COUNTRIES DESCRIBE RELEVANCE FOR THEM OF ‘RULE OF LAW’, AS LEGAL COMMITTEE BEGINS DEBATE ON NATIONAL, INTERNATIONAL IMPLICATIONS

Sixty-first General Assembly

Sixth Committee

7^th Meeting (AM)

COUNTRIES DESCRIBE RELEVANCE FOR THEM OF ‘RULE OF LAW’, AS LEGAL

COMMITTEE BEGINS DEBATE ON NATIONAL, INTERNATIONAL IMPLICATIONS

Matter of Survival, Says Trinidad and Tobago; Representative

Of Sierra Leone Tells Delegates Breakdown of Law Caused Decade-Long Civil War

As the General Assembly’s Sixth Committee (Legal) continued its discussion of its new agenda item, on the rule of law, this morning, a number of representatives described the relevance of the subject to the situation in their countries.

The delegate of Trinidad and Tobago offered the Committee a snapshot of how important it was to a small nation trying to survive in today’s world.  A rule-based international system guaranteed the protection of Trinidad and Tobago’s rights with respect to the trade in goods and services; assisted with protection of its borders from the nefarious drug trade and other illicit activity; and ensured the defence of its sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence.  The promotion of the rule of law, at the national and international levels, was his country’s only means of survival in an increasingly complex and challenging global environment for small states.

The representative of Sierra Leone also spoke from the experience of his country in illustrating the importance of the issue.  The breakdown of the rule of law was the cause of a decade-long civil war, he said.  It was due to a corrupt body politic that was inept in all aspects of good governance.  Restoring the rule of law was essential for the sustainable resolution of conflict and rebuilding of a just society.

The Sixth Committee is debating how to approach the topic of the rule of law, at the international and national levels, in a manner that does not duplicate work being done by such other bodies as the Security Council and the Peacebuilding Commission and that would be suitable for future General Assembly action.

The representative of Liechtenstein, whose country, along with Mexico, proposed the inclusion of the issue on the Assembly’s agenda, said, much could be done in areas where the activities of individuals or non-State entities were of concern to the international community.  He suggested promoting the relatively young discipline of international criminal law.  The responsibilities of transnational corporations and the activities of private military personnel also deserved more attention, he said, adding that the International Law Commission would be well-placed to study ways of addressing those challenges.

Several speakers argued that devising ways to ensure that the terms of international laws were implemented was as important as developing those laws.  China’s representative said, in that context, that the authority of the United Nations must be maintained and the democratization of international relations should be promoted as a prerequisite.  Allowing racial discrimination and religious confrontation, or playing power politics, in the relations among countries, constituted violations of the spirit of the rule of law.  No country had the prerogative to position itself above the international law, or apply it selectively, or with double standards.

Also speaking this morning were representatives of Sudan, Switzerland, Mexico, Guyana (on behalf of the Rio Group), Ethiopia, Malaysia, Japan, Cuba, Zimbabwe, South Africa, the United Republic of Tanzania, Thailand, Republic of Korea, Israel, India, Belarus, Algeria and the Russian Federation.

The Committee will resume its debate on the rule of law on 6 November.

The Committee agreed to establish an open-ended working group, under the Chairmanship of Rohan Perera ( Sri Lanka), to attempt to resolve outstanding issues in the negotiations on a comprehensive convention on international terrorism.  The working group would also consider the question of the convening of a high-level international conference to examine international terrorism, in all its forms and manifestations.

The Committee will next meet at 10 a.m. tomorrow, 18 October, to take up two items:  effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives, and the Status of Protocols Additional to Geneva Conventions, relating to the protection of victims of armed conflicts.

Background

The Sixth (Legal) Committee met this morning to continue its debate on its new agenda item on “The rule of law at the national and international levels”.  (For background information, see Press Release GA/L/3299 of 16 October 2006).  It was also to begin consideration of the status of the two 1977 Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (which deal with the protection of victims of armed conflicts).  The Committee may also take up the question of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives.

The Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols -- Protocol I and Protocol II -- are part of international humanitarian law, a whole system of legal safeguards that cover the way wars may be fought and the protection of individuals.  They specifically protect people who do not take part in the fighting (civilians, medics, chaplains and aid workers) and those who can no longer fight (wounded, sick and shipwrecked troops, prisoners of war).  The Conventions and their Protocols call for measures to be taken to prevent (or put an end to) what are known as “grave breaches”, for which those responsible are to be punished.

