Fifty-ninth General Assembly

Plenary

53^rd Meeting (AM)

SUFFICIENT RESOURCES REQUIRED FOR YUGOSLAV, RWANDA TRIBUNALS

 

TO COMPLETE WORK ON SCHEDULE, GENERAL ASSEMBLY TOLD

The issues of inadequate financing, insufficient staffing and indictees for war crimes and genocide who were still at large in certain Member States were resolutely underscored today, as the Presidents of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia updated the General Assembly this morning on the progress of both courts in the last year.

While he was pleased to confirm that the Rwanda Tribunal was on schedule to complete all trials by 2008, as mandated by the Security Council, Tribunal President Eric Møse said there could only be compliance with timeframes if there were sufficient resources.  Unfortunately, several States had not paid their contributions to both Tribunals, leading to a recruitment freeze.  Over 80 staff members had left the Rwanda Tribunal since the freeze and the number of vacancies was increasing.  Many of those posts were directly linked to the Tribunal’s judicial production.  It was a paradox that indispensable financial contributions were not paid when the Tribunal was doing its utmost to complete its task.

Another critical issue, he said, was the 17 indicted persons who were still at large and continued to evade justice –- some alleged to have been the architects of the events in Rwanda in 1994.  He called on States to intensify cooperation with the Arusha-based Tribunal and to facilitate the arrest and transfer of indictees in their territory.

“Despite substantial obstacles, we are making tremendous strides”, President Theodor Meron of the Yugoslav Tribunal stated.  But echoing President Møse, he said the Tribunal’s financial situation was overshadowing all progress.  Resource shortfalls, he warned, were beginning to “threaten the panel’s capacity to run on all cylinders”.  Far too many States had not met their obligations and outstanding contributions for 2004 and previous years had eaten up an unacceptably high percentage of the Tribunal’s budget.

He said some 100 staff had left since May, which jeopardized the completion strategy, and the Tribunal was unable to replace those that had left.  “We are striving hard to do more with less, but we can only redistribute workloads for so long”, he said.  Inevitably, the freeze would cripple the Tribunal’s ability to operate efficiently and to fulfil its goals.  He also expressed concern that 21 fugitives remained at large, urging the Assembly to be mindful of the risk posed to international justice in seeming to allow fugitives the false hope that they could outrun or outlast the Tribunal.

A number of speakers supported the idea of national courts handling cases which involved low- to medium-level participants in genocide and war crimes, with some stressing that such courts must be strengthened and others offering to help revitalize those institutions.  Other speakers cautioned about overstating progress based on the numbers on trial, particularly when thousands of perpetrators were still at large and while hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children had been killed.

The transfer of cases from the Tribunal to national jurisdiction was envisaged as central to the objective of bringing the perpetrators to justice when the Rwanda Tribunal was set up a decade ago, Rwanda’s representative said.  But although the process of transfer had not yet begun, he was hopeful it would get underway very soon, pledging that his country was ready to facilitate wherever possible.  With respect to the concern expressed about the death penalty, he reiterated that such a sentence would not be exercised with respect to cases transferred from the Tribunal.

Rwanda, he continued, needed international support to train its investigators, lawyers and judges, as well as upgrade its court facilities and infrastructure, in order to handle trials professionally and efficiently.  And now, thanks to the international community, there was a detention facility in his country that met international standards.  Convicts could now serve sentences in Rwanda which would contribute to the process of reconciliation and healing, as well as the eradication of a culture of impunity.

Uganda’s representative said that, having seen the negative impact of insufficient staffing in the past, it was rather puzzling that there was a recruitment freeze for the Rwanda Tribunal.  The reason given was not adequate. Failure by States to pay their contributions to the Tribunal was not new and might even be caused by a genuine inability of the concerned countries to do so, especially those experiencing development challenges.  Holding the Tribunal to ransom on those grounds was, therefore, unacceptable.  The United Nations’ regular budget should meet the needs deficiency.  One could not overemphasize the necessity for the Tribunal to be provided with sufficient resources to allow it to complete its cases within the allotted timeframe.

