In progress at UNHQ

PRESS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

21/04/2003
Press Briefing


PRESS CONFERENCE ON INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT


The election of Luis Moreno Ocampo as the first chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) was yet another momentous step in laying the foundation for the most important human rights organization created in the last 50 years, correspondents were told at a Headquarters pres conference today. 


Addressing reporters prior to today’s election of the Prosecutor by the
89 members of the Court’s governing Assembly of States Parties were William Pace, convener of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court, a global network of some 2,000 non-governmental organizations; Richard Dicker of Human Rights Watch; Francisco Soberon, Executive Secretary of Human Rights Organizations in Peru; and David Donat-Cattin, Senior Programme Officer for Parliamentarians for Global Action.  Mr. Moreno Ocampo, an eminent Argentine prosecutor, lawyer and public servant, emerged as the consensus candidate following an informal meeting at United Nations Headquarters last month.

Mr. Dicker, who is Director of Human Rights Watch’s international justice programme, said the Prosecutor would very likely be the most public and most visible representative of the court and, indeed, more than any other official the Court’s human face to the world.  Mr. Moreno Ocampo’s experience was forged in prosecuting an extremely complex trial of the Argentinean junta in Buenos Aires starting in 1995 and continued for several years thereafter.  That trial could not have been more high profile and was a source of encouragement and thrill to those around the world, who wanted to see accountability for the horrific crimes that junta was responsible for during Argentina’s “dirty war”, he said. 


As Prosecutor, he brought to the job experience in exactly the kind of cases that the Court would be prosecuting, Mr. Decker said.  Similarly, as a lawyer and deputy prosecutor in those junta trials, he was at the eye of the storm in trying to make a national court system work as it emerged from several years of dictatorship.  That first-hand experience would serve the court well, because it was exactly those kinds of situations the Prosecutor would be assessing; determining, for example, whether or not there was a proper case for the Court, or whether a particular case should be handled by national authorities.  Only time and practice would tell how well he would manage his “awesome burden” and responsibility. 


Drawing attention to another aspect of the new Prosecutor’s background, Mr. Dicker said Mr. Moreno Ocampo was currently Robert Kennedy Visiting Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.  Previously, he was a visiting professor at Stanford University.  He knew the United States and its policy-makers very well, and it was striking to contrast Mr. Moreno Ocampo and his background with the danger of the “rogue prosecutor” some in the Bush Administration had been raving about for years now, in defiance of both fact and law.


“You have an individual who has real experience, real credibility in trying these difficult cases and also knows a good deal about the United States”, Mr. Decker said.  The anti-American “rogue prosecutor” did not exist anywhere but in the rhetoric and imagination of ideologues in the Bush Administration.


Continuing, he noted that the election of Mr. Moreno Ocampo naturally raised expectations and questions, such as when would the Court begin its first case, who would its first defendants be and when was all that going to happen?  It was important to realize, however, that the new Prosecutor also had to staff an office of several hundred high-quality individuals from around the world.  Additionally, he had to adopt the policies and procedures for not only beginning investigations, but also bringing indictments and managing his office effectively. 


Mr. Pace said the Court process and the efforts to implement the Rome Statute continued to proceed at an extraordinary pace and, on balance, with the best intentions for creating not only the first permanent criminal court, but one that would be fair, effective and independent.


Mr. Soberon, Executive Secretary of Human Rights Organizations in Peru, discussing the role of non-governmental organizations in the first phase of the Court’s development, noted that human rights associations in the Latin American region continued with the task of promoting implementation of national legislation to meet the standards of the Rome Statute.  In that regard, there were three projects under discussion now in Argentina, Ecuador and Uruguay.  Others were under preparation for Brazil, Venezuela and Panama.  In all those initiatives, civil society organizations were pushing for the prompt adoption of national legislation to comply with the Rome Statute, as well as ratification of the Statute by those in the region that had not yet done so.


He cited Colombia as one special situation that was likely to bring cases to the Court, because of its political violence and human rights violations.  Human rights and Court advocates in that country today worked under threats and harassment.  He hoped that regional and international organizations would closely monitor and pay attention to developments in Colombia, in that regard.


In response to a question, Mr. Pace said it was obvious the war in Iraq would affect the issue of the definition of the crime of aggression.  His understanding was that the governments had decided to re-discuss the matter in 2004 and the Security Council was once again expected to take up the issue of resolution 1422 by the United States in the next two months.


In response to a further question, Mr. Dicker said the Coalition was not aware of any complaint submitted to anyone in relation to the Iraqi conflict.  He noted, however, that neither the United States nor Iraq had ratified the treaty -- “an interesting thread that binds those two States” –- and added it was unlikely that a case would be taken up by the Court, even if such a complaint were to be filed.


In response to another question, Mr. Pace said the United States administration had not “consulted” the Coalition in compiling the list of Iraqi officials that now appeared on the deck of cards.  Would the looting of the museum in Baghdad qualify as a crime against humanity? asked the same correspondent.  Mr. Pace said it would qualify as a war crime if it were committed by belligerent forces, but not by looters who were neither enemy combatants nor belligerent forces.


* *** *

For information media. Not an official record.