Sixth Committee, Upholding Tradition of Consensus in Historic Meeting, Approves Text to Begin Elaborating International Convention on Crimes Against Humanity
Delegations Also Send 15 Draft Texts to General Assembly for Adoption
Concluding its seventy-ninth session today, the Sixth Committee (Legal) approved, without a vote, 16 draft texts — one of which saw the Committee, in a historic process of informal discussions, able to maintain its tradition of consensus as it launched the process to negotiate an international convention to govern the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity.
Introducing that text, “United Nations Conference of Plenipotentiaries on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity” (document A/C.6/79/L.2/Rev.1), Gambia’s delegate reported that every effort had been made to accommodate proposals to reach this text and that the draft resolution “is the result of many exchanges and many hard and difficult choices”. A future convention, he urged, will serve as a tool for accountability and close the gap to impunity. “We must not lose sight of the enormous significance of the decision we are about to make,” he emphasized, but added: “All efforts have been exhausted towards consensus.”
To that, the Russian Federation’s representative said that the whole process of discussion was led by a group of States that have their own idea of “how work should be done”. The decision to convene a conference should be made after the relevant Working Group provides the relevant text. Underscoring that “consensus is more important than problematic issues”, she suggested that the meeting be paused so that delegations can meet informally to find an approach that suits everyone. “My delegation is ready to do everything it can to preserve this consensus,” she insisted.
The Committee then turned to other items on its agenda, as delegations met into the afternoon to arrive at a compromise text that would enjoy consensus. When the Committee resumed, the representative of Gambia announced: “I believe our struggle this afternoon has reached a consensus.”
The amended text saw changes to the dates on which such a conference would be convened, as well as language added to indicate the importance of “the aim of developing an instrument enjoying the broadest possible support”. Further amendments related to the manner in which certain stakeholders’ participation will be decided by the conference’s preparatory committee.
Developing a new international instrument on this topic is sensible only if it will have a chance to become universal, the Russian Federation’s representative stated, adding that consensus is crucial in this regard. Noting that some co-sponsors decided to gain “political dividends” from this process, she underscored that only a solid basis will lead to a universal treaty.
The Committee then approved the draft resolution, as amended, without a vote, as delegations broke into applause for the hard-won fight to uphold its tradition of consensus.
Following the approval of the draft text, many underlined the importance of the decision just taken. “This resolution carries monumental moral, legal, diplomatic and political significance for generations to come,” stressed the observer for the State of Palestine. Brazil’s representative observed: “It is high time the United Nations concluded a convention on prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity to be applied by national courts — a glaring gap in international law.”
Some pointed to the “historic” nature of today’s decision, including the representatives of the United Kingdom and United States. The representative of Jordan said this is a “milestone in the work of the Committee, and will make a huge difference in our common efforts to fight impunity and bring the perpetrators of the crimes against humanity to justice”.
Other delegations highlighted the work to come. Mexico’s representative said that today’s decision sets the Committee on the right path towards a formal negotiation process, voicing hope for a smooth, inclusive and transparent process toward the adoption of a UN convention to prevent and punish crimes against humanity. “It is now incumbent on us to work to achieve a convention that will gain wide acceptance and implementation,” declared Singapore’s delegate. “Failure to advance this progress now would make future progress even more difficult,” warned Sierra Leone’s representative.
Still others spotlighted the fact that the Committee maintained its tradition of consensus. Such practice is rooted in the idea that promoting international law requires collective support that leaves no country behind, observed Iran’s representative. Australia’s representative, also speaking for Canada and New Zealand, said that her bloc is an “adamant supporter” of the Sixth Committee’ consensus tradition. “Although not to Eritrea’s very satisfaction, it is crucial that we are agreeing to having a consensual text and move forward,” added that country’s representative.
However, the representative of the Czech Republic — noting that the resolution’s co-sponsors made “huge concessions” during negotiations — said that an “overreaching proposal” that was on the table was rejected multiple times. While noting that there was enough “time and will” on the side of co-sponsors, he called today’s process “bad-faith negotiations” on the part of the Russian Federation. “We can say we have gone really a long way to preserve the tradition of consensus from the threat of one delegation,” added the representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer.
Nevertheless, the representative of Gambia said that his delegation was grateful for being a part of this “most noble cause” and once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to make a difference. “We dare to lead a way forward, and we are grateful to all delegations that shared this daring journey of hope for a better world — a world without crimes against humanity and a world where voices of victims are heard louder than their perpetrators,” he said. It has been “a journey of pain and perseverance, but worthy of the fight endured”, he declared.
The draft resolution titled “Protection of persons in the event of disasters” (document A/C.6/79/L.16) also pertained to the drafting of a new international convention.
The representative of Jamaica, introducing the text, said it would have the General Assembly decide to elaborate and conclude a convention on this topic. “This is truly a milestone achievement and is a testament to our commitment to strengthening multilateralism as a Committee,” she emphasized. She added: “Our collective action will serve to provide greater protection to persons in the event of disasters and will be of particular benefit to developing countries.”