In spite of progress in its cooperation with the Yugoslav Tribunal on the arrest and transfer of indictees and access to witnesses, documents and records, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s representative said many indicted war criminals had still not been apprehended, creating a major obstacle to inter-ethnic reconciliation. Clearly, failure to cooperate fully with the Tribunal was now the main obstacle to his country becoming a stable, peaceful and prosperous European democracy. Criminal files against 5,908 persons had been submitted to the Prosecutor’s office, but so far only 90 persons had come before the Court.  Thousands of perpetrators of serious war crimes had not even been charged.

Serbia and Montenegro’s representative informed the Assembly that a National Council to promote cooperation with the Yugoslav Tribunal had become fully operational in July.  That body was now effectively assisting in tracking down, interviewing and taking testimony from witnesses and suspects.  All requests for waivers on State secrets had been met, and 21 requests for documents had also been granted.  But the obstacles also, needed to be mentioned.  Some documents, for example, from 1991 to 1992 were unavailable due to negligence or misconduct by officials when criminal proceedings began, while documents stored in military and police facilities were destroyed in the 1999 air strikes by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) against the region.

The representatives of the Netherlands (on behalf of the European Union), Croatia, Malaysia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Nigeria, Norway, United States and the United Republic of Tanzania also made statements this morning.

The Assembly will meet again at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 16 November, to hold a joint debate on matters related to oceans and the law of the sea.

Background

The General Assembly met this morning to consider the annual reports of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.

Before the Assembly is a note by the Secretary-General (document A/59/183) transmitting the ninth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 (ICTR), covering the period 1 July 2003 through 30 June 2004.

According to the report, the most recent version of the ICTR completion strategy was submitted to the Security Council on 30 April, and the Tribunal is on course to complete all trials by 2008, as required by Council resolution 1503 (2003).  It is estimated that, within that time frame, the Tribunal could complete trials involving between 65 and 70 persons, depending on the progress made in the present and future trials.  It is believed the ongoing trials will be completed during the period from 2005 to 2006.  However, there are 17 indictees and 16 suspects at large; fewer will be brought to Arusha, as some may never be found while others may be dead.

The report stresses the need for the assistance and cooperation of States in the arrest and transfer of those individuals.  To that end, the Prosecutor will concentrate on those individuals who are alleged to have been in positions of leadership and bear the gravest responsibility for the crimes committed.  Accused and suspects alleged to have been medium to low level participants in 1994 will be transferred to national jurisdictions, including Rwanda, for trial.  Five of the remaining 16 accused who are currently in detention and four of the 17 presently at large have been identified for such transfer.  For it to comply with the time frames established by resolution 1503, the Tribunal must be given sufficient resources.  Recruitment of new staff was recently frozen because certain Member States had failed to pay their contributions, a situation that needed to be resolved as soon as possible.

Also before the Assembly is a note by the Secretary-General (document A/59/215) transmitting the eleventh annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, covering the period 1 August 2003 to 31 July 2004.  The Tribunal pushed forward with its completion strategy, adopting internal reforms to ensure compliance with relevant Security Council resolutions.  It also continued its work in preparing the States in the region for the prosecution of war crimes cases.  The Tribunal has worked closely with the Office of the High Representative for the Implementation of the Peace Agreement for Bosnia and Herzegovina on the establishment of a special chamber for war crimes prosecutions in the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In furtherance of the Prosecutor’s commitment to complete the investigation of the remaining unindicted high-level targets, investigations have been streamlined and made even more focused than in the previous year to concentrate on the highest-level political and military leaders responsible for having committed the gravest crimes, the report stated.  As a result of the investigative work, six indictments, involving 15 accused, were confirmed.  As the transfer of cases to domestic jurisdictions also forms part of the Tribunal’s completion strategy, the Prosecutor and her staff have identified the cases that could possibly be transferred to these jurisdictions.  During the reporting period, nine accused surrendered voluntarily and one was arrested.  The failure to arrest high-level accused, such as Radovan Karadzić, Ratko Mladić and Ante Gotovina, continues to be a major source of concern for the Prosecutor.

For the biennium 2004-2005, the Secretary-General’s initial budget proposals of $262,283,100 represented a decrease of approximately $1 million, compared with the 2002-2003 budget.  In terms of staffing, the proposed budget contemplated a gradual reduction in posts in the Investigations Division resulting from the anticipated completion of all pre-indictment investigations by the end of 2004, in conformity with the completion strategy.  The Tribunal is currently assessing its ability to continue conducting a full schedule of trials with the increasing impact of the freeze, particularly in regard to posts directly linked to the judicial process.  Continued financial uncertainties may result in serious obstacles to achieving the completion schedule set by the Council.

