OPENING CURRENT SESSION, SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON UN CHARTER CONSIDERS IMPACT OF SANCTIONS ON THIRD STATES
| Press Release L/3060 |
Committee on Charter
and United Nations Role
245th Meeting (AM)
OPENING CURRENT SESSION, SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON UN CHARTER
CONSIDERS IMPACT OF SANCTIONS ON THIRD STATES
Opening its 2004 session today, the United Nations Charter Committee began discussions on its two priority issues, namely, enhancing its efficiency and implementing the Charter provisions related to assistance to third States affected by sanctions.
Also this morning, the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization, whose session will conclude on 8 April, agreed on its Bureau and programme of work. The Committee was established in 1974 to examine proposals to enhance the Charter, strengthen the Organization’s role in maintaining peace and security, develop cooperation among nations, and promote the rules of international law.
Expressing hope for constructive consideration of his revised working paper on sanctions, the representative of the Russian Federation said that its adoption by the General Assembly as a declaration would be useful for the Security Council’s work in that area. Creation of a working group of the Assembly’s Sixth Committee (Legal) on the problem of assistance to third States would also contribute to progress on the subject.
As a third State that had suffered considerably from the consequences of sanctions, Turkey attached utmost importance to implementation of the Charter provisions related to assistance to such affected States, its representative asserted. She expected that the deliberations within the relevant United Nations bodies would be concluded without further delay, and that a functional mechanism would be established with respect to such assistance. The main findings of the Ad Hoc Expert Group, convened in 1998 to consider a methodology for assessing the consequences incurred by third States as a result of such measures, provided a sound basis for attaining concrete results.
Since the Committee’s purpose was to strengthen the role of the United Nations, strengthening the Committee itself would serve that purpose, Japan’s speaker said. For years, Japan had strongly advocated a review of the Committee’s working methods and had proposed a set of concrete measures to increase its efficiency. Together with the co-sponsors, he had submitted a further revised working paper this year, aimed at engaging the Committee in more detailed discussions on each topic over a period of several years, rather than discussing topics each year for a limited duration without results.
In other business, the Special Committee elected Carl Peersman (Netherlands) as Chairman. Elected to the post of Vice-Chairmen were: Zlatko Dimitrov (Bulgaria), Rolando Ruiz-Rosas (Peru), and Mohammed Haj Ibrahim (Syria). Sabri Chaabani (Tunisia) was elected as Rapporteur.
The Special Committee also adopted its programme of work. Several meetings of the working group were planned on the question of the maintenance of international peace and security, including the impact and application of sanctions and the fundamentals of peacekeeping operations. The group would also discuss ways and means of improving the Committee’s working methods. Another plenary was scheduled for 8 April to adopt the Committee’s report.
Statements were also made by the representatives of China, Ireland (on behalf of the European Union), Brazil (on behalf of the Rio Group), Libya, Guatemala, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and Syria.
The Special Committee will meet again at a date and time to be announced in The Journal.
Background
The Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization met this morning to open its 2004 session, elect its Bureau and adopt a programme of work.
The General Assembly, in resolution 58/248, gave priority to two issues for the Special Committee’s consideration this year, namely: implementation of the Charter provisions related to assistance to third States affected by sanctions; and ways and means of improving the working methods of the Committee and enhancing its efficiency.
Among the documents before the Special Committee is its report to the fifty-eighth General Assembly session (document A/58/33), as well as two revised working papers. The first, submitted by Japan, concerns the working methods of the Committee (document A/AC.182/L.108/Rev.3). The second, submitted by the Russian Federation, is on the declaration on the basic conditions and standard criteria for the introduction and implementation of sanctions and other coercive measures (document A/AC.182/L.114/Rev.1).
