General Assembly Hails Value of Justice, Contribution of International Tribunals in Advancing International Law, United Nations Principles
The administration of justice could not be measured in monetary terms alone, the General Assembly was told today as the Presidents of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals and the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and for the Former Yugoslavia presented their annual reports.
Justice was priceless, said the representative of Guatemala, adding that the deterrent effect of tribunals should also be noted. At a time when the two Tribunals were wrapping up their work, now was the right moment for the international community to reflect on the impact they had had, not just in advancing international criminal law, but in advancing the principles of the United Nations.
The contribution of the Tribunals could not be overstated, said the representative of the United States, as they had made immeasurable contributions to the development of international law in ensuring accountability for genocide, from recognizing rape as a crime against humanity to compiling data on how to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity.
Citing numerous international protocols recently signed, the representative of Bosnia and Herzegovina pointed out that continued regional cooperation was a precondition for reconciliation in the region.
Justice could not be served without the cooperation of the countries on whose territory the crimes were committed, agreed the representative of Serbia.
His country had shown readiness to accept its nationals to serve their sentences, and could see no reason for the continued implementation of the 1993 recommendation of the Secretary-General providing for the enforcement of sentences outside the territory of the former Yugoslavia, he said.
Rwanda’s representative, for her part, reiterated a request that the archives of the Rwanda Tribunal be hosted by her country.
Making sure the records of the Tribunal were accessible and manageable after their transfer to the Residual Mechanism should ensure that the events in Rwanda would never be forgotten and might also serve as road maps for future tribunals, and to empower domestic courts and educate the world on the importance of challenging impunity, said Vagn Joensen, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
Theodor Meron, the President of the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal and of the Mechanism, said that the expectation was for that Tribunal to complete its judicial work and close fully in 2017. The Tribunal's achievements since its founding had exceeded the expectations of even the most optimistic observers. That was a testament to the international community's dedication to the rule of law and its commitment to ending impunity.
At the conclusion of the meeting, the Assembly took note of the reports introduced.
Representatives of New Zealand (on behalf of Canada and Australia), Norway (on behalf of the Nordic countries), Nigeria and the Russian Federation also spoke, as did a representative of the European Union Delegation.
The General Assembly will meet again at 10 a.m., on Thursday, 16 October, to elect five non-permanent members of the Security Council.
Background
Meeting this afternoon to consider the international criminal tribunals, the General Assembly had before it two notes of the Secretary-General transmitting the following: the nineteenth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 (document A/69/206), as well as the twenty-first annual report of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 (document A/69/225). Also before the Assembly was the Secretary-General’s note transmitting the second annual report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (document A/69/226).
Introduction of Reports
VAGN JOENSEN, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), introduced the Tribunal’s nineteenth annual report (document A/69/206-S/2014/546). Summarizing highlights of the reporting period of 1 July 2013 to 30 June 2014, he said that, since the Tribunal's Trial Chambers had been completed in December 2012, the remaining work had now been focused on the Appeals Chamber on the judgements of five persons. A further three judgements were issued in the Appeals Chambers on 29 September concerning four persons. The Ngirabatware appeal was pending before the Mechanism, with expected completion before year’s end 2014.
The Appeals Chamber had completed all of its work with the exception of Nyiramasuhuko et al., which involved six persons, and which would be "no small feat" to complete in such a relatively short time, he said. A request for extension of the terms of office had recently been made. Significant progress had been made towards the transition to the Mechanism. Member States should continue to encourage the Secretariat and other United Nations entities to strongly consider the application from the Tribunal for Rwanda staff members.
The Tribunal had already completed transfer of the second and final transfer to Rwanda of an accused in custody, Bernard Munyagishari, in July 2013. There were four cases pending, two in Rwanda and two in France. Six fugitive’s cases had also been transferred, leaving only three fugitives to be tried by the Mechanism. Monitoring the cases now would rest with the Mechanism. Interim monitors from the Mechanism had continued to monitor the transferred cases.
The Rwanda Tribunal continued to prepare the records for preservation by the Mechanism, to make sure they were easily manageable after transfer, to ensure that the events in Rwanda would never be forgotten and might also serve as road maps for future tribunals, and to empower domestic courts and educate the world on the importance of challenging impunity. As of 1 October, the Mechanism had received about 47 per cent of the physical Rwanda Tribunal records.
The Office of the Prosecutor had made significant progress, had continued litigation on 26 appeals in seven cases, handed over responsibility for the tracking of fugitives to the Mechanism and provided support to the Rwandan authorities for prosecuting crimes and the transfer of cases, he said. In January, the Office of the Prosecutor released a best practices manual on the prosecution of sexual and gender-based violence.
He remained deeply concerned that no solution had been identified for the relocation of the remaining eight acquitted persons and three convicted released persons in Arusha, and called on the Member States for their urgent assistance. Only Belgium had recently accepted an acquitted person, Augustin Ndindiliyimana, who would now live in that country.
