Claim No. 5000463 is for damage to or depletion of other resources and Claim 5000219 relates to damage to public health.

Recommendations for any needed programme modifications should be included as a part of all audit reports.

Oral proceedings were held at the Palais des Nations in Geneva on 14 and 15 September 2004.

Representatives and experts of each of the Claimants and Iraq attended the oral proceedings and presented their views.

LEGAL FRAMEWORK Mandate of the Panel The mandate of the Panel is to review the F4 claims and, where appropriate, recommend compensation.

In discharging its mandate, the Panel has borne in mind the observations of the Secretary General of the United Nations, in his report to the Security Council of 2 May 1991, that

It is only in this last respect that a quasi judicial function may be involved.

It will be the function of the Commissioners to provide this element. Applicable law Article 31 of the Rules sets out the applicable law for the review of claims, as follows

1) provides guidance regarding the losses or expenses that may be considered as direct loss, damage, or injury resulting from Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait in accordance with paragraph 16 of Security Council resolution 687 (1991).

Article 35(1) also provides that it is for each panel to determine the admissibility, relevance, materiality and weight of any documents and other evidence submitted .

Article 35(3) of the Rules provides that category F claims must be supported by documentary and other appropriate evidence sufficient to demonstrate the circumstances and amount of the claimed loss .

In addition, Governing Council decision 46 (S AC.26 Dec.46 (1998)) states that, for category F claims, no loss shall be compensated by the Commission solely on the basis of an explanatory statement provided by the claimant .

When recommending compensation for damage or loss that has been found to be a direct result of Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait, the Panel has in every case assured itself that the applicable evidentiary requirements regarding the circumstances and amount of the damage or loss claimed have been satisfied.

Some of these issues were raised by Iraq in its written responses or in submissions during the oral proceedings and were commented upon by the Claimants during the oral proceedings.

Amendment of claims Some Claimants proposed amendments to some of their claims in the fifth F4 instalment, which they stated were based on the results of monitoring and assessment activities.

In some cases, the amendments increase the compensation claimed and in others, the amendments decrease the compensation claimed.

The Panel reviewed each proposed amendment to ensure that it did not constitute a new claim filed after the appropriate deadlines.

Accordingly, the Panel accepted proposed amendments where it was satisfied that they were based on the results of monitoring and assessment activities.

In some cases, Claimants proposed amendments which were not based on information obtained from monitoring and assessment activities.

Where such amendments were received after the expiry of the deadline for the receipt of unsolicited information, the Panel accepted them only if they decreased the claimed amounts.

It alleges that some of the damage resulted from other factors that existed before and after the invasion and occupation of Kuwait.

Iraq contends that Iran has failed to meet the evidentiary standard required to establish this claim.

The Panel, therefore, concludes that the evidence presented does not demonstrate that Jordan's population was deprived of water as a result of the presence of the refugees.

According to Kuwait, each shoreline habitat provides services to a unique set of organisms to varying degrees.

Iraq argues that only 11 of the studies covered by this claim could possibly qualify as compensable monitoring and assessment studies.

The alternative remediation programme in the third F4 report was based on a classification of the damaged intertidal shoreline into five habitat types salt marsh, hard substrate, intertidal, sand beach and supralittoral.

In Iraq's view, Saudi Arabia has failed to make a clear link between exposure to contamination and actual injury.

However, the Panel notes that, although there is evidence of damage to part of the Balbol area that is attributable to the invasion and occupation, the recommended shoreline preserves discussed at paragraphs 611 636 above will adequately compensate for any damage that occurred in that area.

Iraq states that Syria did not present any evidence of sheep death such as veterinary reports, tissue sample analyses or autopsy reports.

The issue of land tenure rights should be addressed at an early stage in the programme design process.

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation (FAO), Sustainable development of drylands and combating desertification. FAO Position Paper.

United States National Research Council (NRC, 1994) Rangeland Health New Methods to Classify, Inventory, and Monitor Rangelands.

In the view of the Panel, the information submitted does not provide a sufficient basis for determining the nature and extent of loss of recreational opportunities to people in Kuwait.

Both the Indian claimant and the claim on behalf of the deceased detainee seek compensation for the loss of stock and income of the same two businesses.

In addition, compensation is sought in the claim filed on behalf of the deceased detainee for the loss of tangible assets of the businesses.

Compensation

Compensation?

Compensation for damage

(d) Compensation

This claim was originally part of category F3 claim No. 5000194.

Iraq also notes that no effects of pollution were noticed either in sheep in Jordan or goats in Syria.

(Signed) Thomas A. Mensah

quot Compensation

Compensation of victims

The monitoring and assessment claims of Kuwait that were awarded funding in the first F4 instalment and are relevant to claim No. 5000183 are claim Nos. 5000403, 5000404, 5000405, 5000406 and 5000407.