IMPACT OF SANCTIONS, IMPORTANCE OF ADHERING TO UN PRINCIPLES DEBATED IN CONTEXT OF IRAQ WAR, AS SPECIAL CHARTER COMMITTEE OPENS SESSION

Committee on Charter

and United Nations Role

243^rd Meeting (AM)           

IMPACT OF SANCTIONS, IMPORTANCE OF ADHERING TO UN PRINCIPLES DEBATED

IN CONTEXT OF IRAQ WAR, AS SPECIAL CHARTER COMMITTEE OPENS SESSION

The impact of sanctions on affected third States and the critical importance of adhering to the United Nations Charter were debated in the context of the ongoing conflict in Iraq this morning, as the United Nations Charter Committee opened its 2003 session. 

The Special Committee on the United Nations Charter and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization, whose session will conclude on 17 April, was established in 1974 to examine proposals to enhance the Charter, strengthen the role of the Organization in maintaining peace and security, develop cooperation among nations, and promote the rules of international law.
Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and United Nations Legal Counsel
Hans Corell opened the meeting.

The representative of the Russian Federation, stressing the need for the United Nations to remain the primary forum for ensuring international security based on Charter principles, said that unilateral approaches, especially involving the use of force, were unacceptable.  On sanctions, adoption by the
General Assembly of a declaration on the basic conditions and standard criteria for the introduction of sanctions and other coercive measures and their implementation, as contained in his revised working paper, would assist the Security Council in discharging its Charter authority in the area of sanctions. 

Asserting that the use of sanctions must have clearly defined start and end dates, Syria’s representative said the Security Council must be fair and equitable in imposing them and look carefully at their potential effects.  Failure to implement the Council’s resolutions was a legitimate basis for sanctions.  Highlighting the use of military sanctions against Iraq without the Council’s authorization, he said the use of force to replace international law was a dangerous precedent.  Moreover, a double standard was being applied with regard to a State in the Middle East, which threatened peace and security in the region with its nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.

As an affected third State bordering Iraq, Turkey had suffered considerably from sanctions, that country’s representative said.  She highlighted some practical ideas to tackle the hardships shouldered by those countries, including granting commercial exemptions to affected third States, establishing a kind of assistance trust fund, and giving priority to the contracts of affected third States for the investments of the target State.  The Security Council had a responsibility to act, without delay, in response to the application of the

measures outlined in Article 50 of the Charter, by which third States could request damages and other equitable measures.

Turning to the other item on the Committee’s agenda, namely improving its working methods, Japan’s representative said that strengthening the Committee itself would serve its aim of strengthening the role of the United Nations.
He advocated a review of that issue and drew attention to his proposed set of concrete measures to increase the Committee’s efficiency.  Together with the delegation of the Republic of Korea, he would submit a revised working paper on that question. 

In other business, the Committee elected Jagdish Dharamchand Koonjul (Mauritius) as Chairman.  Ivica Dronjic (Bosnia and Herzegovina),
Angela Cavaliere de Nava (Venezuela) and Giuseppe Nesi (Italy) were elected as vice-chairs.  Mohammed Hag Ibrahim (Syria) was elected Rapporteur.  

Also speaking in this morning’s general debate were the representatives of the Republic of Korea, China, Greece, on behalf of the European Union, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Tunisia, Cuba, Venezuela, Libya, Ukraine, Egypt and Algeria.

The Committee will meet in closed session and again in plenary at a date and time to be announced.

Background

Among the documents before the Committee are three Assembly resolutions from last year.  The first, on the Report of the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization (document A/RES/57/24), requests the Special Committee to continue its consideration of all proposals concerning the question of the maintenance of international peace and security in order to strengthen the role of the United Nations.  It further requests the Committee to consider other proposals relating to the maintenance of international peace and security already submitted or which may be submitted to the Special Committee at its 2003 session.

By further terms of the resolution, the Committee is also requested to continue to consider, on a priority basis, the question of the implementation of the provisions of the Charter related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions under Chapter VII of the Charter, by commencing a substantive debate on all of the related reports of the Secretary-General and proposals submitted on the question.  The Special Committee was also expected to keep the question of the peaceful settlement of disputes between States on its agenda and to continue to consider proposals concerning the Trusteeship Council.   It was also expected to continue to consider, on a priority basis, ways and means of improving its working methods and enhancing its efficiency.

