PRESS BRIEFING ON INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

Press Briefing

PRESS BRIEFING ON INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

The number of countries ratifying the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court had tripled to 24 in a few months, the Chairman of the Court’s Preparatory Commission told correspondents at Headquarters this afternoon, as the Commission concluded a two-week session.

Philippe Kirsch said that in March only seven countries out of the 60 needed to bring the Court into being had ratified the treaty. As of today, 118 countries had signed the treaty, and 24 had ratified, with Peru being the latest to sign, and the Marshall Islands the latest to ratify.

He noted that at the opening of the latest session, the United Arab Emirates and Syria had announced their signing of the treaty. Given that they were two of the countries that had had difficulties at the end of the Rome Conference, where the treaty was concluded, their signing was a further indication of the fact that the Court was becoming a virtual universal instrument.

The rapid numbers of ratifications, he said, were a reflection of the number of countries that were in the process of revising legislation, and in some cases, even constitutions, to make the treaty compatible with domestic law. He added that the treaty would remain open for signature until 31 December 2000.

The Commission was assigned the task of negotiating certain practical and technical agreements that would allow the Court to function effectively, Mr. Kirsch said. At this session, the Commission had completed a first reading of draft agreements on three specific issues: a relationship agreement between the Court and the United Nations, financial regulations for the Court and privileges and immunities of the Court. Negotiating texts on those agreements had been prepared for discussion at the Commission’s two sessions next year from 26 February to 9 March, and from 24 September to 5 October.

Asked which part of the work of the Commission would deal with a certain State’s proposal to have exemption of its nationals from the jurisdiction of the Court, Mr. Kirsch said it had been considered for quite some time that the relationship agreement between the Court and the United Nations would provide a natural framework to deal with that kind of issue. -- not necessarily to grant what was sought, but rather, to deal with the issue”. He said things were a little less clear now; some proposals just now being put on the table were outside any existing framework, and those issues might be pursued in a different context.

Mr. Kirsch said the previous session of the Preparatory Commission last June had been very important. The Commission had met its mandated deadline of 30 June for finalization of two key texts related to the Court’s Statute -- the Rules of Procedure and Evidence and Elements of Crimes.

It was extremely important that those two documents had been adopted by consensus. It had not been clear at the end of the Rome Conference whether the crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction were really generally acceptable. The consensus agreement at the June session demonstrated that those crimes were indeed acceptable. Also, the efforts that delegations had made to reach agreement on very difficult issues was an indication that the Court would be in existence in the fairly near future.

* *** *