Statements

ERIC MØSE, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, said that during the period under review, the Tribunal had delivered five judgements involving nine accused, while a further judgement had been delivered on 15 July.  That brought the total judgements rendered by the court since the first trial started in January 1997 to 17, involving 23 people.  The next judgement was expected in a couple of months.  Never before had the judicial output of the Tribunal been so high, he noted.  In 2003, the ICTR commenced four new trials involving a total of 10 accused.  In 2004, three new trials had begun involving six detainees.  Consequently, 25 people were currently on trial, including those accused whose trials commenced during the second mandate.  There was presently a docket of completed and ongoing cases involving 48 people.

He said multi-accused or joint cases were voluminous, complex and, by necessity, time consuming because both prosecution and defence had to call a large number of witnesses.  There had been significant progress in three of those trials, which represented a significant element in the implementation of the ICTR’s completion strategy.  Single-accused cases, on the other hand, were less complex and required less time.  Three cases, two of which were completed and one which would finish in early 2005, confirmed the Tribunal’s capacity to complete single-accused cases in less than a year.  To ensure maximum judicial output, it was important to find the right balance between the multi- and single-accused trials.  That required careful long-term planning, as the latter was normally slotted in when there were breaks in the multi-accused trials.  The ICTR was anxious to continue the steady progress of the multi-accused trials, as once they were completed there would only be single-accused cases left.

Based on the progress made during the last year, he was pleased to confirm that the Tribunal was on schedule to complete all trials by 2008, as mandated by the Security Council.  But even if the ICTR was on schedule it could only comply with the time frames established in Council resolutions if it was provided with sufficient resources.  Unfortunately, several Member States had failed to pay their contributions to both Tribunals.  As a result, recruitment of new staff had been frozen.  While that had not had any effect on the ICTR’s completion strategy, the situation was becoming critical.  Over 80 staff members had left his Tribunal since the freeze and the number of vacancies was increasing monthly.  Many of the vacant posts were directly linked to the Tribunal’s judicial production.  It was a paradox that indispensable financial contributions were not paid when the Tribunal was doing its utmost to complete its task.  The Tribunal must continue to receive sufficient resources to enable it to comply with the deadlines set by the Council.

Turning to other critical issues, he said there were about 17 indicted persons who were still at large and continued to evade justice –- some alleged to have been the architects of the events in Rwanda in 1994.  He called on those States where the accused were to intensify cooperation with the ICTR, and to facilitate the arrest and transfer of the accused to Arusha.  Member States should also remain receptive to discussions on the possible transfer of cases of indictees and suspects to their respective jurisdictions for trial.

THEODOR MERON, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), then briefed the Assembly on the court’s work over the past year, declaring, “Despite substantial obstacles, we are making tremendous strides”.  Since his last report, the Tribunal continued steady progress towards achieving its mission.  The Trial Chambers and the Appeals Chamber had continued to hear and dispose of record numbers of cases, and a number of reforms had been implemented to increase the efficiency and pace of the Tribunal’s proceedings. Consistent with the Council-mandated completion strategy, those initiatives –- both internal and external –- ensured that the Tribunal’s energies and resources were concentrated on senior leaders most responsible for crimes within its jurisdiction.

Nevertheless, he acknowledged that there was always room for improvement. The Tribunal was constantly seeking ways to increase the efficiency of its proceedings and to reduce costs without sacrificing the quality of its work.  The ICTY had redoubled its efforts to ensure that the States of the former Yugoslavia did all they could to arrest indicted individuals who remained at large.  It had been noteworthy that Serbia and Montenegro had delivered Ljubisa Beara, who had been indicted for atrocities in Srebrenica.  He noted growing alarm at the ICTY’s fiscal circumstances and the effect of that on its work.  Further, the number of indictees who remained at large was also troubling.  He eagerly invited the cooperation of all Member States, as the ICTY sought to bring to justice the perpetrators of the atrocities that had scarred the Balkans in the 1990’s and devastated hundreds of thousands of lives, and to contribute to reconciliation.

