Fifty-seventh General Assembly

Sixth Committee

2nd Meeting (PM)

SIXTH COMMITTEE BEGINS DISCUSSION OF MEASURES TO ENHANCE

PROTECTION OF DIPLOMATIC/CONSULAR MISSIONS, PERSONNEL

The Sixth Committee (Legal) this afternoon began discussion of the issue of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and their representatives.

As it considered a report of the Secretary-General on the topic, the Committee heard statements from representatives of Cuba, Denmark (on behalf of the European Union), Burkina Faso, Morocco, Turkey, Norway (on behalf of the Nordic countries) and South Africa.  They called for cooperation between States to enhance protection and security of diplomatic missions and their representatives. A call was also made for States that had not done so to become parties to the relevant international legal instruments.  

The Sixth Committee will next meet at 10 a.m. tomorrow, Friday 27 September, to continue and conclude its debate of the item on measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.  It will then take up requests by organizations for observer status in the General Assembly.

Background

The Sixth Committee (Legal) met this afternoon to begin its consideration of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.

A report of the Secretary-General on the topic (document A/57/99 and Add.1, Add.2 and Corr.1) responds to a request from the General Assembly for information on the status of ratifications and accessions to the various relevant legal instruments, as well as reports from States on violations against consular missions and representatives.

A number of countries reported details of violations, and several others provided information on additional measures taken in their countries to protect diplomatic and consular missions and their representatives.

Tables listing participation in the relevant international conventions are annexed to the report. 

SORAYA ALVAREZ NUNEZ (Cuba) reiterated her Government’s condemnation of the attack on its diplomatic mission in Venezuela during the attempted coup in that country on 10 April 2002.  She said the attack was carried out by an extreme right-wing group of Cuban origin, who were in contact with the terrorist Cuban American Foundation based in Miami.  She said States should adopt measures to prohibit activities that instigated acts against diplomatic missions.

The Cuban Government had historically complied with all its international obligations.  It had provided public security to diplomatic missions, residences of their representatives and areas where official activities were carried out.  Cuba was party to all the relevant instruments.  She urged additional steps to enhance security of missions.

MARTIN KOFOD of Denmark (speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States) expressed concern over the "deplorable" breaches of international law relating to diplomatic and consular protection and security. Such violations, after all, rendered diplomats incapable of functioning and thus inhibited international understanding, cooperation, peace and stability.

The principles behind protecting diplomatic and consular missions and representatives were "age-old", he said, and he wished that those principles would become universally accepted throughout the world.  It was essential for the General Assembly to produce a resolution reaffirming its commitment to diplomatic and consular protection.  He also called on all States who had not yet done so to become parties to international instruments dedicated to protecting diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.

IBSEN S. KONE (Burkina Faso) said there had been no infringement of the security of diplomatic missions and consulates in his country since the question was last discussed in the Committee two years ago.  He was pleased to announce that no diplomatic mission had been a target of threat of attack this year.  His Government had always taken measures to guarantee the safety of diplomatic missions.  Representatives of diplomatic missions were free to move about.  Burkina Faso would continue to take measures to ensure the security and safety of diplomatic missions, he said.

KARIM MEDREK (Morocco) said his Government had always taken the necessary measures to protect diplomatic missions and created the environment conducive to their safe operation.  In a letter to the Secretary-General on the topic, Morocco had indicated that diplomatic and consular missions and representatives present in the country had never been subject to serious violations of their security.  Security was provided in residential premises of diplomatic and consular missions. Morocco advocated the strengthening of international cooperation to enhance the protection of diplomatic missions. 

TEOMAN UYKUR (Turkey) said that after 1973, there was an escalation of attacks against Turkish diplomats and that many of those diplomats had lost their lives.  Unfortunately, terrorists who carried out such acts had, in the past, been able to escape prosecution in other States.  He expressed hope, however, that with recent breakthroughs, Turkey would receive more cooperation in investigating attacks against its representatives.

Citing several conventions, such as the Diplomatic Relations Convention of 1961 and the 1963 Convention on Consular Relations, he maintained that it was the obligation of States to take all measures, including preventive ones, to prohibit attacks against diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.  He added that protection provided by receiving States should "correspond to the nature and level of the threat posed by those who breed terrorism".

Before concluding, he stated that in addition to reporting on attacks against diplomatic and consular representatives, States should put forth concrete measures taken to prevent future recurrence.

JAN BUGGE-MAHRT (Norway) speaking on behalf of the Nordic countries, noted that it was the Nordic countries that originally introduced the subject of diplomatic and consular protection to the General Assembly 22 years ago.  He stressed that such protection was recognized by all cultures and legal systems as one of the most fundamental principles of foreign relations.

He insisted that receiving States were obligated to protect diplomatic and consular representatives.  The reason behind such protection was not, however, to defend particular representatives.  Rather, it was to protect inter-State communication.  Thus no representative in a foreign country had the right to disrespect the host State's laws.

He concluded by stressing the need for close cooperation between sending and receiving States.  He also appealed to all States that had not yet done so to become parties to the relevant international legal instruments.

ALBERTUS J.HOFFMANN (South Africa) said his country condemned any act of violence against diplomatic or consular premises or representatives, and was especially concerned by the recent proliferation of such attacks.  South Africa accepted its responsibilities under international law to protect missions and protected persons against any breach of their inviolability, and to bring perpetrators of such deeds to justice.

At the same time, he said, it should be pointed out that the obligation to protect was limited to the taking of reasonable steps by the receiving State.  The obligation to protect remained paramount, but within the framework of what was possible and reasonable.  South Africa furthermore supported all appropriate

measures, taken in accordance with international law, to prevent any abuse of diplomatic or consular privileges and immunities.

* *** *