrative practice in these circumstances. 9. In relation to the provisions in The ICAO Service Code that applied to these circumstances, the Representative observed that there clearly existed certain deficiencies that required rectification vis-à-vis ensuring that there was an element of fairness in the recruitment process. In making a final decision in the recruitment process, the Representative also observed that it would be necessary to take into account the potential of an appeal being lodged as had occurred elsewhere in the United Nations system, which was a factor that supported the option of re-advertising the post. 10. The Representative of the Dominican Republic indicated support for the second option proposed by the HRC and for proceeding with the filling the vacant post in accordance with the existing provisions of The ICAO Service Code. 11. In referring to the discussion on this item thus far, the Representative of South Africa expressed concern that the Council was losing sight of a core aspect of the recruitment at this stage of the process. In this connection, the Council appeared to be confusing whether it should be directing the Secretary General as to the next steps in the process or whether the Council was merely responsible for considering the shortlist of candidates and reaching a determination as to whether they met the selection criteria or not. In his view, it was the latter that was the Council’s primary responsibility at this point and therefore the Council should not be entering the realm of issues that were beyond its level of responsibility. He urged the Council not to encroach on the Secretary General’s areas of responsibility that were clearly set out in The ICAO Service Code. 12. The Representative of the United Kingdom observed that while it was possible to apply a narrow interpretation of the current rules and conclude that the appointment process could be continued without readvertising, it was also necessary for the Council to weigh up whether this would also represent the most prudent course of action especially given the possibility of an appeal being lodged against the process, which carried with it certain reputational risks for the Organization. This would be particularly

- 95 - C-MIN 201/4 (Closed)

awkward if the selected Director of the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB) was required to defend the Organization in a case where the occupant to the D/LEB post was the subject of the legal challenge. This certainly was a set of circumstances that should be avoided. 13. Separately, the Representative observed that this issue had highlighted that there existed certain unresolved demarcation questions between the Council and the Secretariat as to areas of responsibility, He noted that the Representative of South Africa had also drawn attention to this during his preceding intervention. It seemed to the Representative of the United Kingdom that the Council needed to make a decision on the process, not necessarily as a result of, or because of, the irregularities that had been identified in relation to the length of time that had elapsed. 14. In concluding, the Representative accepted that those who had a tendency to stress natural justice within administrative processes would likely favour re-advertising the vacancy. In this case however, it would be important to convey to those candidates that had applied more than two years ago a sense that the re-advertisement was in no way related to their qualities as potential candidates under consideration. This could be coupled with a guarantee that those candidates, who had been on the shortlist could be guaranteed that they would continue to remain on the shortlist of candidates if they so chose during any re-advertisement process. 15. The Representative of the United States expressed his delegation’s support for proceeding with the recruitment for the post according to the current provisions of The ICAO Service Code and thus entrusting the Secretariat to complete the selection process as t his was clearly in the Secretary General’s remit. He took the opportunity to also remind the Council that during this Session it had before it a significant number of other more substantive issues that required its attention. 16. By way of clarifying some of the historical context in this issue, the Secretary General reminded Representatives that during the overall restructure of the Secretariat that he had proposed during an informal briefing of the Council last week, he had explained that in relation to the vacancy for the D/LEB post, he had initially thought at the very beginning of the process more than two years ago, that there was no need to have a Director of the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau. In the circumstances, he had at the time therefore appointed an Acting Director (A/D/LEB). Subsequently however, he came to realise that in fact it was indeed necessary to have a Director in this post and so it was on this basis that he had re-activated the recruitment process. 17. In relation to the delay in the recruitment process, the Secretary General noted that the current rules do not specify time limits on how soon appointments should be undertaken from the point at which a vacancy notice first appears. Nevertheless, he accepted that The ICAO Service Code did need to be improved and he undertook to do so. 18. Finally, the Secretary General noted that as part of the current process, all of the candidates that were on the shortlist had been contacted and had confirmed their ongoing interest in the advertised vacancy. This was consistent with the conclusions drawn by the Human Resources Committee (HRC) in that all four candidates were suitable, interested and available for selection. Therefore, having now received the report of the HRC, it was simply a matter of proceeding with the next steps in the process and selecting one of the candidates in accordance with The ICAO Service Code. 19. Following initial discussion and given time constraints, the Council agreed to resume further consideration of this item at the Fifth Meeting of this session, which was scheduled for Wednesday, 5 March 2014. 20. The meeting adjourned at 1730 hours.

- 97 - C-MIN 201/5 (Closed)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FIFTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, WEDNESDAY, 5 MARCH 2014, AT 1000 HOURS)

CLOSED MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E.A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M.E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. M. Deslisle (Alt.) Mr. Chunyu Ding (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Canada ― China ― Japan ― Mexico ― Republic of Korea ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Dr. Fang Liu Mr. J. Marriott Mr. J. Weich Mr. S. Berti Mrs. L.M. Comeau-Stuart Mrs. K. Balram Mr. A. Djojonegoro Mr. M. Leitgab Mr. A. Larcos Miss S. Black

— DC/OSG ― D/ADB ― C/AVSEC ― DD/HR-ADB ― C/SFP ― C/POD ― C/SEA ― SFP ― ADADB ― ACC ― Précis-writer

C-MIN 201/5 (Closed) - 98 -

Representatives to ICAO Ecuador Lebanon Peru Airports Council International (ACI) European Union (EU)

- 99 - C-MIN 201/5 (Closed)

Subject No. 7: Organization and personnel

Appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB) 1. The Council resumed (201/4) its consideration of this subject on the basis of an oral report by the Human Resources Committee (HRC) on the outcome of its review of the selection reports for the D-2 level post of Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB). The HRC proposed two possible courses of action: a) to re-advertise the post of D/LEB and to obtain a briefing from the Secretary General on the overall restructuring of the Secretariat; and b) to proceed with the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB in accordance with the current provisions of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350). It was recalled that an informal briefing on t he said restructuring of the Secretariat had been given on 25 February 2014. The HRC had also recommended that Doc 7350 be amended to clearly stipulate the maximum duration of a recruitment process from advertisement to recruitment for all posts. 2. The Representative of Australia noted that her State was one of the HRC Members which considered that the more prudent approach would be to re-advertise the post of D/LEB in the interests of equity, integrity and transparency. Australia therefore supported the comments made previously by the Representative of the United Kingdom to the effect that this was not simply a matter of what was within, or outside, the scope of the HRC’s mandate; nor was it simply about what was, or was not, written in The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350). This was, rather, an issue of best practice and common sense. The Representative of Australia recalled that when the Secretariat had responded to the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) Report entitled “Staff Recruitment in United Nations System Organizations: A Comparative Analysis and Benchmarking Framework: Overview” (JIU/REP/2012/4JIU) in October 2013 (C-WP/14084; 200/3, 201/6), it had supported the JIU recommendation that recruitment time from vacancy posting to selection decision should not exceed 120 days. Furthermore, it had indicated that the majority of recruitment processes in ICAO were completed within four months. Her State considered that that should have been a signal at that time to take stock of outstanding recruitment processes and to take appropriate action. That being said, Australia would respect the majority view of the Council on this matter. 3. The Representative of the Russian Federation observed that the current discussion was in accordance with Article 58 (Appointment of personnel) of the Chicago Convention. Affirming that it was necessary to fill the vacant D/LEB post in the same way as it had been necessary to fill the post of Deputy Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (DD/LEB), he underscored that The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) did not place any restrictions on the length of the recruitment process. While the Representative of the Russian Federation shared the concerns expressed by the Representatives of the United Kingdom and Australia, he considered that they would be addressed by endorsing the HRC’s recommendation that Doc 7350 be amended to clearly stipulate the maximum duration of a recruitment process for all posts so as to avoid such a situation in the future. He spoke in favour of option b) and proceeding with the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB in accordance with the current provisions of Doc 7350. 4. The Representatives of Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Malaysia, Argentina, Spain, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), China, the United Republic of Tanzania, Canada, Poland, Nicaragua, Brazil and the Republic of Korea also voiced support for option b). In addition, the Representatives of Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Spain, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Canada, Poland, Nicaragua and the Republic of Korea supported the Committee’s recommended amendment of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350). The Representative of Canada emphasized that the envisaged review of Doc 7350 afforded the opportunity to take into account not only the said JIU recommendation regarding the maximum duration of the recruitment process but also all other pertinent JIU recommendations and any other reforms that the Council considered might enhance The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350).

C-MIN 201/5 (Closed) - 100 -

5. The Representative of Malaysia noted that, under Article IV and Annex IV of Doc 7350, the HRC was mandated to review the selection reports of D-1 and D-2 level posts, and thus the D-2 level post of D/LEB, with the two-fold objective of: ensuring that the shortlisted candidates met the selection criteria; and ensuring that all those rejected by the process had been fairly treated. He recalled that the HRC had recognized that all of the shortlisted candidates for the post of D/LEB were suitable for the position. With regard to the question of whether the selection process had been carried out in accordance with the fundamental principles of transparency and equity, the Representative of Malaysia underscored that some HRC Members had expressed strong concerns that the duration of the selection process had exceeded the 120 day period recommended by the JIU. They had queried whether such non-compliance had undermined the impartiality of the selection process. The Committee had then weighed the difference in outcome if the post of D/LEB were re-advertised.

6. The Representative of Malaysia considered that the non-compliance with the JIU’s said recommendation was a procedural imperfection rather than a substantive one, which touched the root of the transparency and impartiality of the selection process. He maintained, however, that the re-advertisement of the post of D/LEB would be unfair for some, if not all, of the short-listed candidates as it would imply that they failed to meet the selection criteria. The Representative of Malaysia deemed that it would be a disservice to ICAO to not select a s uitable, well-qualified candidate from the shortlist. The Secretary General had admitted that he should have filled the post of D/LEB when it had initially become vacant. He now had an obligation to make good the overdue fairness and impartiality due to the shortlisted candidates. The Representative of Malaysia considered that the objective of the proviso set forth in Regulation 4.8 (Notification of vacancies and appointment decisions) of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) was to provide the Secretary General with the discretionary authority to proceed with the selection process without advertisement of the vacant post. That being said, he accepted option b) to proceed with the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB in accordance with the current provisions of Doc 7350.

7. The Representative of Argentina underscored that the explanation provided by the Secretary General during the said informal briefing and the last meeting (201/4) regarding the circumstances which had led to his initial decision not to fill the vacant post of D/LEB addressed the concerns which had been expressed regarding option b). He affirmed that the Council could trust the wise judgement of the Secretary General when he now stated that the best way forward was to proceed with the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB.

8. Emphasizing that the purpose of the recommended amendment of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) was to clarify the maximum duration of the recruitment process for all posts, the Representative of Argentina stressed that it would not have any legal implications for the current recruitment process for the post of D/LEB. On the contrary, as the Representative of the Russian Federation had indicated, that recruitment process had been impeccable from the legal point of view and could safely be resumed.

9. As a lawyer, the Representative of Argentina had consulted some of his lawyer colleagues regarding precedents in the UN system. He had concluded, however, that the situations and the facts were different and that the recruitment processes were not exactly the same as ICAO’s. In the UN system, there had been a series of irregularities in the recruitment process, such as changing the rules mid-way, which was not the case in ICAO. There was, nevertheless, an important similarity between the situation in ICAO and the situation in the UN system: only staff members or former staff members could lodge a complaint regarding the recruitment process. Recalling that in one such case that he had studied a staff member had taken legal action and won, he cautioned that option a) on the re-advertisement of the post of D/LEB might open the door to a potential complaint. Consequently, the Representative of Argentina was in favour of option b).

- 101 - C-MIN 201/5 (Closed)

10. Observing that this argument was at variance with that made by the Representative of the United Kingdom during the last (201/4) meeting, the President of the Council sought clarification. The Deputy-Director, Human Resources (DD/HR) affirmed that the re-advertisement of the post of D/LEB under option a) would not give rise to the possibility of complaints by the short-listed candidates. Access to the system of internal justice in ICAO entailed a referral initially to the Advisory Joint Appeals Board (AJAB) and subsequently to the United Nations Appeal Tribunal (UNAT) and was only accessible to ICAO staff members. In observing that the argument presented by the Representative of Argentina was a pertinent one, DD/HR indicated that the probability of legal recourse was higher if an ICAO staff member was involved than if an external candidate was involved. 11. While endorsing the HRC’s oral report, the Representative of Spain averred that the Council should not have to address the abnormal situation which had arisen regarding the post of D/LEB. He fully supported the recommended amendment of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) to clearly stipulate the maximum duration of the recruitment process as it would ensure that the situation did not recur. In noting the justification for proceeding with the recruitment process provided earlier by the Secretary General, the Representative of Spain expressed confidence that any of the four short-listed candidates would satisfactorily fill the post of D/LEB. He underscored that, although the point raised by the Representative of Argentina regarding the possibility of litigation if option a) was selected was relevant and rational, the matter under discussion went beyond potential legal recourse. In echoing the comments made by the Representative of Australia, he emphasized that at issue was the need for integrity, transparency and equity in the recruitment process, as well as for the implementation by ICAO of the United Nations (UN) system best practices. The Representative of Spain had no objection to joining the majority of the Council in agreeing to option b) and the amendment of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350). 12. In sharing the concern expressed over gaps in The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350), including with regard to the duration of the recruitment process, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) emphasized that it was significant weakness to take decisions on the basis of custom, especially for posts at the D-2 level, such as that of D/LEB. A custom did not constitute a rule, and everything, from job descriptions and associated responsibilities for all posts at every level to the timeframe for the recruitment process, should be governed by rules. He suggested that the issue be addressed through the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) or a special group so that there would be clear, comprehensive and specific rules to prevent a recurrence of this situation. Given the transparency of the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB and the validity of the selection reports, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) considered that option b) was the most viable way in which to proceed, despite the gaps in The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350). 13. Agreeing that there were gaps in Doc 7350, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) reiterated the need to amend The ICAO Service Code as recommended by the HRC, as well as other related documents. He recalled, in this regard, how the former President of the Council, Mr. Roberto Kobeh González, used to say that everything could be improved upon. In view of the Secretary General’s satisfactory explanation regarding the initial freezing of the post of D/LEB and his subsequent decision to advertise it, the arguments presented by the Representative of Argentina regarding the possible legal implications of re-advertising that post and the clarification provided by DD/HR, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) supported option b).

14. Noting that the HRC had considered the issue twice and that the Council was now discussing it for a second day, the Representative of Canada underscored that it was clearly one to which the Council attached much importance. It had been helpful to have heard the Secretary General’s own

C-MIN 201/5 (Closed) - 102 -

perspective on the situation during the said informal briefing. While during the HRC’s deliberations the Representative of Canada had expressed clear sympathy for the good governance arguments advanced by many Members, he considered that there comes a t ime when it is necessary to ask which choice would create fewer additional challenges for ICAO. In his view, it was option b) and proceeding with the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB, together with a review of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350). The Representative of Canada reiterated that the said review should take into account not only the JIU recommendation relating to the maximum duration of the recruitment process but also all other pertinent JIU recommendations and any other reforms that the Council considered might improve Doc 7350.

15. In sharing the views expressed by the Representatives of the Russian Federation and Argentina, inter alia, the Representative of Poland underscored that The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) should be amended as necessary for the future recruitment of candidates for other posts. For the time being, however, the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB should proceed in accordance with the current provisions of Doc 7350, for the Council’s own benefit and taking into account all the work already done by the Secretariat and the costs incurred.

16. The Representative of Nicaragua supported the recommended amendment of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) as she considered that it was potentially risky to have such situations arise which were not governed by a specific provision of Doc 7350 and which thus opened the door to interpretation and the exercise of discretionary authority. She averred that, as there was no clear way in which to close the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB, it should proceed.

17. The Representative of the United Kingdom noted that the fact that access to legal recourse in the recruitment process was less available to external candidates than to internal ones was a relevant consideration. While it was, in many ways, an unsatisfactory position, it was the position in which the Council found itself. Like the Representative of Australia, he would respect the majority view of the Council to accept option b) and continue with the recruitment process without re-advertising the post of D/LEB. The Representative of the United Kingdom wished, however, to record his dissent on the grounds raised by other Representatives that it was not simply a matter of whether that could be done on the basis of a narrow interpretation of the current rules but whether it was a good practice for the Organization. While he considered that the Council was taking a problematic course of action, he would not stand in the way if the majority of Representatives wished to proceed with the said recruitment process.

18. In summarizing the discussion, the President of the Council observed that the majority of the Council supported option b) and considered that, in the spirit of good governance and best practice, it should endorse the HRC’s recommendation to amend The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) to clearly stipulate the maximum duration of the recruitment process. He thanked the Representatives of Australia and the United Kingdom for having raised pertinent issues and for supporting the views of the majority of the Council, which he believed was very constructive.

19. With regard to the HRC’s responsibility, under Article IV and Annex IV of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350), to review the selection reports of D-1 and D-2 level posts, the President of the Council noted from the Committee’s oral report and the comments made by many Representatives who were also HRC Members, that the HRC had recognized that all shortlisted candidates were suitable for the post of D/LEB. While that was a judgement which was supposed to have been provided to the Secretary General in writing pursuant to paragraph 1 of Annex IV, that action could be deemed to have been taken as the judgement had been presented to the Council. The Council agreed that the HRC’s oral report obviated the need for the Committee to provide the outcome of its said review to the Secretary General in writing.

- 103 - C-MIN 201/5 (Closed)

20. The President of the Council affirmed that the issues raised of best practice, ethics and good governance were very pertinent and would be taken into account, as would the suggestion by the Representative of Canada that the envisaged review of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) be based not only on the JIU recommendation regarding the maximum duration for the recruitment process but also on all other pertinent JIU recommendations and any other reforms that the Council considered might improve the governance of the Organization. As the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) had indicated, everything could be improved upon. The President of the Council proposed that that task be given not to the WGGE as suggested by the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) but rather to the HRC. He recalled, in this context, that in accordance with paragraph 2 of Annex IV of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350), the HRC was mandated to make recommendations to the Council relating to human resources policy for ICAO and its enhancement. In that regard, the President of the Council expressed appreciation to the Chairperson of the HRC for her oral report and for the work done by the Committee. In addition, on behalf of the Council, he thanked the Representative of Argentina for the pertinent legal advice which he had provided regarding the recruitment process for the post of D/LEB. 21. Recalling that some doubt had been expressed as to whether the HRC’s role was to simply comment on the suitability of individual candidates for a D-1 or a D-2 level post or whether it was to make recommendations based on the recruitment process in a particular competition, the Representative of the United Kingdom requested that the Committee’s role be clarified during the envisaged review of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350).The President of the Council indicated that the HRC could also consider that issue. 22. In taking the action then proposed by the President of the Council in light of the HRC’s oral report and the discussion, the Council:

a) noting that the HRC had recognized that all shortlisted candidates were suitable for the

D-2 level post of D/LEB, agreed to proceed with the recruitment process for that post in accordance with the current provisions of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350); and

b) requested the HRC to review The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) and to present, for the Council’s consideration, proposals to amend its provisions, taking into account the recommendation of the JIU regarding the duration of the recruitment process as contained in JIU/REP/2012/4 entitled “Staff Recruitment in United Nations System Organizations: A Comparative Analysis and Benchmarking Framework: Overview” and best practices of the UN system, as well as other relevant JIU recommendations contained in that report which would enhance the governance of the Organization.

23. It was understood that the Council would return to the issue of the appointment of D/LEB on Monday, 10 M arch 2014, when it would have for consideration the Secretary General’s related memorandum SG 2221/14 Confidential dated 5 March 2014. Subject No. 14.5: Safety oversight Subject No. 52.1: Universal Security Audit Programme

Progress report of the Monitoring and Assistance Review Board (MARB) 24. The Council had for consideration information paper C-WP/14099 Restricted, in which the Secretary General reported on the activities of the MARB since its seventh meeting on 28 September 2013 and the last progress report [200/3 (Closed)].

C-MIN 201/5 (Closed) - 104 -

25. In noting the information provided in the paper and in the Secretary General’s introduction thereof, the Representative of Mexico affirmed that the progress made by Kazakhstan and the Republic of Congo in rectifying their respective significant safety and security concerns (SSCs and SSeCs) warranted being highlighted. In wondering whether, mutatis mutandis, ICAO was doing everything possible to assist the other States which had been referred to the MARB, he observed that many had been on the Board’s list for a long time, since 14 December 2011. Noting that Panama was introducing mitigation measures to address its SSeCs in response to the joint letters sent by the President of the Council and the Secretary General to the President of Panama urging their rectification as a matter of high priority, the Representative of Mexico suggested that the issuance of such joint letters to Heads of State/Heads of Government become the norm in order to obtain from MARB-referred States a h igher level of political commitment to remedying their SSCs and SSeCs. That would, in turn, enable ICAO to assist those States in resolving such deficiencies through constructive discussions with the Organization and the various stakeholders. 26. Agreeing that such joint letters to Heads of State/Heads of Government had a positive effect, the Secretary General indicated that he and the President of the Council would consider sending them in certain cases. In emphasizing that ICAO did not act in isolation, he noted that it used all available channels to work with other relevant organizations, including the regional civil aviation bodies, in assisting MARB-referred States in rectifying their SSCs and SSeCs. The Secretary General highlighted, in this regard, the Organization’s very strong relationship with, inter alia, the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC) and the Latin American Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC), which enabled the enhanced provision of assistance to MARB-referred States without any duplication of effort.

27. The Representative of Italy underscored, in this context, that the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) was providing technical assistance to Georgia, a MARB-referred State, with the aim of resolving its SSC. 28. While welcoming the MARB progress report, the Representative of the Dominican Republic noted, from paragraph 2.3.2 thereof, that the situation in Panama had broader implications as a number of other States in the Latin American region might have similar deficiencies and were waiting to see how ICAO responded to the situation in Panama before taking action. Although he understood that some progress was being made by Panama and that it appeared that a solution to its SSeCs would be found that was in conformity with ICAO’s recommendations, he enquired whether any additional information was available regarding Haiti, another MARB-referred State, to enable greater attention to be paid to addressing its situation.

29. Emphasizing that a considerable amount of work was underway with Haiti to rectify its SSC through the North American, Central American and Caribbean Regional Office in Mexico City and the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB), the Secretary General indicated that updated information thereon was available on the Council website. 30. In voicing appreciation to the Secretary General for his progress report, the Representative of Norway underscored that he valued the important work of the MARB and of the Organization as a whole in addressing States’ SSCs and SSeCs. Responding to a query then raised by the Representative regarding paragraph 2.3.2 of the paper, the Chief of the Aviation Security Branch (C/AVSEC) recalled that the SSeC mechanism had been approved by the Council in February 2010 (189/3) and introduced in October 2010. Panama’s Universal Security Audit Programme (USAP) audit had taken place subsequently, and SSeCs had been identified. Other States in the vicinity of Panama had been audited prior to the introduction of the SSeC mechanism and there had been no means to apply the latter retroactively to earlier results. Based on

- 105 - C-MIN 201/5 (Closed)

the findings of the said USAP audits conducted before the mechanism’s introduction and on information subsequently acquired informally, the Secretariat had some belief that similar SSeCs might be found in the Latin American region. That might result in States in the vicinity of Panama attracting continuous monitoring activity early in the implementation of the USAP-CMA, which was to be rolled out in full in 2015. 31. In also expressing gratitude for the paper, the Representative of Spain emphasized that it provided a comprehensive overview of the safety and security situation in MARB-referred States, including the progress made by some in rectifying their deficiencies. He underscored the importance of the ICAO Coordinated Validation Missions (ICVMs) in not only confirming the progress made but also in motivating the States concerned to make further progress. Noting, with satisfaction, that in most MARB cases, technical assistance was being provided under the Regular Programme Budget to remedy the States’ SSCs and SSeCs, the Representative of Spain queried whether such assistance was available for all cases. He also enquired as t o the role of the Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB) in the provision of technical cooperation to rectify deficiencies. The Director of TCB (D/TCB) clarified that in two cases TCB had individual technical cooperation projects with MARB-referred States (Kazakhstan and Panama) to resolve their deficiencies. In other cases, TCB administered regional technical cooperation projects to rectify SSCs and SSeCs, namely Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programme (COSCAPs) projects such as those with the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS), South Asia (SA) and the Southern African Development Community, and Cooperative Aviation Security Programme (CASP) projects. 32. Noting that the Republic of Congo, a State in his region, had made very good progress in rectifying its SSeC, the Representative of Cameroon affirmed the need for regional representation for improving the situation in central Africa. He thus assured the Council that his Delegation would take all necessary measures to communicate with the national authorities of the States concerned in his region and solicit their political will in order to make progress. 33. In sharing the concerns expressed by the Representative of the Dominican Republic regarding Panama, a close neighbour, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) recalled that he had met with the Panamanian authorities in December 2013 and raised the said concern regarding Panama’s SSeCs. There had been a clear commitment on the part of Panama to remedy its security situation. In highlighting the important role which the ICAO Regional Offices, technical cooperation and technical assistance, and the SAFE Fund played in identifying and rectifying deficiencies, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) cited the cases of Kazakhstan and the Republic of Congo.

34. In also underscoring the importance of ICAO Coordinated Validation Missions (ICVMs), the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) expressed concern that some MARB-referred States were considered only to be potential candidates for such missions and sought information regarding the eligibility criteria.

35. The Director of the Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) clarified that her Bureau worked very closely with the relevant Regional Office to determine the best time to conduct an ICVM of a MARB-referred State. An assessment was made, either on-site or remotely, of the maturity, and a decision was taken to either conduct on on-site ICVM or to use the new online procedure for validation. She underscored that the purpose of such validation was to assist the State concerned by recognizing its progress in rectifying its deficiencies.

C-MIN 201/5 (Closed) - 106 -

36. In expressing appreciation for the addition, in the progress report, of the definitions of the levels of progress in resolving the reasons for referral to the MARB, the Representative of the United Kingdom affirmed that they rendered it a very useful quick reference document. Observing that it had improved with every iteration since he had become a Representative, he stressed the need for the Council to recognize the Secretariat’s efforts. 37. Responding to a question raised by the Representative of Portugal regarding those States which had not responded to ICAO’s monitoring and assistance efforts for some time, the Secretary General indicated that if States had been on the MARB’s list for several years, then their prospect of removal therefrom was minimal. There were several ways in which to deal with such States: t o increase the provision of assistance; to intervene at the highest level, such as through a joint letter from the President of the Council and the Secretary General to the Head of State/Head of Government concerned, as mentioned by the Representative of Mexico; and to bring the matter before the Council in accordance with Article 54 j) of the Chicago Convention. The Secretary General noted, in this regard, that the AFI Steering Committee would, for the first time, convene its meeting in Dakar, Senegal, rather than at ICAO Headquarters, to encourage the entire African community to participate in the AFI Aviation Safety Symposium that would take place in that same city from 27 to 28 May 2014. A meeting would be organized on the fringes of that symposium with MARB-referred States having SSCs and a number of donor States in order to increase assistance to those States and to promote more progress in rectifying their safety-related deficiencies.

