Rule of Law Core to Successful Multilateral Treaties, International Cooperation, Sixth Committee Hears as Debate Begins On Principle
Delegates of the Sixth Committee (Legal) recognized that only actions by States could breathe life into multilateral treaties and rule of law at the international and national levels as the Committee took up consideration of that topic today.
With the subtopic of the seventieth session designated as “the role of multilateral treaty processes in promoting and advancing the rule of law”, South Africa’s representative, speaking for the African Group, underscored that multilateral treaties ensured that the rule of law governed relations between States of all sizes. The complex principle was not only embedded in the history of all cultures and nations, but in long-standing efforts of States to create an international community based on law.
Yet, the representative of Liechtenstein pointed to the rarity of the Sixth Committee’s ability in recent years to convert draft legal instruments into treaties. That was due to the Committee’s insistence on concluding treaties by consensus, rather than voting. Seeking the strongest possible support of countries that were actually interested in ratifying a treaty therefore seemed to be a better goal than seeking consensus for the sake of it.
Nonetheless, emphasized the representative of Denmark, speaking also for the Nordic countries, a forward-looking plan of action could be agreed upon to “take our common agenda forward”. It was important to maintain a comprehensive approach to the concept. Multilateral treaty processes were constantly evolving and every treaty was a sign of trust and international cooperation. The rule of law could not be described simply as a legal doctrine or set of principles. “It is only our actions that give meaning to our principles,” he said.
Opening the debate, Stephen Mathias, Assistant Secretary-General for Legal Affairs recounted how the position prevailing at the Organization’s founding had been transformed into a “relatively mature” system of international law, anchored in a web of treaties, at the core of which lay a series of law-making international conventions.
In that context, Santiago Villalpando, Chief of the Treaty Section, also offering opening remarks, said that over its seventy years the General Assembly had conducted such processes and adopted numerous multilateral conventions that “defined our world”. With instruments covering all aspects of international relations, the Treaty Section was currently discharging the depositary functions of more than 560 multilateral treaties and processing over 900 treaty actions per year.
Also today, the Committee concluded its consideration of measures to eliminate international terrorism, with the representative of Afghanistan speaking of how his country’s forces were at the forefront of the international war on terrorism. He called for the use of violent non-State actors and terrorists for proxy wars to be ended. Rival States should not turn a third country into a battleground to advance their agenda.
In that vein, Syria’s representative decried the justification of military intervention in his country by certain Member States on the pretext of combating “the Islamic State” without coordination with his Government — an egregious violation of the Charter and international law. On the other hand, the Russian Federation’s recent actions, which his Government had requested, were consistent with international law and the Charter. He urged all States to support and rally around those efforts.
The representative of Ukraine spoke of how terrorist groups were claiming their criminal acts were in the name of “national self-determination”, resistance to “oppressive political regimes” or the struggle for one’s rights. However, any justification of terrorism, especially through twisting and arbitrarily interpreting the United Nations Charter, was unacceptable. The need for a universal international instrument to counteract terrorism in a comprehensive and consistent manner was not only urgent but long overdue.
Also speaking on measures to eliminate terrorism were representatives of Ethiopia, United States, China, Georgia, Niger, Kuwait, Maldives, Bahrain, Pakistan, Mali, Iran, India, Japan, Montenegro, Philippines, Viet Nam, Djibouti, Republic of Korea, Algeria, Benin and Chad. The Permanent Observer of the Holy See also spoke.
Speaking in exercise of the right of reply were representatives of Turkey and Syria.
Delegations also participating in deliberations on the rule of law at the international and national levels included Iran (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement), Lao People’s Democratic Republic (on behalf of Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)), Trinidad and Tobago (on behalf of Caribbean Community (CARICOM)), Ecuador (on behalf of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC)), Canada (also on behalf of Australia and New Zealand), Peru, Singapore, Bangladesh and Cuba. A representative of the European Union also spoke.
The Sixth Committee would next meet Thursday 15 October at 10 a.m. to continue consideration of the rule of law at the international and national levels.
Statements on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism
Mr. KOUSSY (Syria), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, said that for the fifth consecutive year, terrorism in his country had been at an unprecedented scale, a reality long ignored and denied, but finally recognized by the international community. He expressed his country’s condolences to the Turkish people affected by the recent attacks in their country, but not to the Erdogan regime, which, he said, had been involved in sending foreign terrorist fighters to Syria and the whole region. Such attacks proved that the actions of terrorists and their masterminds were swifter than the joint actions Member States were conducting to fight terrorism. General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, as well as the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, had not been respected in many cases.
Attempts by certain Member States to justify their military intervention in Syria on the pretext of combating “the Islamic State” without coordination with his Government was an egregious violation of the Charter and international law, he said. The “Coalition” had proven to be ineffective. The establishment of an international alliance headed by Syria would be the only likely way to win against terrorism in his country. The Russian Federation’s recent actions, which his Government had requested, were consistent with international law and the Charter. He called on all States to support and rally around those efforts. The Syrian Golan continued to suffer from the practices of occupying forces and terrorism had continued over the decades under successive Israeli Governments. He called for Member States’ sincere will and unshakeable determination to fight terrorism and to bring to justice those who fuelled the scourge. The item, which had been on the agenda for over 40 years, must be resolved for the sake of future generations.