He then gave a detailed review of the panel’s work during the past year, noting that the Chambers had worked on 35 merits cases and five cases of contempt, all at various phases of the proceedings.  They had rendered 11 judgements, some on the merits and others concerning sentencing.  He mentioned the ICTY’s highest profile case –- the trial of Slobodan Milosevic –- that had proceeded even in the wake of the departure, and sadly the subsequent death of, Presiding Judge May.  In February, the Prosecution had rested its case, and the defence had opened its proceedings at the end of August.

He went on to highlight several of the important changes in the ICTY’s rules of procedure aimed at enhancing its efficiency, and noted as well that a Trial Chamber had been tasked to consider requests from the Prosecutor about the possibility of transferring cases to national courts in Serbia and Montenegro and Croatia.  He was pleased to report that another national jurisdiction –- Bosnia and Herzegovina -- was very close to being ready to accept transferred cases of lower and intermediate-level officials.

Overshadowing all that progress was the ICTY’s financial situation, he reiterated.  Resource shortfalls were beginning to “threaten the panel’s capacity to run on all cylinders”.  Although some Member States, including most recently the Russian Federation, had fulfilled their financial commitments to the Tribunal, far too many others had not met their obligations and their payments had fallen into arrears.  Outstanding contributions for 2004 and previous years had eaten up an unacceptably high percentage of the Tribunal’s budget.  As a result, the Secretary-General had, last May, imposed a hiring freezer on all posts to keep expenditures to a minimum.  But that freeze was beginning to have a devastating effect on the Tribunal.

Since May, some 100 staff – or approximately 10 per cent of the Tribunal’s work force -– had left, which, among other things, jeopardized efforts to execute its completion strategy.  The Tribunal was not only unable to hire new staff, but also to replace those that had left.  “And the perceived lack of support from the international community cannot help but influence staff moral and motivation,” he said, adding, “We are striving hard to do more with less, but we can only redistribute workloads for so long”.  Inevitably, the hiring freeze would cripple the Tribunal’s ability to operate efficiently and to fulfil its goals.  As an institution with only a limited mandate and an impermanent duration, the ICTY already faced difficulties in recruiting and retaining talented staff members. That intrinsic disadvantage, coupled with the hiring freeze, posed a serious threat to the panel’s completion goals.

Finally, he repeated his past call for each and every MemberState to do its full part to assist the work of the Tribunal.  Twenty-one fugitives remained at large and must be arrested, including Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic and Ante Gotovina.  In that regard, he urged the Assembly to be mindful of the risked posed to international justice in seeming to allow fugitives the false hope that they could outrun or outlast the Tribunal.  “With the end of the Tribunal’s lifecycle in sight, we must together guard against compromising the legacy of justice and reconciliation in the former Yugoslavia,” he said.

ARJAN HAMBURGER (Netherlands), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, said both Tribunals had made valuable contributions towards reconciliation and the maintenance of peace and security.  The European Union welcomed developments and improvements achieved during the past year.  In the period under review, the ICTR delivered five trial judgements involving nine accused.  By the end of 2004, a total of 25 persons would be on trial, bringing the total number of accused, whose trials have been completed or were in the process, to 48.  Furthermore, he noted that the three Trial Chambers of the ICTY had examined six trials on the merits, two cases of contempt, and rendered two judgements on the merits and nine sentencing judgements arising from nine guilty pleas.

He welcomed the commitment of both Presidents of the Tribunals to the completion strategy, as well as the reforms of the structure and operation of the Tribunals during the reporting period.  The Tribunals should make every effort to respect deadlines stipulated by Security Council resolutions.  Sufficient resources, cooperation, assistance and support of Member States were essential to the work of the Tribunals.  States should cooperate with regard to requests for access to archives and documents, secure the appearance in Court of prosecution witnesses, and assist in the arrest and transfer of people who had been indicted but were still-at-large.  The European Union was particularly concerned by the impact that the non-payment of assessments by Member States had on the work of the Tribunals, and welcomed efforts made by both Tribunals to transfer cases to domestic jurisdictions.

VLADIMIR DROBNJAK (Croatia) said the successful implementation of the completion strategy remained at the forefront of his nation’s approach towards the ICTY.  The fulfilment of that strategy within the 2004, 2008 and 2010 benchmarks remained Croatia’s priority.  Respecting such benchmarks was a question of effective administration of justice and added to confidence building and the stabilization process in the region.  The referral of cases to competent national jurisdictions for trial remained one of the pillars of the completion strategy. Croatian judges and prosecutors stood ready for that serious task, and had already demonstrated –- in several cases -- their high professional standards.  He thanked the Tribunal and its experts for the technical and counselling assistance provided to Croatia’s judiciary.