According to the second resolution, implementation of the Charter provisions related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions  (document A/57/RES/25), the Assembly requested the Secretary-General to pursue the implementation of previous related resolutions and to ensure that the competent Secretariat units develop the adequate capacity and appropriate modalities, technical procedures and guidelines to continue to collate information about international assistance available to affected third States.  He was also expected to continue developing a possible methodology for assessing the adverse consequences actually incurred by third States and to explore innovative and practical measures of assistance to such States.

By further terms of the text, the Assembly took note of the decision of the Economic and Social Council to continue its consideration of the question of assistance to affected third States and invited the Council, at its 2003 organizational session, to make appropriate arrangements for that purpose.  It also invited States, the United Nations system, international financial institutions and other organizations to address more directly the special economic problems of affected third States and to continue consider improving procedures for maintaining constructive dialogue with such States.  The Special Committee is also requested to consider the issue on a priority basis during its present session, deciding to consider, during the Assembly’s fifty-eighth session, the issue within the Sixth (Legal) Committee or a working group of it.

By the terms of the third resolution, on the prevention and peaceful settlement of disputes (document A/RES/57/26), the Assembly urged States to make effective use of existing procedures for the prevention and peaceful settlement of disputes.  Drawing the attention of States to the important roles played by it, the Security Council and the Secretary-General in providing early warning and in working for the prevention of disputes and situations that might threaten international peace and security, it took note of the paper, prepared by the Secretariat, entitled “Mechanisms established by the General Assembly in the context of dispute prevention and settlement”.

Further, according to the resolution, the Assembly urged the continued enhancement of concrete steps by the Secretariat to build and improve the United Nations capacity to respond in matters relating to dispute prevention, including through information-sharing, planning and development of preventive measures, the development of a comprehensive plan for a revived early-warning and prevention system, training to support enhanced capabilities and cooperation with regional organizations.  It also requests the Secretary-General to take steps to encourage States to designate qualified persons for inclusion in lists of conciliators and arbitrators.

In its report to the Assembly on the session last year (document A/57/33), the Committee recommended that it consider, “in an appropriate substantive manner and framework”, the results of the ad hoc expert group which worked on the methodology for assisting third countries affected by sanctions.  It strongly encouraged the Secretary-General to expedite the preparation of his report -– requested by the General Assembly last year –- on the same topic, taking into account work undertaken by the Security Council, the General Assembly itself, its subsidiary organs and the Economic and Social Council. 

During the Special Committee’s debate on the sanctions question in its working group of the whole, delegations had observed that, despite the priority given to the issue, little progress had been achieved.  Others had noted that the time had come for an in-depth discussion of the summary of the deliberations and main findings of the ad hoc expert group on developing a methodology for assessing the consequences incurred by third States as a result of sanctions.

Concerning the creation of mechanisms for providing relief, several delegations supported the establishment of a special standing consultative mechanism to offset the adverse effects of sanctions.  Suggestions for practical relief measures included commercial and trade exemptions or concessions, giving priority to contractors of affected third States when awarding contracts for investment in the targeted State.  The point was also made that the term “smart sanctions” was a misnomer intended to disguise the harmful effects of sanctions, and sanctions as a tool available only to dominant and powerful States.

During its session, the Special Committee’s working group of the whole examined a number of proposals relating to the following:  maintenance of international peace and security, peaceful settlement of disputes, proposals concerning the Trusteeship Council, the Special Committee’s working methods, and the identification of new subjects.

The Special Committee considered two revised working papers submitted by the Russian Federation on “Basic conditions and standard criteria for the introduction of sanctions and other coercive measures and their implementation” and “Fundamentals of the legal basis for United Nations peacekeeping operations in the context of Chapter VI of the Charter”.

It also considered a number of working papers submitted by Libya, Cuba and jointly by Belarus and the Russian Federation.

The Committee also had before it a revised working paper submitted by the Russian Federation (document A/AC.182/L.114) containing a declaration on the conditions and standard criteria for the introduction of sanctions and other coercive measures and their implementation.

Another revised working paper before the Committee, submitted by Japan and the Republic of Korea (document A/AC.182/L.108/Rev.2), was on the Special Committee’s working methods.