The revised paper on working methods was submitted in response to paragraph 3(e) of General Assembly resolution 58/248 of 23 December 2003. The paper sets out the procedure for delegations’ submission of any new proposals. And, it underscores the Special Committee’s determination to: ensure that the meeting is conducted as efficiently as possible and that priority is accorded to the consideration of those areas on which general agreement is possible; to consider, where appropriate, the question of the duration of its next session, with a view to making an appropriate recommendation to the General Assembly; and to review, as and when necessary, other ways and means of improving its working methods and enhancing its efficiency, including ways and means of improving the procedure for the adoption of its report.
The revised working paper on the sanctions declaration, which reproduces that text in its annex, would have the General Assembly, considering that the adoption of the Declaration would contribute towards strengthening the role of the United Nations and enhancing its effectiveness in maintaining peace and security, approve the document and express its appreciation to the Special Committee for its important contribution in elaborating it. The Assembly would ask the Secretary-General to inform the governments of United Nations Member States, members of specialized agencies, and the Security Council of the adoption of the declaration. Further, the Assembly would urge that every effort be made to ensure that the declaration became generally known and fully implemented.
(The declaration is in two parts and contains 25 operative paragraphs. Part I would have the Assembly approve numerous provisions and principles, including that the application of sanctions is an “extreme” measure and is permitted only after all peaceful means of settling disputes or conflict and of maintaining or restoring international peace and security have been exhausted. Among the text’s other terms, sanctions must: be introduced in strict conformity with the provisions of the Charter and the rules of international law, pursue clear and precise objectives, have a time frame, be subject to regular review, and provide for clearly stipulated conditions for lifting them, which must not be linked to the situation in neighbouring and other third countries.
A further term of the declaration states that, before the introduction of sanctions, the target State or party must, as a rule, be given unambiguous notice. The purpose of sanctions, the text states, is to modify the behaviour of the target party that is threatening international peace and security, and not to punish or otherwise exact retribution. Also, the creation of a situation in which the consequences of the introduction of sanctions would inflict considerable material and financial harm on third States or in which an innocent civilian population or neighbouring countries would experience adverse consequences of international coercive measures is not permissible. The Secretariat must make an objective assessment of the consequences of sanctions for the target State and for third States, as far as possible, prior to their introduction.
ZHANG YISHAN (China) said the question of assistance to third States affected by sanctions had remained one of the priority issues under the Committee’s review. The imposition of sanctions, as a method to deal with threats to international peace and security, was by no means a normal approach in the settlement of international disputes. Given their impact and scope, sanctions could have negative consequences for third States. Caution was needed, therefore, in making sanction decisions. Sanctions should be applied only after all peaceful means had been exhausted in the settlement of disputes. Strict sanction criteria, which were consistent with the United Nations Charter and other norms of international law, must be followed. Efforts must be stepped up to devise a set of measures to assess the impact that preventive measures or implementation of sanction measures had on third States and to explore practical ways to provide international assistance to those States, including setting up a fund or a permanent consultative mechanism. Under the current circumstances, multi-channel financial arrangements or economic assistance should be used to minimize the loss incurred by third States.
On the question of United Nations peacekeeping operations, he said the Chinese delegation agreed with the gist of the paper submitted by the Russian delegation. The fact that the question of peacekeeping operations was dealt with by other United Nations organs did not preclude its consideration by the Committee. United Nations peacekeeping operations were an important means developed over many years of United Nations practice for the maintenance of international peace and security.
Regarding the question of enhancing the Special Committee’s efficiency and improving its working methods, China believed that, so long as all the parties demonstrated political will and made joint efforts, the Special Committee could play its expected role. On the current status and the future of the Trusteeship council, his delegation’s position remained unchanged. The question of abolition or change of functions should be seriously dealt with and studied within the overall framework of the strengthening of the United Nations role and reforms.
PETER BARCROFT (Ireland), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, said that the Union, while reiterating its view that mandatory sanctions could be an effective mechanism against a State, entity or group of individuals that threatened international peace and security, recalled the impact of sanctions on civilian population and third countries. The Council’s continuing recourse to targeted sanctions was welcomed, therefore, as it preserved the effectiveness of sanctions while minimizing unintended negative consequences. The Union encouraged the Council to continue to refine its sanctions regime to avoid any undesirable consequences.
