HEADQUARTERS PRESS BRIEFING ON TERRORISM BY UN LEGAL COUNSEL

The Sixth Committee (Legal) will discuss a new report on work relating to conventions against international terrorism, Hans Corell, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel, said at a Headquarters press briefing this afternoon.

He said the report (document A/C.6/56/L.9) had been prepared by a working group of the Committee which had met for two weeks until 26 October under the chairmanship of Rohan Pereira, Legal Adviser to Sri Lanka's Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The two main issues before the working group were a draft convention on nuclear terrorism and a comprehensive convention against terrorism, Mr. Corell said.  The latter was based on a draft presented by India in October last year.  An ad hoc committee had worked on it during the spring, and work had resumed under the working group this autumn.

He said the main purpose of the comprehensive convention was to prohibit all forms and manifestations of terrorist activities, and to cover those offences that were outside the scope of specialized conventions.  Based on the principle of "prosecute or extradite", it provided for cooperation among States in respect of those matters.  The working group had appointed Richard Rowe, Legal Adviser to Australia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to coordinate the remaining work.

Another new report (document A/C.6/56/160) contained a list of several specialized conventions addressing the question of terrorism and the extent to which they had been ratified, the Legal Counsel said.  Without defining terrorism, they were based on the criminality of certain acts, and also advanced the idea that States should either prosecute or extradite those suspected of committing such crimes.

Mr. Corell said that in order to maintain the momentum, Secretary-General Kofi Annan would meet this afternoon with some of the ambassadors representing countries that had played a key role in the working group discussions.  The Sixth Committee was scheduled to meet on those matters in the middle of next week.

He said the Sixth Committee was expected to approve a draft resolution that would later be adopted by the General Assembly, perhaps in December.  The question was whether a convention would be attached to that resolution, or whether Member States needed more time to look at the outstanding issues of defining terrorism and at how to delineate terrorism from other legal areas governed by the laws of war or humanitarian law.

Asked whether such a document could succeed without a definition, the Legal Counsel stressed that by definition a general convention must cover all acts.  There was a provision regulating the relationship between the comprehensive and the sectoral conventions.

Where two Member States in dispute were parties both to a sectoral convention and to the comprehensive convention, the more specific sectoral agreement would apply.  But the comprehensive convention would be very important for States that had not been able to ratify all the sectoral conventions.

What was the Secretariat's role in helping to define terrorism and what was the next step? another journalist asked.

Stressing the positive atmosphere in the working group, Mr. Corell replied that the Secretariat was trying to help maintain that momentum by providing services.  The Secretary-General would follow the matter personally, he added.

Asked whether guidelines had been established to distinguish between terrorists and those defending their faith, country or property, Mr. Corell cited the Secretary-General's statement on 1 October, when he emphasized that no cause could be so just that it could be defended by willfully killing innocent people.

The Legal Counsel said questions of the difference between terrorist acts, war crimes and crimes against humanity must be settled at the appropriate instances and finally at the judicial level.  But the comprehensive convention was an attempt to make it as clear as possible, so that any human being could make the distinction.

* *** *