DOCSLIB.ORG

Reforming the Judiciary in Morocco

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Reforming the Judiciary in Morocco Reforming the Judiciary in Morocco Composed of 60 eminent judges and lawyers from all regions of the world, the International Commission of Jurists promotes and protects human rights through the Rule of Law, by using its unique legal expertise to develop and strengthen national and international justice systems. Established in 1952 and active on the five continents, the ICJ aims to ensure the progressive development and effective implementation of international human rights and international humanitarian law; secure the realization of civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights; safeguard the separation of powers; and guarantee the independence of the judiciary and legal profession. ® Reforming the Judiciary in Morocco © Copyright International Commission of Jurists, 2013 The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) permits free reproduction of extracts from any of its publications provided that due acknowledgment is given and a copy of the publication carrying the extract is sent to its headquarters at the following address: International Commission of Jurists P.O. Box 91 Rue des Bains 33 Geneva Switzerland Cover paintings by Roger Pfund Reforming the Judiciary in Morocco 1 Table of Contents Introduction .............................................................................................. 4 A. The High Judicial Council................................................................. 12 1. International law and standards .............................................. 12 i) Separation of powers .....................................................................12 ii) Composition of judicial councils .....................................................13 iii) Management of the judiciary .........................................................13 iv) Financial resources of the judiciary ...............................................16 2. The current Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature (CSM) .......... 16 3. The new Conseil Supérieur du Pouvoir Judiciaire (CSPJ) .......... 18 4. Assessment of national law in light of international standards. 20 5. Recommendations.................................................................... 23 B. The Statute for Judges .................................................................... 23 1. International law and standards .............................................. 24 2. The current law on the Statute for Judges................................ 27 i) Selection, training and promotion .................................................27 ii) Tenure and termination of office ...................................................29 iii) Freedom of association and expression.........................................29 3. Assessment of national law in light of international standards. 30 i) Selection, appointment and transfer .............................................31 ii) Assessment, promotion and assignment .......................................31 iii) Tenure and termination of office ...................................................32 iv) Freedom of association and expression.........................................33 4. Recommendations.................................................................... 34 C. Judicial Accountability: the Ethics and Discipline of Judges............. 35 1. International law and standards .............................................. 35 i) Judicial ethics.................................................................................35 ii) Judicial discipline ...........................................................................36 2. Current standards on judicial conduct and discipline................ 37 i) Judicial conduct..............................................................................37 ii) Procedures for judicial discipline....................................................38 3. Assessment of national law in light of international standards. 39 i) The development of code of ethics and a new disciplinary regime40 ii) Criminal and civil liability ...............................................................41 4. Recommendations.................................................................... 41 D. Military Courts................................................................................. 42 1. International law and standards .............................................. 43 i) Subject matter jurisdiction: trial of non-military related offences 43 ii) Personal jurisdiction: trial of civilians and juveniles......................45 iii) Fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal.................47 2. The current system of military courts....................................... 49 i) Personal and subject matter jurisdiction .......................................49 ii) Composition ...................................................................................50 iii) Selection, appointment and conditions and security of tenure .....50 iv) Prosecutors of the military courts..................................................51 v) Trials before military courts...........................................................52 vi) Appeals and reviews ......................................................................53 3. Assessment of national law in light of international standards. 53 i) Subject matter jurisdiction ............................................................54 ii) Personal jurisdiction: trial of civilians and juveniles......................55 iii) Fair trial before an independent and impartial tribunal.................55 4. Recommendations.................................................................... 