38. The Representative of Burkina Faso noted that the African Group on the Council had held a meeting to discuss the situation of the nine African States which were on the MARB’s list. It was not a source of pride to them that they represented half of MARB-referred States. Emphasizing that some of the said African States were making every effort to be removed from the list, he and the other Members of the African Group thanked the donors, as well as the Secretary General and the Secretariat, for doing their best to assist them. Acknowledging that some States were not responding to ICAO’s monitoring and assistance efforts, they had decided to invite the relevant Ambassadors in Ottawa to ICAO Headquarters for meetings with the Secretariat to sensitize them regarding their States’ respective safety and security situation and the way forward. It had been noted, in this regard, that the said Ambassadors reported regularly to their Ministries of Foreign Affairs.

39. The Members of the African Group were also exploring the possibility of joint missions with Representatives on the Council to each region. The relevant Regional Office would be visited. Furthermore, a joint meeting would be held with AFCAC after the intervention of the said Ambassadors with their respective States.

40. The United Republic of Tanzania, who was the Coordinator of the African Group, reiterated the Group’s concern over the number of African States which remained on the MARB’s list.

41. Voicing support for the African Group’s strategy, the Representative of the Russian Federation averred that it would help overcome any lack of political will on the part of some MARB-referred States to rectify their SSCs and SSeCs.

42. In light of the comments made regarding paragraph 2.3.2 of the paper, the Representative of India reiterated the point which he had made during the Council’s earlier consideration of the progress report on the implementation of the USAP-CMA transition plan (C-WP/14093; 201/2) that there should be no arbitrariness in the identification of SSeCs or of SSCs. It was necessary to ensure that there was uniformity, transparency and consistency in determining those deficiencies, as well as in selecting States for ICVMs and monitoring their progress in rectifying their SSeCs and/or SSCs.

- 107 - C-MIN 201/5 (Closed)

43. Noting the approaches being formulated to respond to this issue, including the issues of joint letters to Heads of State/Heads of Government, the mobilization of the Council and taking advantage of the Ottawa diplomatic corps to reach Ministries of Foreign Affairs, the Representative of Canada proposed also leveraging the United Nations (UN) family. He underscored, in this regard, that the UN had many agencies in States with SSCs and/or SSeCs which were engaged in an ongoing economic dialogue with their national authorities. The President of the Council commended this suggestion.

44. In expressing appreciation for the proposed regional cooperation, the Representative of Malaysia noted that a few States from the Asia and Pacific region were on the MARB’s list. Observing that while some of them were making good progress in rectifying their deficiencies, others were only making minimal progress, he enquired whether technical assistance or technical cooperation would continue to be provided to enable those States to eliminate their SSCs and/or SSeCs and to therefore be removed from the MARB’s list. 45. In response, D/ANB emphasized that the Secretariat’s highest priority was to assist MARB-referred States to improve their safety and security situations and therefore be removed from the list. She stressed, however, that the States’ progress in rectifying their deficiencies could never be predicted. The Secretariat could only provide assistance. It was up to the States concerned to take the requisite action in order to be removed from the MARB’s list.

46. In summarizing the discussion, the President of the Council noted that the progress reports on the activities of the MARB were very relevant and important, and that significant improvements had been made to their format and contents thanks to the efforts of the Secretariat. Pertinent issues had been raised and had been taken on board, including: the issuance of joint letters by the President of the Council and the Secretary General to Heads of State/Heads of Government; the importance of the provision of technical assistance and technical cooperation to the rectification by MARB-referred States of their deficiencies; the importance of coordination with other stakeholders, particularly the regional civil aviation bodies, in such efforts; the responsibility of States represented on the Council to other States within their rotational/regional groups; and the importance of collaboration between Representatives and the Secretariat in order for safety- and security-related information to be transmitted to the States concerned in a timely manner.

47. In applauding the efforts being made by the African Group to engage the Ambassadors in Ottawa of African States on the MARB’s list and the proposal to work with UN agencies to promote the rectification of deficiencies, the President of the Council affirmed the importance of working with all stakeholders that could assist ICAO in addressing such safety- and security-related challenges. He underscored that both he and the Secretary General would be pleased to raise the issue of SSCs and/or SSeCs with Heads of State/Heads of Government whenever the opportunity arose, including during their missions. 48. Having completed its consideration of C-WP/14099 Restricted, the Council noted the information contained therein. Representatives were invited to consult the MARB presentations available on the Council website under “Periodic Reports” for additional details on the specific monitoring and assistance activities taken for each referred State, as well as for States of concern which had not been formally referred to the MARB. 49. The Council reconvened in open session at 1125 hours to consider the remaining items on its order of business.

- 109 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE FIFTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, WEDNESDAY, 5 MARCH 2014, AT 1125 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E.A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M.E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. M. Deslisle (Alt.) Mr. Chunyu Ding (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Canada ― China ― Japan ― Mexico ― Republic of Korea ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Dr. Fang Liu Mr. I. Galán Mr. B. Djibo Mr. R. Bhalla Mr. J. Augustin Mr. J. Marriott Mr. H. Gourdji Mr. S. Berti Mr. W. Parks Mr. A. Djojonegoro Mr. A. Larcos Miss S. Black

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― D/ADB ― D/TCB ― D/ATB ― C/FIN ― A/D/LEB ― C/AVSEC ― C/CMO ― C/SFP ― ISD-SEC ― SFP ― ACC ― Précis-writer

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 110 -

Representatives to ICAO Ecuador Lebanon Peru Airports Council International (ACI) European Union (EU)

- 111 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

Subject No. 52: Unlawful interference with international civil aviation and its facilities

Report of the Implementation Support and Development — Security (ISD-SEC) Programme 1. The Council had for consideration: information paper C-WP/14098, in which the Secretary General reported on the progress achieved in implementing the ISD-SEC Programme in 2013; and an oral report thereon by the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC), which had considered the paper during the First Meeting of its current session on 29 January 2014. 2. The UIC had noted the assistance projects and training activities that had been completed during the year, as w ell as the projects currently being implemented. The Secretariat had underlined appreciation for the support that States had provided in terms of resources and expertise for the implementation of ICAO assistance activities.

3. The UIC recommended that, in view of the recent informal briefing on measuring the effectiveness of assistance by the Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB), future progress reports on technical assistance be in the form of working papers and include quantitative indicators showing the improvements made as a result of the assistance provided. The Committee also recommended that such information be provided in tabular format. 4. The Representative of Italy noted, from the Council’s earlier review of the progress report of the Monitoring and Assistance Review Board (MARB) (cf. C-WP/14099 Restricted), that not all of the States with Significant Security Concerns (SSeCs) were listed in Appendix B as receiving direct aviation security assistance under the ISD-SEC Programme or participating in ICAO aviation security training courses and workshops. He therefore encouraged the Secretariat to engage more with those States and thus assist them in rectifying their SSeCs.

5. In further highlighting that four States which were listed in the MARB’s progress report as receiving technical assistance to resolve their SSeCs were not listed in Appendix B to C-WP/14098 as receiving direct aviation security assistance, the Representative of Singapore stressed the need for the two reports to be consistent in future. Reiterating that not all MARB-referred States with SSeCs were participating in ICAO aviation security training courses and workshops, he suggested that the Regional Offices concerned systematically encourage their participation.

6. The Chief of the Aviation Security Branch (C/AVSEC) underscored that the provision of technical assistance to States was not necessarily dependent upon their having been referred to the MARB and that the presence of a State on the MARB’s list did not necessarily guarantee that it would receive assistance in rectifying its deficiencies. In each case, a decision had to be made regarding the capacity of the Secretariat to directly effect improvements. In some instances, the challenges that a State faced and which brought it to the MARB’s attention were not matters which ICAO could change. C/AVSEC cited, as an example, the lack of political will. He emphasized that joint letters by the President of the Council and the Secretary General to the Head of State/Head of Government concerned could motivate improvement. 7. While endorsing the UIC’s recommendation that future technical assistance progress reports include quantitative indicators, the Representative of Norway enquired whether that was feasible. He expressed satisfaction with the work being carried out under the ISD-SEC Programme and the consequent enhancement of the implementation of the Organization’s Strategic Objective C: Security & Facilitation.

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 112 -

8. Noting that the Secretariat shared the interest of UIC Members and other Council Representatives in providing quantitative data to demonstrate progress in improving aviation security, C/AVSEC indicated that it had been working with a number of ICAO Members States which were leaders in assistance activities to develop such useful quantitative indicators, which could be produced on an ongoing basis. Underscoring that it was an extremely challenging task to identify appropriate quantitative indicators for aviation security, he noted that the Secretariat would be engaging the Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) in that task during its upcoming Twenty-fifth Meeting (Montréal, 17 to 21 March 2014). The Secretariat was currently developing a dashboard-type system for aviation security as a s tarting point for better metrics.

9. Responding to a question then raised by the Representative of Norway regarding paragraph 2.7 of the paper, C/AVSEC recalled that for a long time ICAO had conducted needs assessments of States using only Secretariat personnel. By also engaging State experts in such assessments, the Organization obtained a different perspective which helped to produce a more holistic, more comprehensive and ultimately, more useful assessment for the production of a report which could lead to the delivery of assistance activities. ICAO welcomed any offers, at any time, for State experts to participate in the conduct of joint needs assessments. 10. In replying to a query by the Representative of the United Kingdom, the Secretary General indicated that he wished to have the vacant post of Chief, ISD-SEC filled as quickly as possible. He recalled that the previous Chief, ISD-SEC had been redeployed to the Middle East region to assist with the implementation of the recently-concluded Co-operative Aviation Security Programme – Middle East (CASP-MID), which the Secretary General considered to be of the highest importance. 11. In the absence of further comments, the Council noted information paper C-WP/14098 and the UIC’s oral report thereon. The Secretariat was requested to: consider the UIC’s above-mentioned recommendations, in consultation with the AVSECP, with a view to developing ways to better highlight the impact of ICAO’s assistance programmes and thus encourage more voluntary contributions thereto; and to also take into account, in future reports, the need for the Council to consider implementation and assistance issues in a more holistic manner.

12. The Council expressed appreciation to those States which were providing support to ICAO’s aviation security programme through voluntary financial contributions and/or in-kind contributions, which enabled much work to be performed. Subject No. 14.2: Regional Plans

Annual Report to Council on Regional Offices’ activities during 2013 and work programmes for 2014

13. Tabled for the Council’s consideration was information paper C-WP/14090, in which the Secretary General presented a summary report of the activities undertaken by the Regional Offices in 2013 and those planned for 2014, as well as the Regional Offices’ respective annual reports and future work programmes. 14. During his introduction of the paper, the Secretary General indicated that despite his best efforts to set forth an exhaustive picture of the Regional Offices’ activities, he was not fully satisfied with the way in which it was presented. Recalling that 25 per cent of the Regular Budget was allocated to the Regional Offices, he noted that future reports would focus more on the outcomes of the Regional Offices’

- 113 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

activities and their impacts on the achievement of the Organization`s Strategic Objectives. Furthermore, they would be produced using a template to improve consistency. In underscoring that efforts would be increased to enhance cooperation between the Regional Offices and the regional civil aviation bodies and regional organizations, the Secretary General solicited the assistance of the President of the Council so that they could undertake that work together. 15. In the course of the ensuing discussion, all Representatives who took the floor agreed with the Secretary General’s analysis and endorsed the comments and suggestions made by the various speakers. In so doing, the Representative of the United Kingdom averred that the Council should have requested, in the first instance, an annual report on the Regional Offices’ achievements rather than one on their activities. He expressed his willingness, and that of other Representatives, to assist in giving a better shape to the annual report in future.

16. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) recalled that during the Council’s consideration of the 2011 annual report on Regional Offices’ activities (C-WP/13793; 195/2), a proposal had been made, and noted, that future reports contain a methodology to assess the impact of the Regional Offices’ activities on the attainment of the Organization’s Strategic Objectives. In emphasizing the need to recognize all of the efforts being made by the Regional Offices to support ICAO Member States, he underscored that, despite their financial and human resources constraints, they had provided much assistance in 2013. 17. The Representative of Mexico proposed that the Regional Offices establish performance indicators to demonstrate the results of their activities, particularly in terms of enhancing compliance with ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) and capacity-building. Future annual reports should include such indicators. In addition, they should focus on the most substantive issues confronting the Regional Offices. The Representative of Mexico suggested that all proposals to improve the Regional Offices’ annual reports be submitted to the Secretary General in writing. 18. Echoing the remarks made by previous speakers, particularly the Representative of the United Kingdom, the Representative of Australia welcomed the Secretary General’s further commitments to objectively identify the impacts of the Regional Offices’ activities on the achievement of ICAO’s Strategic Objectives. Noting that many projects were underway to enhance efficiency and effectiveness, she cited the Organization-wide implementation of a performance management system. The Representative of Australia also recalled, from the Safety Week presentations which had been made during the last (201/4) meeting, that the reports of the Global Air Navigation Plan (GANP) and the Global Aviation Safety Plan (GASP) would contain a dashboard of indicators at the regional level. She suggested that future annual reports on the Regional Offices’ be tabled for discussion in conjunction with safety-related papers. While agreeing that there was always room for improvement, the Representative of Australia affirmed that good progress was being made and that the Organization was going very much in the right direction.

19. In reiterating the need for the said annual reports to be more precise, the Representative of India suggested that the results of the Regional Offices’ activities be presented in a table, together with the expected outcomes for the year. He underscored that it was also necessary to evaluate whether or not the Regional Offices were vested with the authority they required to meet those objectives. Recalling that a Council Retreat would be held in Montebello, Québec from 13 to 14 June 2014, the Representative of India proposed that an item relating to the ICAO Regional Offices be added to its agenda which would encompass a r eview of the Regional Offices’ current functions and consideration of possible further delegation of authority. He also suggested that the ICAO Regional Directors make a presentation thereon.

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 114 -

20. The Representative of Spain proposed that each Regional Office develop an action plan containing performance indicators which would be in line with the Organization’s action plan, in order to enable the Council to validate the outcomes and the progress made. He also suggested that, under the proposed new agenda item for the Council Retreat, consideration be given to the Council’s oversight of activities in the regions.

21. The Representative of Singapore maintained that it was difficult to discern the trees from the forest in the current annual report on Regional Offices’ activities, in particular, it was hard to identify which part pertained to the GANP and which to the GASP. While considering that the said dashboard of indicators at the regional level would be useful, he suggested that the Regional Offices’ annual reports contain a statement of challenges faced by States in the respective regions as they might not be evident from the dashboard. 22. The Representative of Cameroon noted that the key points of importance specific to each Regional Office set forth in paragraph 2.7 of the paper generally represented the challenges being faced. In underscoring the importance of regional projects, he highlighted the AFI Comprehensive Implementation Plan for Aviation Safety in Africa (AFI Plan), which enabled regional safety challenges to be addressed in a harmonized way.

23. In sharing the view expressed by the Representative of India regarding the possible further delegation of authority to the Regional Offices, the Representative of Malaysia indicated that it was his understanding that they wished to take more action that there were authorized to in order to mitigate some of the deficiencies of those States to which they were accredited. 24. Agreeing on the need to focus attention on the challenges being faced by the Regional Offices, the Representative of the Russian Federation concurred that the issue should be considered at the Council Retreat under the suggested new agenda item. In underscoring that the Regional Offices, unlike the Council, had a comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the situation of the States to which they were accredited, he indicated that the Council could adjust its activities and priorities in light of the information provided by the Regional Offices. 25. Responding to a suggestion by the Representative that the information contained in C-WP/14090 be posted on the ICAO public website, the President of the Council noted that the reports of each of the Regional Offices, presented as separate Appendices to the paper, were already available, in English, on the ICAO-Net.

26. In voicing support for all of the suggestions made to enhance the Regional Offices’ annual reports, the Representative of France stressed that it was essential for the Council and the Organization’s partners to have a better understanding of the Regional Offices’ achievements. He underscored that it was also important, during any future global consideration of the organization of the Regional Offices, to take into account the following two factors: aligning the functions of the Regional Offices and their structure along rational lines; and in discussing the possible further delegation of certain functions to the Regional Offices, to articulate the need for overall coherence and the eventual merits of such decentralization. 27. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) observed that different results were sometimes obtained when Council Representatives evaluated the Regional Offices from ICAO Headquarters on the basis of the annual reports on their activities and when they evaluated them in person. He noted that several Representatives from the South American (SAM) region had thus committed to visiting the SAM Regional Office in Lima, Peru, in order to have a closer perspective and thus a more

- 115 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

realistic view of the Regional Office’s expectations, experiences, knowledge and needs and to therefore be in a b etter position to provide guidance. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) affirmed that, when considering the possible delegation of more responsibilities to the Regional Offices, it was better to do so from the trenches rather than from ICAO Headquarters. In recommending that other Council Representatives regularly visit the Regional Offices, he suggested that they visit the SAM Regional Office in 2014.

28. Referring to paragraph 4.1 d) of the paper, the Representative of Norway enquired whether the economic development of air transport and environmental protection were only a small part of the overall work programmes of the Regional Offices due to a lack of specialists or to a lack of resources with which to employ specialists.

29. Clarifying that it was attributable to a lack of budgetary resources, the Secretary General noted that none of the Regional Offices had a post related to air transport matters or environmental issues. While Aviation Security Regional Officers had recently been deployed in all seven Regional Offices, and Technical Assistance Regional Officers in five Regional Offices, there had not been any budgetary allocation for the establishment of posts relating to the economic development of air transport and environmental protection.

30. The President of the Council recalled that in his introductory remarks the Secretary General had highlighted the importance of enhancing cooperation between the Regional Offices and the regional civil aviation bodies and regional organizations, and requested his support in that regard as it was necessary for ICAO to set the objectives in some fields. He underscored that such increased cooperation could enable ICAO to access the resources available within the regions, including from the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC), the Arab Civil Aviation Commission (ACAC), the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) and the Latin American Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC). The President of the Council noted, in this context, that in most cases the ICAO Regional Offices were co-located with the said regional civil aviation bodies. 31. The Council noted, with appreciation, information paper C-WP/14090 on the activities undertaken by the Regional Offices in 2013 and those planned for 2014. In so doing, the Council expressed appreciation for the work being done by the Regional Offices and the desire to empower them to do more.

32. Comments and suggestions made during the discussion to further enhance the format and content of future reports were noted for consideration. It was agreed to include, on t he agenda of the upcoming Council Retreat (Montebello, Québec, 13-14 June 2014), an item relating to the ICAO Regional Offices, which would encompass the pertinent issues raised, such as: the development, by each Regional Office, of an action plan containing performance indicators, and a statement of challenges faced by States in the respective regions; the review of the Regional Offices’ current functions and consideration of possible further delegation of authority; and the Council’s oversight of activities in the regions. It was understood that advance information on the said agenda item would be provided to the ICAO Regional Directors to facilitate their preparatory work for the Retreat. Subject No. 42: Technical cooperation

Report on Technical Co-operation Programme Development 33. The Council considered this subject on the basis of: an oral report by the Secretary General on the Technical Co-operation Programme’s operational and financial performance, as well as on the

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 116 -

preliminary financial results of the Administrative and Operational Services Cost (AOSC) Fund, for the reporting period ending 31 December 2013; and a joint oral report thereon by the Finance Committee (FIC) and the Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC). The two oral reports are given below. Oral report by the Secretary General 34. The Council, at its 192nd Session, decided to change the reporting requirements of the Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB) set forth in C-DEC 188/12 and requested that an oral report on the preliminary financial and operational performance results of the Technical Co-operation Programme for the previous year be presented to the Council in the Winter session, pending a full written report, with audited figures, which should be provided in the Spring session. Programme Financial Performance

35. The total Technical Co-operation Programme implementation for the year 2013 amounted to approximately USD 137.2 million, representing an increase of about 4.7 per cent as compared to 2012. These results fully met the expected implementation of USD 137.0 million reported to the Council in November 2013 (C-WP/14061; 200/2). 36. A breakdown of the Technical Co-operation Programme’s geographical distribution in 2013 shows that, in terms of economic resources, the Americas region continued to account for the majority of the Programme delivery at 79.7 per cent, while the Europe and Middle East region represented 10.2 per cent, followed by the Africa region and the Asia and Pacific region at 7.5 and 2.6 per cent, respectively. The personnel and training components of the projects accounted for 32.3 per cent of the total Programme for the year, while procurement activities represented 67.7 per cent. AOSC Income and Expenditure 37. Given the increase in implementation impacting the volume of support costs recovered from projects, the AOSC Fund is expected to arrive at a surplus of approximately CAD 1.1 million in 2013. Total estimated AOSC income amounted to approximately CAD 9.3 m illion and expenditures to CAD 8.2 million. The AOSC Fund accumulated surplus stands at approximately CAD 3.1 million as at 31 December 2013. It is to be noted that the figures presented in this oral report are based on estimates and are subject to change upon completion of transactions from the field and other final adjustments. 38. A full written report with audited figures for 2013, together with an update of the programme forecast and AOSC budgetary estimates for 2013, will be presented to the Council through the Finance Committee and Technical Co-operation Committee at the Spring (202nd) Session. Programme Operational Performance 39. During 2013, there were 82 national and 29 regional operationally active technical cooperation projects contributing to further improving aviation safety, security, environmental protection and sustainable development of air transport in 138 countries. Of these countries, 42 are in the Africa region, 33 in the Asia and Pacific region, 41 in the Americas region and 22 in the Europe and Middle East region.

- 117 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

40. In coordination with the Implementation Support and Development Section – Security (ISD-SEC) in the Air Transport Bureau (ATB), TCB also implemented two aviation security technical assistance projects in Bahrain and Haiti, which were funded by the ICAO AVSEC Fund in the amount of USD 142 100 and 136 900, respectively.

Experts

41. Three hundred and two (302) international field experts were deployed in 2013 as compared to 272 in 2012, and 625 national experts were recruited for civil aviation administrations, compared to 936 in 2012. These experts were responsible for the transfer of knowledge in various fields to national counterparts, the implementation of ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), the development of adequate civil aviation organizational structures, institutional development and capacity building, as well as the rectification of safety and security deficiencies.

Training 42. Reflective of the Bureau’s greater focus on capacity-building, 3 799 nationals received in-country training, as compared to 4 236 in 2012. This was in addition to the training provided to 453 staff under procurement contracts, compared with 293 in the previous year. Furthermore, 623 fellowships were awarded under the ICAO Fellowship Programme and the Developing Countries Training Programme, the latter offered by Indonesia, the Republic of Korea and Singapore, as compared to 573 fellowships in 2012. These fellowships were awarded mainly in the fields of flight safety, aviation security and air navigation. The training of management, technical and operational personnel was particularly important in terms of improving State oversight capabilities.

Procurement

43. Civil aviation equipment and services were procured for a total of USD 92.8 million, compared to USD 87.2 m illion in 2012. Assistance provided to States to upgrade their civil aviation infrastructure ranged from the development of technical specifications in compliance with ICAO SARPs and regional air navigation plans, tendering and administering of complex multiphase turnkey contracts to the commissioning of equipment, and had a direct and positive impact on the safety and security of airports, communications and air navigation infrastructure, enabling more efficient and economic aviation operations in the countries and regions concerned. 44. A summary of the major achievements for each technical project will be provided in the Annual Report of the Council – 2013. An outline of the main activities implemented by region will be part of the written report to the 202nd Session of the Council. Joint FIC/TCC oral report 45. The FIC and the TCC considered the Secretary General’s oral report at a joint meeting held during the current session on 24 January 2014. The Committees had been informed that, based on the most recent records on the date of the meeting, TCB had implemented a Programme of USD 137.2 million in 2013, equalling the forecasted implementation of USD 137.0 million presented to the Council in November 2013 (C-WP/14061; 200/2). This result represented an increase of 4.7 per cent as compared to 2012.

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 118 -

46. It had been further noted that according to preliminary estimates, the AOSC Fund had generated a total income of CAD 9.3 million while incurring an expenditure of CAD 8.2 million for a surplus of CAD 1.1 million, which should bring the AOSC Fund accumulated balance to approximately CAD 3.1 million as at 31 December 2013.

47. The Members had been informed that TCB had executed 113 projects in 2013, including two technical assistance projects in the aviation security field, in coordination with the Regular Programme. Those projects had been implemented in 138 countries, where 302 international field experts and 625 national experts had been recruited for civil aviation administrations and 4 875 national personnel had received training in a variety of civil aviation disciplines. It had been acknowledged that, although the personnel and training components represented approximately 32 pe r cent of total implementation as compared with 68 per cent for procurement activities, the total income earned from these activities was practically equal.

48. The Committees had been informed that management indicators and dashboards were made available to the Council through its secure portal and updated on a quarterly basis, and that projects’ results were described in the Annual Report of the Council. Furthermore, the Work Programme of the Evaluation and Internal Audit Office (EAO) would include evaluations of selected technical cooperation projects commencing in 2014. Nevertheless, some Members had expressed the wish to also see the impact of the Technical Co-operation Programme in global civil aviation and whether identified deficiencies and significant safety and security concerns (SSCs and SSeCs) were being rectified. In addition, inclusion of key performance indicators (KPIs) and customer satisfaction survey results had been requested to further elaborate TCB’s reporting to the Council. While recognizing the challenges to measure a project's impact on the overall improvement of civil aviation, the Committees recommended that TCB consider expanding future reports in that respect.

49. In consequence, the formation of a TCC Ad Hoc Working Group on Technical Co-operation Programme Development had been proposed to review and address these reporting requirements. It had been decided that the Chairperson of the TCC, under delegated authority, select the Members of the Working Group, which would report on t he results of its deliberations during the 202nd Session of the Council. 50. Finally, the Council’s preference for an external third party to conduct independent periodic customer satisfaction surveys with funds other than the AOSC Fund and recipient States had been reconfirmed.

51. In conclusion, the Committees invited the Council to:

a) note that the Technical Co-operation Programme and AOSC Fund show reasonable levels of stability;

b) note the establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group of the TCC on T echnical

Co-operation Programme Development to review and address TCB’s reporting requirements, and

c) request that a report on the results of the Ad Hoc Working Group’s deliberations be

presented for review, through the TCC, during its 202nd Session.

