UN CONFERENCE ON ESTABLISHING INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT CONCLUDES FOUR DAYS OF GENERAL STATEMENTS
Press Release
L/2883
UN CONFERENCE ON ESTABLISHING INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT CONCLUDES FOUR DAYS OF GENERAL STATEMENTS
19980618 Secretary-General's Representative Observes 'Clear Message of Commitment' towards Fulfilling Mandate of Session(Reissued as received from an Information Officer.)
ROME, 18 June -- The United Nations Conference on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court concluded this afternoon a four-day general debate.
The Representative of the Secretary-General to the Conference, Hans Corell, observed that the clear message in the exchange of views was one of a true sense of commitment towards fulfilling the mandate of the session -- to finalize and adopt a statute to create the Court.
Mr. Corell went on to state that the impression from the debate was confidence, determination and a clear sense of responsibility. The United Nations would do its utmost to support the Conference, he stressed.
In other remarks to the Conference this afternoon, he said that the provision in the court's draft statute for cooperation between it and the United Nations, its nature, scope and modalities in providing oral testimonies or documents, would have to be worked out. The United Nations would be guided by the practice of cooperation with the two ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda. It would also be guided by the principles of the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations which should apply also in its relation to the Court.
The President of the Conference, Giovanni Conso (Italy), said the debate had been rich in ideas and he was sure those ideas would be taken into account by those negotiating and finalizing the draft statute for the Court.
In other statements this afternoon, the representative of Jordan said the centre-piece of the Conference's efforts must be the crime itself and its judicial redress, and not so much whether it is the product of an internal
conflict or an external one. Omissions only serve the cause of the perpetrator and not the better interests of the victims, or of humanity as a whole.
The Georgian representative declared that the attempts to dismember his country, "the ethnic cleansing of my compatriots in Abkhazia and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of citizens from their homes clearly indicate the urgent need of a mechanism that would be capable not only of prosecuting the perpetrators, but would also serve as a strong deterrent against future conflagrations".
The representative of Burundi called for the creation of an ad hoc criminal tribunal for Burundi, or failing that, assurance that the competence of the Rwanda Tribunal should be expanded to cover the events of 1993 in Burundi.
The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina said the Court's sovereignty and independence, as well as its complementarity to national courts and its jurisdiction over trials against most serious crimes, will at least humanize wars and armed conflicts or hopefully put an end to them.
Also this afternoon the President reported that Dominica and Nepal had been appointed to serve on the Credentials Committee replacing Barbados and Bhutan, which stated that they were not in a position at this point to assume those duties.
The Conference began hearing general statements on Monday afternoon, 15 June. Over the course of seven meetings, more than 15O speakers addressed the plenary of the Conference. Although there is broad agreement on the need to have a Court that is independent, effective, impartial and efficient, divergent views were expressed, particularly concerning the relationship between the Court and the Security Council and the power of the prosecutor to initiate investigations. There was unanimity on a call by the international community to put an end to impunity.
Other statements this afternoon were made by the Ministers of Justice of Denmark, Bahrain and Congo; the Foreign Minister of Uruguay; and the representatives of Malta, Russian Federation, Haiti, Iraq, Yemen, Belarus, Angola, Ecuador, Botswana, Monaco and Uganda.
Representatives of the International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies, Latin American Institute of Alternative Legal Services, Asian Centre for Women's Human Rights, European Law Students Association and the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights also spoke.
The plenary of the Conference will meet again on a date to be announced.
- 3 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
Conference Work Programme
The United Nations Conference on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court met this afternoon to continue to hear general statements.
Statements
FRANK JENSEN, Minister of Justice of Denmark: What is important is not only the creation of an International Criminal Court, but ensuring that it will be an effective institution, capable of adequately responding to the needs of today's international society. In short, we should ensure that we have a Court that acts in the same way in which we have come to expect from national justice systems.
Complementarity with national legal systems is vital. The Court should not act when national systems are able and willing to do so, but should have the authority to determine when national systems are unable or unwilling to act.
The jurisdiction of the Court should be limited to the core crimes under general international law -- genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and aggression. The Court's statute would be incomplete without the inclusion of the crime of aggression.