The first Geneva Convention of 1864 dealt, exclusively, with care for wounded soldiers.  The law was later adapted to cover warfare at sea and prisoners of war.  In 1949, the Conventions were revised and expanded:  the First Convention covers wounded soldiers on the battlefield; the Second, those wounded and shipwrecked at sea; the Third deals with prisoners of war; and the Fourth Convention relates to civilians under enemy control.

Protocol I and Protocol II, both adopted on 8 June 1977, relate to the protection of victims of international and non-international conflicts, respectively.  On 8 December 2005, an Additional Protocol III on a distinctive emblem –- alongside the red cross and red crescent -- was adopted.

At its fifty-ninth session in 2004, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General (resolution 59/36) to submit to its current session a report on the status of the 1977 Additional Protocols, as well as on measures taken to strengthen the existing body of international humanitarian law.

In his report (document A/61/222), the Secretary-General describes measures taken by 25 Member States and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) to strengthen international humanitarian law.  The report also contains a list of States parties to the Additional Protocols (Protocol I and Protocol II) of 1977.

Also before the Committee is the Secretary-General’s report on Consideration of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives (document A/61/119 and Add.1 and Add.2), which summarizes communications from 13 States, in respect to specific provisions of General Assembly resolution 59/37 on the subject.

Included in the report is a tabular update on the status of participation in relevant international conventions pertaining to the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives as of 20 June 2006.  These include the Vienna Conventions on Diplomatic Relations of 1961 and 1963; the Optional Protocols to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations concerning Acquisition of Nationality of 1961 and 1963; the Optional Protocols to the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations concerning the Compulsory Settlement of Disputes of 1961 and 1963; and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents of 1973.

Statements on Rule of Law

STEFAN BARRIGA ( Liechtenstein) said that the great interest shown in the new item, which was requested jointly by his country and Mexico, confirmed their view that it was high time that the General Assembly considered the question of the rule of law in a systematic and comprehensive manner.  His country was committed to the rule of law, at both national and international levels, and for a small State like his, it was a question of essence, at times even survival.  At the international level, he said, the work undertaken by the United Nations in the codification and development of international law represented a fundamental pillar of the rule of law.  The scope of international law was, today, greater than ever before and touched upon virtually every aspect of life.  Many countries lacked the capacity to fully absorb international law into their domestic systems.  The Secretariat and other branches of the United Nations system should play a more proactive role in capacity building. The Rule of Law Assistance Unit would be the appropriate place for the coordination of those activities.

He said much remained to be done in other areas where the activities of individuals or non-State entities were of concern to the international community, and suggested that much could be done in promoting the relatively young discipline of international criminal law, particularly through further ratifications of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.  The responsibilities of transnational corporations and the activities of private military personnel deserved more attention, he said, adding that the International Law Commission would be well-placed to study ways of addressing those challenges.  He called upon the International Court of Justice to consider ways and means of conducting its work in a more efficient manner.

He said he regarded the debate on the item as the mere beginning of a strong General Assembly involvement in the area of rule of law; the adoption of a short resolution during the current session underlining the central importance of the rule of law would be welcome, and the Secretary-General could be requested to submit a report on the matter.  He also welcomed the proposal to annually choose a sub-topic, under the agenda on the rule of law for consideration by the Sixth Committee.  He mentioned such topics as the future of international criminal law, or the role of non-State actors in international law.

Yasir A. Abdelsalam ( Sudan) praised the inclusion of the issue on the Committee’s agenda.  He said the Committee should avoid theoretical debates on the issue, and instead, focus its efforts on laying practical foundations for promoting the rule of law.  An international system of laws must be firm and objective, and respect diverse legal cultures, so that it is acceptable to all.  The principles of justice should be applied to all, as equals.  As to assistance concerning the rule of law within the United Nations system, there must be national mechanisms capable of responding.  Attention should also be paid to guaranteeing that the Organization itself would abide by the rule of law; the attempt by some Member States to impose their will on others, as well as the encroachments by the Security Council, contradicted the concept of the rule of law.

He drew attention to the connection between the application of rule of law and the right of the individual to development through the eradication of poverty and the relieving of the burden of debt.  Concerning future work on the topic, he said, he preferred a comprehensive approach, given its link to other social and economic subjects; a working group on the subject would be established.  He cautioned that the rule of law should not be used as a pretext for interference in the internal affairs of a State, nor to encroach on its sovereignty.

