Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2150 (2014), Security Council Calls for Recommitment to Fight against Genocide
7155th Meeting (AM)
Unanimously Adopting Resolution 2150 (2014), Security Council Calls for
Recommitment to Fight against Genocide
Twenty years after the genocide in Rwanda, the Security Council condemned without reservation any denial of the genocide and urged member States to develop educational programmes to help prevent similar events.
Unanimously adopting resolution 2150 (2014), the Council called upon States to recommit to prevent and fight against genocide and other serious crimes under international law.
Through the resolution, the Council also called upon States that had not yet ratified or acceded to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to consider doing so as a matter of high priority.
Jan Eliasson, Deputy Secretary-General, described the genocide in Rwanda as one of the “darkest chapters in human history” and said the world remembered with heavy hearts the international community’s collective failure to recognize and act on the warning signs of genocide. Through the events in Rwanda, the world had seen that genocide was not a single event, but rather a process developing over time and requiring planning and resources. That reality meant that genocide could be prevented with information and mobilization, as well as courage and political will.
“We must do more as a community of nations and as global citizens if we are going to live up to the promise of ‘never again’ and act upon our collective responsibility to protect,” he said.
Eugène-Richard Gasana ( Rwanda) stressed the need for “historical clarity” regarding the events in Rwanda, saying it was the world’s duty to remember that the genocide had been carried out due to systemic indifference. In the case of his country’s suffering, it was not a lack of information or resources that prevented action, but a lack of political will that left the international community paralysed in the face of the atrocities.
He continued, saying recent events in the Central African Republic, Syria and South Sudan could convince many that the United Nations was still struggling to match its normative principles with realities on the ground, and that the prevention of mass atrocities still had a long way to go.
Colin Keating ( New Zealand) was President of the Council in 1994 and said his country apologized for the international community’s failure and asked that New Zealand’s apology be formally inscribed in the records of the Security Council.
He continued, warning that if the international community truly wanted prevention to work, there must be political, operational and financial mechanisms for the Council and the wider United Nations system to achieve better outcomes.
The meeting began at 10:08 a.m. and adjourned at 12:55 p.m.
The Security Council met this morning to consider the prevention and fight against genocide. Before members was a letter dated 11 April 2014 (document S/2014/265) from the Council President informing the Secretary-General of the annexed concept note prepared by the delegation of Rwanda in order to help steer the discussion entitled “Threats to international peace and security”.
Opening Remarks and Action
JAN ELIASSON, Deputy Secretary-General of the United Nations, described the genocide in Rwanda as one of the “darkest chapters in human history”. The world remembered with heavy hearts the international community’s collective failure to recognize and act on the warning signs of genocide. Twenty years ago, the world had seen that genocide was not a single event, but rather a process developing over time and requiring planning and resources. That reality meant that genocide could be prevented with information and mobilization, as well as courage and political will, he said.
The international community must continue to build on the lessons learned and improve the ability to protect populations from the most serious international crimes, he said. The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda had held perpetrators accountable, while the International Criminal Court had been central in advancing international criminal law. More broadly, the United Nations had progressively placed the promotion and protection of human rights at the core of its prevention work, including the “Rights up front” initiative, which was meant to generate early action and greater involvement by M embers States and United Nations system entities.
While Rwanda had come a long way since 1994, the international community must do its best to protect lives in a very violent world, he said. Current conflicts from Syria to South Sudan to the Central African Republic and beyond sadly showed that the protection of populations from atrocities remained lagging and elusive. Those and other crises had different roots, and yet there were commonalities. Across the landscape of conflict, there were similar fault lines — divisions based on religion, ethnicity, even language. No part of the world was immune to the threat, and all of humanity was diminished by it. “We must do more as a community of nations and as global citizens if we are going to live up to the promise of ‘never again’ and act upon our collective responsibility to protect,” he stressed.