The Tribunal had also led and participated in events that commemorated the over 800,000 men, women and children killed in April 1994, which he said helped facilitate the healing process. It planned to hold a legacy symposium and other events in Arusha, followed by a ceremony on 8 November. The Office of the Registrar continued to play a key role in providing outreach to the public. A further sharing of practices between the Tribunals and the International Criminal Court, however, could not continue without further funding.
THEODOR MERON, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and of the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals, introduced the Tribunal’s twenty-first annual report (document A/69/225) and the Mechanism’s second annual report (document A/69/226). He said that the Tribunal had made "steady progress" since last year in completing its last remaining cases. At present, the expectation was that it would complete its judicial work and close fully in 2017. The Tribunal's achievements since its founding had exceeded the expectations of even the most optimistic observers. That was a testament to the international community's dedication to the rule of law and its commitment to ending impunity.
Turning to the work of the Mechanism, he said that it continued to make progress at assuming relevant functions, including witness protection and maintenance of archives. A permanent building was being constructed in Arusha to house the Mechanism's remaining administrative functions. A range of judicial work had already been undertaken, and further, the Mechanism would cooperate with authorities in national jurisdictions.
Two challenges faced the Mechanism, however, he said. Apprehending the remaining nine individuals indicted by the Rwanda Tribunal was one. A second challenge was relocating individuals who had been acquitted by the Rwanda Tribunal, or who had finished serving their sentences. Though their number was small, it was vital to the credibility of international justice institutions that those individuals be appropriately relocated. He urged delegates to discuss with their Governments accepting one or more of the acquitted or released individuals.
The international community had a long history of trying to address the worst crimes that accompanied war, he said. In founding the Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia Tribunals, the symbolic and material goal of justice had finally been reached, a goal that had eluded the international community for centuries. The Rwanda Tribunal, the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal and the Mechanism, along with the International Criminal Court, were profound and lasting achievements. With the continued support of the international community, those institutions would serve as "harbingers" of a world where impunity was history.
Statements
GILLES MARHIC, representative of the European Union Delegation, aligning with Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Albania and Armenia, reaffirmed the Union's unwavering support for the Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia Tribunals, as well as for the Mechanism, and asked that they continue to get the support necessary to complete their mandates. He praised the transition from the Tribunals to the Mechanism. But, continued cooperation from Member States was crucial. The failure to arrest nine fugitives who remained at large was a "grave concern". States should intensify their efforts and cooperation with the Arusha branch of the Mechanism for the fugitives’ arrest. He pledged continued support from the European Union for the Office of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Prosecutor, and said that it was an essential condition for the Stabilization and Association Process in the Western Balkans, and for the membership of Western Balkan States in the European Union. Despite improved regional cooperation between the States of the former Yugoslavia, and the Office of the Prosecutor, the challenges in coordinating judicial activities in the region were a serious concern. He urged all States to cooperate with both Tribunals and branches of the Mechanism.
JIM MCLAY (New Zealand), also speaking on behalf of Canada and Australia, said that the Tribunals in their 20 years of operation had added breadth and depth to international criminal law jurisprudence. Acknowledging the efforts of the Tribunals, he noted that there were no fugitives at large from the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal, which had concluded proceedings against 141 of 161 indicted people. However, critical work remained to be done, as trials of three of the most senior indicted figures were ongoing. States had a central role in facilitating the Tribunals' important work. The successful apprehension of the last fugitives of the Former Yugoslavia Tribunals was due to cooperative efforts of States, along with the Tribunal’s Prosecutor.
Canada, Australia and New Zealand were particularly concerned with the "plight" of the nine people acquitted and released by the Rwanda Tribunal, and that of the three who had completed their sentences, and awaited relocation, he said. He further reiterated their support for the Security Council's decision to establish the Residual Mechanism, which had been integral to ensuring that numerous goals were met. These included the practical application of criminal justice, the protection of witnesses and the maintenance of Tribunal archives continuing beyond the completion of the Tribunals' respective mandates.
MAY-ELIN STENER (Norway), speaking on behalf of the Nordic counties, applauded the work of the Rwanda and Former Yugoslavia Tribunals, and said that both deserved praise for their work in sexual and gender-based violence. She expressed hope that the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal’s vast experience would be passed on to relevant stakeholders. Both Tribunals needed continued support from Member States. She called on the international community to collectively address the need to relocate acquitted persons, and give the Mechanism sufficient support so it could continue the important function of tracking and prosecuting fugitives and conducting appeals, retrials and trials for contempt of court. The fact that 20 Rwandan fugitives still remained at large must be addressed, and she strongly encouraged Member States to intensify their efforts in this area.
MILAN MILANOVIĆ (Serbia) said that his country had made important contributions to making the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal more efficient than most international criminal tribunals, not just by apprehending the last remaining fugitives, but also by "diligently" providing documents to the Tribunal and enabling witnesses to testify. The Government of Serbia was committed to continuing cooperation with both the Tribunal and with the Residual Mechanism. Pending cases had to be completed as soon as possible. Justice could not be served without the cooperation of the countries on whose territory the crimes were committed. Serbia had shown readiness to accept its nationals to serve their sentences, and promoted an initiative on the matter, as the Government could see no reason for the continued implementation of the 1993 recommendation of the Secretary-General providing for the enforcement of sentences outside the territory of the former Yugoslavia.