The area of the former Yugoslavia was turning into a zone of peace and stability, he said.  While the past was not forgotten it was the future that guided and inspired.  It was against the background of new regional stability that the work of the ICTY must be evaluated and that its remaining tasks be completed. Croatia believed, however, that certain interpretations by the Prosecutor regarding the historical background and the political genesis of the conflict in former Yugoslavia appeared not to be fully in line with the General Assembly resolution on the occupied territories of Croatia.  Nevertheless, that would not impede on Croatia’s readiness to cooperate fully with the ICTY.

RADZI RAHMAN (Malaysia) said the Tribunals had contributed to promoting justice over atrocities and to progressive development of international case law, both in the general and humanitarian categories, not just in matters of procedure and competence but also with regard to substantive issues of greater importance.  They had contributed to the field of post-conflict justice and furthered international criminal jurisprudence on matters such as individual responsibility and exercise of jurisdiction over crimes committed during internal conflicts.  The present focus of both Tribunals on completing their work by 2010 as the Security Council had laid out was welcome, as were the substantial structural changes to facilitate the process.

On the Yugoslav Tribunal, he said the most notable reform was the amendment of the rules to allow transfer of cases involving intermediate and lower-level accused to national courts.  A durable legacy would be the strengthening of the criminal justice system in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  And while the Tribunal had made every effort to be more efficient and expeditious, the reluctant cooperation of States in the region had remained a big challenge, particularly in regard to turning over suspects.  Only Croatia had made progress in arresting and transferring indictees.  The countries concerned must meet the Tribunal’s call for cooperation.

TOSHIRO OZAWA (Japan) said continuity of work must be made a priority for the ICTY with regard to the new permanent judges about to be elected, the ad item judges and scheduling to meeting the completion strategies the Security Council had mapped out.  The Tribunal had been established so as to bring to justice those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law.  It was of concern that key figures were yet to be arrested.  Countries concerned must cooperate and provide support not only in the arrest process but in facilitating access to witnesses, archives and other crucial evidence.

With regard to the Rwanda Tribunal, he said improvements in communications between the Prosecutor and the Government were welcome.  More regular and substantive talks were being held on the transfer of cases to the national court.  Local people had been drawn into the judicial process, which allowed them to achieve justice while also maintaining ownership.  However, he said one lesson had emerged from both Tribunals:  Member States could not fund the expenses for the pursuit of justice unlimitedly.  Both Tribunals must maximize efforts to address the issue of the current gap between cost and the number of cases processed.  The operation and cost of the Tribunals should be phased down according to the completion strategies set out.

SHIN KAK-SOO (Republic of Korea) said the two Tribunals had provided valuable lessons for the International Criminal Court and for the other special courts.  A seamless web of transnational justice must be built to embrace both international and domestic jurisdictions together, so as to prevent any impunity gap.  A consulting mechanism should also be established among the various judicial bodies to share experience and information.  Also, fragmentation of international jurisprudence must be addressed now.

He said an important lesson of the Tribunals was the wisdom of mapping out a division of work between international and domestic jurisdictions early in the trials, with international criminal courts concentrating on the most important cases.  Assistance must be provided to domestic courts to enable transparency in judicial functions and neighbouring States must cooperate in bringing the accused to justice.  The practice of negotiating guilty pleas, as introduced in 2002, was helpful in economizing costs.  However, the Tribunals must strike a delicate balance between preserving a sense of justice, for victims and the international community, and delivering justice in a cost-efficient way.  States must exercise jurisdiction over cases to maintain visibility of justice and engage in outreach activities, both on their own and in cooperation with the Tribunals.

ZORAN LONCAR (Serbia and Montenegro) said national elections had caused technical delays in his country’s cooperation with the Yugoslav Tribunal but a National Council to promote that cooperation had become fully operational in July.  As a result, the country was providing effective assistance in tracking down, interviewing and taking testimony from witnesses and suspects.  All requests for waivers on state secrets mentioned in the report had been met.  Twenty-one requests for documents had also been granted since the National Council was constituted.