COLIN KEATING ( New Zealand) said his first responsibility was to remember the almost 1 million people dead, as well as the survivors. As President of the Council in 1994, New Zealand apologized for the international community’s failure and asked that its apology be formally inscribed in the records of the Security Council. He acknowledged the countries that had stood with his own in 1994 and supported efforts to condemn the genocide and reinforce the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda, including Nigeria, Czech Republic, Spain, Argentina and Djibouti. He also paid tribute to those in the field who had displayed great courage and had done their best to save lives.
The events in Rwanda had demonstrated the importance of information flowing to the Council, particularly in the early stages of conflict when there were still opportunities for action, he said. In 1994, the Council had not received accurate information from the Secretariat, and neither had the wholesale slaughter of civilians been conveyed to it because crucial early warning information had been actively concealed. It was important to contrast the 1994 failure in Rwanda with the Council’s actions in 2010, when it had taken quick action in Côte d’Ivoire, where a serious risk of mass atrocities had arisen. While there was a misconception that the international community had lacked the means to intervene in Rwanda, there was a great deal of evidence to the contrary, he said. If the international community truly wanted prevention to work, there must be political, operational and financial mechanisms for the Council and the wider United Nations system to achieve better outcomes.
The Council then unanimously adopted resolution 2150 (2014).
EUGÈNE-RICHARD GASANA ( Rwanda) said it was his hope that the resolution would serve as a wake-up call and make a contribution, small as it might be, to the fight against future genocide. Recalling that nearly a million people had been slaughtered within 100 days in 1994, the equivalent of 10,000 people every day, he said the systemic slaughter of men, women and children had been perpetrated in full view of the international community. “The genocide highlighted the extent to which the UN methods of prevention utterly failed.” There had not been a lack of information or resources, but simply a lack of political will, he emphasized, citing the Council’s permanent members, who held veto power, the United Nations Secretariat, which had purposely given inaccurate information, and troop-contributing countries, which had pulled out their forces.
All had lacked the political will to do what was necessary to protect human life, he said, emphasizing that genocide prevention demanded historical clarity. It was the international community’s duty to remember that the genocide had been carried out due to systemic indifference. One could question whether the United Nations and the international community were any better prepared today to prevent a repeat of the genocide from happening elsewhere, he said. No country in Africa or anywhere else need ever become another Rwanda, but in the absence of historical clarity, the danger was ever present, he warned. The scenes from the Central African Republic, Syria and South Sudan could convince many that the United Nations was still struggling to match its normative principles with realities on the ground, and that the prevention of mass atrocities still had a long way to go. Since the tragedy in Rwanda, however, the Organization had worked to improve capacity, mobilize political will and learn from failures of the recent past, he noted.
The importance of accountability on the part of perpetrators had been highlighted, but the key question was whether the world body’s capacity was adequate or whether there were areas requiring sustained improvement, he said. It was regrettable that some of the initiatives adopted in good faith to prevent and fight genocide faced implementation challenges and had created controversy among Member States, he said, noting that, as a result, some efforts may not amount to much and the promise of “never again” would end up sounding just as hollow as it had following the genocide in Rwanda. Greater emphasis must be placed on preventing genocide and mass atrocities in order to reduce the crisis-response requirement, he stressed. Operational capacities should be developed well in advance to address commonly recurring events, and the United Nations should develop the capacity to deploy quickly rather than mobilizing for deployment only after a crisis had erupted. Enhanced cooperation with regional and subregional entities should also be pursued, and the international community should strengthen the capacity of local and regional actors, since they had a greater incentive to respond to crises in their vicinity.
ZEID RA’AD ZEID AL-HUSSEIN (Jordan) said that 20 years after the slaughter of more than 800,000 Rwandans, aspects of how the United Nations confronted crises remained the same, marked by a long deployment time-lag and concerns over securing enough troops. Recalling the situation in the Central African Republic, he said “we still do not care enough” to act immediately — overwhelmingly — in cases where intervention was needed. Most of the killers in Rwanda were ordinary people who had behaved with unimaginable cruelty in specific circumstances, actions motivated by a fear fed by extreme ideologies that had ground morality “down to a nothing”. The Council must contribute more to peacekeeping and understand that its working methods generated a sense of routine which was “deadening and dangerous”. Further, there was no alternative to the International Criminal Court and it should be strengthened so that it fulfilled its “stated mission to end impunity for all such crimes”. Jordan would submit a draft resolution to award a medal to United Nations personnel who show courage in extreme danger, named after Captain Mbaye Diagne of Senegal, who was killed after having saved perhaps thousands of Rwandans from death.