Also before the Committee is the Secretary-General’s report on the implementation of provisions of the Charter related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions (document A/57/165).  The report highlights measures for improvement of the procedures and working methods of the Security Council and its sanctions committees.  It also reviews the capacity and modalities within the Secretariat for implementing the intergovernmental mandates for addressing the recommendations of the ad hoc expert group on assistance to third States.

An addendum to the report (document A/57/165/Add.1) reviews recent developments related to the role of the General Assembly, Economic and Social Council, and the Committee for Programme and Coordination (CPC) in the area of assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions.

The Secretary-General’s report on the Repertory of Practice of the United Nations Organs and Repertoire of the Practice of the Security Council (document A/57/370) outlines efforts taken by the Secretariat in 2002 to reduce the backlog in the publication of the Repertory.

Statements

Mr. TARABRIN (Russian Federation) said the United Nations should remain   the main forum for ensuring international security based on Charter principles.  Unilateral approaches, especially involving the use of force, were unacceptable.  The problem of sanctions should remain a priority.  In that regard, Russia had submitted a revised working document, which took into account the majority of proposals made at previous sessions.  He believed that work on the document could be completed at the current session.  The Assembly’s adoption would assist the Security Council in its discharge of its Charter authority in the area of sanctions.  The establishment of a working group of the Sixth Committee (Legal) would make for significant progress on the topic. 

Addressing the legal basis for peacekeeping operations in the context of Chapter VI of the Charter, he said there was need to improve the Organization’s peacekeeping potential.  The purposes of peacekeeping operations, including clear definitions of the mandates of such operations, the consent of the parties, the non-use of force must be considered.  By focusing on the legal dimension of peacekeeping, the Committee could maintain contact with other United Nations bodies dealing with the issue.

Regarding proposals on the Trusteeship Council, Russia did not think that the Council should be abolished or given additional functions.  That Council had not exhausted its Charter authority and there was no need to review the Charter on that subject.  On improving the Committee’s working methods, the Committee’s work should be maintained in its current format, and he opposed reducing the time allotted during the Committee’s session. 

HIROSHI ISHIKAWA (Japan) recalled that the General Assembly, last year,   had given priority to two issues for the Committee’s consideration, namely, implementation of the Charter provisions related to assistance to third States affected by sanctions, and ways and means of improving the Committee’s working methods and enhancing its efficiency.  In light of the recent increase in the application of economic sanctions, it was inevitable that the unexpected impact would be substantial.  It was necessary, therefore, to continue to improve the manner in which sanctions were implemented. 

He noted that the Security Council had considered the question of sanctions at an open meeting on 25 February.  It was important to carefully consider the Council’s efforts in that regard, as well as the suggestions made by the Secretary-General in his reports and those of the ad hoc expert group.  On improving the Committee’s working methods, he reiterated that the purpose of the Committee was to strengthen the role of the United Nations; strengthening the Committee itself would serve that purpose.  In order to improve the Committee’s working methods, his delegation had strongly advocated a review of that issue and had proposed a set of concrete measures to increase the Committee’s efficiency.  Together with the delegation of the Republic of Korea, he would submit a working paper that was substantially the same as the one he submitted last year, except for some technical modifications.

HAHN MYUNG-JAE (Republic of Korea) emphasized the need to review the implications of economic sanctions.  Regarding improving the working methods of the Committee, there was an urgent need to streamline and focus the Committee’s work, in order to enhance its efficiency.  He shared the views of the Japanese delegation and supported the revised proposal.

ZHANG YISHAN (China) said he was pleased at the adoption by the General Assembly last year of his draft resolution on the peaceful resolution of disputes.  He also valued the ad hoc committee’s efforts to deliberate the role of the Charter and the strengthening of the Organization overall, for which he sought greater results.  For more than 10 years, the Committee had been discussing assistance to States affected by sanctions.  Hopefully, those efforts would soon bear fruit.  Sanctions were not conventional measures for resolving international disputes, given their great impact and undesirable ramifications for third states.  Thus, a prudent approach should be taken to evolve related decisions.  He welcomed the recommendations and findings of the ad hoc expert group.  Those should be used for reference to assess the impact on third States. 