The Union strongly continued to hold the view that the Special Committee should avoid duplicating the work of other United Nations bodies, he added. Discussions in the Special Committee could better focus on fewer topics, and relevant proposals should be submitted well in advance to allow for thorough reflection. The Union strongly supported the practical recommendations submitted by Japan in its revised working paper on the Committee’s working methods.
At a time when the Assembly was intensively engaged in a comprehensive revitalization review, it seemed peculiar that the Special Committee had by and large refrained from embarking on a similar path, he said. The Committee’s future relevancy was not aided by a tenacious reluctance to introduce badly needed reform in its working methods. The apparent refusal by some to recognize that self-evident fact reflected poorly on the Special Committee and all those who participated in its proceedings.
HIROSHI TAJIMA (Japan) said that the Assembly, in its resolution 58/248, had given priority to two issues, namely the 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. Regarding sanctions, the Assembly had requested the Committee to consider the question on a priority basis by commencing a substantive debate. While he favoured such a discussion, the Committee should pay attention to discussions taking place in other forums, such as the Security Council’s Working Group on sanctions. Regarding the revised working paper submitted by the Russian Federation, the Committee should give careful consideration to both the content and form of the paper with reference to the discussion in other United Nations bodies.
As the Committee’s purpose was to strengthen the role of the United Nations, strengthening the Committee itself would serve that purpose, he said. It was critical that the Committee’s working methods be improved and its efficiency enhanced. During the last four years, Japan had strongly advocated a review of the Committee’s working methods and had proposed a set of concrete measures to increase its efficiency. In the session, Japan, together with other co-sponsors, namely the Republic of Korea, Thailand and Uganda, had submitted a further revised working paper, which took into account the views expressed in last year’s session. The proposed new amendments to the text, while maintaining the substantive aim and strategies for improving the Committee’s working methods, incorporated the suggestions made during the previous session.
He said it was not his intention to discourage Member States from submitting new proposals or to attempt to curtail the right of equal sovereignty of States. His delegation had proposed ideas that would enable the Committee to make its working methods more efficient and effective. Japan regarded its proposal as a means for engaging in more detailed discussions on each topic over a period of several years rather than discussing for a limited time every topic each year without producing any results. He hoped Member States would have a better understanding of the newly revised working paper and would respond by engaging in constructive discussion.
SIDNEY LEON ROMEIRO (Brazil), speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, said the Group in the past had emphasized the importance of the timely presentation of proposals so that delegations would have enough time to analyse them. He also stressed the need for the Committee to establish priorities, to avoid the duplication of work and to prepare a short- and medium-term work programme. The Repertory of the Practice of United Nations Organs was an important source of information on the implementation of the Charter. Among other things, the Repertory provided a recording of the progressive development of the norms and principles of international law. The Group supported its publication, which could only be useful when it was fully up to date.
Recalling that Assembly resolution 58/248 had reiterated the need to eliminate delays in its publication, he noted that in light of budgetary limitations, the Secretary-General had been asked to explore options to address the backlog in the Repertory’s publication. A suggestion had been made to create a trust fund financed through voluntary contributions to ensure the Repertory’s timely publication. The Group supported that proposal, as it would help to rationalize the treatment of subjects common to the most important organs of the United Nations. The Repertory referred to the interpretation of the Charter’s articles by all of the United Nations organs, including the Security Council, while the Council Repertory referred exclusively to the implementation of its regulations.
DMITRY LOBACH (Russian Federation) said his delegation attached great significance to the Special Committee’s work, which was becoming ever more timely and topical as the world encountered global threats. The United Nations should continue to play a primary role in ensuring international peace and security and remain the major forum for the resolution of all current problems based on universally acknowledged norms of international law. One the priority issues before the Special Committee was the issue of sanctions. The Russian Federation had submitted a revised working document on the criteria for introducing sanctions that took into account the majority of remarks by delegations in previous sessions. He hoped for constructive consideration of the document. The adoption by the Assembly of the document in the form of a declaration would be useful for the Council’s work in the area of sanctions. The creation of a working group of the Assembly’s Sixth Committee on the problem of assistance to third States would also contribute to progress on the issue.
