Committee on Charter

and United Nations Role

257^th Meeting (AM)

Member States Focus on Imposition, Impact of Sanctions as Special Committee

on United Nations Charter Opens 2010 Session

 

Delegates also Debate Need for International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion

Opening its 2010 session today, the Special Committee charged with weighing proposals to enhance the United Nations Charter heard from more than a dozen delegations on the application and impact of sanctions and on assistance to third States affected by them.

It also heard a proposal to request the International Court of Justice to consider the question of the use of force without prior approval by the Security Council, as speakers stressed throughout the morning that the parameters for imposing sanctions must conform rigorously to the Charter.  Many delegates said that such coercive measures should be considered only after all other means for the peaceful settlement of disputes had been exhausted, and must be time-bound, periodically reviewed and lifted as soon as their objectives were achieved.

Formally known as the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization, the body was established in 1975 to examine proposals to bolster the world body’s role in maintaining peace and security, to advance cooperation among nations and to promote international law.

Several speakers pointed to the document “Introduction of sanctions imposed by the United Nations” -- annexed to General Assembly resolution 64/115 of 16 December 2009 upon the proposal of the Russian Federation following consideration in the Sixth Committee (Legal) –- as an example of the Special Committee’s best work.  But while the document and the negotiation process from which it emanated were widely praised, a number of delegates called on the Special Committee to continue to address ongoing sanctions-related issues.

The representatives of Turkey and Tunisia, among others, suggested that it focus specifically on the need to compensate targeted and third States affected by sanctions.  Conversely, Spain’s delegate, speaking on behalf of the European Union, said that since no relevant committee had been approached by Member States about special economic problems arising from sanctions since 2003, the issue should be removed from the Special Committee’s agenda.

Views also diverged on a proposal by Belarus and the Russian Federation to request an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the use of force without prior Council approval.  On the other hand, the representative of the United States said an advisory opinion was unnecessary because the matter was clearly defined in the Charter.

However, other speakers voiced support for the proposal, with Iran’s representative warning that the Charter was being undermined by the excessive reliance of some States on the unlawful use or threat of force to advance their national interests.

At the outset of the meeting, the Special Committee elected Carlos D. Sorreta ( Philippines) as Chair for 2010 and adopted its work programme for the session, which is expected to conclude on 9 March.

It also elected the following Vice-Chairs: Ismail Chekkori ( Morocco), representing the African States; and Hilding Lundkvist ( Sweden), representing the Western European and Other States.  The third Vice-Chairperson will be elected after nomination by the Latin American and Caribbean States.  Oleksiy Shapoval ( Ukraine), representing the Eastern European States, was elected Rapporteur.

At Panama’s request, the Special Committee observed a minute of silence on behalf of the people of Chile following the massive earthquake that struck that country over the weekend.

Also speaking today were the representatives of Iran (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Chile (on behalf of the Rio Group), Equatorial Guinea (on behalf of the African Group), Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Russian Federation, Ukraine, Egypt, Syria, Libya and China.

Speaking in exercise of the right of reply were the representatives of the Republic of Korea and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

The Special Committee will reconvene in open session on Tuesday, 9 March.

Background

Before the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization were several documents, including General Assembly resolution 64/115 (contained in document A/64/115); the Special Committee’s report for its 2009 session (document A/64/33); four reports of the Secretary-General on the implementation of the provisions of the Charter related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions (documents A/53/312, A/62/206 and Corr.1, A/63/224 and A/64/225); and the Special Committee’s provisional agenda (document A/AC.182/L.128).

Statements

ESHAGH AL HABIB ( Iran), speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said the Special Committee should play a key role in the current United Nations reform process, important elements of which were democratizing the Organization’s principal organs and respect for the role and authority of the General Assembly, including in questions related to international peace and security.  The Assembly remained the chief deliberative, policymaking and representative organ of the United Nations, he pointed out, adding that its intergovernmental, democratic character and its subsidiary bodies had contributed extensively to promoting the Charter’s purposes and principles.