Rape and other crimes of sexual violence committed in armed conflict should be properly defined and explicitly listed as war crimes in the Court's statute. Also to be included in the list of war crimes is the recruitment of children under the age of 18 into armed forces or groups. States adhering to the treaty must accept the Court's jurisdiction over all the crimes listed in the statute, not pick and choose among them.
All States parties to the statute should have the competence to trigger the Court's dealing with a particular case. In addition, the Security Council must be able to refer situations to the Court when acting under the Chapter VII provisions of the United Nations Charter. The prosecutor should have the power to start investigations ex officio on the basis of information obtained from any reliable source, including non-governmental organizations. The Court's independence will need to be protected against political influence by States or by the Security Council. Its statute must ensure the application of all relevant international standards of fair trial and due process at all stages of the proceedings. The International Criminal Court should be in close relationship with the United Nations and should be financed out of the Organization's regular budget. It is of paramount importance that the future International Criminal Court enjoy universal support.
- 4 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
WALEED SADI (Jordan): The objective of the Conference is straightforward: to create a credible juridical deterrent to those who contemplate genocide, war crimes or other grave breaches of international humanitarian law; and if this deterrence fails, to bring a case against those believed to be culpable before the International Criminal Court -- not only to establish the truth but, of course, to afford some measure of justice to the victims.
The centre-piece of the Conference's efforts must be the crime itself and its judicial redress, and not so much whether it is the product of an internal conflict or an external one. Omissions only serve the cause of the perpetrator and not the better interests of the victims, or of humanity as a whole.
The basic requirement for an effective and independent International Criminal Court is the ex officio power the prosecutor must have in initiating investigations. The State consent regime now being considered would make this aspect of the trigger mechanism all the more critical, if the Court is to be effective. The Conference must not be too cynical in always assuming the worst possible scenario, as regards the competency of the Court and its officials. This would only be self-defeating.
Jordan is concerned over the implications which would arise over the failure to create a credible International Criminal Court. An agreeable balance is possible whereby a general consensus could result in a Court that is respected around the world. If such a consensus is reached concerning the principle of reservations, it should be applied very conservatively.
As to the death penalty, Jordan observes that while international human rights instruments call for the phasing out of the death penalty, these instruments do not prohibit its application altogether. Jordan is concerned by specific attempts, on the part of some delegations to pick and choose from the Geneva Conventions as to what should not be included in the definition of war crimes. This is totally unacceptable to Jordan and it will resist such attempts vigorously.
PETER CHKHEIDZE (Georgia): The creation of an International Criminal Court will significantly contribute to the rule of law, which is the basis for Georgia's democratic development and a necessary prerequisite for its integration into the world community.
War crimes are becoming even more elaborate and sophisticated. Suffering of the civilian population, the massacre of children, the rape of women and the torture of prisoners still remain invariable companions of modern warfare. Such crimes get even more severe and brutal when it comes to
- 5 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
non-international armed conflict, as has been witnessed in various countries, including Georgia, where the most serious crimes are still being perpetrated by those who are unhampered either by morality or by law.
"The attempts to dismember Georgia, the ethnic cleansing of my compatriots in Abkhazia and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of citizens from their homes clearly indicate the urgent need of a mechanism that would be capable not only of prosecuting the perpetrators, but would also serve as a strong deterrent against future conflagrations."
The Court should have jurisdiction over the crimes of genocide, aggression, war crimes during internal and international conflicts, and crimes against humanity. While supporting the principle of complementarity as a means of determining the role of the Court, it should not be reduced to a residual mechanism for dispensing justice. If the Court is not truly empowered to step in where national systems prove incapable or unwilling to punish the perpetrators of serious crimes, its establishment will be of limited value. The Court should be able to take on a case when national prosecution is not likely to occur or when it would be a "sham", the determination of which should be within the competence of the Court itself. Georgia supports the role of the Security Council in bringing matters before the Court, but the independent prosecutor should be able to trigger trials at the request of a State party.
CARMEL AGIUS (Malta): Malta strongly believes in the need for an International Criminal Court which is truly effective and free from political interference. For this reason, the Court must have an independent prosecutor who is able to investigate cases and present indictments on his or her own initiative and without prior consent of States parties.
The inherent jurisdiction of the Court should incorporate all the core crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. If a proper formula is found, the crime of aggression should also be included.