- 119 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

52. The Representative of Spain endorsed this joint oral report. Referring to the first meeting of the TCC Ad Hoc Working Group, he underscored that none of the Members had been aware that they had access to the management indicators which were available on the Council website. The Representative of Spain therefore suggested that the Information and Communication Technology Section (ICT) give an informal briefing to Council Representatives on the type of information available on the website and how to access it. 53. While commending that suggestion, the President of the Council proposed that workshops instead be given to groups of interested Representatives. He noted that the desire of some FIC and TCC Members to determine the impact of the Technical Co-operation Programme in global civil aviation and in the rectification of SSCs and SSeCs was similar to the Council’s desire to measure the impact of the Regional Offices’ activities, evinced during its discussion of C-WP/14090 under the previous agenda item.

54. Observing that the TCC Ad Hoc Working Group was focusing its work on t he identification of KPIs for impact assessments of the Technical Co-operation Programme, the Representative of Spain underscored that it had the advantage of having, as a basis, the Programme’s Management Plan for the period 2014-2016 (cf. C-WP/14060; 200/2). That was in contrast to the Regional Offices, which had yet to develop action plans containing performance indicators with which to evaluate the outcomes of their activities.

55. Responding to a query by the President of the Council, the Director of the Technical Co-operation Bureau (D/TCB) recalled that a n ew provision had been incorporated in all framework agreements for ICAO technical co-operation projects stipulating that, at the request of the recipient State, and provided that it made funding available, an independent voluntary ex-post evaluation of its project could be carried out by a third party, including the ICAO internal and external auditors. To date, however, no State had expressed an interest in having such an external evaluation done at its own expense. Reiterating that an EAO evaluation of at least one ICAO technical cooperation project would be conducted each year, starting in 2014, D/TCB emphasized that the Council would be informed of the results.

56. The Representative of Spain indicated that the TCC Ad Hoc Working Group would also consider the issue of ex-post evaluations of ICAO technical cooperation projects.

57. In then noting the oral reports of the Secretary General and the FIC/TCC, the Council took the action recommended by the two Committees and:

a) noted that the Technical Co-operation Programme and the AOSC Fund show

reasonable levels of stability and congratulated the Secretariat thereon;

b) noted the establishment of an Ad Hoc Working Group of the TCC on Technical Co-operation Programme Development to review and address the reporting requirements of the TCB; and

c) requested that a report on the results of the said Ad Hoc Working Group’s deliberations

be presented for review, through the TCC, during its next (202nd) session.

58. In addition, the Council requested the Secretariat to organize workshops for groups of interested Representatives on how to access the information available on the Council website.

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 120 -

Subject No. 28: Liaison with Contracting States, including public information activities, document distribution, access to the ICAO data bank, etc.

Assistance to States and related matters

59. The Council considered this subject on the basis of C-WP/14135, in which Cameroon raised issues relating to the review of the organizational structure and functions of the Regional Offices, and of the training and capacity-building policy, the strengthening of oversight and priorities of the Council and the promotion of the coordination of regional programmes and cooperation; and an oral report thereon by the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE), which had reviewed the paper at its Second Meeting of the current session on 4 M arch 2014. The WGGE recommended the approval of the action proposed in the paper. While noting that work was already underway in ICAO to address some of the issues raised, the WGGE recommended the establishment of sub-groups to develop specific proposals to address the following issues: the functions and responsibilities of the Regional Offices; training and capacity-building; and reports to the Council on the implementation of Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs) in the regions; and regional cooperation. 60. Observing that the paper contained a number of very positive suggestions, the Representative of Spain emphasized that most of them were directly related to issues that the Council had either addressed or would address in the future. Noting that action paragraph a) invited the Secretary General to review the Regional Office Manual (ROM) to empower Regional Offices’ functions and responsibilities to assist States, he recalled that the Council had discussed the possible further delegation of authority to the Regional Offices during its earlier review of the annual report on Regional Offices’ activities during 2013 a nd work programmes for 2014 (C-WP/14090). The Representative of Spain considered that it would therefore be useful to refine, in due course, the relevant provisions of the ROM. 61. With regard to action paragraph b), in which the Secretary General was invited to review the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy to include management and leadership training, as well as train-the-trainer courses, the Representative of Spain underscored that a review of the said policy was also requested in C-WP/14136 (Review of the ICAO policy formulation process) presented by the Russian Federation, which was to be tabled for discussion later in the current session. Referring to action paragraph c) on the development of template reports for Planning and Implementation Regional Groups (PIRGs), Regional Aviation Safety Groups (RASGs) and the Regional Offices, inter alia, for more oversight by the Council, he recalled, from the Council’s said consideration of C-WP/14090, that future annual reports on the Regional Offices’ activities and work programmes would be produced using a template to improve consistency. The proposed development of Regional Office action plans containing performance indicators would facilitate that difficult task.

62. Noting that action paragraph d) called for the development of a dashboard for programme implementation from each region to avoid duplication, the Representative of Spain reiterated the importance of identifying the outcomes of the Regional Offices’ activities and consequently of formulating the said action plans.

63. The Secretary General thanked Cameroon for its important paper and the WGGE for its review thereof and the related work which it envisaged undertaking. In then commenting on the various actions proposed in the paper, he underscored, with regard to action paragraph a), that the ROM was periodically updated as it was a living document. It had recently been revised to include material regarding the management of regional technical cooperation projects, including Cooperative Development of Operational Safety and Continuing Airworthiness Programme (COSCAPs) projects, and the role of the

- 121 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

Technical Assistance Regional Officer in the Regional Offices. A new chapter on the Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme (USOAP) Continuous Monitoring Approach (CMA) would soon be introduced. The Secretariat was thus going in the direction suggested by Cameroon in terms of updating and amending the ROM in order to better assist States.

64. Drawing attention to action paragraph b), the Secretary General reiterated that the issue of reviewing the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy would be discussed during consideration of C-WP/14136 (Review of the ICAO policy formulation process) presented by the Russian Federation. His establishment of the Global Aviation Training Office would be discussed in conjunction with the said training policy. The Secretary General highlighted that the President of the Council had recently signed the ICAO – Singapore Agreement on Leadership and Management Training — a very important piece of work. Furthermore, a new training course for Directors General of Civil Aviation (DGCAs) would be launched in conjunction with the Asia and Pacific (APAC) DGCA Conference (Hong Kong, 24-27 November 2014) and new safety management and dangerous goods courses would be available in the summer of 2014. Successful completion of the USOAP CMA computer-based training (CBT) was now a requirement for Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB) experts. Training of the COSCAP Project Coordinators (PCs)/Chief Technical Advisors (CTAs) and Regional Technical Assistance Officers was planned for 2014. Thus action was being taken in the direction proposed by Cameroon in C-WP/14135. 65. With respect to action paragraph c), the Secretary General recalled that at the First Global PIRGs/RASGs Coordination Meeting (Montréal, 19 March 2013) it had been agreed to establish regional safety and air navigation priorities, indicators, metrics and targets. Pursuant to participants’ request that similar meetings be convened every two years, the next such meeting was scheduled to be held in February 2015, in conjunction with the High-level Safety Conference. A standard annual PIRG/RASG consolidated report would be presented to the Council by the Secretariat and the President of the Air Navigation Commission (ANC).

66. Observing that another issue raised in C-WP/14135 was cooperation with regional organizations and regional civil aviation bodies, the Secretary General underscored that a number of references in paragraph 2.1.1 needed to be updated. He emphasized, in this context, that ICAO had concluded Memoranda of Cooperation (MoCs) with the Arab Civil Aviation Commission (ACAC), the African Civil Aviation Commission (AFCAC), the African Union Commission (AUC), the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC), the European Union (EU) and the Latin American Civil Aviation Commission (LACAC). However, there was still insufficient cooperation and some duplication of activities which should be avoided by respecting agreed respective areas of leadership and coordinating event calendars. The Secretary General recalled that he and the President of the Council had agreed to work together to enhance cooperation between the Regional Offices and the regional civil aviation bodies. In then drawing attention to paragraph 2.4.2 o f the paper, he underscored that the proposal to coordinate ICAO/regional organization relationships among the various regions was not considered to be feasible. Averring that it would be a huge undertaking, the Secretary General indicated that he failed to see the necessity for the action proposed.

67. Endorsing the comments made by the Representative of Spain, the Representative of Burkina Faso suggested that the Council accept Cameroon’s good intention in presenting C-WP/14135 and request the WGGE to develop more specific proposals on the issues identified in its oral report, taking into consideration the work currently underway.

C-MIN 201/5 (Open) - 122 -

68. In then taking the action proposed in the executive summary of C-WP/14135, as amended by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, the Council:

a) expressed appreciation to Cameroon for its presentation of C-WP/14135, to the WGGE

for its review thereof, and to the Secretary General for providing supplementary information on the excellent work being done to address some of the issues raised in the paper;

b) noted the ongoing work relating to the review of the Regional Offices’ functions and responsibilities and the periodic updating of the Regional Office Manual (ROM);

c) noted that the issue of reviewing the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy would be discussed later in the current session during its consideration of C-WP/14136 (Review of the ICAO policy formulation process) presented by the Russian Federation;

d) noted that development was underway of a reporting template for PIRGs and RASGs

and reiterated the importance of also developing a reporting template for the Regional Offices;

e) noted that the President of the Council and the Secretary General would pursue the

enhancement of coordination between the ICAO Regional Offices and the regional civil aviation bodies and regional organizations to increase the Regional Offices’ outreach and impact and to avoid duplication of efforts;

f) accepted the WGGE’s oral report on C-WP/14135; and

g) requested the Working Group to consider, in consultation with the Secretariat, the

work currently underway to address the four outstanding issues identified in its oral report and to present its report, including any proposals for additional actions, to the Council at its next (202nd) session.

69. It was noted, with regard to paragraph 68 g) above, that it was within the WGGE’s competence to establish sub-groups to facilitate its said review. Subject No. 16: Legal work of the Organization Subject No. 24.3: Action on Assembly resolutions and decisions

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Legal subjects 70. The Council reviewed C-WP/14097, in which the Secretary General proposed actions to implement Assembly Resolutions A38-19 and A38-20 and relevant Assembly decisions related to legal subjects emanating from the Legal Commission of the 38th Session of the Assembly. 71. In supporting the paper, the Representative of France emphasized that, for the Legal Committee to achieve all of its objectives on time, it was essential that it be involved with the Secretariat in the implementation of the proposed actions. States should be consulted well in advance, by questionnaire, regarding the various topics referred to in the proposed actions. Moreover, the Legal Committee should be informed of the composition of the envisaged task forces well in advance and information on the status of

- 123 - C-MIN 201/5 (Open)

their work should be submitted to the Legal Committee in a timely manner, well before its next session in 2015. These comments were noted. 72. The Council then approved the actions proposed by the Secretary General in the Appendix to C-WP/14097 in order to effectively respond to the resolutions and decisions of the 38th Session of the Assembly in the legal field.

Any other business Subject No. 7: Organization and personnel Subject No. 7.1: Organization of the Secretariat

Restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat 73. The Council agreed to waive Rule 26 b) of the Rules of Procedure for the Council (Doc 7559), whereby working papers are to be distributed to all Representatives at least five working days in advance of the meeting at which they are to be considered, to enable C-WP/14137 (Restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat) to be tabled for discussion on Monday, 10 March 2014. Subject No. 13: Work programmes of Council and its subsidiary bodies

Addition of a new item to the Council’s Work Programme for the 201st Session

74. In accordance with Rule 24 of the Rules of Procedure for the Council (Doc 7559), the Council agreed to include the item “Consideration of Directives for Panels of ICAO” on its Work Programme for the current (201st) session, to be considered on the basis of an oral report presented by the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) at the next meeting on Friday, 7 March 2014. It was noted that this item would be included in an Addendum to the Work Programme (C-WP/14076). Subject No. 52.1: Universal Security Audit Programme

Progress report on the implementation of the Universal Security Audit Programme — Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) transition plan

75. A proposal by the Representative of the Russian Federation to re-open discussion of the generic Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the conduct of USAP-CMA activities approved earlier by the Council (C-WP/14093, Appendix; C 201/2) and to refer the MoU to the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC) for review of certain paragraphs and report to the Council later in the current session did not receive the support of the majority of Representatives as required in Rule 43 of the Rules of Procedure for the Council (Doc 7559). The Council’s decision regarding the said MoU therefore stood [cf. C-DEC 201/2, paragraph 11 b)]. The concerns expressed by the Representative of the Russian Federation were noted. 76. The meeting adjourned at 1300 hours.

- 125 - C-MIN 201/6

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SIXTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, FRIDAY, 7 MARCH 2014, AT 1000 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Cameroon Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. J.L. Vieira (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. E. Zoa Etundi — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E.A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M.E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. C.M. Vallarino (Alt.) Mr. M. Deslisle (Alt.) Mr. Chunyu Ding (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.) Mr. J. Bracken (Alt.)

― Argentina ― Canada ― China ― Japan ― Mexico ― Republic of Korea ― United Arab Emirates ― United States

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Mr. I. Galán Mr. J. Augustin Mr. J. Weich Mr. M. Fox Mr. B. Verhaegen Mrs. L.M. Comeau-Stuart Mrs. K. Balram Mr. I. Fuller Mr. A. Jacob Ms. O. Bondareva Mr. M. Leitgab Mr. A. Larcos Miss S. Black

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― D/TCB ― A/D/LEB ― DD/HR-ADB ― C/OPS ― SELO ― C/POD ― C/SEA ― Ethics Officer ― SLO ― LEB ― ADADB ― ACC ― Précis-writer

C-MIN 201/6 - 126 -

Representatives to ICAO Cuba Ecuador Greece Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lebanon Peru Turkey

- 127 - C-MIN 201/6

International Women’s Day 2014 1. The following statement was pronounced by the President of the Council on the occasion of International Women’s Day, commemorated at United Nations (UN) Headquarters in New York exceptionally on 7 March 2014:

“Each year, International Women's Day is celebrated around the world — usually on the 8th of March. Thousands of events occur on or near this date to mark the economic, political and social achievements of women.

“This year, International Women's Day will be commemorated at UN Headquarters in

New York on the 7th of March, on the eve of the 58th Session of the Commission on the Status of Women. The theme which has been chosen to mark International Women's Day in 2014 is: Equality for Women is Progress for All.

“This theme emphasizes how gender equality, empowerment of women, women’s full

enjoyment of human rights and the eradication of poverty are essential to economic and social development. It also stresses the vital role of women as agents of development. With the 2015 deadline to achieve the Millennium Development Goals just around the corner, International Women’s Day is also an opportunity to review the challenges and achievements in the implementation of these goals for women and girls.

“In light of the importance of this date to women around the world, and to how its

development goals relate to ICAO’s mission, I would encourage all Council Members to reflect today on the important roles which women have played and continue to play, both here at ICAO and within each of your States, in support of our common international objectives for global air transport progress, as well as the broader United Nations Millennium Development Goals.”. 2. In response, the Representative of Australia made the following statement, on behalf of the female Representatives on the Council, namely herself and the Representatives of Nicaragua, Poland, Portugal and the United Arab Emirates:

“In 1975, on the occasion of the International Women’s Year, the United Nations started celebrating International Women’s Day on 8 March. A few years later, the UN General Assembly recognized the role of women in peace efforts and development and urged an end to discrimination and an increase of support for women's full and equal participation.

“According to the UN, International Women's Day is celebrated to recognize women’s

achievements without regard to divisions, whether national, ethnic, linguistic, cultural, economic or political. It’s an occasion for looking back on past struggles and accomplishments, but more importantly, it’s looking ahead to the untapped potential and opportunities that await future generations of women.

“On this occasion, we’d like to commemorate the first woman to serve as a Council

Representative when in December 1971 it was announced that Mrs. Betty Crites Dillon, from the US, would join the then 27-Member Council of ICAO. Mrs. Dillon was a licensed private pilot, an authority on air transportation, and a Peace Corps veteran. She served on the Council from 1971 to 1977.

“This ICAO triennium sees the largest cohort of women serving on the Council — with

five very independent, capable and accomplished women representing States from most regions of the

C-MIN 201/6 - 128 -

globe. It is illustrative of the ever-increasing leadership roles that women are playing in all areas of endeavor despite some of the ongoing challenges many still face.

“We stand at the ready to promote cooperation with foreign female students and young

female aviation professionals, to reach out to them, to provide support in their aviation careers, and to make ICAO a more familiar and friendly forum for women working in the aviation sector in our regions.

“Within ICAO, we wish to enthusiastically acknowledge and encourage the many hard

working women that make this Organization operate effectively and efficiently, including those that work in the technical areas of ICAO, those who provide administrative support, those who help us to understand each other in this multilingual environment, and those that keep us secure and our offices clean — we thank each and every one for your dedication to your work.

“While we note that there is no official International Men’s Day, we also take this

opportunity to celebrate our male colleagues whom we have the pleasure of working with to advance international aviation for the benefit of all. We sincerely hope that our cooperation will be fruitful and that it will bring into our work more light and positive energy.

“Finally, we’d like to make a symbolic gesture to celebrate this special day by providing

each of the Council Members and each of the females present in this room and in the interpretation booths, with a simple flower. While flowers can have various meanings in different cultures, we see them as symbolizing life, strength, love and hope. For the male Council Members who will be receiving a flower, we ask that you give yours to a woman who is special in your life.

“And with that Mr. President, I thank you very much from the Delegations of Australia,

Nicaragua, Poland, Portugal and the UAE.”. 3. On behalf of the Council, the President thanked the above-mentioned female Representatives for their very nice gesture and congratulated them, as well as the female members of the national delegations and the ICAO Secretariat, on the occasion of International Women’s Day. 4. The Representative of the United Arab Emirates expressed appreciation to the President of the Council for his kind words and to the Representative of Australia for having spoken on behalf of all female Council Representatives. In also voicing gratitude to the Delegation of the United States for having provided information on Mrs. Dillon, she suggested that information on t he first female Council Representatives from all regions be posted on the Council website in commemoration of International Women’s Day. This was noted. Subject No. 10: ICAO relations with the United Nations, the Specialized Agencies and other

international organizations

Request of the Aviation Working Group (AWG) for inclusion in the List of international organizations that may be invited to attend

suitable ICAO meetings 5. This subject was documented for the Council’s consideration in C-WP/14118, presented by the President of the Council. An editorial point raised by the Representative of Spain regarding the Spanish translation of the AWG’s name was noted.

- 129 - C-MIN 201/6

6. Replying to a question by the Representative of India, the Acting Director of the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (A/D/LEB) clarified that inclusion in the List of international organizations that may be invited to attend suitable ICAO meetings did not give the organization concerned an automatic right of attendance at all ICAO meetings. A decision was taken on a case-by-case basis by the convener of the meeting, in accordance with the relevant rules of procedure. In some cases, it was the Council which decided which organizations would be invited at attend when it considered proposals to convene certain meetings, such as those in the legal field. If an organization were not so invited to a meeting in which it had a particular interest, then it could submit a written request to participate therein as an observer to the President of the Council, who would take an appropriate decision under delegation of authority.

7. The President of the Council noted that organizations on the said List would be invited to attend those meetings which were relevant to their statutes and where ICAO considered that they could contribute to its work. The List did not apply to meetings of the Council.

8. The Representatives of France, Spain, India, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Argentina and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) supported the AWG’s request. Recalling that the AWG had had a close working relationship with ICAO for a long time, the Representative of France affirmed that it would be advantageous to formalize that relationship and facilitate the AWG’s participation in meetings which were pertinent to its mandate. The Representative of India indicated that he would have no objection if, in addition, the AWG were invited to attend Council meetings where subjects relating to its mandate were under consideration, such as international aviation financing and leasing. The Representative of Canada favoured the AWG’s inclusion in the said List for the reasons cited in the paper. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) did so in view of the additional information on the AWG’s objectives and scope of work contained on i ts website, which led him to believe that it could make very valuable contributions to ICAO’s work. 9. In then taking the action proposed in the executive summary of C-WP/14118, the Council agreed that the Aviation Working Group (AWG) be included in the List of international organizations that may be invited to attend suitable ICAO meetings (as observer). It was understood that a r evised List including the AWG would be posted on the Council website and the ICAO-NET. Subject No. 40: Review of the ICAO policy formulation process

Review of the ICAO policy formulation process 10. Tabled for the Council’s consideration was C-WP/14136, in which the Russian Federation drew attention to the provisions of the Chicago Convention and other documents which defined the role of the Council, its President and the Secretary General in the processes of formulating ICAO policies and Standards and Recommended Practices (SARPs), as well as to the ways in which those policies and SARPs were subsequently presented as an official position, especially when dealing with external partners. 11. The Representative of Mexico observed that the paper highlighted the need for the Council to review certain ICAO policies, such as those relating to the conclusion of Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs) with third-party entities and training. It also raised other issues, particularly in paragraphs 3.6, 4.1 and 4.2, relating to the various policies approved by the Council, SARPs, and recommendations emanating from the Technical Co-operation Bureau (TCB). He underscored that, whereas the implementation of ICAO policies was mandatory for the Organization and the implementation of ICAO Standards was

C-MIN 201/6 - 130 -

mandatory for States, the implementation of ICAO recommendations, in particular, TCB recommendations, was optional for States and third party entities, including the United Nations (UN).

12. The Representative of Mexico noted that the paper also indirectly raised the issue of the ownership and confidentiality of documents, which might be a cause for concern for States and other entities which paid to have TCB carry out their technical cooperation projects and consequently were the sole owners of the related project documentation. They trusted ICAO, and in particular TCB, to safeguard the confidentiality of such documentation.

13. In then drawing attention to the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 b) of the paper, the Representative of Mexico questioned whether the Council could review the scope of technical cooperation activities without overstepping Assembly Resolution A36-17 (Consolidated statement of ICAO policies on technical cooperation), which was still in force. He therefore suggested its deletion. Referring to paragraph 5.1 e), the Representative of Mexico indicated that while he fully agreed on the need to protect ICAO’s reputation and integrity, he considered that it was unreasonable to request that presentations to third party entities of a policy related to “recommendations” without prior consideration and approval by the Council. Emphasizing that it was for the Council to establish the appropriate policies, he suggested that paragraph 5.1 e) be amended to read as follows: “request the Secretary General, in order to ‘ensure that the good reputation of ICAO is maintained’ (A36-17, Appendix A, Resolving Clause 10), to present to the Council, for its consideration, a draft policy dealing with recommendations made to third party entities;”. 14. The Representative of Mexico could agree to the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 f) as long as the envisaged list of ICAO documents and other information related to any ICAO activities which were restricted to the Council was posted on the secure Council website. He cautioned that if the list were posted elsewhere, on a website that was not secure, ICAO might face liability for disseminating information of which it was not the owner and of violating its confidentiality. The Representative of Mexico underscored that his suggested amendments were intended to uphold Council governance without negatively impacting the Organization’s activities, in particular, those of TCB. 15. The Representative of the United Kingdom did not support any of the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 of the paper. In disagreeing that the example of ICAO Project UNP/12/801 supported the said actions, he underscored that ICAO’s recommendations had appeared in a presentation by the UN Procurement Director and not by the Deputy Director of TCB as indicated in paragraph 1.1. The Representative of the United Kingdom recalled that he had been informed by others within the UN family whose work ICAO Project UNP/12/801 was intended to support that TCB’s work was very good, very helpful, and consistent with normal best practice elsewhere. He emphasized that the fact that that cooperation was so good made it clear, and important, that the Council not take any action which would prevent the Secretariat from cooperating with officials from other parts of the UN family in order to carry out that work.

16. Observing that some of the proposed actions related to reviews of internal processes, activities and policies, the Representative of the United Kingdom averred that it was first necessary to clearly identify what was wrong with them and what the suggested reviews were intended to remedy before proceeding with them. In particular, he maintained, on the basis of his own experience, that the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 e) would create enormous difficulties for subject matter experts employed by governments or public bodies to perform their work.

17. In expressing appreciation to the Russian Federation for C-WP/14136, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) affirmed that the point of view expressed therein was valid. He also

- 131 - C-MIN 201/6

thanked Cameroon for presenting C-WP/14135 (Assistance to States and related matters), considered at the previous meeting (201/5), which made specific reference to the review of the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) recalled that the 38th Session of the Assembly had supported the paper presented by Colombia (A38-WP/338) calling for guidelines and policies for the interactions of ICAO with third parties in the form of endorsements and MoUs and the publication, in the interests of transparency, of the list of endorsements and MoUs in force. He therefore suggested that the Secretariat compile, for consideration by the Council, a list of outstanding policies requested by the Council in its decisions and by the Assembly in its decisions and resolutions and create an action plan, with priorities, for their development and updating. Such a list would include the said training policy, use of the ICAO emblem and ICAO interactions with third parties. 18. With reference to the paper now under discussion, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) stressed the need for caution to avoid negatively impacting technical cooperation activities. He underscored that technical cooperation project documents were confidential in nature, with their contents being known only to TCB and the recipient State concerned unless the latter decided to disclose them or authorized their disclosure. Such project documents were not presented to the Council for approval.

19. Responding to the comment made by the Representative of Mexico regarding paragraph 5.1 b), the Representative of the Russian Federation clarified that the proposed review of the scope of technical cooperation activities would be undertaken with regard to the existing provisions. Noting that paragraph 4 of the paper elaborated on the Russian Federation’s position vis-à-vis technical cooperation activities, he emphasized that the latter should be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Assembly Resolution A36-17 and that their scope should not exceed that mandated by the Assembly.

20. Referring to a point raised by the Representative of the United Kingdom, the Representative of the Russian Federation emphasized that his State was not opposed to cooperation between ICAO and the UN. On the contrary, it regarded the UN and its activities as a reference point. He reiterated that Project Document UNP/12/801 had been cited in the paper only as an illustration. At issue was the ICAO policy formulation process.

21. With regard to paragraph 5.1 f), the Representative of the Russian Federation noted that the majority of TCB projects related to procurement. The confidentiality of the associated project documentation was not contested. What was questioned was that Council Representatives had not been granted access to the contents of Project Document UNP/12/801 although they had been made known to third parties.