He said the Non-Aligned Movement was concerned about the Security Council’s continuing encroachment on the functions and powers of the Assembly and the Economic and Social Council, as well as its attempts to enter norm-setting areas of which remained within the Assembly’s purview.  Another serious concern was Security Council-imposed sanctions, which should be imposed only as a measure of last resort in the event of an existing threat or act of aggression, rather than preventively in instances of the mere violation of international law, norms or standards.

Moreover, the objectives of sanctions regimes should also be clearly defined, based on tenable legal grounds and specified for a discrete time frame, he said, emphasizing that they should be lifted as soon as their aims were achieved, and their conditions clearly defined and subject to periodic review.  While the Non-Aligned Movement looked forward to the Council’s use of the annex to Assembly resolution 64/115 on “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”, other aspects concerning sanctions, such as the issue of compensation, should also remain under consideration.

ALEJANDRA QUEZADA (Chile), speaking on behalf of the Rio Group, stressed that full execution of the Special Committee’s mandate depended on the political will of Member States, as well as the full optimization of its newly approved working methods.  States must proceed towards the full implementation of that mandate by fashioning a robust thematic agenda based on new identified subjects, while allowing the optimum use of the Special Committee’s resources, she said, adding that it must continue to consider all proposals relating to the maintenance of international peace and security.

She further emphasized that analysis of the Charter’s provisions on assistance to third States affected by sanctions under Chapter VII should continue to be a priority for the Special Committee, which should also keep the question of the peaceful settlement of disputes between States on its agenda.  Calling on the Special Committee to make better use of its resources by examining its working methods, she said the Rio Group recognized the contribution of the Repertory of Practice of the United Nations Organs and the Repertoire of Practice of the Security Council to the international justice system, and underlined the Secretariat’s work in updating those documents.

ANATOLIO NDONG MBA (Equatorial Guinea), speaking on behalf of the African Group, said that, while taking into account the adoption of the document on “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”, there were other matters relating to such measures that required discussion in the relevant ad hoc committee.  He also stressed that the Security Council’s power to impose sanctions should be exercised in accordance with the rules of the Charter and international law.  Sanctions should be considered only after all means for the peaceful settlement of a dispute had been exhausted, as mandated by the Charter, he said, adding that they should be time-bound, periodically reviewed and lifted as soon as their objectives were achieved.  “Sanctions should also be non-selective and targeted to mitigate humanitarian impacts,” he said.

Reiterating the African Group’s serious concern about the imposition of economic sanctions against developing countries as an instrument of foreign policy, he said it rejected such moves as a violation of international law and of the right to development.  As for the Special Committee’s broader work, he said the African Group was open to discussing all outstanding proposals, and was particularly interested in Libya’s proposal regarding the payment of compensation to third States for damage caused by sanctions found to have been imposed in a manner inconsistent with the Charter.  The peaceful settlement of disputes was one of the Organization’s most vital tools for maintaining international peace and security, he said, urging all Member States to make better use of that principle.

FRANCISCA M. PEDRÓS-CARRETERO ( Spain), speaking on behalf of the European Union, asked the Special Committee to continue to consider the issues on its agenda, as laid out in Assembly resolution 64/115.  The European Union recognized the progress made on the question of maintaining international peace and security, she said, noting in particular that the Sixth Committee (Legal) had completed its consideration of -- and the General Assembly had adopted -- a resolution containing the revised working paper proposed by the Russian Federation on “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”.

The European Union continued to believe that sanctions were an important tool for maintaining peace and security, she said, stressing that they must be targeted, limited in time and implemented and monitored effectively to ensure that they achieved their objectives.  She said that, since none of the sanctions committees had been approached by States about special economic problems arising from sanctions since 2003, the question of assistance to third States affected by sanctions was no longer relevant to the Special Committee and should be removed from its agenda.