Malta also believes that while the principle of complementarity should remain as one of the pivotal points of the Court's jurisdiction, the Court must be the judge of its own competence on questions of admissibility or unwillingness of national systems to proceed with a case falling under its jurisdiction.
Although the role of the Security Council in maintaining international peace and security must be secured, it is essential that the Court be able to operate without being unduly prejudiced by the Security Council. This is essential if the Court is to be truly effective. The duty of future State parties to cooperate fully with the Court should be spelt out clearly. Malta supports proposals to have the statute ensure respect for the rights of suspects, victims and witnesses.
- 6 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
JADRANKO PRLIC, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia and Herzegovina: The Court's sovereignty and independence as well as its complementarity to national courts and its jurisdiction over trials against most serious crimes will at least humanize wars and armed conflicts or hopefully put an end to them.
Despite the obstacles it has encountered, including reaching all indicted and suspected of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity, the role of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia is indispensable. Bosnia and Herzegovina has always been cooperative with the efforts by the international community aimed at putting an end to crimes associated with the utmost barbaric behaviour and times that are hundreds of years behind our civilization. The establishment of the Court will help to prevent a repeat of those acts by strongly forcing the parties to a conflict to resolve mutual misunderstandings through peaceful means and political dialogue.
The International Criminal Court should be a just, fair and effective institution;, the statute of the Court should reflect certain fundamental principles and reflect the expectations of humankind embodied in the United Nations Charter and other international instruments.
IURI V. USHAKOV, Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation: It is time to take preventive steps to deter war crimes and crimes against humanity. An International Criminal Court will be a type of guarantor against the exercise of crimes. In no circumstances should it become an instrument for the exercise of political power. The jurisdiction of the Court should also include the crime of terrorism. For armed conflicts not international in nature, the Court should have jurisdiction under the provisions contained in all four Geneva Conventions of 1949.
The Court is important for the maintenance of international peace and security. The Russian Federation cannot accept attempts to establish a Court separate from the Security Council. The statute must have progressive principals of international criminal law, and the death penalty should be excluded.
DIDIER OPERTII BADAN, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Uruguay: There must be guarantees in the Court's statute to ensure that the institution is effective and impartial. The various penal systems of the world should be taken into account to allow for the implementation of the principle of complementarity.
There should be clearly defined limits regarding the Court's competency to ensure harmony. The appropriate functioning of the Court and national judicial systems will wisely determine the enjoyment by the Court of universality.
- 7 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
The relationship between the Court and the Security Council should be properly defined and they should respect each others competency. Special attention should also be given to the role of the prosecutor. The Conference must set itself achievable goals.
JEAN DORNEVAL (Haiti): The world in recent history has experienced blatant violations of international humanitarian law. Not so long ago, Haiti suffered a coup d'etat with thousands of deaths and the perpetrators are still unpunished. The Court is, therefore, a hopeful signal of a more humane world.
The Court must be impartial, rendering justice to all. It must be complementary to national penal jurisdiction. Trigger mechanisms should be formed by the States parties, the Security Council and the prosecutor. Voices are being heard throughout the world against impunity and for a more humane world. Haiti calls on the Conference to hear those calls.
YEAD Al-ADMI (Iraq): There is no doubt that security and peace can only prevail with justice. The statute must contain clear statements on the neutrality of the Court, and its independent role. The statute should also contain provisions safeguarding the Court and preserving it from political influences, particularly as regards its independence.
The Court should strive to do justice and nothing else. The sanctions imposed against Iraq affect not only children and the elderly but will affect people for generations to come and that is genocide. The statute must contain an acceptable balance between national and international institutions through the principle of complementarity.
MOHAMED AL BADRI, Attorney-General of Yemen: There is need for the creation of an International Criminal Court which should be independent and effective. The Court must be
created on the principle of complementarity. It must act in cases where national courts are unable to do so. The right to determine cases should belong to States.
The Security Council should not be allowed to influence the Court's functioning. The Court itself should also not interfere in the internal affairs of States, whose sovereignty must be respected. To ensure universality, maximum consensus should be adopted in resolving issues affecting the Court.
