 |
| Ambassador Lauro Liboon Baja, Jr.
of the Philippines Chairman, Sixth Committee. Chronicle photo | For the Sixth Committee, it's effectively taboo to bypass total agreement among its membership. Traditionally, it strives to embrace the opinion of every member and include it within the final body of opinion. This Committee, like the Second (Economic and Financial), runs on consensus. It has to, if its resolutions on international legal issues are to have more universal validity.
Sixth Committee Chairman Lauro Liboon Baja Jr. of the Philippines told the UN Chronicle that the effectiveness of any international law depended in the end on "the political will of countries themselves and a regional institution to monitor the observance of international law".
In the debate this year, the proposed vote on human cloning attracted the world's attention, but the buzz of other international law also filled the air, especially with regard to the International Criminal Court, the impact of international sanctions, the role of model legislative provisions of the UN Commission on International Trade Law (see box on page 32) and the definition of terrorism in the draft comprehensive convention on terrorism.
The Sixth Committee approved only 15 resolutions in 2003, including one recommending that the vote on a ban on reproductive cloning be postponed for a year until the fifty-ninth session of the General Assembly.
There are two basic positions on cloning within the Committee: to ban research on cloning altogether or to allow selective research for allied medical benefit. In interviews with the Chronicle, diplomats said that postponement was preferred over confrontation. In 2001, Germany and France initiated the resolution on the International convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings. Christian Much of Germany said that his country supported the position to postpone, as it was the "least bad of all the bad options"; the worst option, he added, would have been to force a vote this year. He said that the postponement would see in 2004, "in the worst-case scenario, an exchange of opposing opinions and no flexibility from either side; in the best-case scenario, an open dialogue and consensus on the issue and move toward a draft convention". Chairman Baja felt there was little or no opportunity for the positions to be reconciled. "There does not seem to be a clear-cut understanding among delegations of the wider implications of human cloning". The compromise to postpone, however, must be seen less as a lack of understanding than as earnest attempts at reconciling national positions, he said.
Brazil, for instance, supports a partial ban instead of a ban on all forms of cloning research. Its representative, Sydney Leon Romeiro, told the Chronicle that there was room to improve scientific research in his country, and a total ban would put an end to all inquiry. Since postponement could open up a position between total ban and a step-by-step approach, Brazil had voted for postponement.
Another contentious issue was the draft comprehensive convention on international terrorism. Negotiations continued over defining the term "terrorism". Ambassador Baja said that "if one really would focus on the definition of terrorism, it would not really be impossible, but it would be very, very difficult and ardous labour".
One delegate told the Chronicle in rather bleak terms: "I don't think there would be any future programme" on the terrorism convention. Chairman Baja, however, had a different take on the issue. Three countries, he said, came together to do something about terrorism. The Philippines, Indonesia and Malaysia did not define what terrorism is. "We just enumerated what would constitute terrorist acts, and with a chapeau that this is only for the purposes of that particular development. That could be another way out of the impasse", he explained, referring to the terrorism convention. Three more countries—Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia and Viet Nam—adhered to this trilateral arrangement on the establishment of communications procedures and exchange of information to combat terrorism. Even as efforts to define terrorism continued, the intent to fight it was apparent in the resolution on Measures to eliminate international terrorism. The Committee urged all States, as a matter of priority, to become party to current terrorism conventions and protocols while it continued to elaborate a draft comprehensive convention.
In the train of Committee resolutions that have had an impact on the evolution of international law, one concerned the International Criminal Court (ICC), which was created as a permanent court to investigate war crimes, genocide and crimes against humanity. In 1992, the General Assembly directed the International Law Commission to draft a proposal for an ICC, while the establishment by the Security Council of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia in 1993 and for Rwanda in 1994 created public interest in the Court. The ICC became operational in 2002 and judges were appointed. So far, 81 countries are parties to it.
On the recommendation of the Sixth Committee, the General Assembly adopted the resolution International Criminal Court, which invited the Secretary-General to conclude a "relationship agreement" between the United Nations and the ICC. When asked by the Chronicle how this relationship could be strengthened, Ambassador Baja said: "In the statute of the ICC itself, the Security Council has a role to play, because in instances when national jurisdiction fails to act on offences covered by the statute, the Security Council on its own will then determine when the United Nations will enter, independent of the findings of the (ICC) procedure." He also said that "the idea of a really independent criminal court to punish the crimes will be subject to the inherent procedural weaknesses of the membership of the UN".
While the crisis in collective security was the focus in the First Committee (Disarmament and International Security), delegations to the Sixth Committee also voiced their concerns while considering the report of the Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and on Strengthening of the Role of the Organization. Established during the twenty-ninth General Assembly session in 1974, the Special Committee was given a mandate to decide on government proposals concerning the effective functioning of the United Nations that might not require amendments to the UN Charter. In 2002, it was requested to consider, on a priority basis, the question of implementing Charter provisions related to assistance to third States affected by sanctions.
There was a "lively discussion" on sanctions in the Sixth Committee this year, Ambassador Baja said, adding that the effect of sanctions on third parties had become a priority item and that it was his view that sanctions on developing countries ultimately affected the people the most. Summing up the debate, he said: "Sanctions have been imposed by mostly developed countries. In most developing countries, it is the people, it's the masses, those who depend on local products to go into the export markets, who suffer from sanctions. Employment is affected, living standards are affected, and basic needs are prejudiced. On the other hand, if a country really does not listen to resolutions or consensus of the great majority of nations, then there is no other resort but sanctions."