22. Indicating that her State had no objections, in the interest of continuous improvement, to the Council giving ongoing attention to its internal processes for policy formulation, the Representative of Australia underscored that the Council would not be doing its job if it did not do so. It was not, however, convinced that those internal processes needed an overhaul. Australia considered that the tasks undertaken by TCB in connection with Project Document UNP/12/801 had been carried out in the spirit of cooperation between UN organizations. As such, it had been within TCB’s remit, which had the relevant experience in project- and procurement-related matters, in particular, within the aviation field. There were some parallels between this matter and previous discussions in the Council regarding the distinction between ICAO policy, the formulation of which was the Council’s responsibility, and administrative instructions and directives on related technical matters, the formulation of which was within the Secretary General’s purview. While it might be necessary to use clearer terminology when communicating to third parties, Australia did not see the need for the Council to approve every project output and presentation in which TCB provided technical

C-MIN 201/6 - 132 -

advice to third parties, as the paper implied. It therefore did not support the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 e) of the paper, or in paragraph 5.1 b) relating to a review of the scope of the technical cooperation activities. Australia suggested that the Council exercise caution with respect to some of the actions proposed in the paper as they might impact on matters related to contract law, such as confidentiality provisions. While Australia did support the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 f), it considered that it would be very useful if the envisaged list indicate, in an additional column for each group of documents, the reasons for any restrictions on their broader dissemination, such as ICAO policy or legal issues. 23. The Representative of Chile noted that the paper referred, in general, to ICAO policy formulation and concluded that it fell within the Council’s purview. While that might seem reasonable and logical, it was debatable if ICAO Project UNP/12/801 constituted policy formulation. He affirmed, moreover, that the said project did not constitute a violation of any ICAO Standard, resolution or principle; rather, it was a project that had been undertaken for the parent organization of the UN system in accordance with the terms of the 2009 Management Service Agreement (MSA) concluded between ICAO and the UN. The Representative of Chile underscored that his State considered that TCB’s work was efficient, transparent and of high quality. While there was always room for improvement, TCB’s work was constantly monitored by the Council, using various means. There had not been any serious complaints regarding that work to date. For these reasons, Chile believed that TCB was one of the highest profile areas of ICAO, one which was very important for the effective implementation of SARPs. It thus deserved to be recognized, strengthened and afforded the necessary autonomy. Consequently, Chile considered that any action which might limit or modify the scope of its activities might be detrimental to recipient States and thus hamper the effective attainment of ICAO’s Strategic Objectives.

24. Recalling that the basis for this discussion was the agreement between ICAO and the UN to assist the latter in improving its solicitation process for the procurement of air charter services, the Representative of France affirmed that the work subsequently undertaken was perfectly legitimate and within ICAO’s mandate. It was his understanding that the UN had found that work to be fully satisfactory, which contributed to ICAO’s good image and reputation. The Representative of France therefore considered that there were no grounds for drawing any special conclusions regarding that particular issue, which did not appear to pose any problems. Referring to the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 of the paper, he indicated that he was very hesitant to have the Council embark on any undertaking that might disrupt or modify ICAO’s policy formulation process. That would be highly risky and might impair the efficiency and smooth functioning of the Organization, in particular, of TCB. The Representative of France maintained that the Council should not give its views on each and every recommendation or request emanating from the daily activities of TCB or any other ICAO Bureau. In concluding, he urged the Council not to take the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 and to instead let the Council and the Secretariat continue to fulfill their respective roles. 25. In echoing the comments made by the Representative of France, the Representative of the United States emphasized that his State strongly supported collaboration between the UN Specialized Agencies and the UN. The United States considered that such collaboration assisted the whole UN system in trying to deal with very complex issues around the world. 26. The Secretary General then made the following intervention, which would be posted on the Council website:

“In this regard let me briefly recall the main events on which the concerns expressed in the paper are based:

- 133 - C-MIN 201/6

“a) On the basis of the delegation of authority for the Secretary General to sign technical

cooperation projects, in August 2009 I signed a Management Service Agreement with the United Nations (UN), which constitutes the legal framework conditions for the provision of technical support services by ICAO, should the UN require such services;

“b) Within the framework of this Agreement, I signed on 18 June 2012 the confidential

Project Document UNP/12/801, which defines the details on assistance to be provided by ICAO, at the request of the UN, in the transition of their solicitation process for air charter services from an Invitation to Bid (ITB) to a Request for Proposal (RFP); and

“c) The project was implemented and the results of the study were presented by ICAO to

the UN on 30 July 2013, followed by the dissemination by the UN of the draft report to all willing industry bidders for comments. These comments were subsequently addressed by the UN and ICAO during a bidders meeting organized by the UN on 19 December 2013. The report includes recommendations to the UN related to the transition process mentioned earlier, should the UN decide to do so.

“Referring to these events and to the Russian Federation's assumption that the

recommendations provided by ICAO to the UN ‘do not include any provision on ICAO SARPs’, I wish to state that the study explicitly calls for the inclusion of criteria that requires the application of ICAO SARPs by the air transport companies retained. I hope that this point will satisfy the Russian Federation. “On the other hand, the major concern expressed in the paper is that the recommendations in the study report had been presented to the UN without the Council's approval. This is based on the assumption that the recommendations of a study report under a technical cooperation project have the same status as the ICAO Recommended Practices which are an integral part of the Annexes to the Chicago Convention. That is not the case. The recommendations of a report by TCB on a technical cooperation project are of an entirely different nature. In this respect, please note that: “1. The ‘Recommendations’ made by ICAO to the UN were to assist in their transition

from an Invitation to Bid (ITB) to a Request for Proposal (RFP) process for air charter services for the UN use. These recommendations are for application by the UN, if they so desire, and not for ‘uniform application’ by ICAO Member States, as would be the case for SARPs. This underlying principle is of course applicable to all projects under the ICAO Technical Co-operation Programme, since these projects are implemented at the request of and with funding from States, Organizations and other entities to address matters of their particular concern, which therefore accords such entities ownership of project documentation and deliverables.

“2. For this reason, in the interest of the recipients, all project documents are confidential

in nature and ICAO cannot publish project documents or projects results without the express consent of the parties.

“3. It seems obvious, therefore, that the report submitted to the UN on the basis of Project

Document UNP/12/801, as dozens of similar reports produced every year under other technical cooperation projects, is not subject to Council approval and that the Secretariat's activities in this case do not render necessary the actions as proposed in the paper.

C-MIN 201/6 - 134 -

“In conclusion, I can assure you that: “a) The signing of both the MSA and the related Specific Agreement between the

Secretary General of ICAO and the UN has followed established procedures, as was explained by the Acting Director of the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (A/D/LEB) in the legal opinion provided to the Council during the 200th Session confirming that the characterization of the report as an ICAO report was appropriate and consistent with the legal framework that prompted its production;

“b) All project-related documentation, including framework agreements, project

documents and the corresponding reports are deemed confidential documents and can be disclosed only by the recipient or with its authorization;

“c) Technical cooperation and technical assistance projects implemented by TCB do not

develop ICAO Policies or SARPs of any kind, but rather concentrate on the provision of support, including recommendations on technical matters, upon the request of and with funding from the soliciting government, organization or other entity; and

“d) The decision of the UN to base their future procurement procedures for air charter

services on criteria which are conducive to the application of ICAO Standards and Recommended Practices, as well as their decision to entrust ICAO with assisting them in this transition, is commendable.”.

27. In addition, the Secretary General expressed appreciation to those Representatives who had underscored the UN’s gratitude for the assistance provided by ICAO under Project Document UNP/12/801 relating to its solicitation process for air charter services. He clarified that the fact that he had recruited consultants to assist ICAO in carrying out the said project did not mean that the Organization did not retain responsibility for the latter. 28. In thanking the Representative of the Russian Federation for highlighting, in his introduction of C-WP/14136, the need for the Council and the Secretariat to work in close harmony, he emphasized that that was exactly what he had tried to do since first assuming the post of Secretary General on 1 August 2009. The Secretary General considered that it was his role to serve the Council and to ensure that it functioned smoothly. 29. The Secretary General also indicated that he had no objection to a review by the Council of the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy which had been issued under his authority (cf. Electronic Bulletin EB 2013/54 dated 15 October 2013). He further noted that the list of existing MoUs and endorsements would be published by the end of 2014. 30. The Representative of Germany expressed gratitude to the Russian Federation for having presented C-WP/14136 as it provided food for thought regarding the respective roles of the ICAO Council and the Secretariat, as well as a variety of other issues ranging from technical cooperation to SARPs to policies. However, due to the very fact that it did give food for thought, he considered that the paper was not suitable to be discussed at length in the Council at the present time. Observing, from the discussion, that there was a clear difference of opinion and understanding of what constituted an ICAO policy and what the respective roles of the Council and the Secretariat were, the Representative of Germany suggested that the

- 135 - C-MIN 201/6

paper instead be given further serious consideration outside the Council Chamber, in a forum such as the upcoming Council Retreat (Montebello, Québec, 13-14 June 2014).

31. Averring that the paper went way too far in limiting the powers and functions of the Chief Executive Officer of the Organization, the Secretary General, the Representative of Germany indicated that he could not, therefore, support any of the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 at this point in time. He underscored that he had no reason to seriously complain about any past actions taken by the Secretary General regarding policy issues that were either not within his remit or were not approved by the Council. The situation was just the opposite. Moreover, like the Representative of the United Kingdom, the Representative of Germany had received very positive feedback from the UN regarding ICAO Project UNP/12/801. The Representative of Germany nevertheless was willing to discuss the paper outside the Council Chamber to avoid future confusion as to the respective roles of the Council and the Secretariat.

32. Recalling that the issue which had given rise to the paper was ICAO Project Document UNP/12/801, the Representative of Spain noted that it had been made clear during the discussion that the arrangements between ICAO and the UN were not merely acceptable but correct and positive for both organizations. It had also been made clear that TCB’s work had been well-done and was appreciated by the UN. However, the issue had been complicated by the title of the project document, “Summary of ICAO’s main recommendations”. Averring that it was a matter of semantics, the Representative of Spain emphasized that if the title had instead been along the lines of “Main recommendations of the technical co-operation project of ICAO”, then the Russian Federation’s concerns might have been allayed and the issue would not have come before the Council. He voiced support for the proposals made by t he Representatives of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) and Mexico. 33. The Representative of Nicaragua underscored that consideration of the ICAO policy formulation policy at the 38th Session of the Assembly and during the current session of the Council demonstrated the issue’s importance. For that reason, she endorsed the paper, in particular the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 a), c), d), e) and f), subject to the amendment to the latter proposed by the Representative of Mexico. Referring to the Secretary General’s intervention, the Representative of Nicaragua stressed that no one doubted that the Secretariat was performing its work in accordance with its responsibilities and the Organization’s principles and objectives. In her opinion, the underlying intent of the paper was to ensure that the Secretariat did so, and that there was no issue that was not first considered by the Council.

34. Noting that his State supported the said paper presented by Colombia (A38-WP/338) at the last Assembly, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) stressed the importance of taking into account the principles mentioned therein in developing the envisaged Policy for interactions of ICAO with third-party entities in the form of endorsements and MoUs, including the following: equality of opportunity and representation, objectivity in the selection of participants, avoidance of conflicts of interest, protection of ICAO’s good reputation [also referred to in paragraph 5.1 d) of C-WP/14136], and use of accessible information. In then referring to the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 f) of C-WP/14136, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) reiterated the need to safeguard the confidentiality of project documents concluded between ICAO and States, organizations and other entities. 35. The Representative of Canada agreed with the view expressed by some previous speakers that it was difficult to support the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 of the paper due to the disconnect between the example given of ICAO Project UNP/12/801 and those actions. He considered that, as a practical matter, the Council could not become ICAO’s channel for communicating with other members of the UN family on matters of substance.

C-MIN 201/6 - 136 -

36. While the Representative of Norway supported, in principle, the need for continuous improvement, on which the Secretary General was fully focused, he was not convinced that there were not already sufficient guidelines or policies for the operation of ICAO’s various entities. He therefore could not support the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1.

37. The Representative of Italy endorsed the comments made by the Representatives of Australia, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Spain, the United Kingdom and Germany. In noting the statement made by the Secretary General regarding, inter alia, ICAO Project Document UNP/12/801, he reiterated that whatever resulted from a MSA or MoU with a third party entity was considered to be a product of ICAO, regardless of the Bureau involved. Citing, as examples, the provision of advice by the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB) during ICAO assistance activities and by TCB during technical cooperation projects, the Representative of Italy underscored that such advice was the product of ICAO and the Organization assumed responsibility therefor.

38. In disagreeing with many of the interventions made, the Representative of India underscored that the whole issue of the ICAO policy formulation process would not have been raised if a way had been found to make ICAO Project Document UNP/12/801 available to the Council Representative concerned, even if it had been in consultation with the UN Procurement Division. Recalling that he had previously been involved in long-term air chartering for UN peacekeeping forces, he recognized the UN’s need for the project to assist in the transition of its solicitation process for air charter services. It was his understanding, however, that the study carried out under the project and its findings regarding the solicited methodology would be completely open to the public. With reference to the Secretary General’s intervention, the Representative of India acknowledged that ICAO Project Document UNP/12/801 had only been used as an example in the paper and that the issue was not which Bureau had presented the recommendations but rather the lack of accessibility of the project document which contained them. 39. The Representative of Malaysia observed that much time could have been saved in the Council if the paper had been presented to the Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC) for consideration. In expressing appreciation to the Secretary General for agreeing to the Council’s consideration of the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy, he spoke in favour of the review of ICAO’s internal processes for policy formulation proposed in paragraph 5.1 a) of the paper in order to enhance efficiency. It was necessary to exercise caution, however, given the confidential nature of the related MoUs and MoCs.

40. The Representative of Burkina Faso joined the Secretary General and others in welcoming the paper, which had been presented with a view to making progress and strengthening collaboration and teamwork between the Council and the Secretary General. In fully supporting such collaboration and teamwork, he humbly requested that the concept of micro- and macro-management which he had raised previously (200/3) be laid to rest with all the honour that it was due.

41. The Representative of Burkina Faso noted that, while the intention behind the paper was good, he had some difficulty in understanding all of the points raised therein and precisely what outcomes were desired. He supported the comments made by t he Secretary General with regard to the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 c), d) and e). The Representative of Burkina Faso also welcomed the related work already done by Cameroon and Colombia and the Secretary General’s commitments, which would enable the Council and the Secretariat to move forward together. In recognizing that TCB was making real progress despite the difficult nature of its work, he emphasized that it should continue that work in the same spirit of cooperation between UN organizations while exercising caution as indicated by the Representative of Australia.

- 137 - C-MIN 201/6

42. In commending the paper, the Representative of Poland underscored that it should be further discussed. As a lawyer, she considered that there was always time to improve matters and to achieve better cooperation. The Representative of Poland reiterated that it was the Council’s responsibility to enhance ICAO and the cooperation between the Council and the Secretariat. She affirmed that it was opportune to review all of the procedures to ensure that they were correct and that all associated activities were properly carried out. Noting that the 1944 C hicago Convention was quite an old document, the Representative of Poland indicated that some detailed discussions might be necessary regarding possible improvements thereto. 43. The Representative of China concurred that the paper was excellent and that many issues raised therein deserved further consideration. Underscoring, however, that it was difficult to take any decisions at the present time, he indicated that those issues could be discussed by the TCC. The Representative of China recalled that, during his tenure as Chairperson of that Committee, many Members had highlighted the need to formulate an ICAO policy on technical cooperation and to elaborate on the relationship between the Organization’s policy and that of the UN. In suggesting that the Representative of the Russian Federation further communicate his concerns to TCB, he indicated that, if necessary, an informal briefing could be given to the Council to promote a better understanding of ICAO’s technical cooperation policy and to enable the Council to take a more informed decision on the paper.

44. The Representative of Singapore expressed concerns regarding two issues: whether the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 of the paper would overburden the Council and the Secretariat if they were all approved and undertaken at once; and the confidentiality of technical cooperation projects carried out by ICAO for third party entities. Noting that the latter might not be prepared to have the results of their projects disclosed, he emphasized that the posting of such information on the Council website or its disclosure by other means to third parties might negatively affect TCB’s standing as an impartial executor of technical cooperation projects. Observing that some of the concerns raised by the Russian Federation in the paper were already being addressed by the Secretary General, the Representative of Singapore suggested that the Council not take the corresponding actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 and instead: reiterate its role in approving policy matters; and request the Secretary General to address any recommendations which impacted a specific entity, on the understanding that any recommendations which broadly impacted all Member States would be presented to the Council for deliberation.

45. In expressing satisfaction with the good discussion of C-WP/14136 which had taken place, the Representative of the Russian Federation also voiced appreciation for the Secretary General’s clarifications. Recalling that the Representatives of France and the United Kingdom, inter alia, had not been in favour of the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1, he emphasized that the latter were based on existing provisions of Assembly Resolution A37-16 and other Assembly decisions. Drawing attention to paragraph 5.1 e), the Representative of the Russian Federation underscored that the need to ensure that the good reputation of ICAO was maintained was embodied in Appendix A, Operative Clause 10, of the said Resolution. He further emphasized that the paper did not propose any changes regarding confidentiality rules; rather, it was seeking clarity as to which ICAO documents and other information related to any ICAO activities were confidential and which were not [cf. paragraph 5.1 f)].

46. While grateful to the Representative of Germany for his assessment of the paper, the Representative of the Russian Federation voiced surprise at his suggestion that it be discussed informally outside the Council Chamber.

C-MIN 201/6 - 138 -

47. Stressing that the paper did not call for discontinuing cooperation between ICAO, the UN and other organizations, the Representative of the Russian Federation cited Operative Clauses 1, 2 and 4 of Appendix A of Assembly Resolution A36-17, according to which: the Technical Co-operation Programme was aimed at “the achievement of the Strategic Objectives of the Organization”, “complements the role of the Regular Programme in providing support to States in the effective implementation of SARPs and ANPs as well as in the development of their civil aviation administration infrastructure and human resources;” and was “the main instruments of ICAO to assist States in remedying their deficiencies in the field of civil aviation”. He underscored that, as reflected in Preambular Clause 9 of Appendix A, the Technical Cooperation Programme was dedicated to providing the necessary technical cooperation to States “with the appropriate oversight and control (by the Council) over technical cooperation activities”. The Representative of the Russian Federation emphasized, in addition, that the Assembly, in Operative Clauses 11 and 12, had reaffirmed “the need to expand the provision of technical cooperation by ICAO to the non-State entities (public or private) directly involved in civil aviation, in furtherance of ICAO Strategic Objectives” and reaffirmed “that ICAO should expand the provision of technical cooperation services, upon request, to non-State entities (public and private) that are implementing projects in Contracting States in the field of civil aviation which aim at enhancing the safety, security and efficiency of international air transport”. He recalled that the External Auditor of ICAO and the Council Working Group on Governance (Policy) (WGOG) [since superseded by the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE)] had highlighted the need for the Council to exercise more effective oversight over the function of technical cooperation. 48. Concluding, the Representative of the Russian Federation underscored the need to review the relevant rules and strengthen the cooperation and teamwork between the Council and the Secretariat in order to enhance efficiency and effectiveness. Indicating that he understood the concern expressed by the Representative of Singapore that the proposed actions would result in much work for the Council and the Secretariat, he indicated that the Council could perhaps return to this issue at an appropriate time.

49. The Representative of the United Kingdom emphasized the importance of clarifying that the work carried out by consultants for TCB under ICAO Project UNP/12/801 for the UN Procurement Division was not in question. Confirming that that work was continuing, the President of the Council noted that the Secretary General had given the necessary clarifications. Moreover, the Representative of the Russian Federation had indicated that ICAO Project UNP/12/801was not in contention and that it had only been used in the paper for illustrative purposes.

50. In then summarizing the discussion, the President noted that the Council found the Secretary General’s explanation regarding ICAO Project UNP/12/801 to be satisfactory and noted that the latter had only been used as an example in the paper. While the Council’s role in the formulation of ICAO policy was not in dispute, neither by the Council nor the Secretary General, it was clear that there was some need for clarification regarding the distinction between policies and administrative instructions for internal procedures, as highlighted by the Representative of Australia and supported by the Representative of Germany. Noting that it was also clear from the paper that some of the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1 were the result of Assembly decisions, the President of the Council indicated that it would not be correct to say that the Council did not support them. There was, nevertheless, a disconnect between the main body of the paper and the actions proposed in paragraph 5.1, in particular, sub-paragraph d) relating to the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy.

- 139 - C-MIN 201/6

51. In taking the action proposed in paragraph 5.1 of C-WP/14136, as amended by the President of the Council in light of the discussion, the Council:

a) requested the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE), in consultation

with the Secretariat, to clarify the distinction between policies and administrative instructions for internal procedures;

b) noted that, during its 203rd Session, and in accordance with the decision taken by the 38th Session of the Assembly at its Sixth Plenary Meeting on 4 October 2013 (cf. A38-WP/419, paragraph 25.16) and the decision taken by the Council at its First Meeting of the current session on 24 February 2014 regarding related follow-up action (cf. C-WP/14094; 201/1):

i) the Secretary General would present, for its consideration and approval, a draft

Policy for interactions of ICAO with third-party entities in the form of endorsements and Memoranda of Understanding (MoUs); and

ii) the Secretary General would publish the list of existing MoUs and endorsements

in the interests of transparency;

c) noted that the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy issued under the Secretary General’s authority (cf. Electronic Bulletin EB 2013/54 dated 15 October 2013) would be presented to the Council for consideration during the next (202nd) session; and

d) requested the Secretary General to present, for its consideration, a list of ICAO

documents and other information related to ICAO activities to which the Council did not have access and to post it on the Council website. The said list should indicate the reasons for such restrictions on dissemination.

52. The Council expressed appreciation to the Russian Federation for its constructive approach in presenting C-WP/14136 and to the Secretary General for his clarifications. Subject No. 20: Periodic reports by the Secretary General

Annual Report of the Ethics Officer 53. The Council considered the above subject on the basis of: information paper C-WP/14123 presented by the Secretary General, in which the Ethics Officer reported on the activities undertaken in connection with the ICAO Framework on Ethics during 2013 and presented an analysis of ethics issues which had arisen during that year; and an oral report thereon by the Human Resources Committee (HRC), which had considered the paper at its First Meeting of the current session on 30 January 2014 following its presentation by the Ethics Officer. 54. The Committee had thanked the Ethics Officer for the work accomplished during the year and discussed with him several themes of his report, including: the results of the January 2013 ethics survey; the change in frequency of discussion topics with staff from the prior year; the procedures for administering medical scheme fraud reports; and the implications of the reduction in the Ethics Officer post by 50 per cent in 2014. In addition, the HRC had enquired whether the activities of the Ethics Officer would also include technical contractors who performed duties under the régime of ICAO.

C-MIN 201/6 - 140 -

55. Noting the scope of responsibilities and time available to the Ethics Officer, the Committee had enquired: whether a comparison of the results of the January 2013 and the January 2014 ethics surveys could be presented to a future informal briefing of the Council; whether there was scope to combine the ethics survey with the Staff Association surveys; and whether an explicit zero tolerance policy could be considered for future proven allegations of fraud. 56. During the ensuing discussion, the Representatives of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), the Russian Federation, Italy and Burkina Faso commended the work of the Ethics Officer.

57. Responding to points raised in the HRC’s oral report, the Ethics Officer confirmed that an informal briefing on the comparison of the results of the January 2013 and January 2014 ethics survey would be given to the Council during its next (202nd) session. Consideration was being given to the Committee’s suggestion to combine the ethics survey with the Staff Association’s surveys and would report thereon in due course. The issue of explicit zero tolerance for future proven allegations of fraud raised by the HRC was addressed in the draft ICAO Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy document, which would be presented to the Council at a future session. 58. To a question by the Representative of Spain, the Ethics Officer further clarified that while he had started to include technical contractors working on ICAO technical cooperation projects in his activities, it would be a slower process than it otherwise might have been due to the number of contractors involved and the reduction in resources.

59. Replying to a query by the Representative of Singapore regarding the subject area of harassment (cf. Appendix A to C-WP/14123), the Ethics Officer noted that while one formal report thereon had been received in 2013, the preliminary review thereof had revealed that there was insufficient evidence to undertake an investigation. 60. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) recalled that during the HRC’s meeting surprise had been expressed regarding the managerial weaknesses which the 2013 ethics survey had highlighted and which were outlined in paragraph 4.1.3 of the paper. A proposal had been made that personnel be recruited with demonstrated management skills. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) observed, in this regard, that in many instances emphasis was placed on candidates’ technical abilities rather than on their management skills. It was the responsibility of the HRC and the Secretariat to take this issue into consideration in the recruitment process. 61. The Representative of Norway underscored that while the results of the 2013 ethics survey were not disturbing in and of themselves, they did raise some concerns. He expressed interest in having the 2015 annual report of the Ethics Officer include a comparison of the results of the 2015 ethics survey with those of the 2014 and 2013 surveys to determine if any progress were made in the various subject areas. Noting that other United Nations (UN) organizations had zero tolerance for fraud policies, the Representative of Norway indicated that he would like that issue to be considered and reported on to the Council in future.

62. Noting, from paragraph 4.1.2 of the paper, that 63 per cent of respondents to the 2013 ethics survey had agreed that the ICAO Framework on Ethics would benefit ICAO, the Representative of the Russian Federation affirmed that the implementation of ethical standards was very important for the Organization’s efficiency and effectiveness. He expressed concern that funding for the post of Ethics Officer had been reduced by 50 per cent from January 2014, pursuant to the approved Regular Budget for

- 141 - C-MIN 201/6

the 2014-2015-2016 triennium, and stressed the need to support the Ethics Officer’s work, which was very beneficial. The Representative of the Russian Federation reiterated the need for a comparative analysis of the results of the 2013 and 2014 ethics surveys.

63. The Secretary General underscored that the decision to reduce the funding of the Ethics Officer’s post by 50 per cent had resulted in the Ethics Officer distributing his time between ethics issues and audit issues, where his expertise was also very much needed.

64. The Representative of Italy indicated that, to his knowledge, an Ethics Officer dealt with the grey area between legality and behavior, addressing issues such as c ivility, loyalty, transparency, proportionality and impartiality. He noted, however, that the ICAO Ethics Officer had been responsible for preparing the draft ICAO Anti-Fraud and Corruption Policy document which would normally be dealt with by Human Resources or the Chief Executive Officer, namely, the Secretary General. In enquiring as to the relationship between the Ethics Officer, the Ombudsman, the Staff Association and Human Resources, the Representative of Italy queried whether it would not be proper for the latter to deal with the issue of fraud or the breach of disciplinary rules and regulations.