NATALYA DRUZD (Belarus): The International Criminal Court is unfortunately very necessary. The problems have become global and the solution to them must also be global. Belarus supports the creation of the Court.
- 8 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
Belarus which has experienced many wars, advocates that all war crimes, regardless of the nature of the armed conflict and the time when they took place, be under the jurisdiction of the Court. It supports the principle of complementarity.
There should be a strong link between the Court and the Security Council. Belarus agrees with the power of the prosecutor to initiate investigations, but he or she should take into account the principle of complementarity. There should be a certain limitation on the number of reservations allowed. The Court should be financed by the regular budget of the United Nations.
MYRNA Y. KLEOPAS (Cyprus): Cyprus supports the establishment of an effective, truly independent International Criminal Court able to carry out its functions, and with an independent prosecutor empowered to act on his or her own initiative. Crimes to be covered by the jurisdiction of the Court should not be selective, but should cover all crimes of international concern: genocide, aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Failure to include the crime of aggression would deprive the Court of its primary functions and would discriminate against the victims of such an abominable act. War crimes should include the establishment of settlers in occupied territory and changes to the demographic composition of an occupied territory and the transfer by the occupying Power of parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies. It should also cover the deportation or transfer of all or parts of the population of the occupied territory within or outside the territory. In addition, it should also cover the destruction of places of culture.
Cyprus, a victim of aggression, continued military occupation, colonization of the occupied areas, the systematic destruction of its cultural identity by the occupation forces and the violations of the basic human rights and fundamental freedoms of its people, cannot but lend its support to the victims of such crimes wherever they occur.
ABDULLAH KNALID AL KHALIF, Minister of Justice of Bahrain: The establishment of an International Criminal Court is not a new idea and dates at least from the end of the Second World War. The two ad hoc tribunals have provided the international community with helpful examples for the establishment of the Court.
The jurisdiction of the Court should include aggression, genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, which should be clearly and precisely defined. The Court must be free from any political interference that would compromise its impartiality. The right of victims to reparation should also be included in the statute.
- 9 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
PIERRE NZE, Minister of Justice of Congo: The international community is assuming a historic responsibility as the world wants to live in peace. To achieve this goal, it is necessary to implement international criminal justice.
Congo has just experienced the burden of genocide. The jurisdiction of the Court should be extended to acts such as terrorism, which constitute a great danger to the world community. The Court must be independent from political power but must not run counter to systems established by States.
To avoid the slowness of national courts, the International Court should be financially independent and provide redress.
ANTERO DE ABREU (Angola): The International criminal Court should be independent and should not be selective in its decisions. The principle of complementarity must apply in the Court's jurisdiction. Judicial actions by the Court should in no way be subject to the veto of the Security Council or the consent of States where the crime was committed. That would reduce the Court's credibility. The power of the prosecutor to initiate proceedings should not be circumscribed. He or she should be independent, and States must cooperate with the prosecutor. Angola had been a victim of aggression and supports its inclusion, with proper definition, in the Court's statute. It will not support the inclusion of capital punishment in the statute.
THERENCE SINUNGURUZA (Burundi): The situation in Burundi would have become normal by now, had its neighbours not imposed an unjust economic embargo. Burundi had, since October 1993 faced genocide. Those who ordered that genocide are going about their business under the shelter of neighbouring countries and with the implicit support of the international community, which has been sustaining them.
To avert the danger of national division, the Government is pursuing a reconciliation programme through educational campaigns with the slogan "never again". A monument to the memory of victims is being established, and a panel is being set up to investigate the genocide in the country.
Burundi appealed to the United Nations in 1996 to establish a tribunal to investigate the genocide, but the Organization had not responded. Such a Court is necessary because of the culture of impunity which still exists. The international community should help establish an ad hoc criminal tribunal for Burundi, or failing that, ensure that the competence of the Rwanda Tribunal is expanded to cover the events of 1993 in Burundi.
Burundi favours the establishment of an independent International Criminal Court. It does not believe that any State should have the authority not to recognize the competence of the Court.
- 10 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
CARLOS LARREA (Ecuador): International cooperation and the instinct for survival inspired the establishment of an International Criminal Court. Such a Court should have broad jurisdiction, including over crimes against human rights. Lack of consensus in the definition of the crime of aggression should not delay the establishment of the International Criminal Court. The Court should be given the necessary independence allowing it to act free of political interference. The death penalty should not be applied. The political will of States should be expressed by not registering reservations to the treaty.