FESSEHA A. TESSEMA (Ethiopia), associating himself with the African Group and the Non-Aligned Movement, said his country had enacted counter-terrorism legislation that imposed severe penalties on convicted terrorists. To tackle money laundering and terrorism financing, it had also enacted relevant legislation and established a financial intelligence centre in order to coordinate various governmental institutions in that endeavour. A legal framework was now in place for joint investigations at an interagency level and in collaboration with neighbouring countries and the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL). His country had ratified and become party to many regional and international counter-terrorism agreements. It had also taken a number of legal and administrative measures to implement those agreements, in addition to counter-terrorism resolutions adopted by the Security Council.
STEPHEN TOWNLEY (United States) said he was pleased with the work of the Counter-Terrorism Committee and its Executive Directorate, the 1267/1989 Monitoring Team and the Counter Terrorism Implementation Task Force Office. Such a multifaceted approach was critical to improving Member States’ political will and capacities to address the challenges of terrorism and prevent the radicalization and recruitment of foreign terrorist fighters. He urged States to consider how best to use laws to cover those seeking to travel to become foreign terrorist fighters at the earliest possible stage, as well as those who facilitated others’ travel, including through recruitment.
He called for continued coordination among United Nations entities and with external partners, such as the Global Counterterrorism Forum, that advanced practical implementation of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. He also urged Member States to support and help build the capacity of the Organization’s Counter-Terrorism Centre, among other entities. Lauding the 18 universal instruments that established a thorough legal framework to counter terrorism, he said that they would only be effective if widely ratified and implemented. His own country was making advances, having obtained the legislation necessary to implement and deposit instruments of ratification and accession for, among others, the Nuclear Terrorism Convention and the 2005 Protocols to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Maritime Navigation. However, he recognized that negotiations on the comprehensive convention on international terrorism were at an impasse.
LI YONGSHENG (China), underscoring the importance of removing the breeding grounds of terrorism, said the international community should give high priority to poverty eradication, promoting development and improving people’s livelihood. A pragmatic cooperation at the multilateral and bilateral levels would be the establishing of a counter-terrorism data bank and the sharing of intelligence among States. In addition, there was a need for vigilance on the “back flow” of terrorist fighters. The clear increase in foreign terrorist fighters posed a serious threat to countries of origin, transit and destination and had a huge potential to spread terrorism. Countries must strengthen effective coordination and those concerned should reinforce border control and law enforcement cooperation to cut off the flow of terrorists.
He stressed the need to combat the use of the Internet for terrorist and extremist propaganda, recruitment, incitement, planning and financing. All countries should effectively implement relevant United Nations resolutions, enhance cyber regulation and work jointly to shut down channels for spreading terrorist and extremist ideas. On a national level, the perennial threat posed by the East Turkistan terrorist force had grown in strength and had stepped up efforts to “gang up” with international terrorist forces. The Government had carried out special operations against violent terrorist activities. Counter-terrorism legislation had been improved and de-radicalization was under way to raise awareness among the public, while forcefully suppressing the use of the Internet by religious extremists to spread their ideas and beliefs.
INGA KANCHAVELI (Georgia), associating herself with the European Union Delegation, said her Government had established an interagency mechanism and a working group to enhance its counterterrorism capacities. At the bilateral level, her country had concluded international agreements / memoranda of understanding on cooperation with 25 countries. Expressing support for the United States-led effort to counter the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant/Sham (ISIL/ISIS), she said her country had joined three counter-ISIL working groups on counter-financing, counter-messaging and foreign terrorist fighters.
In order to counter the recruitment of its nationals as foreign terrorist fighters, her Government had strengthened its border security, she said. Underscoring that the occupation of 20 per cent of its territory was its most pressing problem, she said that, like other “grey zones” of the world where international control mechanisms were either non-existent or very weak, there existed grave potential for its use in various illegal activities, including those related to terrorism. Several attempts at smuggling nuclear and radioactive materials through the occupied Georgian territory in recent years further amplified that danger.
ELH MALAM MANZO AMINOU (Niger), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, the African Group and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), said since 2014 his country had seen repeated attacks by the Boko Haram group, which had shown no mercy to his country or its neighbours. That group’s terrorist attacks had hampered his country’s development activities and had made it more vulnerable to organized crime, including drug trafficking, smuggling of weapons, and money laundering. His Government had put together appropriate responses, illustrative of its resolve to combat terrorism and all forms of trafficking.
He went on to say that his country also had acceded to almost all legal counter-terrorism instruments and had equipped itself with a specific legal arsenal, including legislation and initiatives to counter terrorist financing, money laundering, human trafficking, and smuggling of migrants, among others. It had also developed a national strategy for security in the Sahel Sahara region. In addition, it had signed conventions and engaged with several neighbours to coordinate regional cooperation for development and security.
BASHAR ABDULAH E R S ALMOWAIZRI (Kuwait), associating himself with the OIC and the Non-Aligned Movement, said his country had ratified major counter-terrorism instruments and had been involved in the conclusion of a number of regional conventions that had become equal to national law once ratified. He called on Member States to finalize a comprehensive anti-terrorism convention, which included a clear definition of terrorism and State terrorism, underscoring the importance of not “mixing” the right of people to self-determination and resistance to aggression.
His country, he continued, had hosted the forty-second session of the OIC Ministerial Council in May 2015 during which it emphasized the need to unify efforts to protect States, societies and religions. Enhanced cooperation was needed, in particular, to counter terrorism and foreign terrorist fighters. He condemned terrorist attacks in Iraq and Syria, adding that his country too had suffered from terrorist crimes last June, when 27 Kuwaitis had fallen victims while in a place of worship. His country was made more determined to counter terrorism. A culture of tolerance and peaceful coexistence was at the heart of its policies at the domestic and foreign levels.