65. The Ethics Officer emphasized that ICAO’s regulations were quite clear and mirrored those of other UN organizations: responsibility for decisions on disciplinary matters rested with the Secretary General and only the Secretary General, on the advice of, and as enacted by, HR. As Ethics Officer, his role, on the investigation side, was simply to manage the investigations and to put forward resultant decisions to the Secretary General, possibly with a recommendation on a ction. The ICAO Framework on Ethics had not been designed to detract from the normal managerial disciplinary hierarchical route for management operations: responsibility for disciplinary rules and regulations, and action, rested entirely with Human Resources. 66. The Representative of Burkina Faso emphasized that many of the issues raised with the Ethics Officer in 2013 (cf. Appendix A to C-WP/14123) were of great concern, including for ICAO’s image, which encompassed not only its external presentation but also its internal presentation. He highlighted, on this day commemorating International Women’s Day, that there had been an increase, from 5 to 7, in the number of discussions with the Ethics Officer regarding sexual harassment, and queried whether any educational seminars were being given to raise staff awareness of such harassment. In also enquiring as to the subject area “Council Relations/Lobbying”, the Representative of Burkina Faso stressed that the conduct of all Council Members, who were Representatives of their respective States, had to be above reproach. In further querying what comprised the subject area “Other”, he observed that the number of related discussions with the Ethics Officer had risen from 5 to 12 in 2013. Most importantly, the number of discussions regarding the subject area “General staff/manager disputes” had increased from 4 to 24. Reiterating his concern, as well as the high importance of ethics-related work, the Representative of Burkina Faso stressed the need to improve ICAO’s internal image. 67. The Council then noted information paper C-WP/14123 and the HRC’s oral report thereon. The various points raised and concerns expressed during the discussion were noted by the Ethics Officer.

C-MIN 201/6 - 142 -

Subject No. 7.4: Conditions of service Subject No. 10: ICAO relations with the United Nations, the Specialized Agencies and other

international organizations

Report of HRC — Review of Reports of the Joint Inspection Unit entitled “Review of Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” and “Staff Recruitment in

United Nations System Organizations”

68. The Council heard an oral report by the Chairperson of the Human Resources Committee on the outcome of HRC’s review, during its First Meeting of the current session on 30 January 2014, of the following two information papers which had been circulated under cover of President’s memorandum PRES RK/2240 dated 1 November 2013 and subsequently referred to it for consideration (cf. C-DEC 200/3, paragraph 16): C-WP/14082 – Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Review of Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” (JIU/REP/2012/5); and C-WP/14084 – Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Staff Recruitment in United Nations System Organizations: A Comparative Analysis and Benchmarking Framework: Overview” (JIU/REP/2012/4). 69. The Committee had taken note of the recommendations presented in the JIU report entitled “Review of Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” (JIU/REP/2012/5) and had discussed aspects related to performance management applied to consultants, as well as competitive selection processes for consultants. The Secretariat had agreed that, if any disciplinary measure were taken after a negative evaluation of a consultant’s work, then it would be reported on the Council website.

70. The Committee had also considered the recommendations presented in the JIU report entitled “Staff Recruitment in United Nations System Organizations” (JIU/REP/2012/4). It had been noted that the special technical nature of ICAO needed to be taken into account when considering a harmonization of minimum educational qualifications across the UN system. The Secretariat had been requested to analyze the series of recommendations and to reflect on which recommendations would require changes to The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) or the Staff Rules.

71. The Representative of Spain recalled that, at its previous meeting, the Council had requested the HRC to review The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) and to present proposals for its amendment taking into account, inter alia, the JIU’s recommendation that “Recruitment time from vacancy posting to selection decision does not exceed 120 days” (JIU/REP/2012/4, Benchmark 13) [cf. C-MIN 201/5 (Closed), paragraph 22 b)].

72. The Representative of Malaysia noted that, in its response to that recommendation, the ICAO Secretariat had indicated that the majority of recruitment processes, from publication to appointment decision, were completed within four months (120 days). Ten per cent of the cases required six months to fill. To a question then raised by the Representative, the President of the Council clarified that, in accordance with the Council’s earlier decision, the Secretariat would review the ICAO recruitment process from beginning to end, taking into account the said JIU recommendation and the best practices of the UN system, as well as other relevant JIU recommendations contained in JIU/REP/2012/4 which would enhance the Organization’s governance. Proposals for the amendment of The ICAO Service Code (Doc 7350) would then be presented to the Council, through the HRC, for approval. The President of the Council underscored that, in some cases, it might be difficult to complete the recruitment process in 120 days as recommended by the JIU, particularly if the Council was involved in the appointment.

- 143 - C-MIN 201/6

73. The Deputy Director of Human Resources (DD/HR) recalled that, at the time of the JIU’s review of staff recruitment in UN system organizations in 2011, professional recruitments in ICAO had taken 222 days on average. However, according to the latest data available (December 2013), the average duration of professional recruitments had since decreased to 138 days. The Organization was thus on the right track in terms of reducing the recruitment time for professional posts. 74. In the absence of further comments, the Council noted the HRC’s oral report on t he outcome of its review of information papers C-WP/14082 and C-WP/14084.

Subject No. 7.2: Recruitment policy Subject No. 7.4: Conditions of service

Regional groupings for equitable geographical representation purposes at ICAO 75. The Council considered this subject on the basis of: C-WP/14125, in which the Secretary General, in accordance with the Council’s earlier decision (199/6), presented historical information on the regional groupings used by ICAO for equitable geographical representation (EGR) purposes at ICAO and an overview of the practice of the United Nations (UN) system organizations in that regard; and an oral report thereon by the Human Resources Committee (HRC), which had reviewed the paper at its First Meeting of the current session on 30 January 2014. The Committee had noted the information provided in the paper and recommended that the issue of regional groupings for EGR purposes at ICAO be dealt with using the good offices of the President of the Council. 76. The Observer from Turkey expressed appreciation for the paper, which had been prepared in light of a point which he had raised previously (199/6) during the Council’s consideration of C-WP/14008 on the status of the ICAO workforce, and for the HRC’s oral report. In reiterating his request that Turkey be listed in the Eastern Europe (EUR-E) regional group instead of in the Middle East (MID) regional group in documents used by ICAO for EGR purposes, he emphasized that his State wished to ensure consistency and to rectify the current deviation with regard to the listing of Turkey, which was referred to in the paper. In underscoring that Turkey’s actual interaction with ICAO in terms of regional groupings had always been through the European region, the Observer from Turkey noted that his State was accredited to ICAO’s European and North Atlantic (Paris) Regional Office and was in the European Air Navigation Plan (Doc 7754). Furthermore, Turkey was a Member of the European Civil Aviation Conference (ECAC) and the European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation (EUROCONTROL). Furthermore, Turkey would stand for election to the Council in 2016 as a candidate from Europe. Thus the request which the Observer from Turkey had made in May 2013 was still valid. It should not, however, be misinterpreted. Turkey was equally proud of simultaneously being part of Europe, Asia, the Middle East and even Africa as a State which was located at the crossroads of three continents. Yet from an aviation and an ICAO point of view, Turkey believed that it should be listed in the Eastern Europe (EUR-E) regional group to reflect its actual situation in terms of EGR in ICAO.

77. In concluding, the Observer from Turkey expressed the hope that the Council would be able to meet his request, either by taking a direct decision to that effect during the present meeting or by leaving that decision to the President of the Council. Noting that it was his understanding that the HRC was recommending the second option, he expressed full confidence in the President and the Council. 78. Affirming that Turkey’s request was well-founded, the Representative of the Russian Federation endorsed it, as did the Representatives of the United Kingdom and Norway.

C-MIN 201/6 - 144 -

79. In then taking the action proposed by the President of the Council in light of the HRC’s oral report and the discussion, the Council:

a) noted the information provided in C-WP/14125 on EGR and regional groupings;

b) decided that Turkey be reported in the Eastern Europe (EUR-E) regional group in

documents used by ICAO for EGR purposes; and

c) agreed that, in future, issues regarding regional groupings for EGR purposes at ICAO be handled through the good offices of the President of the Council.

Subject No. 32.1: Headquarters premises

Report of RHCC — Report on the deliberations of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country

80. The Council heard the following oral report by the Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country (RHCC) on the outcome of its first two meetings, held on 22 October 2013 and 28 January 2014, w hen the pending issues of the health system, education, traffic offences, work permits, consular officers, banking and the provision of information regarding certain matters had been discussed: “1. BACKGROUND

“1.1 During the third meeting of its 199th session (C-WP/14036; C-DEC 199/3), the Council approved the establishment of the new Committee on Relations with the Host Country (RHCC). During the first meeting of its 200th Session (C-DEC 200/1), the Council noted the composition of RHCC (Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, Mexico, Portugal, Russian Federation, Singapore, and United Arab Emirates), and elected Mr. Jorge D’Escragnolle Taunay Filho (Brazil) as its Chairperson for the period 2013-2014.

“1.2 During its first meeting on 22 O ctober 2013, the RHCC elected Mr. Ng Tee Chiou (Singapore) as its Vice-Chairperson, and agreed that Section 2 of C-WP/14036 adequately constituted its terms of reference. The Chairperson further proposed for consideration outstanding issues previously identified by the Tripartite Consultative Committee (Oral Report, 198/10): education; work permits; health system; traffic issues; visas for delegates to ICAO meetings; acceptances and identity cards; and consular officers. In view of Canada’s commendable efforts on t he occasion of the 38th Assembly Session (Sept.-Oct. 2013), the Committee agreed to remove from its agenda the topic of visas for delegates to ICAO meetings.

“1.3 The Committee held its second meeting on 28 January 2014, chaired by its Vice-Chairperson, and considered pending issues as presented below.

“2. DISCUSSION

“2.1 Health system:

“2.1.1 Given the difficulties for the ICAO diplomatic community in finding family doctors in Quebec, Protocol Quebec had committed to address such concerns with the Ministry of Health and Social Services; feedback is still pending and should be sought.

- 145 - C-MIN 201/6

“2.1.2 Another concern is that some household members of representatives are not authorized to join the premium programme of medical coverage for diplomats; the Committee opined that consideration be given for every such person duly accredited to have access to the programme.

“2.1.3 Furthermore, consideration should be given to seek a discounted family rate and inclusion of drug insurance.

“2.1.4 It was noted that some countries have additional privileges granted at the bilateral level with Canada, which was a separate matter from the privileges granted to the ICAO diplomatic community, and not within the purview of the Committee. However, requests for further enhancement to the privileges for the ICAO diplomatic community may be put to Canada for consideration.

“2.2 Education:

“2.2.1 To avoid repetitive requests for attestations (concerning both payment of local fees and English education) which are currently valid for one year, Protocol Quebec committed to consider issuing attestation letters valid for the duration of the study programme, as long as the student does not change status, programme or institution; while feedback is still pending and should be sought, the Committee agreed that such changes of programmes or institutions should be allowed without further attestations. It was submitted that after the departure of the diplomats, their dependents should be allowed to change programmes or institutions and to continue in English education without further attestations.

“2.2.2 It was also submitted that studies at CEGEP level should be considered as p art of the university cycle, and accordingly, dependents who are studying in CEGEP should be allowed to continue on to universities in Quebec paying the same fees as locals after the departure of the diplomats.

“2.2.3 Moreover, the delay for issuing attestations should be shortened in general; in this vein, Protocol Québec should consider establishing processes starting before arrival in Québec, allowing quicker initial issuance of attestations, possibly before an educational institution may be identified for application/registration. In this latter context, special measures of assistance should also be available to enrol children in schools when arriving in Québec after normal deadlines for school applications and registrations.

“2.3 Traffic: Considering the problems raised by the judicial procedures applied in Montréal to the ICAO diplomatic community for traffic offences, the Committee opined that enhancements are warranted as per the regime of immunities deriving from the existing legal instruments, including the 1961 Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, with the assistance of the Secretariat as appropriate.

“2.4 Work Permits: Although dependents of diplomats may be granted work authorizations before finding employment, for the duration of the accreditation, administrative difficulties subsist: Ottawa’s letters of approval as ad dressed to ICAO (i.e. not the persons concerned) are unclear to prospective employers as well as for independent workers; the procedure for issuance or renewal of the work permits is complicated and lengthy; the access to Quebec Employment Centres is restricted due to the temporary status of diplomatic dependents (as indicated by the code “9” in Social Insurance Numbers) and the strict rules protecting local labour market; and foreign diplomas are not recognized in certain sectors where professional orders are involved. To facilitate access to local job opportunities for dependents of diplomats, Canadian authorities should be requested to revise and clarify the existing procedures regarding work permits.

C-MIN 201/6 - 146 -

“2.5 Consular officers: The Committee acknowledged with satisfaction the decision of the Canadian authorities to grant diplomatic status to consular officers who are also Representatives on the Council/to ICAO. The Committee nevertheless opined that such diplomatic status should be further considered for the Alternate Representatives who are also holding consular functions, as well as for the dependents.

“2.6 Banking: Representatives face critical problems, especially on arrival, for opening bank accounts, as well as to obtain credit cards and loans. The Committee agreed that the situation which prevails in the federal capital should be investigated as a possible comparator to encourage local banks to enhance their services to the diplomats based in Montréal.

“2.7 Information provision: The Committee, with reference to communications on French classes, expressed the wish that information from provincial authorities as addressed to the ICAO diplomatic community be systematically available in English. On the education system, Protocol Québec had announced the issuance of an Information Guide on Education in Québec; pending such issuance, the Committee would appreciate that readily available information on educational institutions, including open house events, be provided. On the health system, the Committee would like to request a list of doctors, clinics and hospitals or other centres (to note that Protocol Québec issued an Information Guide: “The Health and Social Services System and Access to Medical Services in Québec”), as w ell as be kept informed on the expansion of services at the ICAO medical centre (see Staff Notice 5843 dated 12.11.13).

“3. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

“3.1 The RHCC agreed that issues raised for its consideration as per its mandate should be systemic, properly identified and presented in a factually accurate manner, with specific proposals for reasonable requests to be addressed to Canada. For the sake of efficiency of RHCC meetings, the Chairperson should be advised of such issues in advance, allowing sufficient lead time for their review with the Secretary before discussion by the Committee which will prioritize its recommendations to the Council. The RHCC webpage should also be updated on pending issues as matters progress.

“3.2 The Committee agreed that some of the concerns listed above may be effectively dealt with directly by the Secretariat with relevant authorities and/or entities, i.e. information provision (para. 2.7).

“3.3 The Committee recommends to the Council that the Secretary General be instructed to request from Canada improvements on the other matters raised in paragraphs 2.1 through 2.6 a bove, prioritizing the issues on health, education and work permits, with estimated timelines for solutions or clarifications, and to provide a progress report to the Council through the Committee during the 202nd Session.”

81. The President of the Council noted that he, the Secretary General and members of the Secretariat would meet that afternoon with the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada, senior officials from the Québec Government and the Mayor of Montréal, at which time appreciation would be expressed for those issues which had been resolved, and the outstanding issues referred to in paragraphs 2.1 through paragraph 2.6 of the HRC’s oral report would be presented to the Canadian authorities. 82. Drawing attention to paragraph 2.3 of the oral report, the Representative of the Russian Federation underscored that sooner or later all national delegations would have to deal with the issue of traffic offences. While the municipal authorities were of the view that national delegations should resolve any such disputes over traffic offences with them directly, he considered that that was quite risky given the

- 147 - C-MIN 201/6

potential legal consequences. The Representative of the Russian Federation therefore proposed that the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB) resume its former practice as contact in case of such disputes. This was noted.

83. Referring to paragraph 2.2.2, the Representative of Japan noted that CEGEP, a two-year college institution which combined the twelfth grade of high school with the first year of university, was unique to Québec and that it was very difficult to have CEGEP diplomas recognized outside of Canada. It was his understanding, however, that if students living in Québec wished to advance to Québec universities, including McGill, a world-famous university in Montréal, then it was necessary for them to attend CEGEP. The Representative of Japan noted, in this context, that his daughter, who would graduate from CEGEP in June 2014, was now applying for admission to some Canadian universities, including McGill University. While he fully appreciated the tuition fee exemption system provided by the Governments of Canada and Québec, he would greatly appreciate it if a slightly more friendly treatment of that system would be applied to the dependents of members of the ICAO diplomatic community after the latter’s departure. The Representative of Japan was raising this matter in light of the considerable difference between Québec university tuition fees for students living in the province and those for international students. He cited, as an example, the annual tuition fee for the Faculty of Commerce at McGill University, which was some CAD 2 000 for Québec students and CAD 40 000 for international students – twenty times higher and difficult to afford. The Representative of Japan thanked the Governments of Canada and Québec in advance for their attention to this matter. The President of the Council underscored that it was one of the issues which would be raised with the Canadian authorities as recommended by the RHCC. 84. Having himself graduated from CEGEP, the Representative of Canada understood the concerns expressed by the Representative of Japan. He emphasized that Canada remained committed to the RHCC process and to the ICAO diplomatic community. It considered that the Committee’s work was very positive. As mentioned by the President of the Council, a meeting would take place that afternoon with the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Mayor of Montréal, and senior officials from the Québec Government as no Minister was available during the ongoing election campaign. Canada remained committed to finding solutions to the issues raised in the RHCC’s oral report and to providing answers which would satisfy the members of the ICAO diplomatic community.

85. The Representative of Canada also underscored that in the next few weeks an ICAO community liaison officer would be added to the Canadian Delegation on a permanent basis. 86. In then taking action on the basis of the RHCC’s oral report, the Council:

a) requested that, where possible, the Secretariat deal directly with the relevant

authorities and/or entities to address the concerns raised in the Committee’s oral report in paragraph 2.7; and

b) instructed the Secretary General to request from Canada improvements on the other

matters raised in paragraphs 2.1 through 2.6 of the oral report, prioritizing the issues on health, education and work permits, with estimated timelines for solutions or clarifications, and to provide a progress report to the Council, through the RHCC, during the 202nd Session.

87. The President of the Council expressed appreciation to the Vice-Chairperson of the RHCC for his very detailed oral report and to the Committee Members for the substantial work which they had accomplished.

C-MIN 201/6 - 148 -

Subject No. 6: Establishment of subsidiary bodies of the Council

Establishment of “Friends of the Council” 88. Tabled for the Council’s consideration was C-WP/14133, in which China proposed the establishment of an informal friendship organization, the “Friends of the Council”, comprising former Presidents of the Council, former Secretaries General, former Council Representatives and aviation veterans. Its purpose was to offer advice and strategies for the efficient and sustainable development of international civil aviation. During the introduction of the paper, paragraph 2 of the appended proposed Terms of Reference was amended to reflect that the Members of the “Friends of the Council” would be nominated by the President of the Council rather than recommended by Council Members. It was recalled that the proposal had first been made by the Delegate of China to the 38th Session of the Assembly in his general statement at the Second Meeting of the Plenary on 24 September 2013. 89. The Representatives of Argentina, the Russian Federation and Japan endorsed the proposal. While not objecting to the establishment of the “Friends of the Council”, the Representative of France queried what impact it would have on the governance of ICAO as a subsidiary body of the Council. He noted that the group’s establishment would not have any financial implications for the Organization. 90. The Representative of China clarified that the “Friends of the Council” would have no legal status and no influence on the Organization’s governance. He reiterated that the costs incurred by Members in attending the group’s meetings would be borne by the respective Members, their States or organizations and other entities, pursuant to paragraph 5 of the proposed Terms of Reference.

91. The President of the Council indicated that, in order for him to remain within the authority delegated to him to nominate the Members of the “Friends of the Council”, there were other issues which needed to be clarified, such as the said Terms of Reference and the reporting procedure.

92. Noting that he also had a few questions, and doubts, the Representative of Mexico indicated that while it was easy for the Council or its President to assign a specific task to the Lifetime Goodwill Ambassador of ICAO, Mr. R. Kobeh González, to resolve a given issue, it was unclear what type of tasks would be assigned to the “Friends of the Council” and how the latter would report thereon to the Council. While noting that the Members’ attendance costs would be covered by the Members themselves, their States or organizations and other entities, he recalled the difficulties that Members of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) had encountered in attending the EAAC’s meetings despite the fact that their travel costs [airfares and daily subsistence allowances (DSAs)] were defrayed by the nominating States or the Members’ employers (cf. State letter 04/8-11/16 dated 18 M arch 2011). In wondering how effective the “Friends of the Council” would be, the Representative of Mexico suggested that some more thought be given to the specific tasks to be assigned thereto. He cautioned against assigning the “Friends of the Council” tasks which it would be unable to satisfactorily complete.

93. While agreeing to the idea of a “Friends of the Council”, the Representative of Japan echoed the comments made by the President of the Council. He queried whether it was necessary to at least formulate Directives for that group, along the same lines as the Directives for Panels of the various bodies. The Representative of Japan also enquired whether it would be necessary to amend the Chicago Convention to make provision for such a high-ranking and important group. He suggested that when the Council decided to move forward with the establishment of the “Friends of the Council”, the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB), with the Representative of China, consider the basis therefor.

- 149 - C-MIN 201/6

94. The Representative of China recommended that if the Council either agreed, in principle, to the creation of the “Friends of the Council” or noted the paper, then any outstanding issues could be discussed further with LEB or the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE). He considered that Directives were unnecessary as the group was an informal friendship organization. 95. The President of the Council observed that, while the Council had no objection to the establishment of the proposed “Friends of the Council”, it considered that some issues required further clarification. The WGGE was requested to review the proposal set forth in C-WP/14133, in consultation with the Representative of China, LEB and the President of the Council, and to report to the Council on the outcome of the deliberations in due course. Subject No. 14.4.3: Panels Subject No. 41: Rules of procedure of the various representative bodies in ICAO Subject No. 52: Unlawful interference with international civil aviation and its facilities

Report of WGGE — Consideration of Directives for Panels of ICAO 96. The Council commenced consideration of the above subject on the basis of an oral report by the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE). 97. At its Second Meeting of the current session on 4 March 2014, the WGGE, with reference to C-DEC 199/1 and the consideration by the Council of the new fifth edition of the Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission (Doc 7984) (C-WP/14117; 201/3), had reviewed the proposed Directives for Panels of the ANC and the Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC) (C-WP/13928; 199/1). The Working Group had also considered the feasibility of the proposal to develop a single set of directives directives applicable to all panels of ICAO, notably those of the ANC, UIC and the Air Transport Committee (ATC).

98. The WGGE had noted that the various Committees had different tasks, approaches and needs and had agreed that it would be neither realistic nor desirable to have a single set of directives for all panels of ICAO. The Working Group therefore recommended that the Council continue its consideration of the proposed Directives for Panels of the Committee on Unlawful Interference.

99. With regard to the revised Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission (Doc 7984), the Working Group had noted that some minor improvements could be made to provisions in those Directives relating to the participation of international organizations and election of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. The Working Group had noted also that, unlike the ATC, the ANC did not invite nominations to Panels by all States in the first instance. However, considering that substantial work that had been done by the ANC and that the Council had already (201/3) adopted, in principle, the new fifth edition of the Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission (Doc 7984), the Working Group recommended that the latter be definitively approved with the improved text on the participation of international organizations and election of the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson recommended by the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB) and which had been agreed to by the ANC.

100. Reiterating the concerns which she had expressed during the WGGE’s Second Meeting regarding the nomination process for membership in ANC Panels, the Representative of Portugal underscored that pursuant to paragraphs 2.4.4 and 2.4.5 of the new fifth edition of Doc 7984, the ANC initially invited only selected States and international organizations to make nominations. It was only afterwards, when the ANC was deciding on t he actual membership of the panel, that it would extend additional invitations if the number of nominations received was not sufficient or if the balance of expertise

C-MIN 201/6 - 150 -

or area representation was unduly disturbed. Participation in ANC panels was thus not open to all States. This was in stark contrast with paragraph 4.1 of the Directives for Panels of the Air Transport Committee (Doc 9482), which stipulated that all States should be invited to nominate members to serve on ATC panels. 101. In light of time constraints, the Council agreed to defer further discussion of this subject to its next meeting.

102. The meeting adjourned at 1300 hours.

- 151 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SEVENTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MONDAY, 10 MARCH 2014, AT 1430 HOURS)

OPEN MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. P. de Moreas Jardim (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E. A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M. E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. T.M.B. Kabli — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. F. Zizi, President, ANC Mr. N. Castro da Silva (Alt.) Mr. M. Deslisle (Alt.) Mr. Chunyu Ding (Alt.) Mr. CHU Guang (Advisor) Ms. YANG Jiru (Advisor) Mr. M. Millefert (Alt.) Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mr. M. Adan (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mrs. H. Jansson Saxe (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. D.V. Subbotin (Alt.) Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Canada ― China ― China ― China ― France ― Italy ― Japan ― Kenya ― Mexico ― Norway ― Republic of Korea ― Russian Federation ― Saudi Arabia ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Dr. Fang Liu Mr. B. Djibo Mr. I. Galán Mr. R. Bhalla Mr. J. Augustin Mr. J. Marriott Mr. O. Myard Mr. J. Weich Mrs. L.M. Comeau-Stuart Mr. S. Jossai Mr. A. Opolot Mr. M. Leitgab Mr. A. Larcos

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― D/ADB ― D/ATB ― D/TCB ― C/FIN ― A/D/LEB ― C/AVSEC ― C/EAO ― DD/HR-ADB ― C/POD ― HR-POD ― LEB ― ADADB ― ACC

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 152 -

Representatives to ICAO Colombia Cuba Ecuador Ethiopia Greece Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lebanon Morocco Peru Mozambique Turkey Uruguay

- 153 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 1. The President of the Council informed Representatives that he and the Secretary General had, on behalf of the Council, expressed their sympathies to the peoples of Malaysia and other countries with citizens on board Malaysia Airlines flight MH370, which had disappeared on 7 March 2014 somewhere en route from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia to Beijing, China. The President indicated that based on the latest information there had been 227 passengers and 12 crew on board. 2. In referring to this incident, the President also took the opportunity to acknowledge with appreciation, the efforts of Malaysia as well as all other Member States that were contributing to the search and rescue mission, which was focusing on the estimated flight track. He also confirmed that, if requested, ICAO stood ready to provide any form of assistance that might be required. 3. In providing further background information to this incident, the Representative of Malaysia indicated that the Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 had departed from Kuala Lumpur International Airport at about 0040 hours local time and was scheduled to arrive at 0630 hours in Beijing, China, local time, but had lost both communication and radar contact at about 0240 hours. It had been reported missing somewhere between Malaysian and Vietnamese airspace over the South China Sea. At that time, the aircraft was on radar handover to contact the adjacent Ho Chi Minh Flight Information Region (FIR) but this never happened. Likewise, all attempts to establish contact with the pilots via air navigation services providers (ANSPs), had not been successful. 4. The Representative explained to the Council that based on the current available information, it was believed that at no time had the aircraft activated any distress signal. The search and rescue procedures were activated immediately after having exhausted the emergency phases. All resources were deployed involving sea and air operations with the collaborative efforts of other countries and relevant authorities from Australia, China, Indonesia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, United States, and Viet Nam. The search area covered an extensive area of possibilities from the last location of radar contact at around 135 nautical miles South-West of Viet Nam. 5. During the past 63 hours the search operations had proceeded but with limited progress. The focus had been extended by 100 nautical miles and now covered the return track of the flight and further west in the Straits of Malacca. Malaysia was preparing for the worst possible outcome and Malaysia Airlines was continuing all efforts aimed at disaster recovery to locate the missing aircraft. However, until the recovery of the aircraft and flight data recorder (black box), there remained uncertainty as to the causes of any accident. 6. While the Government of Malaysia was taking all possible measures to try and locate the missing aircraft, it was also grateful for the assistance and cooperation rendered by all other parties involved in the search and recovery rescue process. The airline operator was also working with the Government to provide assistance to the families of passengers on board the flight in accordance with the current policy on assistance to victims of aviation accidents and their families. 7. The Representative confirmed that the number of passengers on board the aircraft had been 227 with 12 crew members. Malaysia Airlines was operating this flight in a code share arrangement with China Southern Airlines. It was with a great deal of sadness, that the Representative also confirmed that the spouse of one of the Malaysian nationals, who had been on secondment to the ICAO Regional Sub-Office in Beijing, was on board the ill-fated flight. He also took the opportunity to express gratitude to the President of the Council for the offer of ICAO assistance in the recovery efforts of the aircraft.

