STEPS TO FULL-FUNCTIONING INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT DISCUSSED AS SIX COMMITTEE CONSIDERS ROME STATUTE ADOPTED IN JULY

21 October 1998

Press Release
GA/L/3078

STEPS TO FULL-FUNCTIONING INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT DISCUSSED AS SIX COMMITTEE CONSIDERS ROME STATUTE ADOPTED IN JULY

19981021 Speakers Urge Early Start to Work of Preparatory Commission Charged By Statue to Draft Rules of Procedure, Evidence and Elements of Crimes

The Sixth Committee (Legal) this afternoon continued its discussion of the future International Criminal Court with several speakers urging that its preparatory commission commence work at the earliest possible date in 1999.

The preparatory commission, provided for by the Statute of the International Criminal Court adopted in Rome in July, will lay the groundwork for the functioning of the Court. Among its first tasks, the commission would begin drafting the Court's rules of procedure and evidence, and elements of crimes as well as a budget for the Court's first financial year.

Kenya's representative said that the elaboration of those rules would be the commission's most demanding task. The General Assembly should invite the two ad hoc International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda to share their experiences with the new Court. He called for the re- establishment of the voluntary trust fund to provide travel assistance for developing and least developed countries wishing to participate in work relating to the Court.

The preparatory commission must be given resources and time to complete the important tasks entrusted to it, New Zealand's representative said. He urged States to demonstrate their commitment by signing the Statute and starting the domestic processes required for ratification.

The representative of Croatia said the adoption of the Court's Statute was a victory on legal, political and moral grounds. It represented a new stage in the evolution of international justice. Political leaders would have to take into account the Court's existence when deciding their policies.

Also this afternoon, the representatives of Senegal, Japan, Greece, Norway and Republic of Korea spoke.

The Committee is scheduled to meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, Thursday 22 October, to continue its discussion of the International Criminal Court.

Committee Work Programme

The Sixth Committee (Legal) met this afternoon to continue its discussion of the establishment of the International Criminal Court. (For background information on the item, see Press Release GA/L/3077 of 21 October 1998.)

Statements

IBRA DEGUENE KA (Senegal) said the history of this century had unfortunately been marked by violence, massacres of innocent and defenceless persons, forced exiles, extermination camps, ethnic cleansing and tortures. Humanity could not tolerate those horrors and hope to live with a quiet conscience. Society demanded a certain minimum of justice for durable peace. Unpunished crimes always gave rise to a desire for revenge, thereby upsetting the social order.

For that reason, Senegal strongly supported the establishment of the International Criminal Court, he said. It would participate in the work of the preparatory commission with the same conviction. Equally, it would ratify the treaty as soon as certified copies of the original were available from the Secretariat. The Statute of the Court adopted in Rome in July represented a delicate consensus. It was a symbiosis of ideas, religious beliefs, different cultures and philosophies. He appealed to all States to adhere to the Statute of the Court. Its efficiency and credibility would largely depend upon its universality.

THUITA MWANGI (Kenya) said the preparatory commission should commence its work at the earliest possible date, perhaps as early as February or March of 1999. The elaboration of the Court's rules of procedure and evidence, as well as the elements of crime, would no doubt be the most demanding task to be undertaken by the commission. It was of critical importance to the future of the Court that those items be drafted in a manner which would take into account the peculiarities of the Statute, including the political dimensions and complex nature of the crimes within the Court's jurisdiction. He proposed that the General Assembly invite the two International Criminal Tribunals to share their creativity and experience, particularly on the procedural needs of the Court.

It was important to facilitate the participation of those developing countries that were unable, for financial reasons, to send their experts to Rome, he said. He therefore called for the reestablishment of the voluntary trust fund for travel assistance. He also welcomed the participation of non- governmental organizations in the next phase of the Court.

MAKOTO MATSUDA (Japan) said the historic significance of the adoption of the Rome Treaty could not be overestimated. States must move forward to undertake the remaining tasks. Noting that the most important part of future work would be conducted in the preparatory commission, he said the commission

Sixth Committee - 3 - Press Release GA/L/3078 10th Meeting (PM) 21 October 1998

was expected to draft a number of instruments, including rules of procedure and evidence, and the elements of crimes. It was those two documents which would underpin the day-to-day business of the Court. The documents were important for the creation of a truly independent and effective Court, he said.

Japan believed that delegations must maintain the political commitments that were displayed at the Rome Conference, he said. At the same time, to make the Court universal, those States which could not support the adoption of the Statute should be kept in the discussions. Due attention should be paid to points raised by them, otherwise the final objectives for establishing the Court might not be achieved. Japan was ready to play an active and constructive role in the work of the preparatory commission.

MICHAEL JOHN POWLES (New Zealand) said his delegation fully associated itself with the statement delivered this morning by the representative of Samoa. It was pleased that the Court would have jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, and that there was a willingness to discuss further the issue of aggression. New Zealand would have liked the Statute to have a wider scope and to have included particular reference to the use of nuclear weapons as a war crime. He hoped that at some future stage the use of landmines could be brought within the orbit of the Court.

It was essential that the preparatory commission be set up with appropriate resources and sufficient time to complete the important tasks entrusted to it, he said. Decisions must also be taken on funding to enable the Court to function adequately from the start. He urged States to demonstrate their commitment by signing the Statute and setting in motion the domestic processes required for ratification. He said New Zealand signed the treaty on 7 October.

