42 Compendium: High Level Review of United Nations Sanctions The Secretariat offers individual experts one-year contracts, largely corresponding to the mandate cycle given by the Security Council to the relevant Expert Group. Requiring a re-interview for renewal of the contract for a further year facilitates review of individual experts’ performances (enabling removal of under-performing experts), but some experts see the procedure as compromising both the independence and effectiveness of expert groups. Expert Group members consulted by the Review drew particular attention to the physical threats to which their functions exposed them. Depending upon the nature of the group’s investigation, the threat could extend beyond dangers inherent in field work in conflict zones to include direct personal threat from the individuals or entities being investigated (for example, terrorist organisations). These experts contended that fieldwork should be conducted with proper duty of care from the United Nations, with effective duty of care policies in place, whereas much of the risk was borne by individual experts, which placed them in a precarious position. Secretariat support The Review also heard concerns from some experts that the level of technical and administrative support provided by the Secretariat to expert groups was undermining both the effectiveness and independence of the expert groups. Comments suggested that UN staff assigned to expert groups lacked specific research expertise requested, were a shared rather than dedicated resource, and due to the UN’s mobility policy, could be reassigned to the detriment of institutional memory. Some experts were also concerned that the expert groups had no formal way to provide input to the performance evaluation of the UN staff assigned to them, whereas they understood those UN staff provided feedback on the experts’ performance to the Secretariat. In these experts’ view, this complicated the working relationship between the expert groups and Secretariat staff. Experts also expressed concern at their lack of control over budgetary resources for their activities, making them dependent on the Secretariat for decisions on access to resources and for arrangements for travel. One expert reported a situation where the Secretariat (without consulting the relevant committee) withheld funding for the expert group’s participation in a seminar. In the view of the expert concerned, this amounted to the Secretariat’s compensation where the position requires work at a particular duty station. In relation to travel, another submission noted the paradox that UN staff travelling with expert groups in the field enjoyed better conditions than the experts they were supporting.