VITALY CHURKIN ( Russian Federation) said that the tragic events in Rwanda in 1994 should have and could have been prevented. The Second World War's harsh lessons learned from horrific Nazi actions against his and other countries had demonstrated that the signs of genocide should have been recognized in other situations. And yet, the international community had failed to see genocide as it unfolded in Rwanda. Protecting peacekeeping staff had been considered at the time, but no one paid attention to the news coming from Kigali. As a result, the United Nations had truly betrayed Rwanda and the cost of inaction was 1 million lives. Those mistakes of the past must be corrected, he emphasized, noting that it was important to, among other things, recognize and prevent the incitement of violence over ethnic differences. Those efforts should include the identification of genuine priorities and thorough research. In conclusion, he said that the fragile world now needed joint efforts in order to face current challenges.
WANG MIN ( China) said the unprecedented carnage that occurred in Rwanda should be remembered forever. Since then, the people of Rwanda had spared no effort to overcome challenges and move forward, resulting in broad development achievements. Lessons learned from the genocide in Rwanda had been considered by the international community, he said, pointing to improvements in conflict prevention and resolution. To prevent and respond effectively to various crises, he provided a number of suggestions, including the consideration of the potential factors that were exacerbating conflicts. In addition, efforts should be made towards promoting dialogue and creating an environment conducive to peace. Preventing genocide also required that Governments protected their civilians and that all parties abided by humanitarian law. For its part, the international community should acquire a deep understanding of the situation on the ground, as well as strengthen coordination efforts for protecting civilians.
SAMANTHA POWER ( United States) said the Rwandan people's unbreakable spirit had allowed them to build a strong country after the genocide. The failure of the United States to act, she said, was then-United States President William Clinton's greatest regret. Now, all Governments must look inward to consider what more they could have done, consider lessons learned and to use instruments that did not exist two decades ago, including the role of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, the International Criminal Court and civil society efforts. The international community was committed to respond to prevent mass atrocities, she said, pointing to examples from Timor-Leste to Kenya of joint efforts with local partners to ease tensions and reduce violence. Referring to images of torture in Syria shown at a Security Council meeting yesterday, she wondered how, 20 years from now, the Council's inaction would be defended. In the collective effort to prevent mass atrocities, all tools must be used, including sanctions, truth commissions and courts to influence the decisions of perpetrators.
OH JOON ( Republic of Korea) said the reverberation of the events 20 years ago remained in the world's thoughts and conscious. Based on the lessons of Rwanda, the United Nations and Member States had worked to prevent similar events through the strengthening of institutional capacities to address grave crimes against humanity through national and international criminal justice systems. However, there were still challenges that needed to be addressed before the international community could say that the past lessons had been fully acted upon. Efforts must narrow the gap between people who were in dire situations and the aspirations of the international community to help them. The promotion of regional partnerships with non-governmental organizations was a path to be further explored, while strategies to deal with cultures of impunity were another challenge. The international community needed to continue supporting the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court. The responsibilities of States to protect their own people should be given greater attention, and successful efforts to stop the worst humanitarian crimes required a collective vision and close cooperation.
MARÍA CRISTINA PERCEVAL ( Argentina) said that "humanity has no right to suffer". The genocide in Rwanda showed the absolute evil which naked power was capable of exerting on other human beings. Tragedy, however, could also be the catalyst for new beginnings and was an opportunity to rethink what it meant to rebuild a society. The remembrance of genocide was a search for meaning and should inspire a journey for truth, justice and reparation. Argentina had been a member of the Security Council in 1994 and the commemoration provided an enormous opportunity to reflect. The protection of populations from genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity required the strengthening of the norms of human rights, international humanitarian law and social cultures where the respect for differences must take us away from an ideology of hatred. Every day, the world heard the prayers and saw the tears shed — the issue was to decide whether to listen to them, as they were the words of the victims.