57 E. The Office of the Public Prosecutor ................................................. 58 2 1. International law and standards .............................................. 58 2. The current Office of the Public Prosecutor .............................. 63 i) Organization...................................................................................63 ii) Functions........................................................................................64 3. Assessment of national law in light of international standards. 64 i) Appointment, promotion, tenure and disciplinary proceedings .....65 ii) Relationship with the executive .....................................................65 iii) Relationship with the judiciary.......................................................66 iv) Other elements ..............................................................................67 4. Recommendations.................................................................... 67 F. The Constitutional Court ................................................................. 68 1. The Constitutional Council........................................................ 69 i) Competencies of the Council .........................................................69 ii) Composition and appointment of members...................................69 iii) Conditions and security of tenure..................................................70 2. The new Constitutional Court ................................................... 71 3. Assessment of national law in light of international standards. 72 4. Recommendations.................................................................... 73 3 Introduction Overview In this report, the International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) analyses provisions of the 2011 Constitution and the structures and mechanisms it establishes, as well as existing laws and mechanisms that impact on the independence of the judiciary in Morocco, in light of international human rights standards. The report makes a range of specific recommendations that aim to contribute to efforts to ensure that the ongoing process of law and institutional reform enhances the independence of the judiciary and correspondingly increases respect for human rights and the rule of law in the country. The judicial system is central to respect for the rule of law and the protection of human rights. Both individual and institutional independence are necessary. An independent judiciary means that victims can seek redress, that perpetrators of human rights violations are brought to justice, and that anyone suspected of a criminal offence receives a fair trial. Furthermore, by acting as a check and balance on the other branches of government, the courts ensure that the executive and legislative branches comply with international human rights and the rule of law. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Morocco is a party, guarantees the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal.1 This right is absolute. It is not subject to any exception. Morocco is obligated to respect and ensure respect of this right as well as to provide for necessary safeguards to secure its realisation.2 Despite constitutional guarantees of judicial independence and separation of powers, Morocco has long fallen short of meeting its obligation to ensure that the courts are independent and not dominated by the executive branch. In its 2004 review of Morocco’s implementation of its obligations under the ICCPR, the Human Rights Committee (the expert treaty monitoring body) concluded that Morocco had failed to guarantee the independence of the judiciary.3 The ICJ considers that judicial independence in Morocco has suffered from control by the executive branch over judicial matters, and that this in turn has eroded public confidence in the justice system and has compromised
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Newton Spence and Peter Hughes V the Queen
    SAINT VINCENT & THE GRENADINES IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 20 OF 1998 BETWEEN: NEWTON SPENCE Appellant and THE QUEEN Respondent and SAINT LUCIA IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 14 OF 1997 BETWEEN: PETER HUGHES Appellant and THE QUEEN Respondent Before: The Hon. Sir Dennis Byron Chief Justice The Hon. Mr. Albert Redhead Justice of Appeal The Hon. Mr. Adrian Saunders Justice of Appeal (Ag.) Appearances: Mr. J. Guthrie QC, Mr. K. Starmer and Ms. N. Sylvester for the Appellant Spence Mr. E. Fitzgerald QC and Mr. M. Foster for the Appellant Hughes Mr. A. Astaphan SC, Ms. L. Blenman, Solicitor General, Mr. James Dingemans, Mr. P. Thompson, Mr. D. Browne, Solicitor General, Dr. H. Browne and Ms. S. Bollers for the Respondents -------------------------------------------- 2000: December 7, 8; 2001: April 2. -------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT [1] BYRON, C.J.: This is a consolidated appeal, which concerns two appellants convicted of murder and sentenced to death in Saint Vincent and Saint Lucia respectively who exhausted their appeals against conviction and raised constitutional arguments against the mandatory sentence of death before the Privy Council which had not previously been raised in the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal. Background [2] The Privy Council granted leave to both appellants to appeal against sentence and remitted the matter to the Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal to consider and determine whether (a) the mandatory sentence of death imposed should be quashed (and if so what sentence (including the sentence of death) should be imposed), or (b) the mandatory sentence of death imposed ought to be affirmed.