MARIYAN MIDHFA NAEEN (Maldives), expressing hope that progress could be made on drafting a comprehensive convention during the current session, welcomed Council resolutions 2170 (2014) and 2178 (2014) as they formed a global strategy that acknowledged and took measures to address the hazards posed by foreign fighters. As a country where Islam dominated the social fabric, she asserted that the “so-called Islamic State” and similar groups were not only un-Islamic, but anti-Islamic. They were not religious groups, but terrorist organizations and must not be tolerated.
Her Government was working to raise awareness of Islam’s core principles of moderation, tolerance and peace, and combating practices associated with radicalism such as under-age and forced marriages, among others, she said. It was also striving to educate, empower and provide opportunity to the country’s large youth population and had initiated national strategies, including legislative reforms, in such areas as prevention of travel by Maldivians to join foreign terrorist organizations and of financing for terrorism. In collaboration with a number of United Nations entities, law enforcement agencies, civil society and the judiciary were also enhancing their capacities in the area.
Ms. ALDOSARI (Bahrain), noting that Bahrain had struggled against terrorism at home and abroad, said her country was working with the international community through conventions and accords, including being part of the coalition fighting ISIS. It was also working to implement all relevant resolutions and the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The country strictly controlled its borders and worked with the Gulf Cooperation Council on the matter. She enumerated domestic laws, among them one protecting society against terrorist acts, and said the country had defined terrorism. In November 2012, Bahrain had played host to a conference on preventing the financing of terrorism that had resulted in the Manama Declaration. It would host another conference on terrorism-related matters in November of this year.
MALEEHA LODHI (Pakistan), associating with the OIC and the Non-Aligned Movement, urged that “the unfair and biased portrayal of Islam and Islamic beliefs was unacceptable and must not be allowed to continue.” Acts of incitement and hate speech against Muslims exacerbated and fostered misperceptions between the Islamic world and the West. Those challenges must be addressed through political, normative and legal measures, as well as through dialogue and diplomacy. Her country had lost tens of thousands of lives to terrorism. Resolved to eliminate the scourge, a multi-pronged strategy, including a comprehensive national action plan and a military-led law enforcement operation, Zarb-e-Azab, against terrorists, had been adopted. Zarb-e-Azb, the largest anti-terrorism campaign against terrorists anywhere, involving 180,000 of the country’s security forces, had made substantial progress.
Her country’s national action plan included police and security initiatives, political and legal measures and social and economic packages, she went on to say. Other initiatives included the propagation of counter-narratives to extremist ideology, economic development of areas at risk, skills development for its youth, and capacity-building of its justice and security officials, to name a few. Underscoring the importance of international law, she called for the cessation of drone strikes in her country’s border areas. She expressed support for the OIC position on a consensus-based comprehensive convention that was consistent with international humanitarian law.
DIANGUINA DIT YAYA DOUCOURÉ (Mali), associating himself with the African Group and Non-Aligned Movement, said that in 2012 his country had fallen victim to terrorist groups and religious extremism. To counter terrorism and organized crime, it had adopted legislation and had ratified the majority of legal instruments in that regard. It had also engaged in initiatives with neighbouring States. Currently it was the Chair of the Ministerial Coordination Platform for the Sahel and the Sahel Group of Five [Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania and Niger]. Underscoring the need for dialogue and mutual understanding to discredit the values of hatred and intolerance, he welcomed the nascent and promising cooperation between his country and Morocco to train Mali Imams in Morocco. That initiative, which had expanded to other countries, would allow the propagation of the Islamic values of peace, tolerance and acceptance of others. Turning to foreign terrorist fighters, he reiterated support for Security Council resolution 2178 (2014), as well as for the international coalition against Da’esh and its acolytes in Africa and around the world.
ALI NASIMFAR (Iran), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, said that State terrorism had targeted scientific and technological development in his country, including assassinations and cyber-attacks. However, terrorism should not be equated with “the legitimate struggle of people under colonial or alien domination”, a matter of particular importance when defining terrorism in any international legal instrument.
He went on to say that he rejected the unilateral preparation of lists accusing other States of “sponsoring terrorism” as that was inconsistent with international law and was being used as a political tool to advance other agendas. Genuine facts should be the criteria for dealing with the listing and de-listing of terrorist groups and organizations. Responding to remarks made by the representative of the “Israeli regime”, he said that regime was “built on the basis of intimidation, terror and occupation” and that “the continued occupation of Palestine and the atrocities against its people” had fuelled extremism in the region and beyond.
M. KOTESWARA RAO (India) said that the Committee’s efforts to develop a draft of the comprehensive convention on international terrorism had “languished” because of issues of definition since India had first brought the proposal in 1996. There could be no distinction between “good and bad terrorism”, he stressed, adding that “terrorism has no religion at all”. India had also been at the forefront of global counter-terrorism efforts and initiatives such as the Financial Action Task Force. It strongly condemned direct or indirect financial assistance given to terrorist groups or individual members by States. Among others, Security Council resolution 2199 (2015) in particular obliged States to ensure that any person participating in the financing, planning or perpetration of terrorism acts or in supporting them should be brought to justice.
KAITARO NONOMURA (Japan) said that international society must cooperate and work towards comprehensive counter-terrorism measures. His country was making efforts according to three pillars: strengthening counter-terrorism measures; enhancing diplomacy towards stability and prosperity in the Middle East; and assistance to create societies resilient to radicalization. Recent efforts focussed on strengthening border security capacities in North Africa and the Sahel. His country was also enhancing counter-terrorism dialogues with several countries and organizations, including the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), and was engaged in countering violent extremism, an underlying factor of terrorism. To that end, Japan would convene a conference on countering violent extremism at the Hedayah Centre in 2016.