Another timely subject on the Committee’s agenda was the question of fundamentals of the legal basis for United Nations peacekeeping operations in the context of Chapter VI of the Charter, he said. The basic premise of the Russian document was improving United Nations peacekeeping operations in light of existing problems encountered by the Organization in the area of peacekeeping. The Special Committee might consider the question of transmitting the working paper submitted by the Russian Federation as a so-called legal manual to the Special Committee on Peacekeeping Operations.
On improving the Committee’s working methods, he said the proposals submitted by Japan were constructive. It was important to continue the discussion on improving the Committee’s working methods. He wanted to see its work preserved in its current format and was against any reduction in the periodicity of its meeting times. He welcomed work to reduce the backlog in the publication of the Repertory of the Practice of United Nations Organs. The 2004-2005 budget had not earmarked funds for the publication of the manual. The Fifth Committee could continue the possibility of alternative financing for its publication. He emphasized the importance of the work of the Trusteeship Council, noting that his delegation would not support its elimination.
GÖKÇEN TUĞRAL (Turkey) said her country, as a third State that had suffered considerably from the consequences of sanctions, attached utmost importance to implementation of the Charter provisions related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions. Turkey expected that the deliberations within the relevant United Nations bodies would be concluded without further delay, and that a functional mechanism would be established with respect to such assistance. The main findings of the Ad Hoc Expert Group, which had been convened in June 1998 to consider a methodology for assessing the consequences incurred by third States as a result of such measures, provided a sound basis for attaining concrete results.
Noting that more than five years after the publication of the Ad Hoc Expert Group report, she said that the issue, despites its “serious and urgent” nature, had still not be systematically elaborated in the Special Committee. The Group’s findings awaited overall consideration. Several views had already been expressed, and practical ideas had been presented about how to tackle the hardships shouldered by third States in that regard. The relief measures included according commercial exemptions or concessions to the third States most affected, directly consulting with those States, establishing a fund for that purpose, and giving priority to the contractors of affected third States for the investments in the target State. An in-depth discussion of the matter would add more and allow for their effective application.
In that connection, she underlined the responsibility of the Security Council to “act without delay” in reply to the applications of States under Article 50 of the Charter and to tackle the hardships incurred by third States. She noted that the revised working paper on the declaration on sanctions, submitted by the Russian Federation, referred to the non-permissibility of the situation in which the consequences of the introduction of sanctions would inflict considerable material and financial harm on third States.
On the Committee’s working methods, she said that body could be utilized more efficiently, including by starting the meetings on time and better utilizing conference services. Also, the duration of the session should be determined by the importance of the work it conducted.
AHMED A.S. ELMESSALLATI (Libya) said the Special Committee’s report last year contained information on a large number of working papers before the Committee. Libya had presented two working papers, the first in 1988 in the framework of the strengthening the United Nations in the area of international peace and security. While he would not delve into the details of the two proposals, he renewed his gratitude to delegations that had supported the proposals and urged the Special Committee to work to distill the important elements contained in them. He also called for a review of the United Nations sanctions regime to take into account the basic principles contained in the paper tabled by Libya. Discussions concerning the sanctions question had clarified the importance of having the Security Council impose sanctions under the provisions of the Charter and international law. Sanctions should be an exceptional measure, applied only after all peaceful measures had been exhausted. He was pleased with the trend of many Member States to accept those principles.
He said his delegation also supported the two working papers tabled by Cuba in the 1997 and 1998 sessions. Libya also supported the paper presented by the Russian Federation concerning the basic principles for the imposition of sanctions, which complemented Libya’s proposals. He supported the draft declaration annexed to the Russian document, and was pleased that the majority of elements of the declaration were in consonance with Libya’s paper. He also supported the proposals of Belarus and the Russian Federation for an advisory opinion by the International Court of Justice and supported the working paper tabled by Sierra Leone and the United Kingdom concerning the settlement of disputes by peaceful means.
