Excellencies, Co-Chairs,

I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the Group of 77 and China.

At the outset, the Group wishes to convey its appreciation to the Co-Chairs, Ambassador Brian Wallace, Permanent Representative of Jamaica, and Ambassador Carolyn Schwalger, Permanent Representative of New Zealand, for their work on the zero draft resolution of the Mandate Implementation Review process under the UN80 Initiative. The Group also notes the proposed roadmap, and appreciates the informative briefing held on 8 January, and the opportunity to present general comments today.

We would like to highlight, on a preliminary basis, the following general comments:

First, in our view this process must remain fully Member-State-led. From mandate creation to delivery and review, the intergovernmental nature of the United Nations must be preserved. Mandate texts are political instruments agreed upon by Member States, and this process should not result in the erosion of the substantive content or negotiated language that embody the collective will of Member States. Secretariat support should remain neutral and procedural, ensuring that negotiated language and the original intent of mandates are upheld.

Second, measures aimed at addressing growing administrative burden, including by consolidating meetings and reports, should be considered on a case-by-case basis, and should be undertaken only with the direction and consent of all Member States.

Third, the Group reiterates that the development pillar should maintain its priority under the UN80 Initiative with a focus on how to further enhance support to developing countries.
In addition, we would appreciate the Co-Chairs guidance on the following preliminary thoughts and questions:

1- We take note of the proposal to continue the work of the "Informal Ad Hoc Working Group on the Mandate Implementation Review" as the "Working Group on Mandate Implementation Review", "to monitor implementation of the principles and actions contained in this resolution from 1 April 2026 onwards". In this regard, we would appreciate further clarity on the proposed WG mandate, terms of reference, co-chairs, timeline and how it will reconcile with and avoid overlap with existing oversight bodies and processes.

2- Given the current roadmap, further information would be welcomed on how sufficient space will be ensured for genuine and transparent intergovernmental negotiations to build consensus. Any details regarding the format of the negotiations, including whether there will be an opportunity to engage in line-by-line negotiations, would be especially welcomed, as this would ensure transparency and inclusivity.

We acknowledge the additional information on the proposed "hybrid workshops with permanent representatives" provided in your Note dated 14 January, and we would appreciate further clarity on how it will be ensured that all Member States have the right to speak across the four workshop areas, and that developing countries are adequately represented. We also seek clarification on the expected outcomes of the workshops and on how consensus on the text will be achieved in the absence of direct negotiations among all Member States.

3- Considering that the United Nations mandate landscape is broad and diverse, spanning across the different areas of its three pillars, we would appreciate receiving detailed information on how the WG plans to move forward.

4.-Considering that the requests to the Secretary-General included in this resolution are significant, we would appreciate further clarity on their financial implications, as well as on the proposed timelines. We would also welcome additional information on how the creation of new duplications and PBIs will be avoided, while noting the need to prevent any additional burden on small delegations.

We also wish to underscore that all provisions pertaining to budgetary matters must be fully aligned with the authority, procedures, and established practice of the Fifth Committee, in accordance with its mandate.

5- Without prejudging the position of our group and its Member States, we also take this opportunity to note that further clarification is needed on several terms used in the resolution, including but not limited to: "standardized approach" in OP1E; "intergovernmental coordination and oversight mechanisms" in OP3; "absolutely necessary" on OP8; "greater flexibility" for the SG in OP11; "implementation assessments" in OP12; and "every available opportunity" in OP17 and OP18.

In conclusion, we reaffirm that the review must avoid the path of the 2006 exercise, nor should duplicate ongoing revitalization discussions in the General Assembly and the main committees. Instead, our efforts should be forward looking, objective, and balanced across all three pillars of the United Nations in line with the purposes of the UN Charter, ensuring that decisions remain firmly with Member States and that ongoing priorities, especially those of developing countries, are safeguarded, recalling that there is no "one size fits all" approach. We must uphold the general rule that UNGA resolutions remain valid until they are fully implemented.

Excellencies, dear Co-Chairs,

The Group of 77 and China acknowledges your hard work and stands ready to engage constructively in all negotiations related to the development pillar, with a view to ensuring that mandates remain fit for purpose, that resources are used effectively, and that the priorities of developing countries are fully reflected and advanced.

I thank you.