Welcoming the Secretariat’s efforts to clear the backlog of issues of the Repertory of Practice of the United Nations Organs and the Repertoire of Practice of the Security Council, she said both contributed to the Organization’s institutional memory and were valuable research tools for the international community.  The European Union encouraged Member States to make generous contributions to the two trust funds established to facilitate the preparation of those publications.

SIN SON HO (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) said that, despite 65 years of strenuous efforts at the United Nations, matters of international concern were still handled by specific countries in pursuit of their own interests.  It was clear that the Special Committee had an important responsibility to overcome such practices.  Above all, it was necessary to “take immediate and proper measures” to ensure full respect for the purposes and principles of the Charter, including State sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference.  If those principles were ignored, there could be no genuine peace and development, he warned.  “Even today, we continue to face high-handed and arbitrary acts such as threatening sovereign States by force,” he said, noting also the application of sanctions against such States.

The Special Committee must not overlook the fact that the United Nations was being used by certain countries as a justification for such actions, he cautioned, pointing out that armed invasions perpetrated by “the super-Power” against other sovereign States in the name of counter-terrorism were not discussed by the Organization, even though such invasions generated mass killings.  Moreover, the peaceful methods of dispute settlement employed by developing countries were condemned as threats to international peace and security, leading such peaceful countries to be targeted through sanctions.  That “tragic reality” required that all Member States strictly observe the Charter so that international issues could be solved fairly and in the common interest of all countries, he said.

Most such issues continued to be handled by a few countries, working in their own interests, on the Security Council, a body misused by the big Powers as a political tool, he said.  In addition, the Council continued to encroach on the powers prescribed under the Charter for the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council.  That encroachment continued to erode their power and to destroy the much-needed balance among the main United Nations organs.  With that in mind, he said, it was necessary to establish a mechanism that could ensure that the Security Council could be held accountable for its actions, and that sanctions or the use of force could only be carried out if endorsed by the Assembly.

On regional matters, he said it was well-known that the “UN Command” was not a United Nations force, but an army led by the United States.  It was an illegal entity, and Member States had therefore called for it to be dismantled in 1975.  Nevertheless the United States continued stubbornly to insist on the necessity of the UN Command, which was actually aimed at legitimizing the permanent presence of its troops “and to ignite an aggressive war against the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea at any moment”.  To ensure peace and security on the Korean peninsula, he called for the replacement of the Armistice Agreement with a peace treaty, recalling that on 11 January 2010, his country had proposed that the parties to the Armistice begin talks on such an accord, with the aim of breaking new ground that would help accelerate the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula.

DIANA S. TARATUKHINA ( Russian Federation), expressing confidence that the current session would be fruitful and constructive, said experts had worked in depth, through the Special Committee, on issues of peaceful resolution of disputes and sanctions, among other topics.  Those efforts had resulted in useful and effective guidelines, she said, noting that the last session had been especially productive.  The Russian Federation’s proposal on the “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”, which was annexed to General Assembly resolution 64/115, aimed to define procedures for implementing Security Council sanctions and reducing their adverse effects.  That work should continue during the current session, she said, adding that the question of use of force should also move forward in order to reach a common understanding.

ESMAIL BAGHAEI HAMMANEH (Iran), speaking in his national capacity, said his delegation valued highly the Special Committee’s contribution to the bolstering of Charter purposes and principles, recalling that, as recently as 2009, it had been able to adopt the document on “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”.  That was an important decision that had stressed, among other things, that sanctions should have a clear purpose and support legitimate objectives.  Under the Charter, States should refrain from interfering with the territorial integrity of any other State, a principle buttressed by the international obligation to pursue the peaceful settlement of disputes, he said.  However, the Charter was being undermined by the excessive reliance of some on the unlawful use or threat of force to advance their national interests.  The Special Committee therefore had important work yet to do on that matter.