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 154 -

8. In his statement on this subject, the Representative of China indicated that on board flight MH370 it was understood that there were 154 Chinese nationals. The Government of China was attaching great importance to the incident and demanding that no e ffort be spared on the emergency responses and the proper handling of the aftermath of the incident. Indeed, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Ministry of Transportation, and the Civil Aviation Administration of China (CAAC), together with other relevant departments, had activated an emergency response mechanism and sent a joint task force to Malaysia to assist in the search and rescue efforts. 9. The Representative also confirmed that China had dispatched numerous vessels to the search and rescue zones where the final contact with the airplane had been made. It was hoped that with the concerted efforts of all relevant parties the aircraft would be located as soon as possible. China had also expressed the desire to maintain a close collaborative effort with all relevant parties. The Representative also took the opportunity to convey his sympathies to the families who had passengers on board the flight and particularly to the family of the Malaysian national who was on secondment to the ICAO Regional Sub-Office in Beijing and whose wife had been on board the aircraft. 10. The Representative of Spain joined the Representatives of Malaysia and China in expressing sympathy to all of the families who were waiting for news on the whereabouts of flight MH370, as well as to the Governments of all countries whose nationals were on board the flight. He wondered how in the 21st Century it had not been possible to detect the whereabouts of the aircraft. He also recalled the recent tragedy involving Air France flight AF447, which had in June 2009, been on a scheduled flight from Rio de Janeiro to Paris, but which had crashed into the Atlantic Ocean. At that time he had stated that all aviation accidents were tragedies in themselves but there are some accidents that leave an indelible mark on the human consciousness and that had certainly been one such incident. 11. The Representative noted that it was indeed harrowing for all involved to be unaware as to what had occurred in relation to flight MH370 so in that sense there was an unprecedented level of mystery shrouding this particular incident. Nevertheless, this incident could serve to prompt the ICAO Council to review the overall safety and security level of civil aviation, and to consider a number of issues in a broader sense without necessarily speculating as to the causes of this particular accident. He observed that aside from the use of stolen passports that had been implicated for at least two of the passengers, another intriguing aspect had been the lack of deployment of electronic locator transmitters (ELTs), which should have been transmitting the location of the aircraft. The Representative observed that with all the existing technology and additional measures that had been introduced over the years, as well as relevant provisions in Annex 6, Annex 10, and Annex 13, among others, with regard to ELTs, it was odd that these did not appear to have made a difference. 12. The Representative of Japan joined other Representatives in conveying his sympathies to all the people affected by the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH-370. On behalf of the Government of Japan he expressed sincere hope that the aircraft would be found as early as possible and the Representative also took the opportunity to confirm his country’s readiness to provide assistance in the search and rescue efforts, to the fullest extent possible. 13. The Secretary General informed the Council that the ICAO Regional Office in Bangkok had been in contact with the Government of Malaysia to offer any assistance that it could provide in support of efforts to locate the missing aircraft. In relation to certain security related aspects to this incident, including in relation to the stolen passports, the Secretary General recalled that Member States at the recent 38th Session of the Assembly had adopted a resolution aimed at promoting enhanced document security

- 155 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

(A38-15 refers). This had included an encouragement to all States to communicate to INTERPOL all information in relation to lost and stolen passports with the aim of preventing the use of such travel documents for acts of unlawful interference against civil aviation. Similar wording also appeared in the related resolution concerning facilitation (A38-16 refers). It was in this context that these issues would also be the subject of consideration during the next meeting of the AVSEC Panel and in the ICAO Facilitation (FAL) Programme. 14. The Director, Air Navigation Bureau (D/ANB) joined the Council in expressing sympathies to all who were affected by the incident and in particular to the family of the Malaysian national who was currently on secondment to the ICAO Regional Sub-Office in Beijing, and whose spouse had been on board MH370. 15. In relation to certain safety related aspects of this incident, D/ANB recalled that in the earlier case of Air France flight AF447, which had fallen into the Atlantic Ocean in June 2009, France had initiated flight data recovery and transmission of data processes involving about 120 individuals from relevant investigation authorities, regulators and manufacturers, all of whom had considered not only the Air France accident but another 42 accidents involving large aircraft that had crashed into a body of water, several of which had never been found. It was in the course of this process that a variety of viable solutions were proposed to assist in the location of flight data recorders and the recovery of other relevant flight data. The outcome of this work had been shared with ICAO and it eventually had led to the adoption of certain ICAO Recommendations aimed at addressing a variety of different provisions. In terms of the short-term activities, this had involved work on und erwater locating beacons (ULBs), incorporating a 90-day operational period and which would come into force as from 1 January 2018 for large aircraft. The requirement to fit ULBs to the airframes of larger aircraft was part of the Annex 6 amendment that was applicable in November of 2012, so the work was ongoing. 16. In terms of more medium and longer-term activities, particularly in relation to expediting the location of the accident site, D/ANB indicated that there were a number of requirements that had been referred to the ANC by the Flight Recorder Panel (FLIRECP). This included consideration of automatic deployable flight recorders as one solution, which had been considered by the ANC in 2012 but for a variety of reasons it had been decided not to approve those proposed amendments at that time. This specific issue had been returned to the FLIRECP for further consideration and subsequently the recommendation had been for a performance-based standard that would be applicable in 2020 so that all aircraft of a maximum certificated take-off mass of over 20,000 kilograms, for which the individual certificate of airworthiness would at first be issued after 1 January 2020, should have the capacity to either automatically transmit positional information or an emergency locator transmitter (ELT) signal, in order that the accident site could be established within a six nautical mile radius. This proposal had been reviewed by the ANC, which recommended not to approve this option so the matter was referred back to the FLIRECP for further consideration. D/ANB indicated that this specific issue would be returned to the ANC in the coming week. 17. The Representative of India echoed the sentiments of other Council Representatives in conveying condolences to the Governments of Malaysia and China. In doing so, he informed the Council that there were five Indian nationals on board the ill-fated flight, as well a number of other passengers from the wider Indian diaspora, who held citizenship with another country. 18. In relation to the preceding intervention from the Director, Air Navigation Bureau, the Representative of India suggested that in terms of the security related aspects to this incident, one option for the forthcoming Aviation Security Panel (AVSECP) meeting might be to consider interim measures that could add to existing identification processes. This could be undertaken in the interim until the Public Key

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 156 -

Directory (PKD), Advanced Passenger Information System (APIS) and related biometrics solutions were introduced. Interim arrangements of this nature, while potentially inconvenient for some, could aid security identification measures, and therefore would be worthy of consideration by the AVSECP. In this context, the Representative observed that Member States could also be encouraged to bring forward any ideas to the AVSECP meeting. 19. The Representatives of Argentina, Australia, Canada, Dominican Republic, France, Germany, Italy, Mexico, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russian Federation, Singapore, South Africa, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United Republic of Tanzania and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) also joined with other Council Representatives to express their deepest sympathies to all those who had been affected by the tragic circumstances surrounding the disappearance of Malaysia Airlines flight MH370. In doing so, the Representative of the Russian Federation noted that given this incident it might be an opportune moment for ICAO to revisit its position on issues related to flight data recorders (FDR) and emergency locator transmitters (ELT) with the possibility of these being included as specific items in the future work programme of the ANC. 20. In concluding the discussion on this item, the President of the Council thanked Representatives for their interventions and expressions of sympathy. He noted that until the aircraft was found or until more was learned about what exactly had occurred, it would be important to avoid speculation on the possible causes of the incident. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that ICAO had a responsibility as the United Nations specialized agency responsible for developing the principles and structures of international air navigation, to absorb all the information that eventually became known in relation to this incident, and to use the lessons learned to ensure the safety of international civil aviation throughout the world. 21. The Council then went into closed session so as to consider the next item on the Order of Business. Subject Nos. 14.4.3,

41, and 52: Panels Rules of procedure of the various representative bodies in ICAO Unlawful Interference with international civil aviation and its facilities

Report of the WGGE — Consideration of Directives for Panels of ICAO

22. Upon returning to open session, the Council resumed (201/6) consideration of this subject on the basis of an oral report by the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) on the outcome of its review of C-WP/14117 – Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission – Fifth Edition, and of the proposed Directives for the ANC and UIC Panels. The WGGE had also given consideration to the feasibility of a proposal to develop a single set of Directives for Panels of ICAO. 23. The Representative of Portugal observed that in Article 44 of the Chicago Convention, reference was made to the aims and objectives of the Organization as developing the principles and techniques of international air navigation and fostering the planning and development of international air transport, so as to avoid discrimination between Contracting States (Article 44 g refers). On this basis in relation to the composition of the Panels, she requested that the ANC consider inviting nominations from all States, instead of a select number as is currently the case, albeit in a multiple phase process in which all States were to be consulted.

- 157 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

24. In response to the point raised by the Representative of Portugal, the President of the Air Navigation Commission (P/ANC) explained that there was no intention in the current mechanism for the composition of the ANC Panels to create any discrimination between Member States. Rather the aim of the Directives for Panels was to create an ability to undertake practical and specific work on certain technical issues and problems. Indeed, the current nomination mechanism had existed for many years and had facilitated the efficient commitment of a certain number of countries in ensuring that the required work was properly addressed. 25. As an example, P/ANC cited the System-Wide Information Management (SWIM) Panel where the Directives were clear in confirming that all States had an opportunity to participate. This ensured that all contracting parties can participate in this work, and in addition, ensured that the work was carried out by individuals who had a genuine commitment to addressing the issues and not merely by people who had simply an interest in the topic. This distinction was important especially in ensuring that the right type of expertise was available. In this connection, the Directives that were the subject of consideration by the Council under this item, would not change the existing processes that had been working well for many years. He urged the Council to proceed with caution before contemplating any changes to a mechanism that had been working well for years. He expressed concern that any changes that created new administrative requirements might damage the flexibility that had existed until now for handling certain highly technical issues. 26. In relation to the same issue, the Representative of Germany indicated that even though he understood the reasoning for the intervention by the Representative of Portugal, he nevertheless supported the existing mechanism in relation to how the ANC Panels were formed and operated. He had observed that the ANC Panels were composed of highly specialized technical experts and that it was not always easy to find the required technical expertise. The current mechanism for the formation of the Panels had been working well for years and it still offered any State the opportunity to participate in the technical work if it so chose. In this way, the Representative emphasized that the current mechanism did not exclude any State. However, since the Panels were highly technical in nature, the existing arrangement should not be altered with. 27. The Representative of the Russian Federation observed that over the years the ANC had carried out an enormous amount of work on t he Directives for Panels, and although in principle he understood the intervention from the Representative of Portugal, it did not in his view represent a realistic approach. The Representative recalled a recent occasion in which the Russian Federation had not been invited to participate in an initial discussion on language but it nevertheless had been given the opportunity to subsequently participate in this work. This example represented the most practical way in which to proceed on such matters in that Member States retained the right to participate as and when required. 28. The Representative of the United Kingdom joined with the Representative of the Russian Federation in observing that a considerable amount of work had thus far been undertaken in relation to the Directives for Panels. In this context it was interesting to note that sometimes lessons are learned when thinking about issues and on other times lessons are learned by actively taking certain courses of action. Both options would always be available. For the time being he was pleased to support the adoption of the Directives on the understanding that there was always room for improvement in the existing process. 29. In congratulating the ANC for the work it had undertaken in relation to the Directives for Panels, the Representative of France recalled that when this issue had been discussed at the WGGE, it was emphasized that the ANC Directives were autonomous to a certain extent vis-à-vis the entities of the Council. In this connection, it had been agreed that there was no need to reproduce the approach of other

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 158 -

entities when considering issues of participation and efficiency in the way that the Panels currently operated. The Delegation of France strongly supported the adoption of these Directives on the understanding that the issue of the way in which the Panels operated could be revisited again on another occasion if it was considered necessary. 30. The Representative of Spain suggested that in the future in those instances when a State wished to participate in a given Panel, but could not for whatever reason, that such instances be brought to the attention of the Council. This would allow the Council the opportunity to consider alternative arrangements and whether any changes were required to the existing mechanism for the nomination process to the Panels. 31. In conclusion, the Council agreed with the WGGE recommendation that it would not be desirable to have a s ingle set of Directives for all Panels of ICAO. The Council also agreed with the recommendation that the Council continue its consideration of the proposed Directives for the Panels of the Committee on Unlawful Interference.

32. With regard to the revised Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission, the Council agreed with the WGGE recommendation that some minor improvements should be made to provisions in those Directives relating to the participation of international organizations and the election process for the Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. Subject to this amendment and the recommendation indicated in the preceding paragraph, the Council approved the revised Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission.

33. It was also understood that the Council could at a subsequent session, review the current arrangements by which the ANC invited States to nominate candidates to the Panels. Subject No. 7.1: Organization of the Secretariat

Restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat 34. The Council considered C-WP/14137, which presented an overview of the changes that the Secretary General was intending to introduce to the organizational structure of the ICAO Secretariat to take effect in the 2014-2016 triennium. 35. In introducing the item, the Secretary General recalled that this topic had been the subject of focus during an informal briefing of the Council that had taken place on 25 February. On that occasion, he had indicated that the restructure of the Secretariat was divided into two parts, the first of which related to changes in both the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB) and the Air Transport Bureau (ATB), while the second part related to a proposal to create a post of Assistant Secretary General at the level of Director. On the latter, he had taken careful note of the numerous objections that had been raised by Representatives and in light of these, this option had not been included in the restructure proposals outlined in C-WP/14137, which now dealt only with the changes that were being proposed in relation to the Bureaux.

36. In relation to the budgetary implications associated with the proposed restructure, these were outlined in paragraphs 5.2, 5.3, and 5.4 of the working paper. Although the proposals would lead to an annual deficit of $100,000, the Secretary General explained that this deficit could be easily covered from operational savings. Indeed, if one of the D-1 level posts was not filled until mid-2014, then it would also mean that there would be no negative financial implication for the current year.

- 159 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

37. The Secretary General acknowledged that in relation to the possible creation of an Assistant Secretary General position, this would be something that the Council might wish to come back to on some future occasion, if it so chose.

38. The Representative of Mexico welcomed the proposals that had been presented by the Secretary General as contained in C-WP/14137, especially as they accurately reflected the results of the discussion held by the Council at the informal briefing that had taken place on 25 February. In relation to the proposal indicated in paragraph 5.3 of the document to keep the existing D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB) vacant for the time being as an additional cost-saving measure, the Representative suggested that this ought to be reviewed at some point in the future taking into account the workload of the Bureau. Indeed, it might be necessary to fill this vacancy in the context of the next triennium. In relation to any “operational savings” that were alluded to in paragraph 5.4, the Representative urged that these be found from the administrative support areas of the Organization as opposed to the technical activities.

39. In relation to the financial implications arising from the new D-1 level posts, the Representative of India expressed concern that this would have an impact in future trienniums, even though it appeared that provision could be made for covering the expenditure for at least the current triennium. In this connection, he sought an assurance that the cost implications arising from these posts would not have a carryover impact in future trienniums.

40. In relation to the proposal to create two separate Branches in ANB; one to deal with safety and the other to deal with air navigation, the Representative expressed concern that there would be an ongoing need to ensure there existed strong levels of interrelation between the two Branches especially given the existence of the GANP and the GASP, which would require close coordination between the two separate Branches.

41. The Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) welcomed the proposals that had been presented in the working paper but expressed concern in relation to the long-term financial implications that would be arising from the creation of new D-1 level posts especially given the recent adoption by the Assembly of the new budget for the Organization. Although the Representative acknowledged that it was important provide some flexibility within the budget context for changing circumstances, it was equally important to plan for the long-term implications of decisions such as these.

42. In relation to the existing D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB), the Representative also suggested that it was necessary to assess whether or not this post should remain vacant over a long period of time. In this connection, he noted that in recent years there had been a noticeable increase in the number of D-1 level posts in the Secretariat and this would continue to carry significant implications for the budget leading to certain constraints that would need to be taken into account.

43. In welcoming the proposals for the restructuring of the Secretariat and in particular the ongoing move towards performance-based management the Representative of the United States recalled that the budget that had been adopted by the Assembly necessarily obliged ICAO to operate within a strict budgetary framework. In this connection, he had been led to understand that the proposed restructure would be budget-neutral and that any new posts that were created would be financially covered by the abolishment of other posts. Therefore, he was concerned to note from paragraph 5.2 of the documentation that there was a funding implication of approximately $700,000 in the creation of each new D-1 level post. Even with the abolishment of certain other posts, the Representative was concerned that the long-term budgetary

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 160 -

implications of new D-1 level posts were substantial and could mean that the budget would not be budget neutral in future trienniums.

44. Separately, the Representative also expressed concern that the creation of these new D-1 level posts in recent years was leading to an Organization that would be perceived as being “top heavy” with a resultant deficit at the required lower grade levels. This could potentially have an adverse impact on the completion of the work programmes if the posts for the necessary staff were not available.

45. In clarifying several issues that had thus far been raised in the discussion, the Secretary General explained that in relation to the shortfall of $700,000 that was referred to in paragraph 5.2 of the documentation, it was important to read this in conjunction with the following paragraph (5.3), which clearly indicated that with the achievement of certain savings, the shortfall would amount to only $100,000 per year, an amount that of itself represented less than 0.1 per cent of the overall budget. With the existing carryover, ICAO was well positioned to accommodate such an amount, which was not significant and which would not require sacrificing any of the technical programmes.

46. The Secretary General also reminded the Council that when the budget had been approved, it had been accepted by Representatives that about 40 posts were being abolished while some staff had been encouraged to take early retirement and it might always be possible to find additional savings in the next budget. These could involve additional early retirements or certain efficiency gains. In any case, he assured the Council that the creation of the additional D-1 level posts had not occurred at the expense of existing technical programmes.

47. By way of elaboration on the new D-1 level posts that were being created, the Secretary General indicated that the proposals related to only two such posts, which would be in addition to the current establishment. One of these related to the strategic objective for the economic development of air transport in the Air Transport Bureau (ATB), while the other resulted from the division into three new branches of safety, air navigation, and monitoring and oversight, in the new Air Navigation Bureau (ANB).

48. The Representative of the United Arab Emirates welcomed the proposals for the restructure of the Secretariat that were contained in C-WP/14137. There were however some additional proposals that she wished to have seen in the restructure, including a specific separation of s trategic planning activities from the Finance Branch. Indeed, in her view, the strategic planning function would be more appropriately accommodated within the Evaluation and Internal Audit Office, which itself should be renamed as the Office of Strategic Management and Internal Audit. In this connection, strategic management activities should lead the development, execution and monitoring of strategic plans and performance management.

49. The Representative noted that this added emphasis on strategic planning would be in keeping with other organizations that sought to transform their key management processes so as to focus on strategy execution. She recalled that in her extensive review of various organizational structures, including those that had experienced difficulties during global financial crisis, there were obvious deficiencies in their management structures. Although many organizations had separate offices to manage finance, human resources, information technology, and marketing, among others, relatively few elevated strategic planning to the same degree. While strategic management ultimately rested with line managers and employees, the evidence clearly demonstrated that without central guidance and coordination, the strategy was either omitted from key management processes or poorly coordinated and executed.

- 161 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

50. The Representative also expressed concern at the decision to keep vacant the existing D-1-level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB). She observed that in recent years there had been increasing demands being placed on this Bureau, including the servicing of additional Council Committees for which LEB fulfilled the secretariat responsibility such as with the Relations with Host Country Committee (RHCC). In this regard, she urged that consideration be given to filling this post as soon as possible.

51. The Representative of Italy expressed concern that the proposed restructuring of the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB), which would mean that the current Meteorology Section would be absorbed into the new Airport Operations and Interoperability Section, would signal that this was a lesser priority to the Organization. He noted that the Meteorology Section currently dealt with a range of pertinent issues, including the effects of volcanic ash episodes on civil aviation, something that was particularly important given the recent eruption of the Icelandic volcano Eyjafjallajökull in 2010. The Representative emphasized that in general terms, the effects of extreme weather events was something that would require more attention as the planet experienced the extreme effects of climate change and which were affecting many regions. In this connection, it was necessary for ICAO to pay close attention to meteorological and climate events.

52. In relation to the budget implications arising from the proposed restructure, the Representative cautioned that these had the potential to carry long-term implications on the budget if they were not clarified. He expressed particular concern that some of the changes being proposed would not be sustainable in the long term even if at this stage they represented only a small percentage of the overall ICAO budget. The Representative recalled that a similar issue was identified by the External Auditor in relation to the early retirement of staff and the potential impact of doing so on the long-term sustainability of the staff pension scheme. Therefore, it would be necessary to ensure that any proposed changes would be budget neutral in terms of their impact on the ICAO budget.

53. The Representative of Portugal joined other Representatives in welcoming the proposals to restructure the Secretariat, especially with regard to the alignment of the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB) with the strategic objectives as well as a clarification of the new structure pertaining to the Air Transport Bureau (ATB). In relation to the latter, she expressed a desire to receive further details on the specific powers to be assigned to the newly proposed Economic Development Branch as well as for the newly proposed Branches of International Aviation and Climate Change, and Environment Standards.

54. In relation to the budget implications arising from the proposed restructure and creation of the new D-1-level posts, the Representative joined with the Representative of Italy in expressing concern that these changes would not be budget neutral in subsequent trienniums. She requested confirmation on this as well as further information in relation to the proposed operational savings that were alluded to in paragraph 5.4 of the documentation. She was particularly concerned that the financial impact of $100,000, which although minimal, would carryover in subsequent years.

55. In relation to the D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB), which was slated to remain vacant for the time being, the Representative also requested further information on the scheduled timeline especially since given the ongoing heavy workload in that particular Bureau, there would be a need to fill this vacancy sooner rather than later.

56. The Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania observed that the proposed changes to the current structure of the Secretariat would help to better deliver on the Organization’s mission and objectives while also addressing some pertinent structural deficiencies. In particular, he welcomed the

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 162 -

ongoing focus aimed at strengthening the ICAO Regional Offices, so in this regard the clear reporting lines from the Regional Directors direct to the Secretary General would better facilitate the decision-making process.

57. The Representative stressed however, that there remained room for improvement in enabling Regional Offices to have greater regional capability and responsibility to assist States in their efforts. He cited as an example, the option of Regional Offices having the capacity to assist in the validation of information from the States, as well as with corrective action plans aimed at responding to deficiencies identified during audits. In this connection, the Representative noted that although the document alluded to an adequate level of staffing in the Regional Offices, he considered it worthwhile to explore options to increase the number of experts in the Regional Offices to assist States.

58. In relation to the creation within the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB) of two distinct branches; one for safety and another for air navigation, the Representative of China wondered why the opportunity was not taken as a result to rename ANB as t he Safety and Air Navigation Bureau. In response, the Secretary General explained that his original intention had indeed been to rename ANB as the Safety and Air Navigation Bureau, but that during the informal briefing on the restructure, which he had delivered to the Council on 25 February, there had been a point raised by a Representative that this proposed new Bureau name might also have certain implications for the name of the Air Navigation Commission and on this basis therefore, it was decided not to propose a change to the name of the Bureau. 59. In relation to the various interventions from Council Representatives concerning the long-term financial implications of the proposed restructure, the Secretary General explained that the carryover in the ICAO budget from 2013 w as around $4 m illion, which meant that an additional expenditure of only $100,000 per annum would be minimal in terms of its long-term financial impact. He assured the Council that based on the size of the ICAO budget and the carryover from one triennium to the other, the amount involved as a result of the restructure would not represent an ongoing issue.

60. In relation to the suggestion from the Representative of the United Arab Emirates concerning an additional highlighted focus on strategic planning, the Secretary General undertook to consider possible options in this regard.

61. In relation to the point raised by the Representative of the United Republic of Tanzania concerning the Regional Offices, the Secretary General indicated that their staffing levels were currently considered to be adequate for the moment given the existing constraints of the budget. Nevertheless, he gave a commitment to the Council that the future priority for any additional staffing resources would certainly be directed to the Regional Offices.

62. In relation to the budgetary implications arising from the restructure, the Representative of Germany stated that as a matter of principle he welcomed efforts aimed at introducing greater efficiencies in the Organization and to ensure that the Secretariat remained flexible in adapting to emerging challenges. He observed however, that in order to be able to achieve a satisfactory and sustainable organizational restructure, the objective had to be clear in terms of what the proposed changes were meant to deliver. Given the size of ICAO this would represent a fairly cumbersome exercise that was time and resource intense and included a d etailed examination of the various processes in the Organization in order to determine what was working well and where improvements might need to be made. He was not sure that such an exercise had been conducted in this instance, which made it difficult to arrive at a sound judgement about the merits or otherwise of the proposed restructure.