Also, he said, the feasibility of providing financial assistance to third world States should be explored, in order to reduce, as much as possible, the process sustained by third States.  For resolving that problem, the United Nations bore a primary responsibility and should work out a set of concrete measures to provide such assistance.  He favoured the idea set out by Russian Federation, which deserved in-depth discussion.  Reviews of peacekeeping operations in other United Nations bodies would not affect the Committee’s deliberation, at a legal level, to items related to the United Nations Charter.  Concerning the future of the Trusteeship Council, despite the fact that its historical mission had been achieved, there was no urgency to revoke or change its functions.  That issue should be considered from the perspective of overall United Nations’ reform. 

MARIA TELALIAN (Greece), on behalf of the European Union and associated States, said mandatory sanctions was an effective tool for use by the Security Council against a State, entity or group of individuals that posed a threat to international peace and security or had committed an act of aggression.  Concerned about the adverse effects of sanctions, the Union supported initiatives to minimize the negative consequences of sanctions on innocent civilians and third countries, while at the same time preserving their effectiveness.  Targeted sanctions, such as arms embargoes, visa-based travel restrictions, freezing of personal assets and exclusion from international forums, could address such concerns.  The Union welcomed the Council’s establishment of targeted sanctions of limited duration, when designing sanctions regimes. 

Regarding the legal rights of individuals, she welcomed the Council’s adoption of the “delisting” procedure, as well as a technical resolution on humanitarian exemptions.  She also welcomed the Council’s efforts to streamline the working procedures of the sanctions committees and to facilitate access to them by the affected third States.  The revised paper submitted by the Russian Federation was a useful basis for the Committee’s discussions.

The Union attached great importance to the question of the peaceful settlement of disputes, she said.  Assembly resolution 57/26 of 2002 was a useful tool for the early recourse by States to peaceful settlement procedures and the prevention of disputes.  On improving the Committee’s working methods, the Committee should avoid duplicating the work of other United Nations bodies and focus on fewer topics.  A cut-off mechanism should be established to prevent prolonged discussion of proposals.  She strongly supported Japan’s practical recommendations to strengthen the Committee’s working methods.

MOHAMMED HAJ IBRAHIM (Syria) said that the recourse to sanctions had become frequent, and that had credibility.  Sanctions were a tool to be used in accordance with Chapter VII of the Charter, when there was a threat to international peace and security and a flagrant violation of the Charter and international law.  The use of force in place of the application of international law was a dangerous precedent for international relations.  The application of a double standard had become very popular in international relations and could be seen in such cases as Iraq, Libya, Sudan and other weak States.

Highlighting the use of military sanctions against Iraq outside the authorization of the Security Council, he said a double standard was being applied with regard to a State in the Middle East, which threatened peace and security in that region with its nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction.  It also occupied Arab territories in flagrant disregard for the relevant Security Council resolutions, which provided for its withdrawal from all occupied Arab territories. Failure to implement Security Council resolutions was a legitimate basis for sanctions against such a State.  Yet, the Council must be fair and equitable in imposing sanctions and look carefully at the potential medium- and long-term effects.  Sanctions must also be very carefully defined from the outset. 

Continuing, he stressed that it must be ensured that the imposition of sanctions was consistent with the United Nations Charter and that those had specific start and end dates.  When the threat to international peace and security disappeared and when the affected State returned to normalcy and implemented the Council’s resolutions, those sanctions should be lifted.  Meanwhile, no one should underestimate the danger to third States, which had the right, under Article 50 of the Charter, to request damages and other equitable measures.  The revised paper submitted by the Russian Federation should be considered for adoption.  He also supported Libya’s proposal to consolidate the role of the Organization, the General Assembly, and the Security Council to make them more democratic.  He did not support the elimination of the Trusteeship Council, which did not pose any financial burden to the Organization.

MUNG JONG CHOL (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said the 2003 session of the Charter Committee had been convened at a critical juncture.  The armed attack against Iraq by the United States in defiance of the United Nations strong objection, with the aim of removing leadership of a sovereign State, was a grave encroachment on the sovereignty of the country and a flagrant violation of the United Nations Charter.  The United Nations credibility had been diminished by the high-handed attitude on the part of the United States. 