With regard to the resolution, Implementation of the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations related to assistance to third States affected by the application of sanctions, it was decided that further measures must be elaborated within the Committee or a working group for such assistance at the 2004 Assembly session.
The Sixth Committee also adopted a cluster of other resolutions on international law, among them: the United Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination and Wider Appreciation of International Law. It authorizes the Secretary-General to award fellowships, scholarships and travel grants toward fulfilling this purpose. Chairman Baja, in a last word, said: "In most countries, we make international law or rules as part of the law of the nation. If that is the case, there is no need for a separate international body to enforce that provision; the respective national institutions will do it. But those hopes are way down the road. A nation still lives under the geopolitical reality … whatever nation casts a shadow will have the greatest say in international relations."
Cloning: An Ethical Divide
The Sixth Committee postponed its debate on a ban on human cloning, including medical research on stem cells. It voted 80 to 79, with 15 abstentions, to defer until 2005 the drafting of a treaty to ban all forms of human cloning. The delay was proposed by Iran on behalf of the 57-member Organization of the Islamic Conference. Costa Rica and the United States had lobbied intensively for a vote on a resolution, co-sponsored by some 50 countries, which would have established a working group to start the drafting.
A contending text—introduced by Belgium and co-sponsored by 13 other countries, including the United Kingdom, China, Singapore and Japan, and supported by France, Germany and other nations—called for a ban only on the cloning of embryos, leaving the question of cloning for research and medical experiments, or therapeutic cloning, to individual countries.
Cloning research relies on stem cells found in human embryos. Stem cells go on to differentiate into some 220 cell types that make up the human body. Reproductive cloning, which is aimed at creating a child, is regarded by virtually everyone as dangerous and unethical, but opinion on therapeutic cloning remains divided.
Scientists supporting therapeutic cloning say that the approach may offer promising treatment of Parkinson's, diabetes and other debilitating diseases. The stem cells harvested from cloned embryos can develop into any type of tissue and would not be rejected after implantation into the original donor.
Both reproductive and therapeutic cloning are set in motion when the genetic material in the nucleus of a human cell is transferred to an egg from which the nucleus has been removed. This egg can then be prompted to grow into an early embryo, which when implanted into a woman's womb could produce a baby. But the cells could also be collected for therapeutic use, and its opponents say that the use of the human embryo is unacceptable and unethical. Cloned animals, including Dolly the sheep that made headlines as the first-ever cloned mammal, have suffered serious health problems. For this and for reasons, reproductive cloning is already banned in over two dozen countries. —Namrita Talwar
|
|
UNCITRAL Strives Toward a Global Partnership for Development
The constellation of practices and procedures devised by the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) plots the road map for global partnerships for development. Established by the General Assembly in December 1966, UNCITRAL for nearly four decades has served as the core legal body of the United Nations system that is charged with reforming and harmonizing international trade law. It designed the UNCITRAL Legislative Guide on Privately Financed Infrastructure Projects in 2001 and approved the model legislative provisions as a supplement in 2003. Together with technical assistance from the Commission, these models serve as a reference for Governments desiring a legislative and legal framework favourable to private investment in their public infrastructure.
"UNCITRAL will always be at the cutting edge, meeting evolving needs from a legal perspective. Changes in the law often lag behind technological progress. UNCITRAL devises a legal and legislative framework that keeps pace with technological development, so that technical change can continue to move forward", UN Senior Legal Officer Stephen Katz, who worked with the Commission in Vienna for ten years, told the UN Chronicle. The Commission's focus is well directed since it provides private- and public-sector partners with a reference from which to draw rule-based, predictable and non-discriminatory provisions for concessionaire contracts.
Quite satisfied with the progress of UNCITRAL in the context of globalization, Sixth Committee Chairman Lauro Liboon Baja, Jr. of the Philippines explained to the Chronicle: "While the Commission is not involved with deciding legal issues or preparing holistic instruments, it handles codification of standards and practices from which countries and companies can draw." Indeed, potential private investors in public infrastructure complain about the absence of laws and regulations in host countries that facilitate private financing. To fill this void, the Legislative Guide helps create a favourable framework and provides, inter alia, a mechanism for Governments to apply the provisions in their constitutional law to infrastructure projects, regulatory processes and practices, project allocation and risks, private-partner selection procedures, and project construction and operation agreements, as well as settling disputes between partners.
The model legislative provisions cover specific recurring issues which the contracting authority of a host country and the private commercial enterprise must address in the governing contract. Customizing statutes and establishing legal precedents to meet political, socio-economic and cultural needs and characteristics are up to the host country. UNCITRAL, at the same time, is the compass directing the path along the journey to privately financed infrastructure projects. The emanating private- and public-sector mutual commitment to development, facilitated by the Commission's contributions, makes available to host countries the benefits of new technologies, all of which are geared toward achievement of the eighth Millennium Development Goal: "Develop a global partnership for development". — Fayth A. Ruffin
|
|
|
Print