The obstacles encountered in fulfilling requests for documents needed mention, he said.  Some documents from 1991 and 1992 were unavailable.  When due to negligence or misconduct of officials, criminal proceedings were instituted. Documents stored in military and police facilities were destroyed in the 1999 air strikes by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) against the region.  Some requests needed clarification.  Overall, however, the pace of providing documentation had improved in recent months.  Recent high-level meetings had also improved cooperation between the region and the Tribunal.

He said the essential precondition for meeting the Security Council’s strategy for the Tribunal was the existence and ability of domestic jurisdictions to try the referred cases and meeting international legal standards in the proceedings.  A number of cases were now being tried in the War Crimes Panel of the Belgrade District Court in consultation with the Tribunal.  A new law had been drafted and sent to Parliament regulating witness protection and recognition of evidence.  His country was willing and prepared to prosecute referred cases in its own courts.  Capacity could be improved with further training opportunities for judges and prosecutors, and with experts’ assistance in amending domestic criminal legislation in line with Tribunal standards.

MIRZA KUSLJUGIC (Bosnia and Herzegovina) underlined the role of the Tribunal in individualization of war crimes as a precondition for sustainable inter-ethnic reconciliation.  Those who had pleaded guilty, and expressed remorse to the victims of crimes, represented a milestone in the reconciliation process.  The increase of guilty pleas had particular significance to the hundreds of thousands of war victims.  Bosnia and Herzegovina was determined to meet its obligations regarding cooperation with the ICTY.  Its record in respect to the arrest and transfer of those who had been indicted but were still-at-large, requests for documents and access to archives and the availability of witnesses had improved in the past year.  In spite of its cooperation with the Tribunal, many of the indicted war criminals had not been apprehended, which created a major obstacle to inter-ethnic reconciliation.  It was clear that the failure to cooperate fully with the ICTY was now the main obstacle to Bosnia and Herzegovina becoming a stable, peaceful and prosperous European democracy.

He went on to say that criminal files against some 5,908 persons had been submitted to the Prosecutor’s office for review, but only some 90 persons had been brought before the courts.  Therefore, thousands of perpetrators of serious war crimes committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina had not even been charged.  Turning to its exit strategy, the ICTY intended to transfer to the domestic courts dossiers of unfinished investigations and investigative materials.  It would then be up to the domestic judicial and prosecutorial authorities to act on those cases.  That would begin next year and would represent a serious test for the maturity of the domestic courts.  That was an important step in the building of institutions of justice, which would contribute to the progress towards the creation of a society based on the rule of law and respect for human rights.  In that respect, it was important to complete staffing and budgeting for the Special Chamber for War Crimes of the State Court.

Furthermore, he welcomed ICTY-Office of the High Representative cooperation in the process of establishment of Special Chamber for War Crimes Prosecutions in the State Court and called upon Member States to provide necessary technical and financial support.  He also supported the work of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) missions in the region to promote rule of law.

WEGGER C. STRØMMEN (Norway) said that while the two Tribunals had played a crucial role in advancing the cause of justice in both Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia, the panels had also had a broader significance:  they represented effective systems of international criminal law and left a legacy of international jurisprudence that could guide other courts, including the International Criminal Court (ICC), and deter the commission of crimes against humanity.  In addition, the Tribunals contributed to the development of international criminal justice and the fight against impunity for mass atrocities in general.  He went on to commend both Tribunals’ efforts to achieve the Security Council mandated completion strategies, and applauded enhanced cooperation between the Tribunals and the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the ICC.

But he joined others in expressing concern about the Tribunals’ financial situations, noting that some 60 per cent of Member States were behind in their payments.  He was deeply worried that that might affect the Tribunals’ completion strategy deadlines.  The resultant hiring freeze had prevented both courts from replacing essential personnel, and Norway therefore appealed to all States to honour their commitments and to pay their assessed contributions as soon as possible.  For its part, Norway had been pleased to finance the construction of a fourth courtroom at the ICTR, which would further enhance its trial capacity. Norway also welcomed the Security Council’s adoption last March of a resolution reaffirming the need to intensify efforts to arrest and transfer fugitives indicted by both the ICTY and the ICTR.