JURG LAUBER ( Switzerland) said that for his country, the two concepts of the rule of law, at the national and international levels, were complementary and interdependent; the promotion of one concept helped the other.  One of the measures individual States could adopt, to enhance respect for international law, was the recognition within the national legal system of the principle of the primacy of international law over national law, and the obligation for all the organs of the State to ensure, within the limits of their competence, that national law was in line with the obligations of international law.  The domestic courts, in particular, must ensure that compliance.

On international legislative processes, he said it was important that the capacity of all States was supported, to enable them to participate fully.  Systematic and adequate technical assistance should also be offered by the United Nations to States needing it, in conjunction with other public and private associations and organs.  The General Assembly, in parallel, should also improve its efficiency, putting the emphasis on the substance of problems rather than procedural aspects.

As for relations between the Sixth Committee and the International Law Commission, he said, it was important to improve and intensify exchanges between their members.  Switzerland favoured the elaboration of a global and coherent strategy, specifically based on the notion of the international rule of law.

ALEJANDRO ALDAY (Mexico), noting that his country, along with Liechtenstein, had proposed the inclusion of the item on the General Assembly’s agenda, offered the Committee highly specific and detailed legal observations on the issue.  Among the categories he addressed were the importance of the right of States at the national and international levels; the interplay between international law and national law in the implementation of international obligations; the role of the International Court of Justice, the Tribunal on the Law of the Sea and other judicial organs in the peaceful settlement of disputes; and future consideration of the item in the Committee.  He suggested that the Committee examine the item on an annual basis and limit the debate to a number of sub-themes, to increase the likelihood of achieving concrete results.

George Talbot ( Guyana), speaking on behalf of the Rio Group of countries, said the Group welcomed the inclusion of the item on the General Assembly’s agenda, confident that the deliberations would reaffirm their conviction for international law as the best instrument of the international community to ensure peace, development and the rule of law.  The Group recognized that peace and security, development and human rights, were the pillars of the United Nations system.  The purposes and principles of the Charter and international law, he continued, were also the pillars for a better, pacific and prosperous world.  The Group strongly believed in the crucial role of the International Court of Justice and considered that the United Nations system should make more requests for its advisory jurisdiction.  Other main organs of the United Nations also had a key role on the rule of law at the international level.

He said efforts to strengthen and streamline the rule of law within the United Nations activities should not only focus on conflict and post-conflict situations; the rule of law should be a broader notion that applied also in the preventive area.  The Rio Group believed that the United Nations system, as well as Member States, could play an important role to support States in the implementation of international obligations and standards, through technical assistance and capacity-building.

MINELIK ALEMU GETAHUN ( Ethiopia) said his government had undertaken concrete measures on reform in administration of justice, the fight against corruption, civil service reform, amending the proclamation on conduct of elections and the promulgation of a new revised penal code, consistent with the country’s international obligations.   Ethiopia remained firmly committed to the principles of international law, particularly for the peaceful resolution of disputes among countries and respect for the sovereignty and equality of States and non-interference in their internal affairs.  It was firmly convinced that respect for international rule of law could be restored only through accountability of States for violating it.  The violation of the prohibition on the threat or use of force and aggression should be met with punitive measures against the aggressor and appropriate mechanisms of redress and remedy.

He said the Sixth Committee should try to avoid unnecessary duplication with the work done by other main committees of the General Assembly and organs of the United Nations.  The Committee could contribute to the promotion of the rule of law, by undertaking an open dialogue in a number of areas, including the application of international law and the impact of different approaches on its implementation.

MARKIMAN KOBIRAN ( Malaysia) said the most important aspect of the rule of law was knowledge and respect of it.  Therefore, the first step must be continued efforts toward codification and progressive development of international law.  Developing countries, and countries emerging from conflict situations, had limited resources to participate fully in the process, even as they realized its value.  However, there was room for improvement; Secretariat legislative implementation guides, especially for highly technical treaties, facilitated the treaty-adherence process for many States.  He encouraged the provision of technical assistance and educative seminars.

Treaty bodies should focus on facilitating compliance, rather than on fault-finding, he said.  If the rule of law was to prevail, States must be assured of a level playing field.  There should be due accountability for transgressions of law and order.  Third-party dispute settlement mechanisms should not pre-empt the use of bilateral negotiation through diplomatic channels.  In most cases, that was the more practical, flexible, cheaper dispute settlement mechanism.