    [Show full text]
  • When the Dust Settles
    WHEN THE DUST SETTLES Judicial Responses to Terrorism in the Sahel By Junko Nozawa and Melissa Lefas October 2018 Copyright © 2018 Global Center on Cooperative Security All rights reserved. For permission requests, write to the publisher at: 1101 14th Street NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005 USA DESIGN: Studio You London CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS: Heleine Fouda, Gildas Barbier, Hassane Djibo, Wafi Ougadeye, and El Hadji Malick Sow SUGGESTED CITATION: Junko Nozawa and Melissa Lefas, “When the Dust Settles: Judicial Responses to Terrorism in the Sahel,” Global Center on Cooperative Security, October 2018. globalcenter.org @GlobalCtr WHEN THE DUST SETTLES Judicial Responses to Terrorism in the Sahel By Junko Nozawa and Melissa Lefas October 2018 ABOUT THE AUTHORS JUNKO NOZAWA JUNKO NOZAWA is a Legal Analyst for the Global Center on Cooperative Security, where she supports programming in criminal justice and rule of law, focusing on human rights and judicial responses to terrorism. In the field of international law, she has contrib- uted to the work of the International Criminal Court, regional human rights courts, and nongovernmental organizations. She holds a JD and LLM from Washington University in St. Louis. MELISSA LEFAS MELISSA LEFAS is Director of Criminal Justice and Rule of Law Programs for the Global Center, where she is responsible for overseeing programming and strategic direction for that portfolio. She has spent the previous several years managing Global Center programs throughout East Africa, the Middle East, North Africa, the Sahel, and South Asia with a primary focus on human rights, capacity development, and due process in handling terrorism and related cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Process Lpbooklet 2016 15Th Edition.Qxp Booklet00-01 12Th Edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 1
    LPBkltCvr_2016_15th edition-1.qxp_BkltCvr00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 2:49 PM Page 1 South Carolina’s Legislative Process LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 1 THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 2 October 2016 15th Edition LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 3 THE LEGISLATIVE PROCESS The contents of this pamphlet consist of South Carolina’s Legislative Process , pub - lished by Charles F. Reid, Clerk of the South Carolina House of Representatives. The material is reproduced with permission. LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 4 LPBooklet_2016_15th edition.qxp_Booklet00-01 12th edition 11/18/16 3:00 PM Page 5 South Carolina’s Legislative Process HISTORY o understand the legislative process, it is nec - Tessary to know a few facts about the lawmak - ing body. The South Carolina Legislature consists of two bodies—the Senate and the House of Rep - resentatives. There are 170 members—46 Sena - tors and 124 Representatives representing dis tricts based on population. When these two bodies are referred to collectively, the Senate and House are together called the General Assembly. To be eligible to be a Representative, a person must be at least 21 years old, and Senators must be at least 25 years old. Members of the House serve for two years; Senators serve for four years. The terms of office begin on the Monday following the General Election which is held in even num - bered years on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
    [Show full text]
  • Mauritius's Constitution of 1968 with Amendments Through 2016
    PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:39 constituteproject.org Mauritius's Constitution of 1968 with Amendments through 2016 This complete constitution has been generated from excerpts of texts from the repository of the Comparative Constitutions Project, and distributed on constituteproject.org. constituteproject.org PDF generated: 26 Aug 2021, 16:39 Table of contents CHAPTER I: THE STATE AND THE CONSTITUTION . 7 1. The State . 7 2. Constitution is supreme law . 7 CHAPTER II: PROTECTION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS OF THE INDIVIDUAL . 7 3. Fundamental rights and freedoms of the individual . 7 4. Protection of right to life . 7 5. Protection of right to personal liberty . 8 6. Protection from slavery and forced labour . 10 7. Protection from inhuman treatment . 11 8. Protection from deprivation of property . 11 9. Protection for privacy of home and other property . 14 10. Provisions to secure protection of law . 15 11. Protection of freedom of conscience . 17 12. Protection of freedom of expression . 17 13. Protection of freedom of assembly and association . 18 14. Protection of freedom to establish schools . 18 15. Protection of freedom of movement . 19 16. Protection from discrimination . 20 17. Enforcement of protective provisions . 21 17A. Payment or retiring allowances to Members . 22 18. Derogations from fundamental rights and freedoms under emergency powers . 22 19. Interpretation and savings . 23 CHAPTER III: CITIZENSHIP . 25 20. Persons who became citizens on 12 March 1968 . 25 21. Persons entitled to be registered as citizens . 25 22. Persons born in Mauritius after 11 March 1968 . 26 23. Persons born outside Mauritius after 11 March 1968 .