NIKOLA IVEZAJ (Montenegro), aligning himself with the European Union, said that the United Nations’ fight against terrorism was crucial, both in the global agenda as well as on the level of assisting Member States in their abilities to prevent such acts. Montenegro had never faced a terrorist act, but given that global terrorism and organized crime posed a serious threat to international peace and security, the country was continuously improving the system for prevention of terrorist activities. Terrorism was a challenge that affected everyone, and countries could not isolate themselves. The international community should act together, learning the lessons of the past, and tackle the root causes of terrorism while fully aware that each country had its own speed and pace.
MAHMOUD SAIKAL (Afghanistan), aligning himself with the OIC and the Non-Aligned Movement, said that, following the withdrawal of tens of thousands of international troops from his country in 2015 and the establishment of the National Unity Government, the Taliban and other terrorist groups had accelerated their campaign against the Afghan people. His country’s forces were at the forefront of the international war on terrorism, having defended Afghanistan, the region and the world against external terrorist elements, and in the face of tremendous hardships. It was continuing to fight thousands of international terrorists and groups, derailing many plots and killing scores of enemy combatants. Those terrorists continued to receive support from outside Afghanistan’s borders. The use of violent non-State actors and terrorists for proxy wars must be ended. Rival States should not turn a third country into a battleground to advance their agenda.
Underscoring that Afghanistan had been a victim of regional State-orchestrated violence for the last twenty years, he stressed that “Unless the mentality of using violence in pursuit of political objectives changes, achieving peace in Afghanistan will be very difficult.” The Government was engaging its neighbours and promoting regional cooperation towards a comprehensive approach to the threat. A comprehensive strategy to combat terrorism and violent extremism must be long-term and multilateral and deal with poverty, marginalization and economic inequality, which enabled conditions for recruitment. Furthermore, education and critical thinking must be promoted. Looking forward to the Secretary-General’s action plan, he highlighted the need for an early conclusion of the comprehensive convention.
LOURDES ORTIZ YPARRAGUIRRE (Philippines), associating him/herself with the Non-Aligned Movement and ASEAN, said that enhancing cooperation at all levels was the raison d’être of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Since the adoption by the Assembly of resolution 49/60 in 1995, the exchange of information among Member States, international and regional organizations had been crucial to that cooperation. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the Counter-Terrorism Task Force and the Organization’s Counter-Terrorism Executive Directorate had all contributed to the exchange of best practices and capacity building, especially among security and law enforcement agencies.
Domestically, she noted that her country had long supported global efforts to counter violent extremism, a capacity it continued to develop through raising security awareness in local communities and training them to prevent terrorist attacks. De-radicalization programmes, in partnership with local religious leaders and schools, were also under way. Among new developments she noted a national consultation process that countered violent extremism and drew wide stakeholder support, especially from women and youth, and an inter-agency entity that, once fully created, would streamline mechanisms in monitoring a suspected traveller or person with potential to become a foreign terrorist fighter. She also stressed the need for political will to finalize a draft comprehensive convention on international terrorism.
OLEKSIY SHAPOVAL (Ukraine), aligning with the European Union, said his country was closely engaged with many international and regional organizations, including, among others, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, the Financial Action Task Force, and the Georgia, Ukraine, Azerbaijan and Moldova Organization for Democracy and Economic Development. Ukraine was taking a leading role in efforts aimed at preventing nuclear terrorism and promoting non-proliferation by implementing the pledge to eliminate its national stocks of highly enriched uranium.
Combatting activities of individual terrorists and terrorist groups was insufficient if the problem of sponsor States was not properly addressed, he went on to say. That was true both in the Middle East and in the Donbas region of Ukraine. International terrorism had proven to have better flexibility than the political will of nations, and was taking hybrid forms, with States and non-State actors becoming interlinked. Terrorist groups claimed that their criminal acts were in the name of “national self-determination”, resistance to “oppressive political regimes”, or the struggle for one’s rights. However, any justification of terrorism, especially through twisting and arbitrarily interpreting the United Nations Charter, was unacceptable. The need for a universal international instrument to counteract terrorism in a comprehensive and consistent manner was not only urgent but long overdue.
PHAM QUANG HIEU (Viet Nam), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and ASEAN, said his country had focused its efforts on reinforcing the rule of law at the national level and had engaged in cooperation at the bilateral and multilateral levels. In 2014, its law on counter-terrorism had come into effect, setting out a comprehensive legal framework to better combat terrorism and foster the country’s international cooperation. Underscoring the importance of cooperation with the United Nations, in particular, he said his country was participating in the Organization’s counter-terrorism programmes. In 2014, it had ratified the International Convention on Suppression of Terrorist Bombing and the Convention against the Taking of Hostages of 1979. It was party to 12 major international counter-terrorism instruments.
KADRA AHMED HASSAN (Djibouti), associating herself with the Non-Aligned Movement, the African Group and the OIC, said that because the East Africa region had been one of the first victims of attacks by terrorist groups, it had developed knowledge of terrorist groups’ functions and strategies that could be shared. To counter terrorism, her country had harmonized national laws with relevant international provisions, including universal legal instruments and Security Council resolutions. In February 2014, a second forum to combat terrorism in the Gulf of Aden was held where it decided to implement a cooperation and policy mechanism between Yemen, Somalia and Djibouti.