HIROSHI TAJIMA ( Japan) said that his Government assisted in capacity building in the field of law, in other countries, particularly in the Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN) countries.  He cited the organizing of seminars on promoting accession to the international counter-terrorism treaties.  He suggested it would be worthwhile to identify the concrete, practical difficulties that many Member States faced, when applying international law within the framework of their domestic law.

He said the International Court of Justice and the Tribunal on the Law of the Sea played an active role in the peaceful settlement of conflicts.  There could be further interaction, though, between States and the Courts.

DUAN JIELONG ( China) said the rule of law was an important manifestation of human civilization and progress.  The United Nations had actively pushed for the development of the rule of law, with considerable accomplishments.  He offered several examples of the importance China attached to the rule of law, including its adherence to the purpose and principles of the United Nations Charter, and its accession to more than 300 multilateral treaties and 17,000 bilateral treaties.  He said China had also set an example for the international community of peacefully settling issues inherited from history, as in the cases of Hong Kong and of Macao, through diplomatic negotiations with the United Kingdom and Portugal, respectively.  China had also actively participated in the negotiations on the Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Stressing the need to implement the provisions of international law, he said, the authority of the United Nations must be maintained.  Also, the democratization of international relations should be promoted as a prerequisite and basis for the rule of international law.  Allowing racial discrimination and religious confrontation, or playing power politics in the relations among countries, all constituted violations of the spirit of the rule of law.  Moreover, no country had the prerogative to position itself above the international law, or apply it selectively, or with double standards.  Uniform application was essential for the rule of law at the international level, in light of the ever-increasing number of international judicial organs.

He said the international legal regimes for non-proliferation and the weaponization of outer space should be enhanced, to ensure the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and of outer space.  The autonomy of a country, to develop its rule of law, should be upheld as much as possible, so as to encourage its initiative.  Assistance and support should focus on the financial and technical aspects and capacity building.  For any model of the rule of law to be effective, it must be in conformity with the political system and the historic and cultural traditions of the country.

JUANA ELENA RAMOS RODRIGUEZ ( Cuba) said her delegation reaffirmed its confidence in multilateralism and the United Nations, as well as its total commitment to the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter and international law.  These were the principled positions for the promotion of economic development, social progress, international peace and security, human rights for all and the rule of law.

She said her delegation noted, with concern, the escalating tendency of encroachment by the Security Council on the functions and powers of the General Assembly, some of them legislative in nature, that fell under the purview of the General Assembly, as provided for under Article 13 of the Charter.  Cuba believed that, with the analysis in the context of the issue of rule of law, the central position of the General Assembly as the chief deliberative, policy-making and representative organ of the United Nations was reaffirmed.

The General Assembly, she said, had broad authority, even in questions related to international peace and security, as stipulated in articles 10-14 and 35 of the United Nations Charter and in rules 7-10 of the Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly.

She said true rule of law, based on justice, equity and respect for human rights, was endangered by certain factors.  Among them were the existence of double standards, the unilateral exercise of criminal and civil jurisdiction not derived from international agreements, and the reinterpretation in some countries of rules established by those agreements.

ALLIEU IBRAHIM KANU ( Sierra Leone) said that breakdown of the rule of law was the cause of a decade-long civil war in his country.  It was because of a corrupt body politic that was inept in all aspects of good governance, hence the request, made in June 2000, by the President of Sierra Leone, Alhaiji Ahmad Tejan Kabbah, for the establishment of the Special Court for the country.  The restoration of the rule of law was essential for the sustainable resolution of conflict and rebuilding of a just society.  The approach to rule of law issues in the country was holistic, ranging from judicial and legal reforms to the reforming of institutions responsible for dispensing justice.  It was now realized, he said, that to prevent conflict or relapse into conflict, the promotion of the rule of law was a top priority.

The tribunals established by the Security Council had sent a clear message to those most responsible for heinous crimes offending the conscience of mankind that “they could run but could not hide”.  The permanent International Criminal Court would contribute significantly to the promotion of international law, he said.  The Court was here to stay and it was imperative that its statute had universal participation.

He said the experience of his country and others emerging from conflict clearly indicated that there was a gap in the international community’s response to impunity within a relatively short time.  The initiative of the Justice Rapid Response Mechanism was a mechanism taken by the German Foreign Ministry and supported by States like the United Kingdom, Sweden and Sierra Leone.  It could fill the gaps in the international community’s ability to address accountability for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.  It could, also, ensure that international law, the rule of law and justice play an integral part in post-conflict peacebuilding.