PHANI DASCALOPOULOU-LIVADA (Greece) said the Rome Statute had clear advantages, such as the elaboration of detailed rules, which constituted a definite improvement over the Statutes of the Yugoslavia and Rwanda Tribunals. Also the definition of the crimes subject to the Court's jurisdiction were detailed and comprehensive. There were, however, also definite shortcomings which could not be ignored, such as the omission from the list of crimes of a considerable number of criminal acts involving the use of certain weapons; the inclusion of the possibility "to opt out" of the jurisdiction of the Court over war crimes; the choice made in favour of the State of the nationality of the accused against the custodial State; and the over-extensive interpretation of the complementarity principle.

The omission, for the time being at least, of the Court's jurisdiction over the crime of aggression was an unfortunate development, particularly in view of the fact that the overwhelming majority of States had never ceased to express their unwavering desire to include that crime, she said. It was surprising that the international community had failed to seize the opportunity to settle a matter which was important, not only because of the

Sixth Committee - 4 - Press Release GA/L/3078 10th Meeting (PM) 21 October 1998

gravity of the crime of aggression, but also because of the moral cost of its omission. Greece hoped the commission would fulfil its mandate with respect to that question by devoting the necessary time and energy to it.

OLE PETER KOLBY (Norway) said the adoption of the Statute establishing the Criminal Court was a historical achievement. The Statute provided for an effective and independent Court, while allowing for the broadest possible basis of support to the Court. The contributions of all regions, legal systems and cultures to the negotiation process before and during the Rome Conference had cemented the foundation for a universal institution. The Statute provided for satisfactory written rules of international law, and thus substantially enhanced legal predictability and certainty. It provided against arbitrary and unwarranted prosecutions, as well as protection against biased or arbitrary prosecutions.

He said he hoped that States that had not been able to support the Statute would in due time reconsider their position. The Court was a safety net for cases where national investigations and prosecutions were not genuinely carried out. Its existence should therefore be a powerful incentive for States to do the work themselves. It was also important to recognize all the safeguards that had been adopted to prevent unwarranted prosecutions.

Challenges remained at the international and national levels to establishing the International Criminal Court, he said. Internationally, this involved the future preparatory commission working in close consultation with all States concerned. At the national level, the challenge lay in activating domestic procedures on signature and ratification. Norway had signed the Statute on 28 August and initiated preparations with a view to parliamentary approval to ratification. The international community must mobilize the "Rome Spirit" and ensure the early establishment of the Court.

IVAN SIMONOVIC (Croatia) said adherence to the principle of "victors' justice" had been broken with the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and for the Former Yugoslavia, as those bodies had jurisdiction over perpetrators from all sides to the conflict. The establishment of the International Criminal Court was a step in the evolution of international criminal prosecution and adjudication.

The adoption of the Statute was a legal, political and moral victory, he said. Legally, it represented a new stage in the evolution of the international system of criminal justice in that not only States, but also individuals, would be held internationally accountable for their actions. Politically, the Court would affect domestic and foreign policies. Leaders would have to take into account the existence of the Court when deciding their policies. This could help deter policies of terror. The moral dimension of the Criminal Court lay in its role in suppressing a culture of impunity when national jurisdiction did not take action.

Sixth Committee - 5 - Press Release GA/L/3078 10th Meeting (PM) 21 October 1998

Croatia had directly and indirectly contributed to the Court's establishment, he said. The recent tragic events in his country, in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Rwanda had given impetus for ad hoc international tribunals and for accelerating work on establishing a permanent judicial body. The difficulties between his country and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia -- regarding that body's proceedings and statutory matters -- had been resolved before the Tribunal itself and helped to clarify certain issues relevant to the International Criminal Court's Statute.

Croatia had signed the Statute on 12 October, he said. It commended the Secretary-General's prompt response, as depository, to technical errors in the Statute. The General Assembly should set a date for the Secretary-General to convene the preparatory commission as early as possible, but no later than spring 1999. The Statute had been the result of difficult compromise. It must not be undermined by delays in further preparatory work or by any subsequent modification to the text.

CHO CHANG-BEOM (Republic of Korea) said the Rome Statute was not a perfect legal instrument, but compromise was inevitable to bridge the gaps that existed between national positions on different issues. Despite that compromise, though, the Statute was a well-balanced treaty which successfully accommodated various conflicting interests without infringing upon the key tenets of the Court: fairness, independence and effectiveness.

The overwhelming support for the adoption of the Statute in Rome demonstrated the genuine will of the international community to expedite the process for the establishment of the Court. It was important that follow-up measures be taken as soon as possible. The preparatory commission should start its work early next year to finalize the rules of procedure and evidence and the elements of crimes before 30 June 2000, the deadline set by the Rome Conference. Given the complexity of its tasks, he said the commission should meet often enough to complete its heavy workload. His delegation would like to see those points reflected in the draft resolution on the Court to be approved by the Committee. The conditions of participation by non- governmental organizations should be the same as those at the preparatory committee meetings and the Rome Conference. There should be trust funds for voluntary contribution to assist developing and the least developed States to participate in the preparatory commission meetings.

* *** *