Turning to the question of the peaceful settlement of disputes, ROBERTO LAVALLE-VALDÉS (Guatemala) said that the relevant working group in 2003 had left that subject aside and had dedicated only some sporadic remarks to it in the general debate. When it was time to broach that subject, no one had taken the floor. For some years, the General Assembly had been asking the Special Committee to devote time to States affected by sanctions. Thus, that had been the subject on which the latest progress had been made, and the Committee had at least nine achievements in that regard, including three recommendations to the Assembly, which had been adopted without amendments. A very useful initiative of the Special Committee had been the publication of the manual on the peaceful settlement of disputes in 1993.
As a whole, he said, the results of the work of the Special Committee in the area of the peaceful settlement of disputes had been “impressive and valuable”. Last year, in resolution 53/337 entitled “Prevention of armed conflicts”, the General Assembly had called on States to employ new procedures and methods to solve disputes. Meanwhile, he had serious doubts about the ability of the Special Committee to achieve consensus decisions. It might, however, find a niche for some progress, including perhaps in the field of arbitration.
KIM CHANG GUK (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said the principle of respect for national sovereignty was being trampled upon in international relations. The standards of justice and injustice, good and evil, were being rampantly set by the strong. The present international situation required the further strengthening of the role of the United Nations. Enhancing the role of the United Nations, which was a prerequisite for rejecting unilateralism, necessitated giving more priority to the General Assembly and reforming the Security Council. Empowering the General Assembly would prevent unilateralism, and reforming the Security Council would ensure that developing countries were adequately represented.
Due to the highhandedness of the United States, the United Nations command had been fabricated more than 50 years ago, he said. The United States had prevented his country from attending meetings related to the United Nations command, in violation of the Charter, according to which any Member of the United Nations that was a party to a dispute could participate in the meetings of the Council related to the dispute. The United Nations command was an illegal organ, a de facto United States military command that served only as a tool of aggression for the strategic purposes of the United States. The United Nations should no longer remain indifferent to the illegal United Nations command and take follow-up action on the General Assembly resolution calling for its dissolution.
MOHAMMED HAJ IBRAHIM (Syria) expressed his concern over the imposition of sanctions, which had been more frequent than ever before and had also involved the use of force without the consent of the Security Council. That was a dangerous precedent in international relations. The imposition of sanctions by the parliament of one country over another was an extremely dangerous practice. Sanctions could be resorted under Chapter VII of the charter, only in specific cases, such as the flagrant violation of international law and threats to international peace and security, and only after the means outlined in Chapter VI of the Charter had been exhausted. The effects of sanctions on third States must also be considered.
He stressed that the Security Council must be fair when it imposed sanctions, and it should think very deeply about their impact in the short- and long-term. The objective of such measures should not be as a kind of punishment of a population, but must be very clearly defined from the minute they were imposed. Also the steps to be taken by the country concerned must also be clearly defined, so that sanctions, which had a specific time frame, could be lifted as soon as the country renounced its harmful conduct. The aim should also be that country’s reintegration into the international community. Throughout the process, serious thought should be given to the consequences on third countries, about which an objective assessment should be made.
The problem of sanctions had assumed numerous dimensions, involving the political, legal and material spheres, he said. The revised paper of the Russian Federation containing a declaration on sanctions was extremely important and deserved due attention, in order to follow-up the positive actions begun by the Committee. He also supported, among other proposals: the one aimed at strengthening the role of the United Nations and the General Assembly in maintaining international peace and security, and rendering those more efficient and more democratic; and the proposal by Belarus and the Russian Federation calling for an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice about the resort of some States to the use of force without the Security Council’s consent and outside their self-defence requirements. Such an opinion would shed light on reinforcing the role of the Organization in the maintenance of international peace and security.
* *** *