Following its approval without a vote, the representative of Colombia — also speaking for a cross-regional group of eight States — said that the adoption is a “historic moment” for the Committee. “With this decision, we commit to an ambitious, yet vital, goal,” she said, one that reflects a collective commitment to thorough, balanced deliberations and ensures that all voices will be heard. “The urgency of this task cannot be overstated,” she added, noting that disasters are increasing in frequency and severity, from cyclones in Yemen to wildfires in Chile.
Expressing solidarity with all people affected by disasters “whose frequency and seriousness are only getting worse,” El Salvador’s representative stressed that this instrument would strengthen mechanisms for all phases of disasters, without undermining other agreements. Her delegation was committed to fostering a constructive dialogue geared towards the adoption of a legally binding instrument on this crucial issue.
Another text that sparked debate was the draft resolution titled “Status of the Protocols Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and relating to the protection of victims of armed conflicts” (document A/C.6/79/L.17).
Introducing the text, Sweden’s representative — coordinator for the draft resolution — expressed regret that it had to be submitted as a technical rollover after weeks of negotiations. While the text placed under silence procedure captured the broadest possible agreement — and included many compromise proposals — she said that, given the time constraints and the Committee’s long-standing tradition of consensus, she opted for a technical rollover.
However, the Russian Federation’s representative — also speaking for Belarus, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Nicaragua and Syria — said that a technical rollover is appropriate when consensus is not reached on new proposals during negotiation. “It is of no help when a problem arises with the old wording,” she stated. Pointing to the “consistent degradation” of the International Criminal Court, she also said that the coordinator’s approach saw new language, important to certain delegations, lost. This decision did not resolve any problems. Rather, “it created new ones where we all lose out” and she therefore disassociated from consensus regarding preambular language referencing the Court.
Nevertheless, Switzerland’s representative, also speaking for a cross-regional group of 27 States and the European Union, thanked the coordinator who “spared no effort in seeking common ground on a genuine update of the resolution”. She expressed regret that one delegation requested the deletion of previously agreed, factual language regarding the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court while making a further request — already opposed by multiple delegations — to include new substantive language in the draft. “The [Court] is instrumental in the fight against impunity and enjoys our full support,” she underscored.
For his part, the representative of Burundi said that, while his delegation joined consensus, it would disassociate itself from the paragraphs related to the International Criminal Court, as it left the Rome Statute in 2017.
The Committee then approved the draft resolution without a vote.
Speaking afterwards, the representative of Andorra expressed regret that his country could not co-sponsor the draft resolution as it has not yet ratified the Protocols additional to the Geneva Conventions. Noting that the accession process commenced in the national legislature in November, he emphasized that — amid increasing armed conflict — this accession represents a significant step towards universal adoption of international-humanitarian-law instruments in his country.
Israel’s representative also disassociated from language concerning the International Criminal Court. “This body has shown a dangerous lack of responsibility and integrity, acting as merely a political tool by its outrageous decision yesterday to issue arrest warrants without any jurisdiction against the leaders of a democratic country fighting to protect itself,” he said.
Yet, the observer for the State of Palestine — also speaking for 17 African and Middle Eastern States — underscored that all States must uphold their obligation to protect civilians. Further, Israel, the occupying Power, broke silence on this resolution. “This does not come as a surprise,” she said, as this reflects Israel’s commitment — not to international humanitarian law, but to undermining, violating and manipulating the law to achieve its illegal military goals.
Other draft resolutions approved, without a vote, by the Committee today were “The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction” (document A/C.6/79/L.15); “Criminal accountability of United Nations officials and experts on mission” (document A/C.6/79/L.18); “Report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its fifty-seventh session” (document A/C.6/79/L.12); “Model Law on Warehouse Receipts” (document A/C.6/79/L.13); “Model Law on Automated Contracting” (document A/C.6/79/L.14); and “United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law” (document A/C.6/79/L.19).
Also approved without a vote were draft resolutions on “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-fifth session” (document A/C.6/79/L.7); “Consideration of effective measures to enhance the protection, security and safety of diplomatic and consular missions and representatives” (document A/C.6/79/L.9); “Report of the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organization” (document A/C.6/79/L.10); “The rule of law at the national and international levels” (document A/C.6/79/L.11); “Measures to eliminate international terrorism” (document A/C.6/79/L.6); and “Report of the Committee on Relations with the Host Country” (document A/C.6/79/L.5).
In other business, the Sixth Committee also authorized its Chair to sign a letter concerning the administration of justice at the United Nations and forward it to the President of the General Assembly; decide to recommend the deferral of a decision on observer status for the Regional Anti-Corruption Initiative to the eightieth session; and approve the draft decision, “Provisional programme of work of the Sixth Committee for the eightieth session” (document A/C.6/79/L.8).
Closing its seventy-ninth session, Rui Vinhas (Portugal), Chair of the Sixth Committee, noted that during the main part of the Committee’s session, 25 substantive agenda items were discussed over the course of the 39 meetings, while the Committee adopted 16 draft resolutions, 11 draft decisions and approved one letter on an agenda item allocated jointly with the Fifth Committee (Administrative and Budgetary).
“It has, once again, been an extraordinary event, a historic one even,” he declared, thanking delegates for their flexibility and cooperation that allowed the Committee to persevere its tradition of reaching agreement by consensus. “It is the hope of the Bureau that the Committee will seek to maintain this tradition in the future,” he concluded.
NEW – Follow real-time meetings coverage on our LIVE blog.