Her country’s armed forces also participated in the African Union Mission in Somalia (AMISOM) to put an end to the terrorist activities of Al-Shabaab, she said. At the regional level, it was engaged, in particular, with the Intergovernmental Authority for Development. Her country had also decided to create a centre of excellence to counter violent extremism, as its Head of State had announced during the Assembly’s debate. She reiterated thanks to the United States Government for its driving role in combating violent extremism through various meetings in which her country had participated. Those initiatives were vital for neutralizing the terrorist threat and had made collective action both tangible and decisive.
RHEE ZHA HYOUNG (Republic of Korea) said the recent savagery of terrorist groups and foreign terrorist fighters were posing new threats well beyond the region, as ISIL and other transnational terrorist organizations continued to claim countless innocent lives and caused unprecedented levels of refugees, particularly with the increased number of foreign terrorist fighters. The security concerns that stemmed from the increase of those fighters, many of whom returned to their home countries, posed a serious threat to the larger international community. His country was accelerating efforts to implement resolutions 2170 (2014) and 2178 (2014).
Terrorism bred on various plagues of society such as discrimination exclusion, and inequality, he said. He supported the efforts to implement the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, which aimed to address the key components of terrorism, notably weapons, funding and networks. For the past several years, the negotiations on the draft comprehensive convention had remained at an impasse and substantial challenges were yet to be overcome. The scale and dimension of terrorist threats and suffering faced today called for flexibility in order to bring the negotiations to a close. It was imperative to go forward and rise above differences.
MOHAMMED BESSEDIK (Algeria) said that the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy must be made relevant and contemporary in light of emerging new threats and evolving trends of international terrorism. The struggle against extremism and terrorism must also include the fight against xenophobia and “Islamophobia”, which had emerged as the new faces of violent extremism. In July 2015, his country had hosted the international conference on the fight against extremism and de-radicalization, which had offered an opportunity to share its experience in its fight against that phenomenon.
Noting the increase in incidents of kidnapping and hostage-taking by terrorist groups, he said his country’s well-known policy was not to pay ransoms or make other substantive concessions to hostage-takers. In the Sahel region, his country had engaged, among others, with the Working Group on the Sahel which Algeria and Canada were co-chairing under the global counterterrorism Forum. Furthermore, Algeria’s military deployments on its borders helped ensure its security as well as that of its neighbours. His country continued to contribute to the stabilization and promotion of peace in the Maghreb region, the north of Mali and the Sahel while respecting the principles of State sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs.
JEAN-FRANCIS R. ZINSOU (Benin), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and the African Group, said the strength and effectiveness of the counter-terrorism architecture depended on the weakest link in the chain. Needed was assistance to countries where terrorists were most active. Information exchange networks must be strengthened in order to deprive terrorists of all sources of financing. Underscoring that payment of ransoms was one of terrorist groups’ most lucrative sources of support, he said it was urgent for consensus to be reached on a global and comprehensive ban on the payment of ransoms, adding that international cooperation, assistance and capacity-building could prevent hostage-taking.
Similarly, he called for an increase in international dialogue to bring about a rapid conclusion on the draft comprehensive convention. His country had been engaged in sub-region and regional efforts to vanquish Boko Haram and other extremist groups. It had contributed men and material to multinational forces with Member States of the Lake Chad Basin Commission. It had also invested in promoting education and inter-cultural and inter-faith dialogue as a complementary pillar of action. He appealed to the international community to allocate resources to those projects in their collective efforts to rid the world of terrorism.
OUMAR SEIDOU HISSEIN (Chad) said that many States in Africa were facing terrorism and had to expend their resources on that fight to the detriment of economic and social development. His country had suffered attacks from Boko Haram, whose latest strategy was to use children as suicide bombers. That strategy had been used three days ago at a market in Baga Sola, in Chad’s border region, killing dozens. Such attacks had not prevented his country from combating terrorists in the Sahel, Mali and Nigeria, where Chad’s troops had inflicted significant losses. He noted that as President of the Security Council in 2014, Chad had initiated resolution 2195 relating to the growing link between terrorism and transnational organized crime and on measures against it. Terrorism could only be eradicated if existing instruments were implemented, he said, emphasizing the urgent need to conclude a comprehensive convention on combating terrorism under United Nations auspices. He proposed declaring 2016 as the “Year of the fight against terrorism”.
BERNARDITO AUZA, Permanent Observer of the Holy See, said that while there remained substantive disagreements on a comprehensive definition of terrorism, article 2 paragraph 1.b of the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, adopted by the Committee, offered a useful definition of that crime. That definition, he said, had already been accepted by the 187 States Parties to the Convention and had enabled the international community to adopt a host of welcome measures to counter terrorism. Bringing to mind the “utter savagery” seen in terrorists’ activities, he recalled the recent address to the General Assembly by Pope Francis who said that those realities must serve as “a grave summons to the examination of conscience on the part of those charged with the conduct of international affairs”.
The fight against international and all forms of terrorism required upholding of the rule of law, strict adherence to the Charter and to international law, and respect for fundamental human rights, he stressed. Underlying causes of terrorism must also be addressed. Expressing concern for the manipulation of religious faith to promote terrorist activities, he said Pope Francis had called repeatedly on all religious communities and leaders never to use religion as a pretext for committing acts of violence.
Right of Reply
In exercise of the right of reply, a representative of Turkey said her country categorically denied the allegations of the Syrian regime, which had lost its legitimacy and had resorted to all means to stay in power, including chemical weapons, barrel bombs, targeted killings, systematic abuse and torture. The brutal acts of that regime had resulted in gross violations of human rights and had exacerbated the situation in Syria.
