text: 12. Mr. RUEDAS (Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management), speaking to clarify the management improvement measures, said that, when the proposed programme budget and the report of the Advisory Committee had been prepared, the Secretary-General had not as yet made a decision on the 50 or so recommendations made by the Administrative Management Service concerning the operation of UNHCR. That had now been done, and, in accordance with normal procedure, a detailed report would be submitted by the Administrative Management Service to the Advisory Committee at its forthcoming session. The question of phasing out 14 posts would therefore be considered in the context of the overall report on the question to be submitted to the General Assembly at its thirty-ninth session. 13. Currently, UNHCR considered that the phasing out of those posts, if not offset by a series of supplementary measures, would considerably weaken its supervisory capacity. It had therefore decided to postpone the phasing out. The question would, however, be reconsidered during 1984, as part of the overall management improvement programme, without waiting for the full report on the implementation of the programme. 14. Mr. RIZVI (Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees), replying to the representative of Japan, said that the post of co-ordinator for the South-East Asian region had been established in 1979 to cope with an acute crisis. Since the situation of refugees in that region of the world had improved somewhat in the interim, it would be reasonable to envisage phasing out that post in 1984. That decision was, moreover, fully in line with the consistent policy of the Office of the High Commissioner, which endeavoured to tailor the number of posts in the field to the needs of changing situations. Similarly, the Office of the High 
analysis: This text appears to be discussing the management and administration of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), specifically the proposed phasing out of certain posts and the impact it may have on the organization's supervisory capacity. The language used is formal and bureaucratic, suggesting that the text is related to organizational governance and decision-making.