- 163 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

63. In the circumstances, it was therefore important to consider the budgetary implications of the proposals. While he saw merit in the proposals, the Representative was doubtful as to some of the financial conclusions that had been drawn. Specifically, he referred to the $300,000 impact that the proposals would have on the current triennium budget. Although he acknowledged that it would not be difficult to cover such an amount from within the existing budgetary framework, he recalled that during the budget discussions last year, one of the options had been to adopt a budget based on a zero-nominal growth scenario with an additional reduction of two per cent. This had been based on the premise that the Organization already had sufficient funds and that it could always identify the additional required savings. He recalled that during those budget discussions when a difference of just $300,000 between budget scenarios had been identified, it was understood that this amount was considered essential as it represented the equivalent of a P -4 level post required to deliver programme objectives. At that time, several delegations had to seek approval from their Ministries before being able to approve the increase of $300,000 to the proposed budget scenario. 64. Against this background, he had understood paragraph 5.4 of C-WP/14137 to suggest that the Secretariat was unable to absorb the extra costs arising from the creation of the new D-1 level posts, albeit small, in future budgets. In the circumstances, the Representative was hesitant to approve the proposals for the restructure unless it was clear that there would be no request for an increase in the assessed contributions from States in the next budget simply because it had not been possible to absorb the costs of the new D-1 level posts from within the existing budget.

65. The Representative also took the opportunity to remind Representatives that the level of the Working Capital Fund had been increased to ensure coverage for any budgetary shortfall and in addition the Council on pr evious occasions had also expressed a desire to limit the number of staff, who were currently being paid for from the Ancillary Revenue Generation Fund (ARGF), but for whom funding would now come from the regular programme budget. He urged the Council to keep in mind that there would always be budgetary implications from the creation of new posts, or from the filling of currently vacant posts and therefore he remained concerned as to the decisions being reached by the Council on such items.

66. In recalling that the proposals on the restructure of the Secretariat reflected the new strategic objectives of the Organization, the Representative of the Russian Federation noted that some of the issues that had been raised during the present debate thus far had also been raised in the Council last year in the context of the budget discussions. While he did not wish to revisit some of these issues, the Representative nevertheless observed that it would be inevitable for the Council to hold yet another discussion on further changes to the organizational structure once a new Secretary General was appointed. While this was understandable, the Representative was concerned that constant changes to the organizational structure would not facilitate effectiveness of Secretariat operations.

67. With that background and given some of the concerns that had been raised in preceding interventions, the Representative wondered whether the Council was genuinely ready to take the required decisions on the proposed restructure. This being the case, he suggested that it might have been better to allow for more work to be carried out on the restructure proposals so as to address all the concerns that had been thus far raised during the Council’s consideration of this item and to clarify all outstanding issues. Although he acknowledged that the proposals deserved merit, he remained concerned that the Council was not ready at this meeting to approve the proposed changes.

68. In relation to the proposal to maintain as vacant the existing D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB), the Representative of the Dominican Republic expressed

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 164 -

support for reviewing this decision in the future especially given the significant workload being experienced in that Bureau.

69. The Representative of South Africa expressed concern over the way in which the Council was approaching this item. He recalled that following the briefing that the Secretary General had provided to the Council on 25 F ebruary on issues related to the proposed restructure, certain questions had been raised as well as requests for clarification, which the Secretary General had taken into account when returning to the Council in the form of C-WP/14137. Therefore, he was concerned that Representatives were now raising totally new issues that had not been alluded to on previous occasions. The Representative urged the Council to respect the process that had been undertaken to date and to move on by accepting the proposals that had been presented. Otherwise there was a risk that the Council would fail to move on from this item.

70. While acknowledging that the proposed restructure had indeed already been considered by the Council on a previous occasion at the informal briefing on 25 F ebruary, the Representative of Spain expressed the view that it was nevertheless important to ensure that the proposals were fine-tuned to reflect the best and most efficient outcome for the Secretariat. The current debate enabled certain doubts and concerns to be aired at the Council and to hopefully address these in the course of finalizing the proposals. As an example he cited the previous discussion concerning the name of the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB). In this instance, the Representative thanked the Secretary General for ensuring that the name of the Bureau would stay as it was, which would ensure ongoing consistency with the name of the Air Navigation Commission.

71. In relation to the budget implications of the proposals, the Representative agreed with previous interventions in emphasizing the need to take into account the long-term implications on the ICAO budget of any posts that were being created. In the same vein, he had closely followed the debate in the Council in relation to the existing D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB), which was slated to remain vacant for the time being. He cautioned that filling this post in the short-term would carry obvious budgetary implications that the Council needed to take into account if this was what it wished to recommend.

72. In the context of discussions about the new D-1 level posts, the Representative also noted that it might be necessary at some stage for the Human Resources Committee (HRC) to consider the basis for the contract being offered for all D-1 level posts in the Secretariat and whether there should be a fixed term limit for these positions in the same way as there is for D-2 level posts, where there is a maximum limit of two four-year terms.

73. In response to some of the additional points raised in relation to the budgetary impact of the proposed restructure, the Secretary General stated there would be no financial implications vis-à-vis the assessed contributions of States in the context of the next triennium budget. Specifically in relation to the $300,000 shortfall that would result from these proposals, he assured the Council that there existed adequate coverage within existing cost-saving provisions that would not affect other more substantial parts of the work programme.

74. In relation to the funding of certain posts that ought to be covered from the regular programme budget but which currently are not, he agreed that this would have been the ideal outcome. However, he recalled that when it had approved the budget, the Council had been well aware that there were some important positions that would not be funded by the regular programme budget simply because no funding was available for these posts. Since these posts were essential, the Secretary General allocated the

- 165 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

funding for this purpose from the ARGF, even though as had occurred at one time with some posts in other areas of the Secretariat, this was not an ideal situation.

75. As for the shortfall of funds, which really represented only $100,000 per annum in the current triennium, the Secretary General assured the Council that these funds could be found and it was to be expected that within a budget of the magnitude that ICAO had, identifying such a small level of funds without affecting the technical programmes was easily achieved. In conclusion, the Secretary General urged the Council to move beyond the focus on t he budget related issues arising from the restructure proposals.

76. The Representative of Germany assured the Secretary General that he did not wish to micromanage the Secretariat on matters such as this but the Council had a responsibility to focus on the budget and the impact that any new proposals might have. He concurred with the Secretary General’s approach, in that within a budget of the size that ICAO had, it would be relatively easy to cover the proposals that had been presented. He certainly had no di fficulty in accepting that but what he was concerned about was that any additional proposals to create new posts or to fill posts such as the D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB), which was currently slated to stay vacant for the time being, would carry financial implications. He urged the Council to keep in mind that there had to be a limit to any new spending proposals and that any new proposals were budget neutral.

77. The Representative of Singapore observed that over the years there had been an increase in the staffing resources of ICAO commensurate with the additional responsibilities that it had been given. In this connection, he hoped that these additional resources would help the Organization to become more efficient in its operations and better able to deliver on its objectives. In relation to the budgetary impact of the proposed restructure, the Representative expressed support for the approach outlined since it would be budget neutral. It would also be important to maintain some flexibility in the budget since it would not be possible to foresee what future demands might need to be responded to.

78. In expressing support for ensuring that any new proposals were budget neutral, the Representative of France also emphasized the need to maintain a linkage between the new organizational structures and the strategic objectives. Specifically, he welcomed the creation of the new Economic Development Branch in the Air Transport Bureau (ATB), which he observed reflected discussions at the 38th Session of the Assembly and which led to the adoption of the new strategic objective concerning economic development of air transport. In this connection he would welcome a subsequent discussion in the Council on the role and responsibilities of this new Branch.

79. In the same way, the Representative observed that it had been important when dealing with the proposed new structure of the Air Navigation Bureau (ANB), to maintain a linkage with the newly adopted strategic objectives. In this context, he sought clarification on the exact link that would exist between the strategic objectives and proposed new Oversight Audit Section given the functions that had been outlined in the supporting documentation.

80. As for the financial implications arising from the proposals, the Representative emphasized the need to maintain budget neutrality for the current triennium and when the budget negotiations commenced for the next triennium. It would be equally important to keep in mind the financial imposition on Member States of any additional proposals.

81. While expressing support for the proposed restructure, the Representative of Bolivia (Plurinational State of) expressed concern over the long-term budgetary implications that would arise and

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 166 -

he wondered whether this issue could not be referred to the Finance Committee for further consideration of the long-term impacts.

82. Likewise, while indicating support for the proposals to restructure the Secretariat, the Representative of Argentina expressed concern over the intention to leave vacant the existing D-1 level post in the Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (LEB). He urged that this question should be addressed before a decision on the restructure was taken.

83. The Representative of Poland drew attention to the possibility of making further changes to the structure of the Secretariat in due course. She indicated that this should not be perceived in a negative light since it would mean that the Council was taking the opportunity to ensure that the structure of the Secretariat was adapted to meet new and emerging challenges as they arose.

84. In concluding the discussion on this item, the President of the Council indicated that the structure of the Organization was important for the delivery of its strategic objectives. This was clearly implied by the fact that Member States continually kept giving additional responsibilities to ICAO. Unfortunately, it was accepted that the necessary resources did not always follow the allocation of these new responsibilities to the Organization, no matter how important they were.

85. He acknowledged that Member States were facing ongoing financial challenges even while the aviation industry kept growing. Indeed, it was expected that the industry would double over the next 15 years. Therefore, it ought to be expected that even more responsibilities would be given to ICAO and so it was important to ensure that the Organization would be able to meet those new challenges. It was possible that this would represent an ongoing dilemma in trying to find ways to do more with less but this would simply imply that ICAO had to be more efficient as well as more effective in how it approached its activities.

86. However, following the informal briefing by the Secretary General on the proposed restructure, which took place on 25 February, the President considered that the working paper that had been brought to the Council for consideration of this item (C-WP/14137) adequately responded to many of the concerns that had been raised. The proposals were somewhat reduced in scope when compared to what had been presented at the informal briefing but they nevertheless would help to empower the Organization with the necessary resources to do the work that was required of it.

87. The President also acknowledged the concerns underlying some of the interventions in relation to the difference between the level of resources at the top of the Organization compared to what would be available at the middle levels of the organizational structure. He also appreciated the concerns with respect to the long-term budgetary impact, but in the overall assessment of what he had heard from Representatives in the course of the debate, he was of the view that the general consensus was that the Council was ready to approve the proposed restructure, albeit with certain caveats that had been expressed. That being the case, the Council would request the Secretary General to ensure that in implementing the new structure, all the concerns that had been expressed would be borne in mind into the future, especially in relation to the possible long-term budgetary impact.

88. The Council then approved the restructuring of the Secretariat as presented in C-WP/14137. It was understood that comments made by the Council during the consideration of this item would be taken into account by the Secretary General.

- 167 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

89. Finally, the Council also noted the suggestion from the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) concerning the option of requesting the Finance Committee to study the long-term budgetary implications of the proposals to restructure the Secretariat and the creation of certain new D-1 level posts in the context of the next triennium budget. Subject No. 7: Organization and personnel Subject No. 7.4: Conditions of service

Conditions for granting continuing appointments at ICAO 90. The Council considered C-WP/14124, presented by the Secretary General and a related oral report by the Chairperson of the Human Resources Committee (HRC). These concerned a recommendation of the Secretary General on implementation details and criteria for the granting of continuing appointments at ICAO. 91. In introducing the item, the Chairperson of the Human Resources Committee (Representative of the United Arab Emirates) indicated that at its meeting on 30 January 2014, the Human Resources Committee (HRC) had considered the background to the issue. In doing so, the HRC had noted the proposed criteria for granting continuing appointments and had made several recommendations concerning the new text to reflected in the proposed new Annex VII to The ICAO Service Code.

92. On a separate matter, the Committee had proposed that the Council might wish to reflect on the need to limit the assignment for all D-1 level positions to two terms, which would be similar to the existing provisions for D-2 level positions and Regional Directors.

93. In conclusion, the Committee recommended that the Council approve: a) the granting of continuing appointments in the ICAO Secretariat on the basis of one-third of eligible Professional and General Service staff, respectively, using the criteria reflected in paragraph 5.1 on page 3, and as amended for 5.1 e); b) the amendments to Staff Regulation 4.27.3, Annex V and Annex VI of The ICAO Service Code, as reflected in Appendix D (pages D-1, D-2 and D-3, respectively) of C-WP/14124; and, c) the new Annex VII to The ICAO Service Code on the criteria for the granting of continuing appointments, provided in Annex D (page D-4) of C-WP/14124, and as amended for 1 e).

94. The Representative of India welcomed the recommendations of the Human Resources Committee. In relation to limiting D-1 level appointments to only two terms, the Representative expressed support for this proposal and noted that it would ensure that the practice for these posts would be brought into line with that which currently existed for D-2 level posts and for Regional Directors.

95. In relation to the possible introduction of term limits for D-1 level appointments, the Representative of Mexico sought clarification on the reasons underlying the proposal. He wondered if this was related to aligning all D-1 level posts to be on the same basis as the Regional Directors or whether there had been other considerations as well.

96. The Representative of Japan welcomed the recommendations of the Human Resources Committee in relation to the conditions for granting continuous appointments, which he perceived as providing a good incentive to staff and in fostering the promotion of able staff to higher-grade positions in the Secretariat. The latter point was important because as the Representative had noted on previous occasions, it was a matter of concern that the average age of staff in the ICAO Secretariat was around 50 years of age. As this was a relatively high average, he observed that it had the potential to impact the

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 168 -

budget in future years especially as salary-related costs accounted for about 70 per cent of the regular programme budget.

97. Although the proposals for granting continuous appointments would not worsen the situation vis-à-vis the average age of staff, the Representative wished to see the Secretariat more actively explore other potential measures that could be considered for reducing the overall salary-related costs of the Organization. In the course of such an exercise, the Secretariat should take into account the current organizational chart, as well as the breakdown of the different age groups across the Secretariat to ensure that the best staff configurations were in place given the potential work programme.

98. In relation to a question from the Representative of the Russian Federation concerning what categories of staff were to be excluded from the proposals regarding the granting of continuing appointments, the Secretary General confirmed the new text in the Service Code would not apply to Junior Professional Officers, Associate Experts, and Secondees.

99. In expressing support for the proposals to introduce term limits for D-1 level posts, the Representative of Australia observed that this measure would allow greater flexibility at the upper management levels of the Organization since it would provide for more opportunities to change the structure now and then as new circumstances arose. The proposal would also provide more opportunities for career movement within the Organization, which would help foster this sense of renewal. In this regard, she specifically acknowledged the role of the Representative of Spain who had provided the initial impetus for this proposal.

100. Moreover, the proposals to introduce term limits for D-1 level appointments would ensure consistency between D-1 level posts in Headquarters and in the Regional Offices where the Regional Directors, who were appointed at the D-1 level, already had a fixed term applied to their appointment. On this basis the Representative noted that there was no justification why some D-1-level posts should have greater tenure than any other D-1s in the Organization, so it was important for purposes of consistency to align the terms for these appointments across the Secretariat. It was also the case that in recent times there had occasionally been an appointment at the senior levels that had proven to be less that successful. In this instance, this proposal would provide the capacity to deal with that situation by limiting an appointment to a fixed term.

101. The Representative of Spain thanked the Representative of Australia for comprehensively summarising the reasons for the proposal to create term limits for all D-1 level posts, which he had initially aired for consideration. He reiterated that this proposal would provide a good opportunity to renew the upper management levels of the Organization on an ongoing basis.

102. In relation to the proposal to introduce fixed term limits for D-1 level appointments, the Secretary General indicated that he was very much in favour of the initiative.

103. With regard to the proposed criteria for the granting of continuing appointments, the Council agreed with the HRC recommendation that the word “formal” precede the words “disciplinary measure” in paragraph 5.1 e) and paragraph 1 e) of the proposed new Annex VII to The ICAO Service Code, reflected on pages 3 and D-4 respectively of C-WP/14124.

104. In taking the action indicated in the executive summary of C-WP/14124, and as recommended in the oral report of the Human Resources Committee, subject to the amendments as indicated in the preceding paragraph, the Council approved:

- 169 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

a) the granting of continuing appointments in the ICAO Secretariat on t he basis of one-third of eligible Professional and General Service staff, respectively, using the criteria reflected in paragraph 5.1 on page 3 of C-WP/14124, and as amended above for paragraph 5.1 e);

b) the amendments to Staff Regulation 4.27.3, Annex V and Annex VI of The ICAO Service Code, as reflected in Appendix D (pages D-1, D-2, and D-3, respectively); and

c) new Annex VII to The ICAO Service Code on the criteria for the granting of continuing appointments, provided in Annex D (page D-4) of C-WP/14124, and as amended above for paragraph 1 e) of the Annex.

105. In addition, the Council agreed that all appointments to D-1 level posts would henceforth be limited to a maximum of two terms in keeping with the existing practice for D-2 level post appointments and Regional Director positions, which are also at the D-1 level. The Secretary General was requested to prepare corresponding amendments to The ICAO Service Code that would reflect this decision and to present these to the Council at the 202nd Session via the Human Resources Committee.

106. In response to a subsequent question from the Representative of Spain concerning when the initiative concerning term limits for D-1 level posts would take effect, the President of the Council indicated that this would apply henceforth as from any new appointments at this level unless the Council felt strongly otherwise.

Subject No. 13: Work programme of the Council and its subsidiary bodies

Work programme of the Council and its Committees for the 202nd Session 107. The Council considered C-WP/14126, which was presented by the President of the Council and the Secretary General, as well as an oral report thereon by the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE).

108. In introducing the item, the Chairperson of the Working Group on G overnance and Efficiency (Representative of China), indicated that at its meeting on 4 March 2014, the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) had reviewed C-WP/14126 (Work Programme of the Council and its Committees for the 202nd Session). In reviewing the work programme the WGGE had met in expanded form by inviting the Chairpersons and Secretaries of the other Committees of the Council.

109. The WGGE noted that the Council in the course of the current session had decided to pay closer attention to revenue-generating activities (C 201/1). In that connection, the WGGE therefore welcomed item 25 in Appendix A of C-WP/14126, (report on the performance of revenue-generating activities in 2013 with audited financial figures of ARGF and the financial projections and the business plan for 2014, 2015 and 2016).

110. The Working Group recommended that item 30 in Appendix A, (Report on publications for 2013), which was identified as an information paper to be circulated under cover of a PRES Memorandum, should instead be tabled as an item for discussion in the Council as it related to a major revenue-generating activity. The item would similarly be added to Appendix D for consideration by the Finance Committee.

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 170 -

111. The Working Group was advised by the Secretariat that following a request made by the Council for a briefing on the subject, an oral report on the new Universal Security Audit Programme (USAP) Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) methodology would be presented to the Committee on Unlawful Interference for information. The Working Group therefore recommended that this item should be added to Appendix E.

112. Finally, the Working Group noted that in light of ongoing discussions in the Council an item relating to the review of the Service Code should be added to Appendix G as well as Appendix A, in the event that the Council decided to proceed with such a review.

113. In response to a question from the Representative of Mexico, it was confirmed by the President of the Council that an item on the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy, which was raised during the sixth meeting of the current session (C 201/6) would be added to the work programme for the 202nd Session. Likewise, an item related to the issues raised by the Committee on Relations with the Host Country (RHCC) would also be added to the work programme.

114. It was noted that in relation to item 6 of the work programme of the Joint Support Committee (JSC), which concerned the work programme for the subsequent 203rd Session, the Representative of Norway would, in the course of consideration of this item, be seeking to have a detailed discussion on key performance indicators.

115. In response to a question from the Representative of the Russian Federation, it was agreed by the Council that an informal briefing on air cargo and mail security, which was an issue that had been raised in the course of the current session (C 201/4), would take place during the 202nd Session and that the Secretariat would contact a range of relevant external stakeholders to ensure their participation in such an event.

116. In response to a question from both the Representatives of Spain and Bolivia (Plurinational State of) concerning third party entities and the use of memorandums of understanding to strengthen levels of cooperation in a regional context, which had been referred to earlier in the current session (C 201/5), it was noted that this item would return for Council consideration at the 203rd Session.

117. Separately, in relation to all the issues that had arisen in the course of the current session as they applied to The ICAO Service Code, including amendments to introduce fixed term limits for D-1 level posts, it was confirmed that these would be incorporated into a comprehensive package of amendments to the Service Code that would be presented to the Council at the 202nd Session.

118. Based on the recommendation of the WGGE, the Council agreed that item 30 in Appendix A (Report on publications for 2013), which is identified as an information paper to be circulated under cover of a PRES memorandum, would instead be tabled as an item for discussion in the Council as i t related to a m ajor revenue-generating activity. The item would similarly be added to Appendix D for consideration by the Finance Committee.

119. Also based on recommendation of the WGGE, the Council agreed that a report on the new Universal Security Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) methodology would be presented for information to the Committee on Unlawful Interference, and therefore would be reflected in Appendix E.

- 171 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

120. In relation to C-WP/14135 concerning Assistance to States and related matters, which was considered during the present (201st) Session (C-DEC 201/5 refers), the Council requested the Working Group on Governance and Efficiency (WGGE) to consider, in consultation with the Secretariat, the work currently under way to address a number of outstanding issues identified in its oral report and to present its report, including any proposals for additional actions, to the Council at its next (202nd) Session.

121. The Council also noted that the Secretary General would present a report on the ICAO Civil Aviation Training Policy and that this would be added as an item to the work programme for the next (202nd) Session.

122. As decided during the Sixth meeting of the current session (C-DEC 201/6 refers), it was further noted that a progress report on t he deliberations of the Committee on R elations with the Host Country (RHCC), will be provided to the Council during the 202nd Session. It was also understood that item 6 of Appendix C of C-WP/14126, concerning the work programme of the Joint Support Committee, would include a proposal to report on key performance indicators.

123. Subject to the above-mentioned changes, the Council approved the work programme for the 202nd Session as set forth in Appendix A to C-WP/14126. The Council also approved the work programmes for the 202nd S ession of the Air Transport Committee (ATC), Joint Support Committee (JSC), Finance Committee (FIC), Committee on Unlawful Interference (UIC), Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC), and Human Resources Committee (HRC), as set forth in Appendices B, C, D, E, F, and G of the working paper.

124. It was also understood that a revised version of C-WP/14126 would be issued reflecting amendments made in accordance with the accepted recommendations of the WGGE and the Council’s deliberations, as well as any other consequential items that might need to be added subsequent to this current (201st) Session. It was also noted that Council Representatives could at any time request the addition of any new items to the work programme of a session.

125. Further to the Council’s previous consideration of a request by a Representative concerning the issue of air cargo and mail security (C-DEC 201/4 paragraph 31 refers), the Secretariat was requested to contact relevant external stakeholders with a view to scheduling an informal briefing on this issue to take place during the 202nd Session.

Any other business Subject No. 6.3: Election of Chairmen and Members of subsidiary bodies of the Council

Appointment of a Member on the Air Navigation Commission (ANC) 126. In the absence of comments by 28 February 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 24 February 2014, Mr. Raúl Héctor Carboni, nominated by Argentina, has been appointed as a new Member of the ANC, replacing Mr. Rubén O. González with effect from 1 March 2014.

C-MIN 201/7 (Open) - 172 -

Membership on the Air Transport, Finance and Technical Co-operation Committees (ATC, FIC, TCC)

127. In the absence of comments by 28 February 2014 to the President of the Council’s e-mail dated 26 February 2014, Mr. Martins Emeka Nwafor (Nigeria) has been appointed as a Mem ber of the FIC and TCC for the remainder of the period 2013-2014.

128. In accordance with paragraph 1 of the Special Provisions applicable to the ATC in the Rules of Procedure for Standing Committees of the Council (Doc 8146), the President of the Council has also appointed Mr. Nwafor as a Member of the ATC.

Council working papers presented for information 129. As the President of the Council has not received any requests to have the following information papers tabled for consideration, it is considered that the Council has noted the information provided therein:

• C-WP/14129 — Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Review of enterprise

resource planning (ERP) systems in United Nations organizations” – circulated under cover of PRES OBA/2265 dated 14 F ebruary 2014 w ith a deadline of 28 F ebruary 2014 f or comments;

• C-WP/14128 — Financial situation of the Organization – circulated under cover of PRES OBA/2274 dated 21 February 2014 with a deadline of 28 February 2014 for comments; and

• C-WP/14127 — Report on activities during the recess – circulated under cover of

PRES OBA/2275 dated 21 February 2014 with a deadline of 28 February 2014 for comments. 130. In addition, the President of the Council has received a request to have the following information paper referred to the Human Resources Committee for consideration at the next (202nd) Session:

• C-WP/14130 — Report of the JIU entitled “Staff-Management relations in the United

Nations specialized agencies and common system” – circulated under cover of PRES OBA/2265 dated 14 February 2014 with a deadline of 28 February 2014 for comments.

Farewell to Council Representative 131. The Council farewell to Mr Talal M. B. Kabli, the Representative of Saudi Arabia.

Closing of the 201st Session 132. In closing the session, the President of the Council thanked Council Representatives for their cooperation in the course of the discussions and for their efficiency in finishing the session a day ahead of the scheduled close.

- 173 - C-MIN 201/7 (Open)

133. The President noted that along with the Secretary General, he and many of the Council Representative would shortly be undertaking a working visit to Mexico and in this regard he specifically thanked the Representative of Mexico for his kind invitation.

134. Finally, the President thanked all the interpretation teams for their flexibility in supporting the work of the Council throughout the session.

