CRIMINAL PROCEDURES FOR PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL COURT DISCUSSED IN PREPARATORY COMMITTEE

Press Release
L/2768

CRIMINAL PROCEDURES FOR PROPOSED INTERNATIONAL COURT DISCUSSED IN PREPARATORY COMMITTEE

The Criminal procedures of an international criminal jurisdiction must ensure the protection of the rights of accused persons, the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court was told this afternoon, as it continued its consideration of general rules of criminal law.

The representative of France told the Preparatory Committee that criminal procedures must ensure respect for internationally-recognized human rights. The court's statute should clearly lay down applicable laws and enumerate rights. Judges should be empowered to implement rules, not to draft them. Those rules must establish a balance between various major legal systems.

The Court's rules of procedure should be adopted at the same time as its statute, he continued. Those rules should be modifiable in the light of experience, but such modification must be approved by States. As far as possible, there should be a precise statute, rather than having annexes. Acts should be defined as specifically as is done in national penal codes. Also, the issue of personal responsibility must be clearly defined. It should be specified when individual responsibility can be exempted and when it should not.

Many speakers said that the proposed court should only refer to national laws as a last resort in cases where there was a legal lacuna and in which the statute of the court did not cover a particular matter. The representative of Malaysia called for a hierarchy of applicable law as follows: the statute itself, applicable treaties, and rules of customary international law. The application of the national law of the State in which the offense was committed should be allowed in case of lacunae.

The representative of Australia said that if it became necessary to apply national law, then the national law of any particular country should not be applied. The representative of Slovenia said that the provision in the draft statute with relation to the application of national laws was very ambiguous.

The representatives of Cameroon, Qatar, China and Ukraine said that in the event of the need to apply national laws, the national laws of the country where the offence was committed should apply.

Several delegations urged that Article 33 of the proposed court's draft statute, which describes applicable laws for the court, should be re-drafted with a view to achieving greater precision. The representative of Tanzania said that the article was overly general and did not adequately address the statute. The representative of Venezuela called for clarification as to which national law might be applied in the court, that of the victim's nationality, the accused's nationality or the nationality of the country in which the crime was committed.

The representative of Austria said that court rules should ensure transparency, fair trial, predictability and consistency of procedures, and equality before and in law. The primary rules should be established in the statute. The remainder can be established by the court and approved by States. The court should avoid undertaking criminal definitions on a case-by- case basis. That would violate both predictability and equality before the law.

Both Austria and China noted that the proposed court would generally not be carrying out jury trials. Austria said that in that sense, the procedures more closely resembled civil law than common law.

Many speakers said that the statute of the court should be the main source of the rules guiding the court. The representative of Greece said that the statute should be almost the sole source of guidance for the court. Only procedural matters should be left to the judges to decide. The representative of Egypt said that not defining the rules under which the court would operate would cast it in a legislative role.

The representative of Spain said that the court should be guided by: the statute and its annexes; other pertinent rules of international law; applicable treaties as defined by the court and accepted by states parties; and by the rules of procedures of the court in that order.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Mexico and India and Thailand.

The Preparatory Committee will meet again at 10 a.m, Friday, 29 March, to continue its consideration of general rules of criminal law.

* *** *