Noting that the matter of sanctions had been on the agenda for many years, he said such coercive measure could only be imposed after the Security Council had determined –- on the basis based of valid information and not speculation, faulty data or aggression –- that there was a threat to or a breach of the peace.  Furthermore, such measures should be imposed only after peaceful means had been exhausted.  The Security Council’s power in that regard was articulated in the document on the “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”, and should remain true to Charter purposes and principles.  The Council could not determine that a State’s lawful and legitimate actions were a threat to international peace and Security, he emphasized, adding that it should be held accountable for the consequences of sanctions imposed illegitimately, and that the States targeted in such instances should be compensated for the damage inflicted on them.  States that abused their Council membership should also be held responsible, and the International Law Commission should consider that matter under the topic “Responsibility of international organizations”.

VOLODYMYR G. KROKHMAL (Ukraine), associating himself with the European Union, said his delegation was fully satisfied with the visible progress made by the Special Committee, and highlighted the improvements made to the process for listing and de-listing for purposes of Security Council sanctions since 2006.  While Ukraine recognized the Council’s statutory prerogatives concerning sanctions, it in no way underestimated the General Assembly’s role in that area, he stressed, adding that there was also a need to further strengthen the Special Committee as a forum for deliberations on various issues relating to the revitalization of the United Nations.

NAMIRA NABIL NEGM ( Egypt)said the Special Committee had played an important role in strengthening the Organization’s efforts to find peaceful ways to settle disputes and in elaborating legal standards.  Egypt supported its new working methods, included in the working paper submitted by Cuba.  The Special Committee should also contribute to ongoing efforts to make the Security Council more democratic and thus more legitimate.  For its part, the Council should, in implementing sanctions, take into account the annex to Assembly resolution 64/115 and ensure the existence of a clear system for imposing them, she said, stressing the need to bear in mind the implications for civilians.  As for those countries that tried to avoid acknowledging the suffering of populations under sanctions, she suggested seeking an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice.

JAMES B. DONOVAN ( United States) said he hoped the session would proceed in a sprit of efficiency and avoid duplicating efforts under way in other United Nations bodies.  The Special Committee should continue to focus on ways to streamline its work, especially since a number of items had been on its agenda for many years.  There were other bodies making efforts to ensure that targeted sanctions did not inflict humanitarian damage, he said, adding that his delegation did not support requesting an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the use of force, particularly since that issue was clearly defined in the Charter.  As for the Repertoire of Practice of the Security Council and the Repertory Practice of the United Nations, he welcomed the work under way to reduce the backlogs and urged the General Assembly to reiterate its call on Member States to support the relevant trust funds for their management, stressing that they should be continually updated.

MAZEN ADI ( Syria) expressed grave concern about double standards in the imposition of sanctions, saying that had become the order of the day.  Unilateral sanctions imposed without the Security Council’s prior approval represented a dangerous precedent and ran counter to international law.  While sanctions were a tool to address flagrant violations of peace and security, they should be used only after all other options had been exhausted, he emphasized.  Should they be imposed, they should be rigorously evaluated to ensure they did not have adverse effects.  While today’s meeting was not the forum to decide that, the Council should be fair in imposing sanctions and deeply investigate their impact, he said.

Stressing that sanctions should be specified in full conformity with the Charter and be time-bound, they should be lifted immediately when threats vanished, he said.  There was also a need to address the harm done to third States and to develop methods for the prevention of such damage.  He said the Council’s encroachment on the mandate of the General Assembly must be stemmed, adding that his delegation supported Assembly resolution 64/115.  The Special Committee must continue to study any new proposals by Member Sates, and to that end, Syria supported the proposals by Libya and Cuba.  It also backed the proposal by Belarus and the Russian Federation to seek an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice on the use of force without prior approval by the Security Council.

ABDELRAZAG E. GOUIDER ( Libya) said his delegation agreed with speakers who had called for strengthening the Organization and putting an end to double standards, adding that broad reform of the United Nations must continue apace.  As for sanctions, they must not be imposed arbitrarily, and even when they were legitimate, such measures should be implemented only after all other efforts had been exhausted.  Everyone knew that Libya had been the subject of illegal and punitive sanctions, he said, adding that those who had imposed them should be held accountable for the social and economic damage the measures had wrought.  To that end, the Committee and all Member States should consider ways to bolster the General Assembly’s standing in addressing such matters.