The rule of law demanded that the States respected the United Nations Charter, and that members of the Security Council –- the custodian and the embodiment of the rule of law –- should set an example for how the rule of law was maintained in international relations.

BONIFACE G.CHIDYAUSIKU ( Zimbabwe) said his country respected and upheld the rule of law, which protected the rights of its citizens, as enshrined in its constitution.  It welcomed the debate on the item in a transparent manner, to sharpen the focus on the rule of law at the international level, as a means of achieving a just and equitable international legal order.

The basic tenet of criminal justice, he said, should be applied both at national and international levels, as a way of upholding the rule of law and guaranteeing due process.  With that in mind, his delegation deplored the continued detention without trial of unindicted prisoners at Guantanamo, as unlawful and undermining the rule of law that the agenda item sought to promote.  All States should take heed of the call by the Heads of State and Government in the 2005 World Summit Outcome to recognize the need for universal adherence to, and implementation of, the rule of law, both at the national and international levels.

EDEN CHARLES ( Trinidad and Tobago) said that, as a developing country, his Government had placed the rule of law at the centre of all its development efforts and aspirations.  It was a fundamental pillar of its vibrant democracy.  A rule-based international system guaranteed the protection of his country’s rights, with respect to the trade in goods and services; assisted with protection of its borders from the nefarious drug trade and other illicit activity; and ensured the defence of its sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence.  The promotion of the rule of law, at the national and international levels, was Trinidad and Tobago’s only means of survival in an increasingly complex and challenging global environment for small States.

Noting that his country often faced challenges in meeting its international legal obligations, he encouraged help with capacity development and training of nationals, through workshops, seminars and fellowships.  He also recommended training for lawyers and judges in the interpretation and application of treaties.  He urged all Member States to avail themselves of the peaceful settlement of dispute mechanisms, citing the positive experience of Trinidad and Tobago.

SABELO SIVUYILE MAQUNGO ( South Africa) said a possibility for future action on the agenda item on the rule of law would be to link it with treaty signing events in a particular year, thus, reinforcing and supporting the increased ratification of international treaties.  A general debate on the sub-topic could be useful with States encouraged to report on progress on ratification of particular treaties, implementation, best practice and challenges.  He said it would also be useful if the Secretariat undertook a study of the 2005 World Summit Outcome document, to identify areas that lent themselves to follow-up action in the Sixth Committee, in the context of promoting the rule of law.

The rule of law, she went on, should include entrenching the legitimacy of international law, rather than the adoption or ratification of existing international law instruments.  The Sixth Committee might also want to consider the extent to which international law was respected equally by all States.  There was also a need for consideration of the limits of the Security Council when exercising Chapter VII powers.  Consideration of that issue might raise questions about whether the discretion of the Security Council, either in determining that a threat to the peace existed under Article 39 of the United Nations Charter, or in taking measures under Articles 40, 41, 42, was an absolute discretion.  Such a process would also necessitate consideration of the relationship between various organs of the United Nations, particularly the General Assembly, the Security Council and the International Court of Justice.

MWENDWA MALECELA (United Republic of Tanzania) said her country supported the efforts of the International Law Commission in the development of international law, including human rights law.  It had ratified most of the core human rights instruments and, hence, played a significant role in the promotion and protection of human rights at the national, regional and international level.

The 2005 World Summit Outcome document was a landmark achievement in the development of the rule of law, she said.  It harmonized peace and security on the one hand and development on the other.  States had an obligation to ensure that the goals of the Outcome document, which included economic growth, poverty eradication and elimination of hunger, were realized.  In the realization of those goals, her country had adopted a “Vision 2025”, or poverty eradication strategy.

She said politics within the Security Council should not be allowed to defeat the enterprise of international law.  The international community must be prepared to act in consensus when such a situation arose.

KHUNYING LAXANACHANTORN LAOHAPHAN ( Thailand) said the rule of law was subject to each national context, because it greatly depended on the conditions and circumstances that prevailed in each society.  So, the rule of law in one country might not be appropriate to the modus operandi of another country.  She encouraged Member States to become parties to United Nations treaties, particularly those codifying customary international laws, and to treaties outside the United Nations regime, such as those from the World Trade Organization.  Model laws from the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) should be adopted into national legislation as well; in that way, the international community would be adopting the same commitments.

She said she supported the holding of an annual treaty event at the margin of the Assembly’s general debate, to promote awareness and to encourage signatures.  A legislative guide would help State parties to properly implement their treaty obligations.  Capacity-building was also a crucial factor that could be extended to promote public awareness and understanding at the national level.  Technical assistance should include training for Government officials, attorneys and law enforcement officials.  Sixth Committee discussion of the topic should be arranged thematically, perhaps to coincide with, and to complement, the treaty event, or to suit global needs.