He acknowledged the merits of proposals submitted by a number of delegations, including proposals on the peaceful settlement of disputes and advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice on the legality of the use of force lacking Security Council approval.  Appropriate outcomes must be produced on those proposals at the earliest.  The violation by the United States of the Charter and its legal obligations could be seen on the Korean peninsula.  The southern part of Korea continued to harbour some 40,000 United States troops under cover of the United Nations.  Even after the new millennium, the United States kept its military presence on the southern part of Korea against the will of the Korean people and the General Assembly.

While responding with threats of pre-emptive strikes and the use of nuclear weapons to his country’s proposals to resolve the issue through dialogue, the United States had been behaving in contradiction to Assembly resolution 57/26 and the principles of the United Nations Charter.  The United States, taking the “nuclear issue” of the Korean peninsula as a pretext, had built up its massive military in order to carry out a pre-emptive military strike upon his country.  The United States continued to take the cover of the United Nations for its actions in the Korean peninsula.  Now was the time for the Committee to contemplate how to terminate the continued United States abuse of the Charter. 

SOUMAIA ZORAI (Tunisia) thanked the Russian Federation and Libya for their contributions in past sessions.  Tunisia had for several years been experiencing economic difficulties as a result of sanctions.  While the item had been on the Committee’s agenda for some 10 years, only small progress had been made.  The effective implementation of provisions for affected third States was urgent.  Her delegation had called for the establishment of a trust fund for States whose economies had been affected by the implementation of sanctions.

She hoped the Secretary-General’s report on the Secretariat’s capacity in implementing the recommendations of the ad hoc expert group would be published soon, so that its proposals could be committed to a working group of the Sixth Committee, she continued.  The Committee should contribute to the democratization of the Organization in light of the principles set forth in the Millennium Declaration.  Coordination between the various United Nations bodies, in particular the General Assembly and Security Council, had to be improved. 

EMINE GOKCEN TUGRAL (Turkey) said that her country, as a third State, had suffered considerably from sanctions.  She, therefore, stressed the importance of the relevant Charter provisions and she followed the work of the Committee on that matter with close interest.  The relevant deliberations should be concluded without further delay and a mechanism should be established for dispensing assistance to third States.

The documents before the Committee contributed to consideration of that issue, but more than four years had elapsed since the ad hoc expert group had presented their findings, and those had still not been systemmatically deliberated.  It was high time for an in-depth discussion of the report and to take the necessary steps to eliminate the burden of third States.  Thus, substantive work on that issue should commence without further delay. 

She said that practical ideas to tackle the hardships shouldered by the third States had been presented in the Committee.  Those relief measures had included according commercial exemptions or concessions to the most affected third States, directly consulting with those States, establishing a fund for dispensing assistance, and giving priority to the contracts of the affected third States for the investments of the target State.  An in-depth discussion of that matter would add to such measures and enable the elaboration of ways and means to ensure their effective application.  In that connection, she underlined the Security Council’s responsibility to act, without delay, in response to the applications of measures outlined in Article 50 of the Charter and to tackle the hardships incurred by third States. On the second item under consideration, the Committee had a unique character and it should be utilized in a much more efficient manner.

SORAYA ELENA ALVAREZ NUÑEZ (Cuba) said unilateral acts and preventive wars were unacceptable and deserved categorical condemnation.  It was the Organization’s task to deal with the serious problems of the globalized world, as it was the universal organization with historic, moral and legal authority to achieve progress in international cooperation.  The world’s current problems would not be resolved by war or revenge.  The Committee had the fundamental role to consider issues such as the democratization of the Council and the full exercise of the Assembly’s functions.  Cuba attached importance to the Committee’s work and had submitted, since 1992, several documents for strengthening the Organization’s role. The Committee had a responsibility to make progress on the issues before it.

She believed that during the current session, agreement on a number of the items before the Committee could be reached, including the question of sanctions and improving the Committee’s working methods.  She fully supported the continued the publication of the repertory of practice of the United Nations, which was one of the Organization’s most important publications.  The Committee should reaffirm the importance of re-establishing the United Nations as the principle organization for promoting relations among nations and as a centre for solving global problems.  The Committee could provide substantive assistance in attaining those purposes.

ANGELA CAVALIEREDE DE NAVA (Venezuela) said that, given the current circumstances of a new war, the Committee’s work was more relevant than ever.  She was satisfied by the General Assembly’s adoption last year reaffirming peaceful means as the way to settle disputes.  Concerning the effects of sanctions, she shared the majority view in the United Nations of the urgent need to review the sanctions regime, so as to truly attain the objectives.  Updating and adjusting the sanctions regime should be guided by a more rational character, both in terms of time and objective.  Such changes would avoid the shortcomings of the current regime and minimize the undesirable humanitarian effects and the specific effects on third States.