    [Show full text]
  • Judicial Review and the Conseil D'etat George D
    Boston College Law School Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School Boston College Law School Faculty Papers January 1966 DeGaulle's Republic and the Rule of Law: Judicial Review and the Conseil d'Etat George D. Brown Boston College Law School, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/lsfp Part of the Comparative and Foreign Law Commons Recommended Citation George D. Brown. "DeGaulle's Republic and the Rule of Law: Judicial Review and the Conseil d'Etat." Boston University Law Review 46, (1966): 462-492. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College Law School Faculty Papers by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. :DE GAULLE'S REPUBLIC AND THE RULE OF LAW: JUDICIAL REVIEW AND THE CONSEIL D'ETAT GEORGE D. BROWN* Americans tend to regard France as a somewhat despotic country where drivers' licenses are summarily revoked by roadside tribunals, political opponents are treated badly, and in general the rule of law is lightly regarded.' From time to time disgruntled Frenchmen come forward to reinforce this picture.2 Against such a background of illiber- alism, the lack of judicial review of legislation in France does not seem surprising. And it has become a commonplace to present the French hostility to judicial review as a polar example of attitudes toward this institution.3 Yet there are ample signs that this generalization needs to be reexamined.
    [Show full text]
  • The Seychelles Law Reports
    THE SEYCHELLES LAW REPORTS DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT, CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND COURT OF APPEAL ________________ 2017 _________________ PART 2 (Pp i-vi, 269-552) Published by Authority of the Chief Justice i (2017) SLR EDITORIAL BOARD Chief Justice – ex officio Attorney-General – ex officio Mr Kieran Shah of Middle Temple, Barrister Mr Bernard Georges of Gray’s Inn, Barrister CITATION These reports are cited thus: (2017) SLR Printed by ii THE SEYCHELLES JUDICIARY THE COURT OF APPEAL Hon F MacGregor, President Hon S Domah Hon A Fernando Hon J Msoffe Hon M Twomey THE SUPREME COURT (AND CONSTITUTIONAL COURT) Hon M Twomey,Chief Justice Hon D Karunakaran Hon B Renaud Hon M Burhan Hon G Dodin Hon F Robinson Hon E De Silva Hon C McKee Hon D Akiiki-Kiiza Hon R Govinden Hon S Govinden Hon S Nunkoo Hon M Vidot Hon L Pillay Master E Carolus iii (2017) SLR iv CONTENTS Digest of Cases ................................................................................................ vii Cases Reported Amesbury v President of Seychelles & Constitutional Appointments Authority ........ 69 Benstrong v Lobban ............................................................................................... 317 Bonnelame v National Assembly of Seychelles ..................................................... 491 D’Acambra & Esparon v Esparon ........................................................................... 343 David & Ors v Public Utilities Corporation .............................................................. 439 Delorie v Government of Seychelles
    [Show full text]
  • MOROCCO: Human Rights at a Crossroads
    Human Rights Watch October 2004 Vol. 16, No. 6(E) MOROCCO: Human Rights at a Crossroads I. SUMMARY................................................................................................................................ 1 II. RECOMMENDATIONS...................................................................................................... 4 To the Government of Morocco ........................................................................................... 4 To the Equity and Reconciliation Commission ................................................................... 6 To the United Nations............................................................................................................. 7 To the U.S. Government.........................................................................................................8 To the European Union and its member states................................................................... 8 To the Arab League.................................................................................................................. 9 III. INTRODUCTION: ADDRESSING PAST ABUSES................................................... 9 The Equity and Reconciliation Commission......................................................................14 Limits of the New Commission ...........................................................................................16 2003 Report of the Advisory Council for Human Rights ................................................23 IV. HUMAN RIGHTS AFTER THE
    [Show full text]