She said that Syria, which had been categorized as a State sponsor of terrorism, had been condemned several times for its well-known policies of aiding terrorists and providing a haven for their leaders. It was not in a position to lecture her country on counter-terrorism. Today, her country countered terrorism of all kinds. Its efforts were in line with democratic principles, the rule of law and international human rights. Its international cooperation to that end was well known by its partners.
Responding to his counterpart, a representative of Syria said that the Erdogan regime and its allies’ role in financing terrorism was clear. They also facilitated the travel and training of and provided support to foreign terrorist fighters, as well as mercenaries and extremists. Most of the 25,000 foreign terrorist fighters crossed the Turkish border into Syria and were there with the Turkish Government’s support. Turkey was supporting Da’esh, the Al Nusra Front and the Al-Mahdi Army, as well as other terrorist groups active in Iraq and Syria, indicating that the Erdogan regime was the main threat to peace and stability in the region as well as in Europe and the world.
He said that while the Turkish Government many years ago had said that it was going to have a zero problem policy, the regime’s action in recent years indicated a policy that was in fact “zero rule of law and zero morals”, inspired by dreams of hegemony, colonization and a desire to bring back the Ottoman Empire and Sultanate and to have the Erdogan Empire. Not only did they pose a threat to international peace and security, they harmed the reputation of the Turkish people. “We are brothers with them and have compassion for them… we have good relations with the Turkish people,” he concluded.
Opening Remarks on Rule of Law
STEPHEN MATHIAS, Assistant Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, touching on the Secretary-General’s report on Strengthening and coordinating United Nations rule of law activities (document A/70/206), said the document highlighted the broad range of work carried out by the twenty United Nations entities belonging to the Rule of Law Coordination and Resource Group (RoLCRG). Those bodies focused on the areas of rule of law promotion at the international and national levels as well as efforts undertaken to strengthen system-wide coordination and coherence over the past year.
Noting that the subtopic for the current year, “the role of multilateral treaty processes in promoting and advancing the rule of law”, had particular relevance to the Office of Legal Affairs, he highlighted a few aspects of how the Office supported the development of a robust, open and transparent multilateral treaty framework, a commitment reflected in the Charter. He recounted how the position prevailing at the Organization’s founding had been transformed into a “relatively mature” system of international law, anchored in a web of treaties, at the core of which lay a series of law-making international conventions. He also elaborated the roles of the various entities, from the Office of Legal Counsel to the Treaty Section and the Codification Division in contributing to further strengthening the international order.
The report emphasizes developments related to the role of multilateral treaty processes in promoting and advancing the rule of law; recent developments in those processes; activities of the Secretariat in that regard and provides highlights on the development and promotion of the international framework of norms and standards. It also addresses international courts and tribunals; international hybrid criminal courts and tribunals; and non-judicial and Security Council accountability and support mechanisms.
It further details the Organization’s support for rule of law at the national level in such areas as constitution-making; law reform and justice systems; access to justice and other areas. On system-wide coordination and coherence it focuses on those efforts at Headquarters; with regard to country-level requests; country-level rule of law arrangements; and strengthening the rule of law within the Organization.
SANTIAGO VILLALPANDO, Chief of the Treaty Section, said that the General Assembly had played a key role in the law of treaties throughout its seventy years, by initiating and conducting multilateral treaty processes and adopting numerous multilateral conventions that “defined our world”. From 1977 to 1984 the Assembly undertook a review of the multilateral treaty-making process aimed at assessing the efficiency of the methods employed in negotiations conducted under United Nations auspices, resulting in the adoption of recommendations and resolutions to improve that work.
Since then multilateral treaty activity had grown exponentially, he continued, with the Treaty Section currently discharging the depositary functions of more than 560 multilateral treaties and processing over 900 treaty actions per year. Those treaties covered all aspects of international relations. The actors involved in multilateral treaty processes had multiplied with the increase in the number of States in the international community as well as the growing role of other stakeholders. Multilateral treaties themselves had become more complex, resulting in new developments in treaty law and practice.
Statements on Rule of Law at National and International Level
GHOLAMHOSSEIN DEHGHANI (Iran) speaking on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement, said it was indispensable to maintain balance in developing the national and international dimensions of the rule of law. However, there was concern over the continuing encroachment by the Security Council on the functions and power of the General Assembly and the Economic and Social Council by taking up issues which fell within the competence of the latter organs. Recognizing the importance of national ownership in rule of law activities, he reiterated the need to take into account the customs and national political and socioeconomic realities to prevent the imposition of pre-established models upon Member States.
He also welcomed the resolution which had accorded to Palestine the status of non-Member Observer State in the United Nations, and reaffirmed support for the State of Palestine, which included its admission to membership in the United Nations, in fulfilment of the application that remained pending before the Security Council. As freedom of expression was not absolute, its exercise should be carried out with responsibilities in accordance with the relevant international human rights law and instruments.
KHIANE PHANSOURIVONG (Lao People’s Democratic Republic), speaking for ASEAN, associated himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and said that the rule of law was an important foundation for universal respect for the principles of justice in accordance with the Charter. It was relevant to all three pillars of the United Nations — peace and security, development, and human rights. As a rules-based inter-governmental organization, ASEAN was making strides toward establishing an ASEAN Community by the end of the year.