Unless the highest-ranking indictees were brought to justice, the Tribunals’ main mission would not be fulfilled, he said.  Norway applauded the improved cooperation of the Croatian Government during the period under review, and expected that to continue in order to ensure that General Ante Gotovina was brought to the Hague-based ICTY.  Norway would call on all States to honour their international obligation to cooperate with regard to requests for access to archives and documents, surrendering indictees, providing full and effective assistance with regard to witness, giving financial and material support, and not least, in providing practical assistance in the enforcement of sentences.  Norway had expressed its willingness to consider applications from the ICTY concerning the enforcement of sentences and, in conformity with international law, to receive a limited number of convicted persons to serve their sentences in Norway.

SUSAN MOORE (United States) appreciated the work of both Tribunals in bringing to justice those most responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law.  With regard to the ICTY, the international community must work together to ensure success of the Security Council-endorsed completion strategy that sought to conclude investigations by the end of 2004, trials by 2008 and all work by 2010.  However, to fulfil that programme, Serbia and Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia must fulfil their legal obligations to cooperate fully with the ICTY.  Such cooperation included the apprehension of all fugitive indictees and their transfer to The Hague.  In that regard, he noted that the Republika Srpska had failed to render a single fugitive indictee to the Tribunal and Serbia and Montenegro’s cooperation had deteriorated to a standstill in the past year.

She went on to say that Serbia and Montenegro’s lack of cooperation with the ICTY also undermined the confidence of the international community that it was willing and able to prosecute fairly and effectively perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity.  Until Serbia met its cooperation obligations, her nation did not see domestic trials of ICTY indictees as a realistic option.  She called on all authorities in Serbia, especially the Prime Minister as head of the Government, to act immediately to apprehend and render to The Hague all fugitives hiding in the country.  The United States supported efforts to help create the capacity for credible domestic trials of low and mid-level cases throughout the region, and noted the significant work being done in Sarajevo in that regard.  The United States had completed the transfer of all of its assessed contributions for the ICTY to the United Nations.  With regard to the ICTR, she commended the increased pace of trials there under the leadership of its President.

FELIX AWANBOR (Nigeria) said that with the establishment of both the United Nations Tribunals, the international community had resolved to stop the perpetuation of genocide and other heinous crimes against humanity.  Nigeria was pleased to note that the cooperation between both the ICTY and the ICTR had expanded to include the Special Court for Sierra Leone, as well as the ICC.  The exchange of experiences and the initiation of joint activities between the bodies had greatly contributed to the strengthening of international criminal justice, he added, saying that the work of the Rwanda Tribunal had made a significant contribution to the enrichment of international jurisprudence and the rejection of impunity.  The ICTR’s decisions were already creating a solid body of case law, which was being acknowledged by many courts around the world, as well as the ICTY.

Concerning the ICTR’s completion strategy, Nigeria was gratified that the panel was on schedule to wrap up its work by the Council-mandated 2008, and would call for the cooperation of all States to facilitate the arrest and transfer of the 17 indictees and 16 suspects who remained at large.  To that end, he called for the strengthening of national legal systems in the effort to ensure the smooth transfer of identified individuals to national jurisdictions for trial.  As for the ICTY, Nigeria noted that panel’s internal reforms, which had been geared toward the timely completion of its work.  It was also noteworthy that the Tribunal was continuing to prepare States in the region to be ready to prosecute war crimes cases.  He stressed that both Tribunals needed sustained international support, particularly adequate financial resources, which would allow them to complete their work on time.

ANDY MWANDEMBWA (United Republic of Tanzania) commended the work of the Rwanda Tribunal during the period under review and welcomed the most recent version of its completion plan.  Hoping that the Tribunal would get the much needed resources to facilitate the implementation of that plan, he called on Member States to pay their contributions to facilitate its work.  He also commended Prosecutor Hassan Bubacar Jallow for his efforts to increase the number of prosecutions and conduct speedy trials.  Also under his leadership, the tracking team had been revamped and greater cooperation had been sought from countries in which some of the fugitives were known to be located.  As host country, Tanzania had closely worked with the Tribunal.

Now that the Tribunal was working towards completion of its work by 2008, he invited the United Nations and the international community to use the facility after completion of the ICTR’s work.  Much had been invested in putting up that infrastructure and it was only reasonable to start thinking on how best to re-employ the facility to better use for the benefit of the international community.