  • Burkina Faso 2020 Human Rights Report
    BURKINA FASO 2020 HUMAN RIGHTS REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Burkina Faso is a constitutional republic led by an elected president. On November 22, the country held presidential and legislative elections despite challenges due to growing insecurity and increasing numbers of internally displaced persons. President Roch Marc Christian Kabore was re-elected to a second five-year term with 57.74 percent of the popular vote, and his party--the People’s Movement for Progress--won 56 seats in the 127-seat National Assembly, remaining the largest party in a legislative majority coalition with smaller parties. National and international observers characterized the elections as peaceful and “satisfactory,” while noting logistical problems on election day and a lack of access to the polls for many citizens due to insecurity. The government had previously declared that elections would take place only in areas where security could be guaranteed. The Ministry of Internal Security and the Ministry of Defense are responsible for internal security. The Ministry of Internal Security oversees the National Police. The army, air force, and National Gendarmerie, which operate within the Ministry of Defense, are responsible for external security but sometimes assist with missions related to domestic security. On January 21, the government passed legislation formalizing community-based self-defense groups by establishing the Volunteers for the Defense of the Fatherland, a civilian support corps for state counterterrorism efforts with rudimentary oversight from the
    [Show full text]
  • Burkina Faso
    AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT FUND BURKINA FASO COUNTRY GOVERNANCE PROFILE OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT UNDP RESIDENT REPRESENTATION: BURKINA FASO WEST REGION (OCCW/ADB) JULY 2005 SCCD: G .G. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page List of Boxes and Annexes; Acronyms and Abbreviations, Executive Summary i-ix I. INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Preamble 1 1.2 Key Elements of Good Governance 1 1.3. Methodology 2 II DIAGNOSIS OF THE GOVERNANCE SITUATION 3 2.1 Accountability at the Political Level 3 Administrative Accountability 6 Accountability in Economic Management 7 Accountability in Public Finance Management 9 Accountability at the Level of Budgetary Control 11 Public Accounts and Debt Management 13 Private Sector and Accountability 14 2.2 Transparency 15 Transparency in Politics 15 Freedom of the Media 16 Transparency in Government Procurement Process 16 Transparency in Public Expenditure Implementation Process 18 Access to the Public Information on the Government’s Economic and Social Priorities 20 2.3 Stakeholder Involvement 20 Civil Society Involvement 20 Gender 22 Security of Persons, Protection of Returnees and Refugees, Child Trafficking 23 Land Tenure 24 Decentralisation and Deconcentration 25 Public-Private Sector Interaction 26 Regional Cooperation and Integration 27 2.4 Legal and Judicial Reforms 27 Legal Reforms 27 Judicial Reforms 28 Alternative Settlement of Disputes: the Ombudsman 29 Legal Framework and Environment of the Private Sector 30 2.5 Fight against Corruption 30 III. EVALUATION OF THE NATIONAL GOOD GOVERNANCE STRATEGY 32 3.1 Presentation of the Key Elements of the Strategy 32 3.2 Examination of the Pertinence of the Strategy in Light of the Diagnosis 34 IV PRIORITY AREAS OF GOVERNANCE AND IDENTIFICATION OF 37 POTENTIAL AREAS OF BANK INTERVENTION 4.1 Areas that may be Considered Priorities for Improving Governance in Burkina 37 Faso 4.2 Areas of Intervention of Development Partners 43 4.3 Potential Areas of Bank Intervention 45 4.4 CGP Recommendations Monitoring Framework 48 V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 49 5.1 Conclusions 49 5.2 Recommendations 50 LIST OF BOXES 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Private Prosecutions in Mauritius: Clarifying Locus Standi and Making the Director of Public Prosecutions More Accountable
    African Journal of Legal Studies 10 (2017) 1–34 brill.com/ajls Private Prosecutions in Mauritius: Clarifying Locus Standi and Making the Director of Public Prosecutions more Accountable Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi University of the Western Cape, South Africa [email protected] Abstract Case law shows that private prosecutions have been part of Mauritian law at least since 1873. In Mauritius there are two types of private prosecutions: private prosecutions by individuals; and private prosecutions by statutory bodies. Neither the Mauritian consti- tution nor legislation provides for the right to institute a private prosecution. Because of the fact that Mauritian legislation is not detailed