In April of this year, ASEAN leaders had adopted a declaration which included further commitments to enhancing judicial systems and legal infrastructure in order to maintain a peaceful and harmonious environment, he said. On human rights, ASEAN reaffirmed the role of the ASEAN Inter-Governmental Commission on Human Rights as the overarching human rights institution to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people in the region. The Commission’s efforts in finalising its five-year work plan, a continuation of its 2010-2015 plan, was commendable.
LIZANNE ACHING (Trinidad and Tobago), speaking for the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and associating herself with the Non-Aligned Movement and CELAC, said the sub-topic chosen for consideration under the agenda item was particularly significant, given the importance of the multilateral treaty process in developing a comprehensive legal framework and promoting the rule of law at all levels. Underscoring that domestic implementation of international laws was enhanced through the provision of technical assistance and capacity building to Member States, she reiterated calls for adequate financing to the Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law. In addition, the growing number of ratifications to the Kampala Amendments to the Rome Statute was welcomed and all States Parties, which had not yet done so, should accelerate efforts to ratify the amendments so that it could enter into force by 2017.
She said she also looked forward to the adoption of an internationally legally binding instrument under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the issue of conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction. Underscoring the importance of the rule of law in laying the foundation for sustainable development and protection of mankind’s common heritage, she said that CARICOM, as a group of countries from a region highly vulnerable to the unprecedented loss of marine biodiversity and the impacts of unsustainable practices on the marine environment, viewed the conclusion of a legally binding instrument to address those matters as inextricably linked to the pursuit of justice and fairness for all.
AGUSTÍN FORNELL (Ecuador), speaking for the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), said that mechanisms within the Latin American and Caribbean region played a significant role in promoting the rule of law among its member States. The Community recognized the necessary link between the rule of law at the international and national levels, which were not parallel and separate concepts but, in fact, interlinked. Advancing the rule of law at the national and international levels was essential for achieving sustainable development, eradicating poverty and hunger, and for fully realizing Human Rights, including the right to development.
The Regional Seminar on Treaty Law and Practice for States in the region of Latin America and the Caribbean held in Asuncion, Paraguay this May was very productive, he continued. Participants there had emphasized the importance of continuing the provision of regional training seminars on a regular basis. Multilateralism played an important role in the treaty making process, spearheaded by the General Assembly, for the progressive development and codification of international law. That had allowed the international legal framework to continuously respond to the transformations of the community and the needs of an ever more globalized world. The Latin American and Caribbean region was very active in the development of international law at the regional level, and had paved the way for similar norms reflected in universal treaties.
THEMBILE JOYINI (South Africa), speaking for the African Group and associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement, said that multilateral treaties were an integral aspect of a comprehensive and robust legal framework to ensure that the rule of law governed relations between States of all sizes. It was a broad and complex concept embedded in the history of all cultures and nations as well as in long-standing efforts of States to create an international community based on law. As well, it was linked to critical goals such as poverty reduction and sustainable human development, peace-building and peacekeeping, accountability for gross human rights violations and combating organized crime and terrorism.
Capacity building was key to the promotion of the rule of law at the national level and to strengthening Member States’ national capacities, he continued. However, determining needs and priorities should be anchored in local or national ownership. Because the activities of the Rule of Law Unit aimed at bringing about better coherence, coordination and quality of rule of law capacity-building, he encouraged the Unit to explore initiatives that would enable donors, recipients and other entities involved in financing rule of law activities to work in a more collaborative and coordinated manner. He also called upon States to ensure that the rules of various international law instruments they had adopted were effectively implemented domestically according to national legislation.
GILLES MARHIC (European Union) underscored that multilateral treaties were vitally important tools for promoting international relations in which justice and peace prevailed. The European Union was a contracting party in an increasing number of international agreements, often alongside its member States and its participation in multilateral treaties had strengthened treaty law and practice. Commending the work of the Office of Legal Affairs, he said the use of new technologies for the Treaty Section database, a particularly useful tool for legal practitioners around the world, made information more accessible and transparent. Looking ahead to the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in Paris, he expressed hope for a fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement that covered both mitigation and adaptation.
Turning to the International Criminal Court and other international criminal tribunals in the promotion of the rule of law, he noted the importance of an effective and efficient interplay between national justice systems and the Court. In July of this year the Union had adopted an ambitious new Action Plan on Human Rights and Democracy, which would guide its work for the next five years. It would also adopt by the end of 2015 a policy on support to transitional justice to ensure its active and consistent role in situations where past violations or abuses had occurred. The Organization’s many initiatives with Member States were timely and relevant in the context of pledges made in 2012 towards sharing knowledge and best practices, as well as enhancing international cooperation. He underlined the importance of that pledging process and the need to implement the pledges made.
RASMUS BØGH JOHANSEN (Denmark), also speaking for the Nordic Countries, noted that a forward-looking plan of action could be agreed upon to “take our common agenda forward”. It was important to maintain a comprehensive approach to the concept. While rule of law at the national level should be at the core of the agenda item under discussion, he stressed support for the international courts and tribunals and called on Member States that had not done so to consider accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. The international and hybrid criminal courts and tribunals could play a crucial role where legal processes were de facto unavailable at the national level.
The international criminal justice system must be strengthened, he went on to say. Justice must be brought to victims of crimes of mass atrocity for inclusive and lasting peace. States must shoulder their responsibilities at the national level and close any gaps in impunity that might exist to complement efforts by international jurisdictions. Noting the Nordic countries’ long tradition of close regional cooperation and the hundreds of treaties concluded among them, he said such relations had improved rule of law in the region. More broadly he said that multilateral treaty processes were constantly evolving and that every treaty was a sign of trust and international cooperation. Emphasizing that the rule of law could not be described simply as a legal doctrine or set of principles, he said, “It is only our actions that give meaning to our principles”.