MOTHUSI NKGOWE (Botswana) : The statute to be adopted by the Conference should make clear that those contemplating to commit genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity shall be held individually accountable and responsible for their deeds.
The Security Council should be allowed the right to refer cases to the International Criminal Court. Such referrals should be carried out speedily and without the encumbrances usually associated with the activities of the Security Council. It should be possible for any member State, or group of States of the Council to refer any case before the Council to the Court without interference from the other members. Matters for referrals to the Court should not be subject to a veto.
By the same token, Botswana believes that the prosecutor should be mandated to initiate action in his or her own right. This should be the case when national courts are in no position to bring perpetrators of serious crimes to justice. Such initiatives should not violate the principle of complementarity.
RENE NOVELLA Monaco: Justice is a sacred value. In 1903, an international Institute of Peace was established in Monaco, a predecessor of the League of Nations. From the beginning of his reign, Prince Renier has also been active in peace-related activities, including those relating to the environment. Prince Albert, who has headed Monaco's delegations to several United Nations meetings, is following that tradition. For all those reasons, Monaco strongly supports the establishment of an International Criminal Court.
VINCENT KIRABOKYAMARIA (Uganda): Uganda supports the creation of a permanent, independent, transparent and effective International Criminal Court, readily accessible to all. It should have unfettered jurisdiction over the most heinous crimes, such as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and aggression.
Uganda does not support any attempt to differentiate between international and internal conflicts when dealing with war crimes. The authors and perpetrators of either should be similarly dealt with. The Court should not replace national jurisdictions.
- 11 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
Uganda support the inclusion of effective provisions in the statute to protect children in conflict situations. As far as trigger mechanisms are concerned, it supports the view that any individual, State, non-governmental organization or the prosecutor can initiate action. The statute should also take account of gender concerns.
MARIAPIA GARAVAGLIA, of the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies: The delegates of the Societies met last year and adopted a resolution inviting all national societies to promote the creation of an efficient and impartial International Criminal Court. The realization of this Conference is an expression of strong political will. All the volunteers are not aware of what is at stake at this Conference, but are ready to subscribe to its conclusion. They have so many problems to face; let us not disappoint them.
LEONEL SUAREZ GIL, of the Latin American Institute of Alternative Legal Services: Two months after the death in Bogota of lawyer Eduardo Umana Mendoza, who dedicated his life to the fight against impunity and to the ideals of justice and peace. Recall also Monsignor Gerardi in Guatemala, who was assassinated a few days after presenting the report of that country's Truth Commission.
Such situations are well known and familiar in the Latin American region, and require an international tribunal to investigate them in countries where the national systems are not able to do that. In many countries such killings are not investigated, and that triggers new spirals of violence. Many countries in the region have refused to punish the crime of enforced disappearance. The Court's statute should include such crime. There is a need for a dispassionate analysis of why the domestic judicial systems of Latin America do not have the capacity or the will to administrate fair trials.
NORMAN DORSEN, Chairman, Lawyers Committee for Human Rights: This Conference has the opportunity to create a Court that will provide a forum to prosecute the worst international crimes when national systems are unable or unwilling to do so. An effective Court would deter gross human rights violators by confronting them with the threat of punishment. It would offer redress to victims where national courts cannot to do so, including justice, protection for women, children and witnesses of international crime.
The Court's jurisdiction should be limited to the three core crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and serious war crimes. The Security Council should not be able to control the Court's docket. The prosecutor must be permitted, subject to appropriate safeguards to initiate investigations on his or her own authority.
- 12 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
The Court must be empowered to exercise its jurisdiction without the necessity of obtaining State consent before it can proceed. It must adhere to the highest international standards of fair trial and due process; and State parties must be obligated to cooperate fully with the Court and to comply with its orders and decisions. The Court should be financed out of the regular United Nations budget.
INDAI LOURDES SAJOR, of the Asian Centre for Women's Human Rights: It is deeply disturbing that insufficient attention continues to be given to the violence committed against women during war and armed conflicts. Rape has been clearly listed as a war crime since the conclusion of the First World War. If this Conference fails to deal adequately with crimes committed against women, then it will be part of a process that leads to injustice for women rather justice.