on the issue of locus standi to insti- tute private prosecutions and does not address the issue of whether or not the Director of Public Prosecutions has to give reasons when he takes over and discontinues a pri- vate prosecution, the Supreme Court has had to address these issues. The Mauritian Supreme Court has held, inter alia, that a private prosecution may only be instituted by an aggrieved party (even in lower courts where this is not a statutory requirement) and that the Director of Public Prosecutions may take over and discontinue a private prosecution without giving reasons for his decision. However, the Supreme Court does not define “an aggrieved party.” In this article the author takes issue with the Court’s findings in these cases and, relying on legislation from other African countries, recom- mends how the law could be amended to strengthen the private prosecutor’s position. Keywords private prosecutions – Mauritius – Locus Standi – Director of Public Prosecutions – aggrieved party – supreme court © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi �0.��63/�7087384-��3400Downloaded�6 from Brill.com10/03/2021 04:36:42PM via free access 2 Mujuzi I Introduction Private prosecutions have been part of Mauritian law for a long period of time.1 In Mauritius there are two types of private prosecutions: private pros- ecutions by individuals; and private prosecutions by statutory bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Seychelles Law Reports
    THE SEYCHELLES LAW REPORTS DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT, CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AND COURT OF APPEAL ________________ 2017 _________________ PART 1 (Pp i-xii, 1-268) Published by Authority of the Chief Justice (2017) SLR EDITORIAL BOARD Chief Justice – ex officio Attorney-General – ex officio Mr Kieran Shah of Middle Temple, Barrister Mr Bernard Georges of Gray’s Inn, Barrister CITATION These reports are cited thus: (2017) SLR Printed by ii THE SEYCHELLES JUDICIARY THE COURT OF APPEAL Hon F MacGregor, President Hon S Domah Hon A Fernando Hon J Msoffe Hon M Twomey THE SUPREME COURT (AND CONSTITUTIONAL COURT) Hon M Twomey,Chief Justice Hon D Karunakaran Hon B Renaud Hon M Burhan Hon G Dodin Hon F Robinson Hon E De Silva Hon C McKee Hon D Akiiki-Kiiza Hon R Govinden Hon S Govinden Hon S Nunkoo Hon M Vidot Hon L Pillay Master E Carolus iii (2017) SLR iv CONTENTS Digest of Cases ................................................................................................ vii Cases Reported Amesbury v President of Seychelles & Constitutional Appointments Authority ........ 69 Benstrong v Lobban ............................................................................................... 317 Bonnelame v National Assembly of Seychelles ..................................................... 491 D’Acambra & Esparon v Esparon ........................................................................... 343 David & Ors v Public Utilities Corporation .............................................................. 439 Delorie v Government of Seychelles
    [Show full text]
  • Decision 74/402 A
    Decisions A. Elections and appointments 74/401. Appointment of the members of the Credentials Committee At its 1st plenary meeting, on 17 September 2019, the General Assembly, in accordance with rule 28 of its rules of procedure, appointed a Credentials Committee for its seventy-fourth session consisting of the following Member States: BARBADOS, BOTSWANA, CHINA, MAURITIUS, NEPAL, RUSSIAN FEDERATION, SAN MARINO, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and URUGUAY. 74/402. Appointment of members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions At its 14th plenary meeting, on 10 October 2019, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee,1 appointed Ms. Donna-Marie Chiurazzi-Maxfield as a member of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a term of office beginning on 14 October 2019 and ending on 31 December 2020, as a result of the resignation of Mr. David Traystman. At its 29th plenary meeting, on 8 November 2019, the General Assembly, on the recommendation of the Fifth Committee,2 appointed the following persons as members of the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions for a three-year term of office beginning on 1 January 2020: Mr. Patrick A. Chuasoto, Mr. Udo Klaus Fenchel, Mr. Olivio Fermín, Mr. Marcel Jullier, Mr. Takeshi Matsunaga and Mr. Ye Xuenong. As a result, as of 1 January 2020, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions is composed as follows: Mr. Bachar Bong ABDALLAH (Chad),* Mr. Yves Éric AHOUSSOUGBEMEY (Benin),** Mr. Amjad Qaid AL KUMAIM (Yemen),** Mr. Makiese Kinkela AUGUSTO (Angola),** Mr. Pavel CHERNIKOV (Russian Federation),* Ms.
    [Show full text]