DRAGANA ANĐELIĆ (Bosnia and Herzegovina) said it would continue to cooperate with the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal and with the Residual Mechanism, by allowing access to documents and archives and providing support in the field of witness protection, as well as for all necessary administrative and judicial work. Bosnia and Herzegovina continued to promote regional cooperation. On 26 April, it, and Montenegro, signed the Protocol on Cooperation in Prosecution of Perpetrators of War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity and Genocide. Last year, the Office of the Prosecutor of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Office of the Prosecutor of Croatia signed protocols on the exchange of evidence and information on war crimes. Continued regional cooperation was a precondition for reconciliation in the region. In light of the classification of sexual abuse as an integral part of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, she welcomed the Court’s decision that 56 per cent of the professional staff and 53 per cent of the Mechanism's staff must be female.
ANA CRISTINA RODRÍGUEZ PINEDA (Guatemala) recognized the achievements of the Tribunals, including in advancing international criminal law, but said that much remained to be done before they could close their doors. The situation of those who had been acquitted should remain a priority. The functioning of the Residual Mechanism ensured that the eventual closure of both Tribunals would not leave the door open for future impunity. The Residual Mechanism set an excellent example because it struck a balance between the need to respect due process and justice, and the requirement of efficiency and cost-effectiveness. To those who noted the low number of persons tried by the Tribunals, as well as the Tribunals' high cost, she said that the administration of justice could not be measured in monetary terms alone. Justice was priceless. The deterrent effect of Tribunals should also be noted. The United Nations should not sacrifice international peace and security owing to budgetary concerns. Given that one of Tribunals would soon conclude, it was timely to reflect on the impact the Tribunals had had, not just in advancing international criminal law, but in advancing the principles of the United Nations.
USMAN SARKI (Nigeria) recalled that, since the Security Council’s adoption of resolution 2150 (2014), all Member States had the duty to cooperate with the Rwanda Tribunal, the Mechanism and the Government of Rwanda in the arrest and prosecution of the remaining fugitives. A welcome development was the appearance of the Rwandan fugitives on the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) list. Continued attention had to be paid to the preparation and submission of archives to the Mechanism because it faced major challenges. The Tribunal had completed proceedings, but Nigeria was concerned about the late arrests of certain individuals and other issues that would impact the 31 December deadline. The Assembly had the duty to revisit the subject of extension of Former Yugoslavia Tribunal judges before the end of the year. He called on the Mechanism to continue to work closely with the Tribunals to endure a smooth transition.
CAROL HAMILTON (United States) said that reconciliation was not possible without accountability or truth, which work of the Tribunals had gone far towards ensuring. The work of the Rwanda Tribunal was now complete, and that of the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal was also impressive, with just nine cases remaining. The Tribunal had worked hard to expedite those proceedings without sacrificing due process and the rights of the accused. He commended the Tribunals’ efforts in the past several years to wind down operations and transfer their remaining workload to the Mechanism. The contribution of the Tribunals could not be overstated, she said, as they had made immeasurable contributions to the development of international law in ensuring accountability for genocide, from recognizing rape as a crime against humanity to compiling data on how to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity. They had not just brought justice to the communities they were serving, but had brought the international community closer to the day when the words "never again" could be said with certainty.
EVGENY ZAGAYNOV (Russian Federation) said his country had carefully followed the efforts of the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal to meet its timetable, but recent developments had shown that might not be possible. The Appeals judgement recently handed down in that Court confirmed the importance of adhering to the principles of justice. Also in the case of the Rwanda Tribunal, instead of early completion of the Butare case, there was an additional delay. He cautioned against the use of technical issues to draw out the process. He also urged the Rwanda Tribunal to pay closer attention and conclude its work within its allocated budget. He called on both Tribunals to transfer any tasks it could to the Mechanism as soon as possible. It was important that the Tribunals continue to carry on bilateral work in their respective regions.
JEANNE D'ARC BYAJE (Rwanda) commended the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal and the Rwanda Tribunal for their contributions to the fight against impunity. Requesting that the archives of the Rwanda Tribunal be hosted by her country, she noted concern that no progress had been made on tracking the three key remaining genocide suspects. Naming other cases about which her Government had concerns, she noted that justice delayed was justice denied. Reiterating her call on all to fight genocide denial, which took forms such as using the term "the Rwandan genocide", she said that this gave a pretext to revisionists and scholars from Western countries to mislead the public into thinking that the genocide that occurred in Rwanda was perpetrated against a national group, Rwandans, killing each other. The terminology established by the Rwanda Tribunal was to call it "genocide against the Tutsis, in which Hutus and others who opposed genocide were also killed".