Preparatory Commission for

International Criminal Court

27^th Meeting (AM)

PREPARATORY COMMISSION FOR INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

OPENS SEVENTH SESSION AT HEADQUARTERS

The Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court began its seventh session at Headquarters this morning, with the Commission Chairman announcing that 139 States had signed the Rome Statute of the Court and 29 had ratified it.

Philippe Kirsch (Canada), Chairman, said those developments clearly indicated the growing support for the Statute and the fact that it would not be long before the International Criminal Court was established.  They also implied that the Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court would have to ensure that it completed its mandate by the time the Statute entered into force -– which will occur following 60 ratifications.

Statements were also made by the representatives of Argentina, Austria, Cameroon and Ghana.

At the outset of the meeting, a moment of silence was observed in memory of Monsignor Vincent La Rocca of the Holy See, and Dr. Dafar El Muraied of Libya, two members of the Commission who passed away after its last session. 

The Commission's two-week session, scheduled to end on 9 March, will consider a new item on Draft Rules of Procedure of the Assembly of States Parties -- a body of States that have ratified or acceded to the Rome Statute or treaty establishing the Court.  The Statute was adopted at a Diplomatic Conference of Plenipotentiaries on the Establishment of an International Criminal Court on

17 July 1998.

In addition, the Commission will continue discussion -- in working groups -- on a draft relationship agreement between the Court and the United Nations, financial regulations and rules and a budget for the first year of the Court’s operation, and a draft agreement on the privileges and immunities of the Court.  Work will also continue on the preparation of proposals on the elements and conditions under which the Court could exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, once agreement is reached on a legal definition of that crime.

The Court will be a permanent judicial body that will investigate and bring to justice individuals who commit the most serious violations of international humanitarian law, namely, genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes and, once defined, the crime of aggression.

27^th Meeting (AM)

The working group on the crime of aggression was expected to begin its work following the plenary meeting.

The next plenary of the Preparatory Commission will be at 10 a.m. Tuesday,  6 March.

Background

The Preparatory Commission for the International Criminal Court met this morning to resume discussion of the following topics, begun at its sixth session held from 27 November to 8 December 2000:  the Relationship Agreement between the Court and the United Nations; Agreement on Privileges and Immunities; Financial Regulations and Rules of the Court; and the Crime of Aggression.

At the sixth session (document PCNICC/2000/L.4/Rev.1), the Commission decided to include a new topic on the agenda of its current seventh session:  Draft Rules of Procedure of the Assembly of States Parties -– a body of signatories to the Statute or treaty establishing the Court.  Saeid Mirzaee-Yengejeh (Iran) is the Coordinator.

(For background, see Press Release L/2973 issued 23 February.)

Draft Rules of Procedure of Assembly

The mandate of the Assembly of States Parties is set out in article 112 of the Statute which also provides for a bureau consisting of a President and Vice-President, in addition to 18 other members, taking into account equitable geographic distribution and adequate representation of the principal legal systems of the world.  The Assembly will have some legislative powers, as it can adopt the budget of the Court and establish subsidiary bodies to provide management oversight to the Presidency, the Prosecutor and the Registrar regarding the administration of the Court.

       A Secretariat working paper on the draft rules (document PCNICC/2001/WGRPASP/L.1) outlines how the Assembly will conduct its procedural and substantive work.  It contains rules relating to logistics of meetings, such as place of meetings, selection of representatives for specific committees, agenda for meetings, and notification for sessions.  It also provides for regular and special sessions of the Assembly.

According to the draft, the official and working languages of the Assembly will be the same as the United Nations General Assembly -- Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish.  Each State Party shall have one vote.  Every effort shall be made to reach decisions in the Assembly and in the bureau by consensus, or by vote if it cannot be reached.

Draft Relationship Agreement

The draft relationship agreement (documents PCNICC/2000/WGICC-United Nations/L.1 and PCNICC/2000/L.4/Rev.1/Add.1) is intended to regulate the working relationship between the Court and the United Nations.  It comprises 21 articles covering such issues as cooperation between the Security Council and the Court, cooperation between the United Nations and the Prosecutor, exchange of information and protection of confidentiality.

At the last session, the working group on the topic, chaired by Cristian Maquieira (Chile), began a review of all the articles of the text prepared by the Secretariat.  He told the final plenary of the need for additional coordinators to deal with specific topics within the context of the relationship agreement.

Financial Regulations and Rules of Court

The Working Group on Financial Regulations and Rules of the Court completed the first reading of the draft regulations (documents PCNICC/2000/WGFIRR/L.1 and PCNICC/2000/L.4/Rev.1/Add.2) during the last session and began a second informal reading under its Coordinator Georg Witschel (Germany).  There was general agreement that a committee on budget and finance should be established under the Assembly of States Parties, rather than as part of the Court.

The Preparatory Commission added the following items to the Working Group’s agenda:  composition, tasks and format of the committee; rules dealing with drafting the budget of the States Parties; establishment of trust funds and other funds as provided, for example, in article 79 of the Statute; and elaboration of criteria for receiving and utilizing voluntary contributions in accordance with article 116 of the Statute.  Discussions are expected to continue on the choice of official currency for the Court –- the euro or the dollar.  There was a consensus that the United Nations regular budget scale of assessment be applied.