GÉRARD ARAUD ( France) said the world would forever be shocked by the events in Rwanda, although collective efforts to prevent genocide and mass atrocities had been strengthened since then. The prevention of such crimes was dependent, first and foremost, on the ability to raise the alarm. That was followed by the responsibility to act and protect. A State could not only be solely responsible for protection; the international community must also play a part. Specifically, the Security Council must continue to play its critical role in the responsibility to protect. There was no excuse for inaction in Syria. Despite the enhancement of early warning and preventative actions, crimes against humanity and war crimes continued to be perpetrated, while the Security Council remained paralysed by the use of the veto. As such, France was working for a voluntary code of conduct for the use of the veto when the question of such crimes was at stake. The Council must renew its commitment to do everything possible, so that the lessons of the horrors of the past were not repeated.
RAIMONDA MURMOKAITĖ ( Lithuania) observed that the gap between the concept of the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and its implementation persisted with tragic consequences. The Khmer Rouge, Srebrenica and Rwanda were among the international community’s “breathtaking failures”. The Rwanda genocide could have been prevented if warning signs had not been ignored and action had been taken. The Concept of Responsibility to Protect, adopted in 2005 by Member States, showed global progress, with early warning offices established and mediation and preventive diplomacy capacities implemented, among others. However, the situations in Syria, South Sudan and the Central African Republic still demonstrated a need for further progress. A critical ingredient in preventing mass atrocities was the existence of inclusive, credible, legitimate and accountable national institutions. As well, accountability must be assured, both nationally and internationally. In that regard, the International Tribunal for Rwanda did important work, setting precedents in the development of international criminal law, such as the first ever prosecution of rape as an act of genocide.
BELÉN SAPAG ( Chile) said that her country had conveyed its support to Rwanda at last week's commemoration in Kigali, noting that the world had advanced to adopting actions to prevent genocide. Feelings of exclusion were among the root causes that created conditions for tensions and political will was needed to recognize that and to prevent genocide. Supporting the Secretary-General's report, which had reaffirmed the central role of human rights in the United Nations, she said that preventive diplomacy must be emphasized. Recognizing the roles played by regional groups, civil society and the media, she added that international cooperation was needed alongside greater commitments to strengthen humanitarian laws and address the root causes of tensions. The international community must step in when Governments failed to meet their responsibilities to protect human rights. There was also a need to establish international mechanisms and tribunals that acted as deterrents and brought perpetrators to justice. In conclusion, she reiterated her country's appeal for States that held a veto right to abstain from using it in situations related to crimes against humanity, since vetoing such actions detracted from the mandate of the Security Council.
GARY QUINLAN ( Australia) said that inaction on the Rwanda genocide was one of the Organization's "darkest failures". "We all failed," he declared, warning that, 20 years later as the world cried "never again", similar atrocities were occurring in the Central African Republic and Syria. Last week's approval of a United Nations mission in the Central African Republic had shown that act in response to the situation in Syria, which included reports of systematic and widespread torture. Referring that situation to the International Criminal Court was long overdue, he said, supporting France's suggestion on limiting veto power in the Security Council. Welcoming references to the responsibility to protect in resolution 2150 (2014), he cautioned that genocide in Rwanda began in hate speech. Other factors of concern in prevention included, youth alienation, the role of the media and effective early warning systems, so that an alarm could have been sounded earlier. To do that, regular horizon-scanning sessions should also occur and the Secretary-General's leadership on that would be essential. Human rights violations were often the "canary in the mineshaft", he said, highlighting the current situation in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Steps taken in Sudan to shelter fleeing civilians were an example of what was working. As conceptual frameworks and toolkits were in place, what was now needed were greater efforts to make them work.