135. The meeting adjourned at 1740 hours.

- 175 - C-MIN 201/7 (Closed)

COUNCIL — 201ST SESSION

SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE SEVENTH MEETING

(THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MONDAY, 10 MARCH 2014, AT 1500 HOURS AND 1700 HOURS)

CLOSED MEETING

President of the Council: Dr. Olumuyiwa Benard Aliu

Secretary: Mr. Raymond Benjamin, Secretary General

PRESENT:

Argentina Australia Bolivia (Plurinational State of) Brazil Burkina Faso Canada Chile China Dominican Republic Egypt France Germany India Italy Japan Kenya Libya

— Dr. N. Luongo (Alt.) — Ms. K. Macaulay — Mr. J.G. Soruco — Mr. P. de Moreas Jardim (Alt.) — Mr. M. Dieguimde — Mr. M. Allen — Mr. W.H. Celedón — Mr. Tao Ma — Mr. C.A. Veras Rosario — Mr. A. Mahmoud — Mr. O. Caron — Mr. U. Schwierczinski — Mr. P.N. Sukul — Mr. E. Padula — Mr. T. Koda — Mr. H.K. Kioko — Mr. M. Sayeh Eltayf

Malaysia Mexico Nicaragua Nigeria Norway Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Russian Federation Saudi Arabia Singapore South Africa Spain United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United Republic of Tanzania United States Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of)

— Mr. Y.-H. Lim — Mr. D. Méndez Mayora — Mrs. E. A. Aráuz Betanco — Mr. M. E. Nwafor — Mr. K.M. Skaar — Dr. M. Polkowska — Mrs. M.H. Faleiro T. de Almeida — Mr. Choi, D. — Mr. A.A. Novgorodov — Mr. T.M.B. Kabli — Mr. T.C. Ng — Mr. L. Mabaso — Mr. V.M. Aguado — Capt. A. Al Hamili — Mr. M. Rodmell — Mr. R.W. Bokango — Mr. J.L. Novak (Alt.) — Mr. D.A. Blanco Carrero

ALSO PRESENT: SECRETARIAT: Mr. F. Zizi, President, ANC Mr. N. Castro da Silva (Alt.) Mr. M. Deslisle (Alt.) Mr. Chunyu Ding (Alt.) Mr. CHU Guang (Advisor) Ms. YANG Jiru (Advisor) Mr. M. Millefert (Alt.) Mr. A. Bardaro (Alt.) Ms. M. Furuhata (Alt.) Mr. M. Adan (Alt.) Mrs. D. Valle Álvarez (Alt.) Mrs. H. Jansson Saxe (Alt.) Mr. Kang, M. (Alt.) Mr. D.V. Subbotin (Alt.) Mr. A. Almoghraby (Alt.) Mr. R.A. Al Kaabi (Alt.)

― Brazil ― Canada ― China ― China ― China ― France ― Italy ― Japan ― Kenya ― Mexico ― Norway ― Republic of Korea ― Russian Federation ― Saudi Arabia ― United Arab Emirates

Mr. D. Azema Ms. N. Graham Dr. Fang Liu Mr. B. Djibo Mr. I. Galán Mr. R. Bhalla Mr. J. Augustin Mr. J. Marriott Mr. O. Myard Mr. J. Weich Mrs. L.M. Comeau-Stuart Mr. S. Jossai Mr. A. Opolot Mr. M. Leitgab Mr. A. Larcos

— DC/OSG ― D/ANB ― D/ADB ― D/ATB ― D/TCB ― C/FIN ― A/D/LEB ― C/AVSEC ― C/EAO ― DD/HR-ADB ― C/POD ― HR-POD ― LEB ― ADADB ― ACC

C-MIN 201/7 (Closed) - 176 -

Representatives to ICAO Colombia Cuba Ecuador Ethiopia Greece Iran (Islamic Republic of) Lebanon Morocco Mozambique Peru Turkey Uruguay

- 177 - C-MIN 201/7 (Closed)

Subject No. 7: Organization and personnel

Appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB) 1. This subject was documented for Council’s consideration in a confidential memorandum circulated by the Secretary General (SG 2221/14), dated 5 March 2014, as well as an oral report from the Human Resources Committee (HRC/D-2/6 Restricted), dated 28 January 2014. The latter had separately been subject to Council consideration during the fifth meeting of current session. 2. In accordance with Article IV and Annex IV of The ICAO Service Code, the Human Resources Committee (HRC) had reviewed the shortlist of candidates and agreed that they met the selection criteria for the post of Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations.

3. The Secretary General indicated that in his confidential memorandum of 5 March 2014 to Council Representatives, reference had been made to the procedure which had been followed for the appointment of the Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB). The Secretary General recalled that this memorandum had also informed the Council that he was intending to appoint Mr John Augustin from Santa Lucia to the post of D/LEB.

4. The Council then noted that, as indicated in the said memorandum, the Secretary General, having carefully examined the documentation on the shortlisted candidates, taking into account the advice of the HRC and the decision of the Council at its fifth meeting (C-DEC 201/5 refers), and having obtained the approval of the President of the Council, would appoint Mr John Augustin (Saint Lucia) to the post of Director, Legal Affairs and External Relations Bureau (D/LEB). The Council did not object to the appointment of Mr Augustin to this post.

5. In taking the action outlined in the preceding paragraph, the Council also then proceeded to congratulate Mr John Augustin on his appointment. Any other business Subject No. 14: Subjects relating to air navigation

Freedom of overflight over the high seas and air defense identification zones (ADIZs) 6. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of Japan delivered the following statement:

“Japan and the United States, together with other like-minded States, remain concerned about the actions of any State to infringe the freedom of overflight in international airspace, which is a general principle of international law. We would like to draw once again the attention of the ICAO Council to this issue.

“Recalling our remarks made under the same agenda item at the last session of the Council, which it took note of, we believe that ensuring freedom of overflight in international airspace and effective management of civil air traffic within allocated Flight Information Regions (FIRs) are common interests to all ICAO Contracting States. We also believe that ICAO, as the technical multilateral

C-MIN 201/7 (Closed) - 178 -

organization tasked with ensuring safety of flight, is an appropriate venue where we can address such concerns.

“Especially, the unilateral imposition by a State of obligations on civil aircraft flying over international airspace, not intending to enter that State’s airspace, and within an FIR managed by a different State, creates a significant concern to international civil aviation. Also, this hazardous situation may lead to further aggravation if a State threatens military enforcement measures against the civil aircraft.

“Therefore, bearing this in mind, we submitted a letter to the ICAO Secretariat after consultations with other Council members. In this letter, we requested in particular the Air Navigation Bureau to clarify the management of FIRs, specifically as regards the authority of a State to put in place procedures to be followed by aircraft transiting international airspace outside that State’s FIR.

“We sincerely hope that this technical clarification by the Secretariat within ICAO’s mandate will lead all ICAO Contracting States to further enhance the safety of international civil aviation.

“As responsible members of the ICAO Council, we have taken the initiative to achieve ICAO’s mission, which is to ensure the safety of international civil aviation. That is clear from the letter sent to the Secretariat and our remarks.

“We would like to invite each member of the Council, recalling our mission to ensure the safety of international civil aviation, to devote ourselves to tackling the issue before us for its solution, with its wisdom and professionalism.

“Japan requests the Council to take note of this statement”. 7. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of the United States delivered the following statement:

“We would like to support the statement of the Representative of the Government of Japan regarding safe and effective management of flight information regions.

“During the last Council session the United States joined other Council members in raising the issue of overflight of civil aircraft in international airspace, a general principle of international law and the effective management of civil aircraft within allocated FIRs, both of which are vital for the order and safety of international civil aviation.

“Ensuring freedom of overflight in international airspace and effective management of civil air

traffic within allocated FIRs is of common interest of all members of ICAO. It is to that end that the United States and Japan have submitted a w ritten enquiry to the Secretary General asking for some clarification within the context of the Chicago Convention of a State’s authority to direct or restrict the operations of a flight of civil aircraft outside of that State’s FIR.

“We are concerned that any unilateral imposition by a State of obligations on civil aircraft flying in international airspace and not intending to enter that State’s airspace while that aircraft is within an FIR that is managed by a neighbouring State creates a significant hazard to international civil aviation. For example, a civilian pilot could be asked to obey two different controllers who may issue potentially

- 179 - C-MIN 201/7 (Closed)

contradictory instructions or guidance. This hazard is further exacerbated if a State potentially threatens military enforcement measures against the civil aircraft.

“We look forward to the response of the Secretariat to our enquiry, and to further discussions on

this issue in ICAO. “Thank you Mr President and other members”.

8. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of China delivered the following statement:

“Some representatives just referred to the question concerning “a State’s authority to direct or restrict the operation of the flight of civil aircraft outside the FIR”. China expresses its deep regret and categorical opposition. The observations made by the above representatives, while appearing to be related to the mandate of ICAO concerning FIRs, alluded in reality to the establishment of Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) by a State. I’d like to take this opportunity to elaborate in full the positions of China.

“Firstly, as an organization to promote international cooperation in the field of civil aviation, ICAO is not the appropriate forum to discuss ADIZ. The first ADIZ was established by a State in the 1950’s, and another State set up ADIZ as early as over 40 years ago. Why didn’t they initiate, then and in the ensuing decades, any request for ICAO to discuss the authority to direct or restrict the operation of civil aircraft outside the FIR? They are eager to raise this issue at ICAO and request ICAO to engage in political and security issues only upon the establishment of ADIZ by China. The political agenda behind is evident. The intention of one State is to divert the international attention from its denial of aggression to other Asian countries during the World War II and challenge the outcome of the WWII and post-war international order. Such move, if unchecked, may create a bad precedent, and may even divert the Council away from its normal direction. China is opposed to the discussion of this question at ICAO by the States concerned, because we do not want to see ICAO as a specialized agency to serve the political interests of a minority of States.

“Secondly, the establishment of ADIZ over the East China Sea falls within the sovereignty of China. At present, over 20 States have established ADIZ. The East China Sea ADIZ of China is aimed at safeguarding the security of its territorial land and airspace and maintaining orderly flight. It is not directed against any specific State or target, and is in full conformity with international laws and international customary practices. Facts have shown that there has been no impact on the flight safety and freedom of international civil aviation in the ADIZ over the East China Sea, and that orderly flight in the area has been effectively safeguarded. It is also indicated by IATA that since the setup of ADIZ by China, airlines of various States have been operating normally in this area and civil aviation operations have not been affected. The reason that a certain State raises this issue in the ICAO is, in fact, that China’s ADIZ covers the airspace over the Diaoyu islands, which have been China’s sacred territory since ancient times.

“Remarks were made concerning “unilateral imposition of obligations on civil aircraft not

intending to enter that State’s airspace”. There are no uni form international standards relating to the requirement by the State setting up ADIZ on reporting by other States and regions. The relevant rules of China are not the first created by ourselves, nor are they in contradiction with rules and arrangements of relevant international organizations. In fact, it is required by many States that a flight plan be filed in advance for an aircraft operating in an ADIZ.

C-MIN 201/7 (Closed) - 180 -

“A remark was also made that “a State threatens military enforcement measures against the civil aircraft”. ADIZ is an identification zone, not a restricted zone, let alone a no-fly zone. Therefore, it doesn’t hold true to make allegation such as “direct or restrict the operation of the flight of civil aircraft”. In addition, as clearly stipulated in Annex 15 to the Chicago Convention, civil aircraft are required to comply with special identification or reporting procedures, and the description of ADIZ shall include risk of interception in the event of penetration of ADIZ. As known to all, a civil aircraft by its nature poses no threat unless it’s under extreme circumstances. Therefore, China respects the freedom of over-flight by States in accordance with international laws, and international flights operating by the rules and in a normal manner in the ADIZ over the East China Sea won’t be affected in any way, and China will not take enforcement measures against them.

“As a contrast, there are more than a few instances that certain State jeopardizes the interests of neighboring State by abusing ADIZ. The ADIZ of a State covers most part of airspace over the East China Sea. That State also frequently dispatches military aircraft to follow and monitor Chinese airplanes operating normally over the East China Sea, thus posing serious threats to the flight safety and freedom of over-flight in the airspace concerned. That State also requested that flights operated by China on both sides of the Taiwan Straits crossing ADIZ of that State file flight plans to that State. While that State is anxious to create dispute and antagonism at ICAO, it may have overlooked the fact that what it is accusing now is exactly what it did itself a long time ago.

“At this moment, joint search-and-rescue efforts for flight MH370 and its passengers are

underway. Entrusted with a fundamental responsibility to promote the safe and orderly development of international air transport, ICAO is facing many major challenges, necessitating common efforts of all Contracting States. In this context, the attempt of certain State to create disturbance to the detriment of unity of the Council will not prevail.

“Thank you, Mr. President”.

9. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of Canada delivered the following statement:

“Canada’s overriding priority at ICAO is the maintenance of international civil aviation safety and we are concerned by any situation which may result in an aviation accident or incident. For that reason we do support seeking a technical review by the Secretariat on the questions which have been raised regarding the control of air navigation outside of a State’s FIR”. 10. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) delivered the following statement:

“We agree with China that ICAO is not the appropriate place to address this matter, and, we also agree that this issue should not be drawn out in the Council”. 11. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of the United Kingdom delivered the following statement:

“This is a sen sitive subject touching as it does on military and civil operations. As such the United Kingdom delegation would be happy for this work to proceed provided that it is clear we are looking at the general question of enabling the safe and free movement of civil aviation through ADIZ,

- 181 - C-MIN 201/7 (Closed)

and that this work is done at the appropriate technical level without focusing on any particular ADIZ or otherwise steering onto questions that do not belong in this house.

“I thank the Representative of Japan and the United States for their explanation of this point and

also the Representative of China for his comments. I am not certain that the question as initially framed is exactly correct but we are not here to debate this question in this chamber, and sometimes to look at the problem at a technical level is necessary to get the question right before one can work on the answer. At this stage I think it is appropriate that the Council simply note the matter”. 12. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of the Russian Federation delivered the following statement:

“Along with China, the Russian Federation believes that this issue goes beyond the mandate of ICAO. We u nderstand the concerns raised by colleagues regarding the safety of international civil aviation, and, it is something that has been expressed many times before.

“The history of ADIZ was that it was established by the United States soon after World War II.

Several countries in the region now have such a zone, including Canada, India, Japan, Pakistan, Norway, United Kingdom, China, Republic of Korea, Taiwan and the United States. ADIZ should not be confused with the FIRs, which are used to manage air traffic.

“The United States maintains four ADIZs: ADIZ-United States, ADIZ-Alaska, ADIZ-Guam, and

ADIZ-Hawaii. If radar interrogation fails to identify the aircraft in the ADIZ, then the airforce launch interceptive aircraft to identify the intruder immediately. This is a general rule that applies to all zones.

“Canada also operates a North American ADIZ, while the Republic of Korea operates a zone that

covers most, but not all, of its claimed airspace. It does not cover some remote spots. The zone was established in 1951 during the Korean War.

“Lastly, the establishment of the Chinese ADIZ is not unique in some respects. For example, in

2010, Japan extended its ADIZ by some 2000 kilometres. This means that there is now overlap in some of the ADIZs in the same region but importantly there are not any problems and no restrictions for civil aviation flights. The difference is simply that the flight plan must be sent to an additional source for information.

“In conclusion, the Russian Federation has some difficulty with the request made to the

Secretariat and to the Air Navigation Bureau to undertake some work on this issue. We believe that the mandate set out in the Chicago Convention does not relate to this, and nor is it within the ICAO mandate. Should there be any concern regarding flight safety of civil aviation it is hoped that these issues would instead be looked at by the United Nations Headquarters in New York”. 13. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of the Republic of Korea delivered the following statement: “As provided for in the Convention and the relevant Resolutions, sovereignty, harmonization, and cooperation are among basic values that underlie the safe and orderly development of international civil aviation and continue to provide the basis for its future development.

C-MIN 201/7 (Closed) - 182 -

“In particular, the freedom of overflight by civil aircraft in international airspace constitutes a guiding principle that has been and should be upheld and abided by all Contracting States of the Convention.

“The Republic of Korea is fully committed to this stance and it was for this reason that at the

200th Council Session, my delegation emphasized the importance of this commitment to be shared and delivered by all Contracting States.

“My delegation is of the view that the issue before us also needs to be addressed in due

consideration of the overarching principles of the freedom of overflight in international airspace and the safety of international civil aviation as well as in the spirit of cooperation among States concerned”. 14. On behalf of his Government, the Representative of Germany delivered the following statement:

“We take note of the request by Japan and the United States to ask the Secretariat for its view on the issue of overflight in international airspace. We welcome that the ICAO Secretariat will take an independent look into technical and safety aspects associated in general with the FIR boundaries, international airspace and civil air traffic purely transiting that airspace. We are looking forward to the result of this technical clarification”. 15. On behalf of her Government, the Representative of Australia delivered the following statement:

“We also note this matter and thank the Representatives of China and Japan for their presentations. We do not wish to hold a debate on the specifics of this subject, but to make the point and put on the record that Australia considers it primarily a matter for the Secretary General to determine whether any requests directed to ICAO clearly fall within its remit, and, within its area of competence, which is the promotion of safe, secure and sustainable civil aviation operations. If such requests are within the remit of ICAO, then it is appropriate for the Secretary General to determine which areas within the Secretariat have the relevant technical expertise to properly consider and appropriately respond to such issues. As with all the work of ICAO any requests should also be considered within the context of other ICAO priorities and resourcing”. 16. In closing the consideration of this item, the Council took note of the statements made by Japan, United States, China, Canada, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), United Kingdom, Russian Federation, Republic of Korea, Germany and Australia on the matter of freedom of overflight over the high seas and air defense identification zones (ADIZs).

- 183 -

SUBJECT INDEX TO THE SUMMARY MINUTES OF THE 201ST SESSION

Air Cargo and Mail Security Informal briefing (90) Air Navigation Freedom of overflight over the high seas and air

defense identification zones (ADIZs) (177) Safety Week –Presentations (79) Air Navigation Commission (ANC) Appointment of Members (23, 171) Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation

Commission (Doc 7984)— Fifth Edition (69) Work Programme for 196th Session (88) Air Transport (48) Voluntary Fund (48) Air Transport Committee (ATC) Appointment of Members and Alternates (23, 172) Airports Council International (ACI) Request to participate as Observer in closed

meetings of the Council on aviation security (24)

Annex 1 – Personnel Licensing Adoption of Amendment 172 (81) Annex 4 – Aeronautical Charts Adoption of Amendment 58 (84) Annex 6, Part I - International Commercial Air Transport – Aeroplanes Adoption of Amendment 38 (82) Annex 6, Part II - International General Aviation – Aeroplanes Adoption of Amendment 33 (83) Annex 6, Part III - International Operations – Helicopters Adoption of Amendment 19 (83) Annex 10 – Aeronautical Telecommunications Adoption of Amendment 89 (85) Annex 14 – Aerodromes, Volume II – Heliports Adoption of Amendment 6 (84) Annex 15 – Aeronautical Information Services Adoption of Amendment 38 (85) Annex 16 — Environmental Protection, Volume I — Aircraft Noise Adoption of Amendment 11 (86)

Annex 16 — Environmental Protection, Volume II — Aircraft Engine Emissions Adoption of Amendment 8 (87) Annex 17 – Security Adoption of Amendment 14 (29) Annex Amendments Impact assessment process (87) Assembly, 38th Session Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions —

Economic development of air transport (46) Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions —

Environmental protection (56) Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions –

Legal subjects (122) Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions —

Policy and Administrative Subjects (12) Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions —

Safety and air navigation capacity and efficiency (74)

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions — Security & Facilitation (35)

Assistance to States Assistance to States and related matters (120) Aviation Security Report of the Implementation Support and

Development – Security (ISD-SEC) Programme (111)

Risk overview (30) Aviation Working Group (AWG) Request for inclusion in the List of international

organizations that may be invited to attend suitable ICAO meetings (128)

Chicago Convention 70th Anniversary (25) Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) Appointment of Members (23) Committee on Relations with Host Country Report (144) Conditions of service Conditions for granting continuing appointments at

ICAO (167) Regional groupings for equitable geographical

representation purposes at ICAO (143)

- 184 -

Condolences Minute of silence and condolences (3, 55) Council Addition of a new item to the Council’s Work

Programme for the 201st Session (123) Closing of the Session (172) Establishment of “Friends of the Council” (148) Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 (153) Opening of the Session (3) Report on activities during the recess (172) Report on the deliberations of the Committee on

Relations with the Host Country (144) Retreat (24) Schedule for consideration of items during

the 201st Session (3) Work programme of the Council and its Committees

for the 202nd Session (169) Council Representatives – farewell Kabli, T.M.B. (172) Council Representatives – new Nwafor, M.E. (Nigeria) (3) D/LEB Appointment (93, 99, 177) Dangerous Goods Panel Report of the Twenty-fourth Meeting (DGP/24) (68) Directives for Panels Consideration of proposals (149, 156) Fifth Edition (69) Environment Establishment of the Environment Advisory Group

(EAG) (62) Recent developments in other United Nations bodies

and international organizations (56) Ethics Officer Annual Report (139) European Union (EU) Request to participate as Observer in closed

meetings of the Council on aviation security (24)

Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) Appointment of Members (14) Evaluation and Internal Audit Office (EAO) 2013 Report (21)

Finance Financial situation of the Organization (172) Proposal for ICAO Council review of salaries (11) Report on the Evaluation of Results Based

Management at ICAO – ICAO Performance Management Project (4)

Revenue-Generating Activities Policy (6) Finance Committee (FIC) Appointment of Members and Alternates (23, 172) Friends of the Council Establishment (148) Human Resources Committee (HRC) Appointment of a Member (23) International Women’s Day 2013 Statement by the President of the Council (127) Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) Report entitled “Review of enterprise resource

planning (ERP) systems in United Nations organizations” (172)

Report entitled “Staff-Management relations in the United Nations specialized agencies and common system” (172)

Review of Reports entitled “Review of Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” and “Staff Recruitment in United Nations System Organizations” (142)

Joint Support Committee (JSC) Appointment of a Member (23) Kotaite, A. Dr. Funeral arrangements (90) Minute of silence and condolences (55) Malaysia Airlines Disappearance of flight MH370 (153) Monitoring and Assistance Review Board (MARB) Progress report (103) Policy formulation process Review (129) Public Key Directory (PKD) Membership (24) Regional Offices Annual Report to Council on activities during 2013

and work programmes for 2014 (112)

- 185 -

Results Based Management Performance Management Project (4) Revenue-Generating Activities Policy (6) Safety oversight Progress report on the implementation of the ICAO

Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP-CMA) (76)

Secretariat Appointment of Director, Legal Affairs and External

Relations Bureau (93, 99, 177) Conditions for granting continuing appointments

(167) Restructuring of ICAO Secretariat (123, 158) Secretary General Mid-term Report to the Council (67) Technical Cooperation Report on Programme Development (115) Technical Co-operation Committee (TCC) Appointment of Members and Alternates (23, 172) Unlawful Interference Committee Appointment of Members (23) Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP-CMA) Progress report on implementation (76) Universal Security Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP-CMA) Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) (90) Progress report on the implementation transition

plan (39, 123)

- 187 -

LIST OF WORKING PAPERS CONSIDERED DURING THE 201ST SESSION C-WP/14070

Environmental Protection - Recent developments in other United Nations bodies and international organizations (56)

C-WP/14082

Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Review of Individual Consultancies in the United Nations System” (142)

C-WP/14084

Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Staff Recruitment in the United Nations System Organizations: A Comparative Analysis and Benchmarking Framework: Overview (142)

C-WP/14089

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Economic development of air transport (46) C-WP/14090

Annual Report to Council on Regional Offices’ activities during 2013 and work programmes for 2014 (112)

C-WP/14091

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Security and Facilitation (35) C-WP/14092 Restricted

Adoption of Amendment 14 to Annex 17 (29) C-WP/14093 Revision No. 1 (French and Spanish only)

Progress report on the implementation of the Universal Security Audit Programme – Continuous Monitoring Approach (USAP CMA) transition plan (39)

C-WP/14094

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Policy and administrative subjects (12) C-WP/14095

Appointment of Members of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) (14) C-WP/14096

2013 Report on the activities of the Evaluation and Internal Audit Office (EAO) (21) C-WP/14097

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Legal subjects (122) C-WP/14098

Report of the Implementation Support and Development – Security (ISD-SEC) Programme (111)

- 188 -

C-WP/14099 Restricted Progress report of the Monitoring and Assistance Review Board (MARB) (103)

C-WP/14100

Voluntary Air Transport Fund (48) C-WP/14101

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Environmental Protection (56) C-WP/14102

Establishment of the Environment Advisory Group (EAG) (62) C-WP/14103

Secretary General’s Mid-term Report to the Council (67) C-WP/14104

Review of Assembly resolutions and decisions – Safety and Air navigation capacity and efficiency (74)

C-WP/14105

Progress report on the implementation of the ICAO Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme Continuous Monitoring Approach (USOAP CMA) (76)

C-WP/14106

Review of the Report of the Twenty-fourth Meeting of the Dangerous Goods Panel (DGP/24) (68) C-WP/14107

Adoption of Amendment 172 to Annex 1 (81) C-WP/14108

Adoption of Amendment 58 to Annex 4 (84) C-WP/14109

Adoption of Amendment 38 to Annex 6, Part I (82) C-WP/14110

Adoption of Amendment 33 to Annex 6, Part II (83) C-WP/14111 Corrigendum No. 1 (Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish only)

Adoption of Amendment 19 to Annex 6, Part III (83) C-WP/14112

Adoption of Amendment 89 to Annex 10 (85) C-WP/14113

Adoption of Amendment 6 to Annex 14, Volume II (84) C-WP/14114

Adoption of Amendment 38 to Annex 15 (85)

- 189 -

C-WP/14115

Adoption of Amendment 11 to Annex 16, Volume I (86) C-WP/14116

Adoption of Amendment 8 to Annex 16, Volume II (87) C-WP/14117 Blue rider (Arabic only)

Directives for Panels of the Air Navigation Commission - Fifth Edition (69, 156) C-WP/14118

Request of the Aviation Working Group for inclusion in the List of international organizations that may be invited to attend suitable ICAO meetings (128)

C-WP/14119

ANC work programme for the 196th Session (88) C-WP/14120

ICAO Performance Management Project (4) C-WP/14121

Report on the Evaluation of Results Based Management at ICAO (4) C-WP/14122

Revenue-Generating Activities Policy (6) C-WP/14123

Annual Report of the Ethics Officer (139) C-WP/14124

Conditions for granting continuing appointments at ICAO (167) C-WP/14125

Regional groupings for equitable geographical representation (EGR) purposes at ICAO (139, 143) C-WP/14126

Work programme of the Council and its Committees for the 202nd Session (169) C-WP/14127

Report on activities during the recess (172) C-WP/14128

Financial situation of the Organization (172) C-WP/14129

Report of the Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) entitled “Review of enterprise resource planning (ERP) systems in United Nations organizations” (JIU/REP/2012/8) (172)

- 190 -

C-WP/14130 Report of the Joint Inspection Unit entitled “Staff-Management relations in the United Nations

specialized agencies and common system” (172) C-WP/14131

Review of the Evaluation and Audit Advisory Committee (EAAC) (14) C-WP/14132

Proposal for ICAO Council review of salaries (11) C-WP/14133

Establishment of "Friends of the Council" (148) C-WP/14135

Assistance to States and related matters (120) C-WP/14136

Review of the ICAO policy formulation process (120, 129) C-WP/14137

Restructuring of the ICAO Secretariat (73, 123, 158)

— END —

NOT FOR SALE Printed in ICAO