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.

C. Legal challenges to the sanctions

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.

C. Legal challenges to the sanctions

Recommended award for category F claim

Iraq also provided comments on this claim.

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.

Will views about the prosecution still change?

The award for this category A claim should be reduced to the amount appropriate to the proper status of the claim.

Specifically, the secretariat failed to present to the Panel the particular facts of the claim, as evidenced by the documents in the claim file.

Claim form

Do you blame me?

The Ministry of Agriculture and Water of Saudi Arabia originally submitted this claim unit as claim 5000207.

THE STAND ALONE CLAIMS Applying the procedures described above, the Panel has reviewed the stand alone claims according to the nature and type of loss identified.

Instead, where relevant, this report refers to sections in the previous E2 reports where such issues have been addressed.

Stand alone claims