GUO XIAIOMEI ( China), noting that the question of third States had been discussed for many years, expressed hope that progress could be made as soon as possible.  The Security Council had revised its procedures for implementing sanctions, but given their nature, the impact on third States could not be totally excluded, she said, adding that the issue of assistance to third States remained relevant and the Special Committee should keep it under consideration.

While fully acknowledging the Special Committee’s work, China favoured continuous exploration of ways to improve its working methods, she said.  To ensure that the Special Committee’s work continued seriously and rigorously, no new proposals to amend the Charter should be received prior to the General Assembly’s recommendation, she stressed, noting that the basic conditions and criteria concerning sanctions were included in Assembly resolution 64/115 and stood as proof of the Special Committee’s contribution.

ÇAĞLA TANSU-SEÇKIN (Turkey) welcomed the document on the “Introduction and implementation of sanctions imposed by the United Nations”, which had been agreed after long negotiations, saying it proved that the Special Committee could take concrete decisions and make progress on issues on its agenda.  As for sanctions, the relevant ad hoc committees dealing with that issue had made no headway and the Special Committee should therefore continue to consider the matter while focusing also on assistance to third States affected by sanctions.  She concluded by emphasizing that some issues had been before the Special Committee for years and it was time that it concluded its consideration of them so it could move ahead on other matters.  The current session would provide the opportunity to consider which issues could be tackled immediately.

ADEL BEN LAGHA (Tunisia), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Group, underlined the Special Committee’s mandate to promote cooperation among nations and improve standards of international law, among other things.  The Special Committee should also continue to play a role at the forefront of strengthening the role of the United Nations.  On sanctions, he recalled that resolution 64/115 took note of the Russian Federation’s proposal, which had been under negotiation in the Special Committee for years, but work should continue on advancing other related issues, including possible compensation for target and third States.  For the Special Committee to carry out its mandate fully and effectively, it must be able to count on the political will of Member States and the revision of its working methods, he said.

Rights of Reply

The representative of the Republic of Korea pointed out that the use of the United Nations flag by the united, unified command was authorized by Security Council resolution 84 (1950), emphasizing that both that text and resolution 88 (1950) had been adopted through recognized legal procedures.  Moreover, on 18 November 1975, the General Assembly had adopted resolution 3390 (a) and 3390 (b) on the Korean question, he said, noting that the two texts offset each other.  It was misleading to imply that the Assembly had a particular stance on the issue, he continued, adding that doing so painted a one-sided picture that did not do justice to the matter.  The bottom line was that today’s meeting was neither the time nor the place to discuss the status of the United Nations Command, he added.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea said that his counterpart from the Republic of Korea was claiming that the so-called “UN Command” had been established by Security Council resolution 84 (1950), while the text had in fact been “cooked up” in the Council without wide participation by the United Nations membership.  The resolution only recommended that Member States provide preliminary forces under the command of the United States, which, he stressed, had unilaterally called it the United Nations Command.

He said the United Nations Command was not in compliance with many provisions of the Charter’s Chapter VII provisions in terms of reporting its activities to the Organization, adding that, from a principled viewpoint, resolution 3390 (a) advocated its dismantlement.  Turning to the 15 June North-South Joint Statement, he said that if the Korean people implemented it, they may solve all the problems on the Korean peninsula.

The representative of the Republic of Korea responded by reemphasizing that the United Nations Command had been established through all due legal procedures of Security Council resolutions.  In addition, General Assembly resolution 977 of 15 December 1955, entitled “Establishment and Maintenance of a United Nations Memorial Cemetery in Korea”, recognized the deaths of forces under United Nations command.  He reiterated that the meeting was neither the time nor the place to discuss the status of the Korean peninsula.

The representative of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea asked his Republic of Korea counterpart not to try and justify the existence of the United Nations Command.

* *** *

For information media • not an official record