In the Name of God, the compassionate, the merciful

Mr. President,

My delegation, once again, would like to endorse the statement made by the Group 77 and China which also covers the issue of Review of the Implementation of the UN Convention against Corruption.

Mr. President,

The I.R of Iran attaches great importance to the review of the implementation of the UN Convention against Corruption.

In accordance with article 63 of the United Nations Convention against Corruption, the Conference of the States Parties to the Convention has been established to improve the capacity of and cooperation between States parties to achieve the objectives set forth in the Convention and to promote and review its implementation.

At its first session (Amman - 10 to 14 December 2006) and in its resolution 1/1, the Conference of the States Parties had agreed that it was necessary to establish an appropriate and effective mechanism to assist the COSP in reviewing the implementation of the Convention. In the same resolution, the COSP also had agreed on a certain number of characteristics that the review mechanism should have: a) it should be transparent, efficient, non-intrusive, inclusive and impartial; b) it should not produce any form of ranking between the States Parties; c) it should provide opportunities to share good practices and challenges; and d) it should complement existing international and regional review mechanisms in order that the Conference might, as appropriate, cooperate with them and avoid duplication of effort.

Mr. President,

In view of the provisions of the Convention and the resolution 1/1 of the COSP, the I.R of Iran supports any mechanism for reviewing the implementation of the Convention which is efficient, effective, transparent, impartial, objective, non-intrusive and inclusive. My delegation firmly believes that the Conference of the States Parties is the sole body responsible for the review of the implementation of the Convention and any mechanism or body to be established will, therefore, have to be a subsidiary mechanism or body of the COSP. The final recommendations and decisions on any report on the review of the implementation of the Convention will have to be made by the COSP and not by the mechanism itself.

It should not be forgotten that the issue of review mechanism was first proposed to help the Member States to better implement the Convention. Therefore any mechanism for reviewing the implementation of the Convention should avoid bringing about political difficulties, or some kind of selectiveness between States Parties in future. In addition, such a mechanism should not undermine the universality of the Convention or dissuade the accession of new countries to it. Moreover, such a mechanism should function under the authority of the Conference of the States Parties to the Convention. It should also have the following terms of reference:

- The mechanism should be in compliance with the obligations set forth in the convention and in a manner consistent with the principle of the sovereignty of States.

- The review mechanism should enable States Parties to identify gaps in their legislatives and institutional frameworks so that such gaps might be closed.

- The review mechanism should be well-focused and should be an ongoing process and that a gradual approach should be adopted. In fact, we should guard against overly hasty decisions, as those could lead to a mechanism that needed to be revised after a period of time.

- The review mechanism should enable the Conference to identify difficulties encountered and good practices adopted in efforts by States Parties to implement the convention.

- An overly complex and resource-intensive review mechanism should be avoided and that the mechanism should be transparent and participatory.

- The composition of any mechanism or body should be based on equitable geographical distribution.

- The review mechanism or body should base its reports only on the information provided by the States Parties and all its reports must be submitted to the COSP for its consideration. Only COSP will be competent to approve and issue Implementation Review Reports.

- The review mechanism or body should also base its reports on the information provided only by the States Parties.

- All States parties should enjoy equal footing in any review mechanism or body.

Mr. President,

The I.R of Iran appreciates the work of the intergovernmental expert group established by the resolution 1/1 of the first meeting of the COSP which was held from 29 to 31 August 2007 in Vienna. My delegation supports the continuation of the work of the expert group till a compromised is reached on the establishment of an appropriate mechanism or body for review of the implementation of the Convention. The I.R of Iran also emphasizes on the necessity of preparation of the terms of reference for such mechanism or body which the working group was mandated to do. Moreover and after carefully considering the report of the Working Group, My delegation would like to make the following comments:

1- The I.R of Iran is in favor of a mechanism for the review of the implementation of the UNCAC rather than establishment of an independent body, since the COSP itself is the principal body to review the implementation of the Convention.

2- The I.R of Iran believes that the proposal regarding the establishment of an independent body such as the model of the International Narcotics Control Board (INCB), cannot serve the characteristics decided by the first meeting of the COSP and therefore is not supported.

3- Another Proposal made at the first meeting of the Working Group foresaw the establishment of regional mechanisms, which would report to the COSP as the global review mechanism. According to that proposal, the Conference would coordinate, ensure consistency and oversee the quality and uniformity of the regional reviews. The I.R of Iran believes that this proposal has the merit and enough support to be considered very carefully.

4- My delegation believes that the 10 elements of convergence submitted by three delegations during the Working Group, contain some important factors, which some of them could be added to terms of reference for the future review mechanism.

5- The I.R of Iran believes that the voluntary mechanism, called as the Pilot Project, has the potential to create a two-tier review mechanism among the States Parties and therefore should not be of an unlimited duration. In this regard and since the main aim of the project was to test methods for reviewing the implementation of the Convention, and not to evaluate that implementation, my delegation fully endorses the Statement made by the Group G.77 and China that “recommendations by any voluntary mechanism, such as Pilot Project, should not be imposed on States Parties in a later stage”.

Thank you for your attention