MARK LYALL GRANT ( United Kingdom) said the current debate was an opportunity to consider the past and look at what must be done in the future. He commended the Rwandan people for transforming their country. While the primary responsibility to protect civilians had rested with a State itself, he said the international community must ensure that the responsibility was met, urging all States to sign and ratify relevant treaties. It was vital that States cooperated with the International Criminal Court when national authorities failed to act. He regretted that some States parties had failed to implement an arrest warrant connected to three counts of genocide. The Rwandan genocide was one instance when the Security Council had failed to act, but since then, action had been taken to respond to mass atrocities, including resolutions 1674 (2006) and 1894 (2009). However, early warning alone was not enough and political will was required to ensure improved preventive efforts. When the international community was united, security was possible, such had been the case in Côte d'Ivoire and Libya. Yet, he lamented that the current situation in Syria had continued. "We now have the tools to act together to prevent future genocides," he concluded.
SYLVIE LUCAS ( Luxembourg) said that, in spite of the many warning signs, the world was not able to take decisive measures which would have ended the propagation of ethnic hatred to prevent the genocide in Rwanda. The events of 1994 had created a shockwave that shook the United Nations as a whole and raised fundamental questions on the authority and responsibility of the Security Council. It had also highlighted the need of the Organization to expand its capacity to respond to crimes against humanity and was a catalyst for the development of the principle of the responsibility to protect. The world must pay attention to the warning signs of atrocities and sustained efforts were needed to protect human life. Since Rwanda, the Security Council had recognized that the fight against impunity was essential to prevent further crimes. In that regard, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was a source of inspiration and had been instrumental in the creation of the International Criminal Court.
MAHAMAT ZENE CHERIF ( Chad) said that the massacre in Rwanda shook the conscious of the entire world through its brutality. The world was increasingly threatened by conflicts within States, with the causes multiple and varied. The international community should make use of all necessary tools to anticipate conflict and prevent its incalculable consequences. The world must rethink its means of reaction and capacity to react. The international community must have an early warning mechanism to detect potential mass crimes. He noted with great concern that the international community was still powerless in the face of some mass crimes, including in the Central African Republic. It was up to States, but also the United Nations, to protect lives. Justice for the victims and their families was a central part of reconciliation and lasting peace. Only independent and impartial justice could alleviate the wounds and reconcile broken hearts. In that regard, he applauded the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
U. JOY OGWU ( Nigeria), Council President, spoke in her national capacity, providing an overview of steps that the United Nations had taken to address genocide, including efforts by then-Secretary-General Kofi Annan to establish prevention tools in 2004, and to set up early-warning systems. In 2005, world leaders had agreed to a set of principles on human rights issues, including preventing genocide and mass atrocities. In the coming years, the Secretary-General had issued reports on related issues, some of which had been debated, including the 2010 Security Council's dialogue on genocide. The Secretary-General had also made several significant appointments, including Special Advisers. With a plethora of theatres of conflicts going on, action was needed to halt tensions and address its root causes, she said, underlining the importance of an early warning mechanism, enhancing the chances of preventing genocide. Nigeria was committed to the fight against impunity and the prevention of mass atrocity crimes. Let the memories of Rwanda emphasize the necessity of making the right choice, she added, the choice of peace.