STANISLAS KAMANZI (Rwanda) recognized the commendable work done by the Rwanda Tribunal so far.  Nevertheless, when the Tribunal was established 10 years ago, the country had hoped that by now more progress would have been achieved.  He noted that originally the Office of the Prosecutor had identified in excess of 300 “big fish” for prosecution before the Tribunal completed its work.  Today, the Tribunal’s completion target was significantly more modest.  If it apprehended and put on trial the suspects still at large, and completed the trials of the suspects still awaiting trial and those whose trials were still in progress or waiting appeal, the Tribunal would have completed the trials of 77 individuals when it concluded its work.

He recalled that the transfer of cases from the Tribunal to Rwandan jurisdiction was envisaged as central to the objective of bringing the perpetrators to justice when the ICTR was set up a decade ago.  Although the process of transfer of cases had not yet begun, he was hopeful it would get underway very soon, pledging that Rwanda stood ready to facilitate the process wherever possible.  With respect to the concern expressed about the death penalty, he reiterated that the death penalty would not be exercised with respect to cases transferred from the ICTR.

He also noted that Rwanda required the international community’s support in training its investigators, lawyers and judges, as well as upgrading its court facilities and infrastructure, in order to handle those trials with the highest level of professionalism and efficiency.  He was thankful for the international community’s support in enabling the country to construct a detention facility that met international standards.  He expected that convicts would now serve sentences in Rwanda as a result, and believed that that would contribute to the process of reconciliation and healing, as well as the eradication of a culture of impunity.

He was also concerned that late payment or non-payment of assessed contributions by Member States to the Tribunal had resulted in serious financial difficulties, which had led to recruitment freezes and a slow-down in its work. That slow-down came at a time when the Tribunal was expected to work steadily towards implementation of its completion strategy.  It was imperative that Member States made their contributions on time, in full and without conditions, if the goals outlined in the completion strategy were to be realized.  He noted that many of the survivors of the 1994 genocide lived in conditions of enormous hardship.  Most of them, particularly the orphans, widows and victims of sexual violence, were poorer and more vulnerable today than they were ten years ago.  The Assembly should note the plight of thousands of women who contracted HIV/AIDS as a result of being raped during the genocide, he added.

ROSSETTE NYIRINKINDI KATUNGYE (Uganda) said that last year the Security Council heard how the ICTR had been plagued by insufficient funding and inadequate staff while trials were unduly delayed -- the latter causing consternation to victims and their families, as well as the international community.  Having seen the negative impact insufficient staffing had caused in the past, it was rather puzzling that the Comptroller had proceeded to freeze the recruitment of new staff in the period under review.  The reason given was not adequate.  Failure by Member States to pay their contributions to the Tribunal was not new and might even be caused by a genuine inability of the concerned countries to do so, especially those experiencing development challenges.  Holding the Tribunal to ransom on those grounds was unacceptable.  The United Nations’ regular budget should meet the needs deficiency.  One could not overemphasize the necessity for the ICTR to be provided with sufficient resources to allow it to complete its cases within the allotted timeframe.

The ICTR’s report talked of eight defence counsels being withdrawn “for reasons constituting exceptional circumstances”, she noted.  Perhaps in the spirit of transparency, and to help draw important lessons, it might have been useful for the report to have elaborated on that further.  Addressing progress, she said that while positive advances had to be lauded, “we need to caution that the figure of 48 accused persons being subjected to trials may appear insignificant in a situation where hundreds of thousands of innocent men, women and children were brazenly killed”.  She urged all States that were required to do so, to arrest and transfer all indictees and suspects still at large.  Further, the Prosecutor for the ICTR needed to be facilitated to transfer the individuals in national jurisdictions identified by him for trial.

The Government and people of Rwanda had demonstrated through the “Gacaca” legal system that they were capable of handling some of the perpetrators of genocide within their national jurisdiction, she noted.  Therefore, she urged that the Government of Rwanda be facilitated where necessary to strengthen its country’s judicial system.  Both the ICTR and ICTY, together with the ICC and the Special Court for Sierra Leone, were evidence that the international community was determined to bring to justice the perpetrators of genocide, war crimes and grave crimes against humanity.  “Prevention, however, is better than cure and we have to put in place early warning systems that alert the world on events that lead to such crimes taking place.  We can no longer afford to sit on the fence in the wake of genocide or other such grave crimes”, she said.

* *** *