She said that the Committee should seek to achieve concrete progress in terms of its objectives.  It should be ensured that there was an institution and a Charter that was solid and capable of dealing effectively with the current challenges.  She would follow carefully the proposals made in the context of maintaining international peace and security, particularly regarding sanctions, as well as the strengthening of the Organization, the work of the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences for using force without the Security Council’s authorization, and the proposal concerning the Committee’s working methods.  Creative input and flexibility should enable progress. 

AHMED ELMESSALLATI (Libya) said his delegation followed the work of the Committee with keen interest.  While the Charter had been established to respond to the aspirations of the peoples of the world, the practice of double standards and hegemony by its main organs affected its ability to respond to that challenge.  The aggression against Iraq was against the principles of international legitimacy.  The Committee’s 2002 report included several important issues, including the effects of sanctions and their implementation.  Libya had participated in the elaboration of those issues and was grateful for the support its proposal had received. 

On the revitalization of the General Assembly and Security Council reform, he emphasized the need to consider the proposal submitted during the Committee’s last session.  The proposal, if adopted, would contribute to the peaceful settlement of conflicts.  Recent developments emphasized the need to improve the Security Council’s methods of work. Unless the veto power was removed, the Council could not be reformed.  He supported all efforts to eliminate the current imbalance in the Council’s membership.  He supported the revised working paper submitted by the Russian Federation.  Sanctions should have specific targets and should not be used as a punitive measure.  Delegations must demonstrate political will in order for the Committee to succeed.

OLEKSIY ILNYTSKI (Ukraine) said the Charter Committee continued to present a forum for various issues of United Nations revitalization.  He appreciated the efforts of the Japanese delegation to streamline the Organization’s working methods and encouraged delegations to achieve consensus on outstanding issues.

Regarding the issue of sanctions, he said visible improvements on the part of the Security Council in past years were obvious.  Sanctions must remain an

important policy instrument in the hands of the Council, which must apply a clear and coherent methodology for the implementation and lifting of sanctions.  While recognizing the importance of the Council’s prerogatives, he did not underestimate the important role of the General Assembly in that regard.  He supported continued work on the sanctions issue on the basis of the document submitted by the Russian Federation.  Regarding assistance to affected third States, the review by the ad hoc expert group was a significant step forward.  Practical and timely assistance to third states would contribute to the international community’s comprehensive approach to sanctions. 

MAHMOUD SAMY (Egypt) reaffirmed the Committee’s importance in strengthening the United Nations.  The Committee should be given the time it needed to consider all the items on its agenda.  Sanctions affected many countries and required a balanced system in order to make them effective.  The Charter Committee needed to strengthen the United Nations by developing the role of the General Assembly.  He thanked Cuba for its proposal, which was a solid basis for discussion.  Consent had to be the basis for dispute settlement among States.  He also stressed the importance of publishing the repertory of practice of the United Nations, as it was the Organization’s primary institutional memory.

ALI HAFRAD (Algeria) said the imposition of sanctions should only be agreed to when all other peaceful methods had been exhausted.  Sanctions should go hand in hand with specific conditions regarding their lifting from the outset.  Given their detrimental consequences, the humanitarian dimension of sanctions must be addressed.  He supported considering the document submitted by the Russian Federation.  Sanctions should be adapted to a particular humanitarian situation or lifted to prevent a humanitarian disaster.  Punishing innocent people should not be the objective of sanctions.  Careful evaluation of effects on civilian populations was, therefore, needed. 

He said the Security Council had an obligation to help affected third States.  The proposal of the Non-Aligned Movement on permanent consultation methods to prevent the adverse consequences of sanctions deserved careful attention.  Regarding the maintenance of international peace and security, he supported the paper by the Russian Federation and Belarus concerning the request for an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice on the legal recourse for actions committed outside the authority of the Security Council.  The proposal should be submitted, as the ideas it contained were consistent with the principles of the United Nations Charter.  Regarding the Trusteeship Council, as differences of view had not disappeared, it was premature to take a definitive decision on the issue.

* *** *