The full text of resolution 2150 (2014) reads as follows:
“The Security Council,
“Reaffirming the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide,
“Further reaffirming the significance of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide as an effective international instrument for the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide, emphasizing that the crime of genocide as recognized in this Convention, is an odious scourge that has inflicted great losses on humanity, and that further international cooperation is required to facilitate the timely prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide,
“Recognizing that States bear the primary responsibility to respect and ensure the human rights of their citizens, as well as other individuals within their territory as provided for by relevant international law,
“Acknowledging the important role played by regional and subregional arrangements in the prevention of, and response to, situations that may lead to genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, especially noting article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act of the African Union,
“Recalling the important role of the Secretary General’s Special Advisers on the Prevention of Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect, whose functions include acting as an early warning mechanism to prevent potential situations that could result in genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnic cleansing,
“Recalling the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), established pursuant to its resolution 955 (1994) for the sole purpose of prosecuting 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 1994 and 31 December 1994, and further recalling that genocide involves intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such,
“Recalling the conclusions of the final report (S/1994/1405) of the Commission of Experts, established pursuant to Security Council resolution 935 (1994), among which included that ‘there exists overwhelming evidence to prove that acts of genocide against the Tutsi group were perpetrated’, and noting that during the genocide, Hutu and others who opposed it were also killed,
“Recalling that the Appeals Chamber of the ICTR issued, on 16 June 2006, a judicial notice (ICTR-98-44-AR73(C)) concluding that it was a ‘fact of common knowledge’ that ‘between 6 April and 17 July 1994, there was a genocide in Rwanda against the Tutsi ethnic group’, further recalling that more than a million people were killed during the genocide, including Hutu and others who opposed it, and noting with concern any form of denial of that genocide,
“Noting with concern that many genocide suspects continue to elude justice, including the remaining nine ICTR-indicted fugitives,
“Reaffirming its strong opposition to impunity for serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights law, and emphasizing in this context the responsibility of States to comply with their relevant obligations to end impunity and, to that end, to thoroughly investigate and prosecute persons responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, or other serious violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law, in order to avoid their recurrence and to seek sustainable peace, justice, truth and reconciliation,
“Stressing that the fight against impunity and to ensure accountability for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other egregious crimes has been strengthened through the work on and prosecution of these crimes in the international criminal justice system, ad hoc and mixed tribunals as well as specialized chambers in national tribunals; and recognizing in this regard the contribution of the International Criminal Court, in accordance with the principle of complementarity to national criminal jurisdictions as set out in the Rome Statute, towards holding accountable those responsible for such crimes, and reiterating its call on the importance of State cooperation with these courts and tribunals in accordance with the States’ respective obligations,
“Recognizing the contribution made by the ICTR to the fight against impunity and the development of international criminal justice, especially in relation to the crime of genocide,
“Noting that the prosecution of persons responsible for genocide and other serious international crimes, through the national justice system, including the Gacaca Courts of Rwanda, and the ICTR, contributed to the process of national reconciliation and to the restoration and maintenance of peace in Rwanda,
“Recalling that leaders and members of the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR), were among the perpetrators of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, during which Hutu and others who opposed the genocide were also killed, further recalling that the FDLR is a group under United Nations sanctions, operating in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and which has continued to promote and commit ethnically based and other killings in Rwanda and in the DRC, and stressing the importance of neutralizing this group, in line with the Security Council resolution 2098 (2013),
“Recalling that the General Assembly has, on 23 December 2003, designated the date of 7 April as “the International Day of Reflection on the 1994 Genocide in Rwanda”,
“Emphasizing the particular importance of all forms of education in order to prevent the commission of future genocides,
“1. Calls upon States to recommit to prevent and fight against genocide, and other serious crimes under international law, reaffirms paragraphs 138 and 139 of the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document (A/60/L.1) on the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, and underscores the importance of taking into account lessons learned from the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda, during which Hutu and others who opposed the genocide were also killed,
“2. Condemns without reservation any denial of this genocide, and urges Member States to develop educational programmes that will inculcate future generations with the lessons of the genocide in order to help prevent future genocides,
“3. Welcomes efforts by member states to investigate and prosecute those accused of this genocide, calls upon all States to cooperate with the ICTR, the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals and the Government of Rwanda in the arrest and prosecution of the remaining nine ICTR-indicted fugitives, and further calls upon States to investigate, arrest, prosecute or extradite, in accordance with applicable international obligations, all other fugitives accused of genocide residing on their territories, including those who are FDLR leaders,
“4. Requests the Secretary-General to ensure greater collaboration between existing early warning mechanisms for genocide prevention and other serious international crimes, in order to help to detect, assess and respond to sources of tension and points of risks or identify vulnerable populations,
“5. Calls upon States that have not yet ratified or acceded to the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide to consider doing so as a matter of high priority and, where necessary, to enact national legislation in order to meet their obligations under that Convention.”
* *** *