YOO KI-JUN ( Republic of Korea) said that international and national dimensions of the rule of law were strongly interlinked.  However, the concept of the “rule of law”, per se, said nothing of the “justness” of the laws themselves, but simply of how the legal system upheld the law.  Therefore, he said, the discussion over “the rule of law at the national and international level” should not be equated with one about whether a legal system was right or wrong.  The international legal order should serve as a framework for peaceful relations, and a source of rights and obligations for States, rather than generating more disputes among States.  Legal standards should be followed, in particular, on the lines of article 34 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which read “(a) treaty does not create either obligations or rights for a third State without its consent”.

He said strengthening of the rule of law at the international level could have a direct effect on, but could not guarantee, the rule of law at the national level.  Strengthening the rule of law might mean ensuring compliance with decisions of international judicial bodies.  When the stakes were high, he said, States might believe in certain approaches that clearly challenged the legal requirements laid down in the United Nations Charter.  He observed that the United Nations had, in recent years, greatly improved its mechanisms for strengthening the rule of law at the national level, particularly in post-conflict situations.  At the international level, however, a considerable gap remained.  The General Assembly was uniquely placed, he said, to fill the gap, and to promote universal adherence to the concept of the rule of law, especially at the international level.

TAMAR KAPLAN ( Israel) said respect for the rule of law was the crucial element in her country’s society.  Israel wholly supported the notion that the promotions of the rule of law at the national level were an essential precondition in ensuring an effective international legal order.  She believed the rule of law provided an important basis for negotiations between nations.  Israel had provided technical assistance to nations seeking to enhance their capacity in the field of the rule of law.

TARIQ ANWAR ( India) said the establishment of the proposed international law assistance unit would be useful.  The dissemination of regular information, about actions taken by the General Assembly and other international organizations, would be helpful in identifying and evaluating new trends in international law.  The provision of information on treaty actions and other relevant developments would also help, for example, in areas like the Law of the Sea, to which many United Nations agencies and international and regional organizations had a related mandate.  The dispersal of authority led to overlap and posed a challenge to cooperation and coordination.  All those bodies had important legislation.  The advantages of having focused information in that field from one source were self-evident, he said.  On the matter of technical assistance, he said, the coordination functions of the proposed unit would be crucial.

ANDREI N. POPKOV ( Belarus) said the rule of law was one of the founding principles in the creation of the United Nations.  Problems that arose lay more in the absence of the necessary political will to resolve them, rather than in the absence of rules that governed them.  International law could not be static; it must be flexible and adapt to changing times.  Important contributions to the rule of law were made by the International Law Commission and the Sixth Committee.  Unfortunately, however, Member States had been unable to reach agreement on a number of important texts produced by the International Law Commission.

He said it was important for the Sixth Committee to set limits in considering the topic of the rule of law.  Discussion should be confined to its international legal aspects, so as not to infringe on the work being done by other United Nations organs.  The rule of law would be helped by the hosting of more legal seminars and workshops by the United Nations Legal Office.

EL HADJ LAMINE ( Algeria) said his country attached importance to the agenda item.  The rule of law at the national level went together with economic development.  He also called for respect of international law.  He noted that international conventions on terrorism had provisions for prosecution or extradition, and he welcomed the work being done by the International Law Commission, on that subject.  He also said Member States should avail themselves of the mechanism for the peaceful settlement of disputes provided by the International Court of Justice, rather than resorting to the use of force.

GENNADY KUZMIN (Russian Federation) said political will was needed for States to assume their obligations under international law, and to strictly comply to rules of international law.  Efforts of States in upholding international law could be in two directions -– improving the process of creating international norms, and then their implementation.  In that connection, he acknowledged the roles of the International Law Commission and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.  Lately there had seemed to be some reluctance, on the part of the Sixth Committee, to elaborate conventions on the basis of International Law Commission drafts.  There was need to improve the inputs of the International Law Commission and United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, in the work of the Sixth Committee.

He said that it might be useful for a convention on the responsibility of States, in the area of international law, to be enacted, as proposed by the International Law Commission.  The proposed “rule of law assistance unit”, in the Secretariat, should be subject to the oversight of one of the following bodies:  the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary), the Sixth Committee, or the Peacebuilding Commission.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record