Draft Agreement on Privileges and Immunities of Court

The Working Group on Privileges and Immunities, coordinated by Phakiso Mochochoko (Lesotho), concluded preliminary examination of the Secretariat draft PCNICC/2000/WGAPIC/L.1).  The draft agreement deals broadly with the privileges and immunities of the Court as an institution with its own legal personality; the privileges and immunities of officials and personnel of the Court and standard provisions, including the waiver of privileges and immunities.  The coordinator informed the final plenary of a discussion paper he had prepared (document PCNICC/2000/L.4/Rev.1/Add.3). 

Crime of Aggression

At the last session, the Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, coordinated by Tuvako Manongi (United Republic of Tanzania), held four meetings during which discussions focused on the definition of aggression and the conditions under which the Court will exercise its jurisdiction.  A key issue is the nature of the relationship between the Court and the Security Council, as the Council under Article 39 of the United Nations Charter has the responsibility to determine when acts of aggression have occurred.

Statements

PHILIPPE KIRSCH (Canada), Chairman of the Preparatory Commission, opening the Commission's seventh session, said he hoped the year 2001 would be as productive for the Commission as last year.  As of today, 139 States had signed the Rome Statute and 29 had ratified it, he said, adding that it was a clear indication of the growing support for the Statute and the fact that it would not be long before the International Criminal Court was established.  Those developments implied that the Preparatory Commission should ensure that it completed its mandate by the time the Statute entered into force.

He announced that Silvia Fernandez de Gurmendi (Argentina) would act as the Coordinator for the Working Group on the Crime of Aggression in place of Tuvako Manongi (United Republic of Tanzania), the substantive coordinator who had completed his tour of duty in New York.

He reminded delegations that the remaining issues on the Commission's agenda had been divided into two groups and assigned to a contact point each.  Saeid Mirzaee-Yengejeh (Iran) would act as the contact point for the budget for the first financial year of the Court.  Zsolt Hetesy (Hungary) would serve as contact point for the second group, containing the basic principles governing the Headquarters Agreement to be negotiated between the Court and the host country of the Netherlands.

At the next plenary, on 6 March, the Commission would hear a statement by the Registrar of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Hans Holthuis, he stated.

LUIS ENRIQUE CAPPAGLI (Argentina) said that on 8 February his country’s Minister for Foreign Affairs had delivered Argentina’s instrument of ratification of the Rome Statute to the Secretary-General.  That affirmed the high level of importance Argentina gave the issue.  The country continued to review and develop internal legislation to ensure speedy and appropriate implementation of the provisions of the Statue.  Indeed, the creation of an International Criminal Court was an important step forward in the area of international law.  He had tremendous expectations for the preparatory session and appealed to all States to speed up the process, so that the Statute could enter into force and the Court become operational.

ALEXANDER MARSCHIK (Austria) said his country had supported the creation of an International Criminal Court from the very beginning.  Suffering the horrors of past world wars had taught Austria and the international community a valuable lesson.  Indeed, being able to hold individuals responsible was the best way to deter future crimes.  He was encouraged by the large number of signatories and appealed to other States to sign and ratify the Rome Statute as soon as possible.

MARJA LETHO (Finland) said her Government had undertaken several internal review procedures before ratification of the Rome Statue could take place.  Most importantly, there had been a parliamentary review of certain provisions, as the Government had, quite predictably, expressed reservations on issues related to State sovereignty and the criminal responsibility of heads of State and parliament.  It was also felt that some of the Statute’s provisions contravened the Finnish Constitution.  Interestingly, she added, the Constitutional Law Committee came to the conclusion that the provisions in question did not contravene Finnish law.  That body had also found no contradictions with Finland’s State sovereignty.  Following the parliamentary review, Finland had reaffirmed its commitment to the timely entry into force of the Statute.

JEAN PIERRE SOH (Cameroon) said that in November his delegation had announced it would hold a regional seminar on various perspectives of the International Criminal Court in the first quarter of 2001.  That seminar was held in February in Yaoundé and involved regional and international participants from various legislatures, as well as legal workers and representatives from civil

society.  The discussions took the form of interactive debates and included such themes as the crime of aggression, adaptation of national legislation to the provisions of the Court, and the role of the media and civil society in the implementation of the Court. 

He said that participants in the seminar recommended, among other things, that all members of the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and other regional organizations give ratification of the Statue and creation of the Court the highest priority.  He also announced that out of the seminar had come a subregional support network that would provide information and assistance to non-governmental organizations and other civil society actors working to disseminate information about the Court.  Participants had also requested that Gabon hold a follow-up conference within a year.  He proposed that a copy of the seminar’s final report be deposited with the Committee so that it would be available as members began their important work for this session.

NANA EFFAH-APENTENG (Ghana) said his country had hosted a conference in Accra in February on domestic implementation of the Statue and the mandate of the Court aimed at educating the public.  The Minister of Justice affirmed commitment to the process and pledged to work towards completion of implementation.  Participants committed themselves to work for the prompt adoption of the relevant legislation, to review their respective constitutional laws, and enhance cooperation with civil society.  The outcome document of the conference should serve as an important basis for the work of the Committee.  The positive outcome showed, among other things, that Africa was moving away from a culture of impunity.

* *** *