GILES NORMAN (Canada) also speaking on behalf of Australia and New Zealand, welcomed the inclusion in the 2030 Sustainable Goals of “the promotion of the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensuring equal access to justice for all.” Transitional justice efforts, which encapsulated truth-seeking measures, justice initiatives, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence, could strengthen the rule of law and help resolve societal grievances that might have led to conflict in the first place. For that reason, Canada, New Zealand and Australia had been supportive of a range of nationally owned transitional justice mechanisms.
The primary responsibility for enhancing the rule of law rested with States, he went on to say. For Canada, the promotion and support of law was one of the country’s national priorities, as it supported national rule of law capacity development in fragile and conflict-affected areas such as in Ukraine, Haiti, Colombia and Afghanistan. The Australian aid program prioritized the promotion of effective governance, including access to justice. New Zealand’s support for promotion of the rule of law made its mark in the form of assistance and capacity-building initiatives with its neighbours. The country had in 2015 provided sitting judicial officers to elections in the Papua New Guinea Autonomous Region of Bougainville.
STEFAN BARRIGA (Liechtenstein) said that while the number of multilateral treaties had “grown exponentially” the Committee had contributed relatively little in that regard in recent years. The products of the International Law Commission and other draft legal instruments had been rarely converted into treaties in the Committee’s Chamber. “This is a worrying trend, and one that is partially caused by our insistence on concluding treaties by consensus,” he underscored. Voted treaties, such as the Arms Trade Treaty and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, could be very successful from the beginning, and their acceptance could grow further over time. In contrast, striving for consensus without even the possibility of a vote as an alternative greatly reduced the incentive to compromise. That could lead to prolonged deadlock or to treaties of such diluted content that Parliaments would have little interest in ratifying them. In general, seeking the strongest possible support of countries that were actually interested in ratifying a treaty therefore seemed to be a better goal than seeking consensus for the sake of it.
Recalling the concern expressed by some delegations in past debates that insufficient attention had been paid to the rule of law at the international level, he said it was primarily up to States themselves to take action to achieve the desired balance. That was particularly true with respect to accountability and independent adjudication of disputes, which were largely dependent on the active consent of the States concerned. Noting that not all Member States had accepted the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice or were parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, he said consenting to those and other forms of international adjudication was the most concrete support any State could give to the rule of law at the international level. Any such commitment, however, must not waver in the face of inconvenient outcomes. Judges’ decisions must be accepted and implemented, once final, even when not agreeable — an ultimate expression of commitment to the rule of law.
GUSTAVO MEZA-CUADRA VELÁSQUEZ (Peru), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and CELAC, said that, as part of the Latin American Group, his country had played a role in developing the Charter based on the new realities of that time and went on to detail measures on the rule of law that had been taken since that time, as well as the United Nations bodies that had contributed to them. He also highlighted the role Peru had played as President of the Conference of Parties on Climate Change, which worked to lay a basis for an international agreement. Noting that the rule of law and sustainable development were closely linked, he encouraged the current General Assembly to continue finding linkages across the three pillars of the United Nations.
DANIELLE YEOW PING LIN (Singapore), associating with ASEAN and the Non-Aligned Movement, said that the rule of law was the cornerstone of her country’s stability and continued to provide the framework for its proper functioning. She voiced full support for the stand-alone goal on rule of law in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Discussing the “virtuous cycles” brought by multilateral treaties and their negotiation processes, she noted that the promotion and observance of the international rule of law was particularly important to small States. Small did not equate to insignificant. Small States could promote and function as neutral, trusted venues for the resolution of disputes. Listing challenges faced by small States, she questioned the increasing infusion of different subject domains and specialised streams of international law in the same treaty-making forum, among other issues to reflect on.
MOHAMMAD MAHMUDUZZAMAN (Bangladesh), associating himself with the Non-Aligned Movement and noting that his country was the world’s eighth-largest democracy, expressed his belief that the rule of law was necessary for promotion of sustainable peace and development in any society. Reviewing recent national legislation which aimed at safeguarding the rights of all citizens, he noted that countering terrorism remained at the top of the national agenda. Fully supporting efforts to uphold the sovereign equality of all States, to respect their territorial integrity and political ideology, he said that advancing the rule of law at the national and international levels was essential for sustained and inclusive economic growth.
TANIERIS DIEGUEZ LAO (Cuba), associating herself with the Non-Aligned Movement and CELAC, said a true rule of law began with a reformed United Nations. The role of the General Assembly — the only organ with universal membership and with the exclusive function of the progressive development and codification of international law — needed to be strengthened. True rule of law meant the democratization of international, economic, monetary and financial organizations in order to place them at the service of the development of peoples and not for the enrichment of a few. Her country was committed to the broad and extensive reform of the Security Council to turn it into an inclusive, transparent and democratic organ that reflected the interests of the international community.
Recalling the High-Level Declaration on the Rule of Law, she said the international community must work for the real implementation of the principles enshrined therein. She expressed concern in regards to the intentions to impose a concept on the rule of law and create a monitoring mechanism that went beyond the Sixth Committee. Another matter of concern was the lack of an adequate balance in addressing the rule of law at the national and international levels. The latter should be the focus given the nature of the Organization. The approach and inclination toward a national plan for the rule of law could give rise to interventionist interpretations. She also condemned and called for the immediate repeal of the economic, commercial and financial blockade imposed on her country for more than 50 years and urged compliance without delay to paragraph 9 of the High-Level Declaration.