In considering the creation of the International Criminal Court its statute must reflect the present state of international law. This means that the words rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution, enforced pregnancy, mass rape and other forms of sexual violence be used and specifically listed as war crimes, crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the human rights of women.
AGNIEZSKA STOBIECKA, of the European Law Students Association: New generations want to live in a just world in which there is respect for human dignity, an international society in which peace and justice go hand in hand. An independent, fair and effective International Criminal Court should be the first building block of a just world order, insofar as criminal justice is an essential prerequisite for the rule of law. World public opinion, civil society and future generations are watching the Rome Conference and expecting concrete results.
Statement by Secretary-General's Representative
HANS CORREL, Representative of the Secretary-General and Under- Secretary-General for Legal Affairs: The United Nations Secretariat strongly supports the idea that the Conference criminalize and qualify as a war crime the improper use of the flag, military insignia and uniform of the United Nations by any of the parties to a conflict, when such use results in death or serious personal injury.
Attacks against United Nations and associated personnel were criminalized under the 1994 Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associate Personnel, but it was left for the national jurisdiction of each of the State parties to prosecute or extradite. In the view of the United Nations Secretariat, these crimes should now be among the crimes falling within the jurisdiction of the Court. The Secretariat would, however, caution that conditioning the criminalization of attacks against United Nations
- 13 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
personnel on their systematic character and large scale would be inconsistent with the definition of the crime established in the 1994 Convention, and would hardly ever be appropriate in the circumstances of peacekeeping.
As an organization whose peacekeeping, humanitarian and similar field operations are deployed in areas of conflict, the United Nations will almost certainly be in possession of first-hand information which could significantly assist the Court in the determination of the individual criminal responsibility of the accused. The nature, scope and modalities of its cooperation with the Court in providing oral testimony or documents will have to be agreed upon between the Organization and the Court. The United Nations, for its part, will be guided by the practice of cooperation with the two ad hoc tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Consequently, the United Nations will cooperate with any proper international criminal jurisdiction, whether a tribunal of the kind established for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda whose orders and requests are binding under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, or a treaty-based Court whose requests must be complied with by the United Nations on the basis of mutually agreed procedures.
The United Nations understands the scope of the cooperation to embrace all stages of the legal process from the investigation to the trial phase, and all organs of the Court, including the defence which, while not strictly speaking an organ of the Court, is nevertheless an indispensable element of the administration of justice. An agreement between the United Nations and the Court, as foreseen in the draft statute, will be subject to the approval of the General Assembly.
The principles of the 1946 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations should apply also in relation to the Court. Accordingly, when requested to waive the immunity of any of its officials in order to enable them to appear in Court, or when requested to disclose any information which has not yet been made public, the Secretary-General will balance the need to cooperate with the Court with the protection of the internationally recognized interests of the United Nations. The Secretary- General will consider the relevancy and specificity of the request for information, the gravity of the charge under consideration, the confidentiality of the documents requested, the risk what their disclosure may entail for the safety of United Nations staff and the interests of the Organization, and whether in such a case, sufficient guarantees and protective measures can be provided.
The notion of confidentiality of documents and information in the United Nations context needs clarification. Where a request for disclosure of documents entails an examination of deliberations of closed meetings of the Security Council, the United Nations records of meetings with representatives of Member States, including troop-contributing States, a decision to permit such an examination of the activities of the Security Council and individual
- 14 - Press Release L/2883 18 June 1998
Member States would raise serious questions equivalent to "national security" of States. Any provision in the statute for the protection of sensitive national security information should, therefore, be made applicable to the United Nations mutatis mutandis and with the necessary modifications. Ultimately, it is for Member States to strike the appropriate balance between the competing interests.
The clear message from this Conference after the general debate is that there is a true sense of commitment towards fulfilling the mandate of the Conference: to finalize and adopt a Convention on the establishment of an International Criminal Court. The impression from the debate is confidence, determination and a clear sense of responsibility. The Secretariat will do its utmost to support the Conference. As the Secretary-General said in his opening remarks, we have before us an opportunity to take a monumental step in the name of human rights and the rule of law. We must not fail.
* *** *