Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
04THEHAGUE167
2004-01-23 15:42:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy The Hague
Cable title:  

HCOPIL: MEMBERSHIP OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY IN

Tags:  KJUS PREL EUN HCOPIL 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 000167 

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR IO, EUR/ERA, L

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KJUS PREL EUN HCOPIL
SUBJECT: HCOPIL: MEMBERSHIP OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY IN
THE HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW


UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 THE HAGUE 000167

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR IO, EUR/ERA, L

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KJUS PREL EUN HCOPIL
SUBJECT: HCOPIL: MEMBERSHIP OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY IN
THE HAGUE CONFERENCE ON PRIVATE INTERNATIONAL LAW



1. Summary. The Hague Conference convened an informal
advisory committee to consider the request of the European
Community to become a member of the organization. Group
agreed that changes would be necessary to the Statute and
Rules of the organization, that there should be "no
additionality," that FAO precedent should be generally
followed and tailored to working conditions of Hague, and
that the process should proceed with due speed.
Secretary-General will prepare a report and recommendations

SIPDIS
for consideration by the Special Commission on General
Affairs and Policy to convene in April. End Summary.


2. The Hague Conference on Private International Law
convened an advisory committee January 21 to 23 to consider
the request of the European Community to join the Hague
Conference as a full member. Membership under the Statute of
the organization is limited to "states." Assistant Legal
Adviser (L/PIL) Jeffrey Kovar attended for the U.S. Meeting
was chaired by Xue Hanqin, Chinese Ambassador in the Hague,
and included Kirill Gevorgian, Russian Ambassador, Gilberto
Vergne Saboia, Brazilian Ambassador, and Fausto Pocar,
Italian vice-president of the International Criminal Tribunal
for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY),as well as experts and
government officials from the UK, Australia, Canada, Egypt,
Spain, Japan, Sweden, France, Belgium, Germany, and the
Netherlands. Maria Tenreiro, Head of the Unit for Civil
Justice from the European Commission's Directorate-General
for Justice and Home Affairs attended the second day of the
meeting.


3. Meeting discussed changes to the competence of the
European Community and the shift of responsibility of many of
the traditional subjects of the organization from the "third
pillar" to the "first pillar" of the EC Treaty -- meaning
that they have become the subject of Community responsibility
and are no longer the subject of exclusive member state
competence. In some cases the Community now has exclusive or
near-exclusive competence (e.g., civil jurisdiction and the
enforcement of judgments); in others competence in mixed
(e.g., securities law). It is clear, however, that the
European Commission is in the process of rapidly expanding
its competence over these areas, and that the member states

no longer have the freedom to act in many if not most of the
areas covered by the organization's work. In this context,
the Community and member states have decided that the
Community must be represented through the European Commission
with full status in the organization.


4. Meeting participants noted that as a practical matter,
the Hague Conference had developed an adequate method for
permitting the Commission to play an effective role in
negotiations from its position as an observer, but generally
agreed that it would be desirable to formalize its membership
in the organization as soon as practicable. Precedent of the
Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) was held up by
participants and the Commission representative as a good
precedent. There was no dispute that there should be "no
additionality" -- that the Community would not benefit from
any extra vote on top of those of its member states. In any
case, participants stressed that the presence of a block of
EU states soon to number 25 out of a total of 62 member
states had led to a practice that now discourages resort to
voting and encourages the preparation of treaties by
consensus-based negotiating procedures.


5. Participants agreed that the Hague Conference Statute --
a multilateral treaty -- would have to be amended to include
participation by Regional Economic Integration Organizations
(REIO). Several participants spoke in favor of dropping the
"Economic" from REIO as outdated and no longer reflecting the
full range of Community integration. U.S. participant
stressed that this would be unwise since the REIO formulation
is often used and well known, and clearly covers the EU.
European Commission rep agreed that REIO was adequate for
their purposes.


6. Participants also agreed that Rules of Procedures and
Regulations on Budgetary Matters would have to be reviewed
and revised to ensure that voting was conducted on the basis
of the "no additionality" principle, and that there were
rules requiring the Community to spell out in advance of
meetings the relative competences of the Community and member
states. There was agreement that the Community would not pay
a full member's assessment (EU member states already provide
more than half of the annual assessed budget of the
organization),but should contribute based on increased
administrative costs directly related to its participation.
Unresolved was whether the Community should be able to
participate in meetings of the Council of Diplomatic
Representatives, which determines the annual budget.


7. Participants acknowledged value of FAO Constitution and
Rules as precedent for amending the Statute and Rules of the
Hague Conference, but noted they would need to be tailored to
the specific circumstances of the Hague Conference. It was
agreed that other necessary changes to the Statute and Rules
to reflect evolving practice in the Hague Conference should
also be included. The latter changes, it was stressed,
should be held to a minimum so as not to open up a long and
drawn-out process. Changes contemplated are references to
the role of the Netherlands Standing Committee, which no
longer plays an oversight role for the organization, and
language reflecting the importance now placed on
consensus-based working methods.


8. The question was raised whether the Article 12 amendment
provision of the Hague Conference Statute permitted
amendments to be decided and approved through resolutions
adopted at a formal diplomatic session, or whether it was
necessary to go through a formal treaty amendment process and
await national ratification. Hague Conference
Secretary-General Hans van Loon pointed to drafting history

SIPDIS
of the provision, which could be read to imply that the
process should be simple rather than complex. U.S.
participant noted that it would be necessary to consult on
this point with the Department of State (L/T) in Washington.
Meeting agreed that further examination of this question was
necessary.


9. Meeting concluded that Secretary-General van Loon would
prepare a report and recommendation for the April 5-7 Special
Commission on General Affairs and Policy of the organization
reflecting the discussions in the informal group. The
Special Commission would then take formal decisions about the
method and schedule for drafting and approving changes to the
Statute and Rules.
RUSSEL