8 July 1998

The Committee of the Whole began this morning to hear the reaction of delegations to the discussion paper submitted by its bureau on contentious issues on matters related to crime, jurisdiction, and applicable law. The focus this morning was on article 5, crimes under the jurisdiction of the Court, and the main points related to the inclusion or not of the crime of aggression, the need for a threshold for war crimes, the weapons issue under war crimes, whether or not armed conflict not of an international character should be included in the Statute, and the inclusion or not of treaty crimes. An overwhelming number of delegations indicated that this part of the paper provides a sound and acceptable basis for further refinement.

A total of 23 delegations spoke, and the Committee will continue to hear their views in two meetings scheduled for this afternoon and evening.

Also this morning, the Committee was informed that the President of the Conference, Giovanni Conso, had received a letter from the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, asking States participating in the Conference to "find the necessary spirit of cooperation" in order to finalize the Statute on 17 July and create a court "which is strong and independent enough to carry out its task" (The text of the letter is contained in document A/CONF.183/INF/8)

On the question of aggression there was widespread support for the inclusion of that crime in the Statute, as long as there was agreement on an acceptable definition of the term and on the role of the Security Council as provided for in the UN Charter. Some delegations, however, noting the difficulty in reaching agreement on the definition, said they would be willing to accept an elaboration on the matter after the Conference. Other delegations noted that United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 contains most elements for the definition of the crime of aggression and should be included in the Statute. It was also mentioned that a General Assembly action under the "Uniting for Peace" resolution should also be considered as an additional trigger mechanism for the Court to consider a crime of aggression. There was a view that a determination of a crime of aggression by the Security Council should be considered as a procedural matter and thus not subject to a veto by a permanent member. Still other delegates felt that these crimes should be omitted from the Statute having due regard to the insurmontable difficulties regarding the definition of the role of the Security Council.

The need for a threshold for war crimes refers basically to a decision on whether the Court should have jurisdiction in respect of such crimes "only", or "in particular", when committed as part of a plan or policy or as part of a large commission of such crime. A third option would have that provision deleted. A great part of the delegations this morning supported the "in particular" option.

Also under war crimes there is a provision including among grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions the use of weapons, projectiles and material and methods of warfare which are of a nature to cause superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering. That statement, with slight variations, is followed by a list of those weapons. One option includes anti-personnel mines, blinding laser weapons and nuclear weapons, and the other, the so-called generic option, refers to other weapons that might become the subject of a prohibition, with a determination to be made by the Assembly of States Parties. Most delegations preferred the generic approach.

Also under war crimes, the question of whether or not armed conflict not of an international character should be included in the Statute received broad support. The representative of Sierra Leone provided a very graphic description of the internal conflict in his country and stressed the need to have this provision included, adding that he knew what he was talking about.

The inclusion or not of treaty crimes refers to jurisdiction of the Court over the crimes of terrorism, illicit drug traffic and crimes against United Nations personnel. Most speakers were against the inclusion of those crimes for different reasons, depending on the crime. However, it was stressed that the Court should not be overburden and should focus only on the core crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. There was also the view that this matter should be left for later review after the Statute has come into force for a period of time.

The Committee of the Whole started its afternoon meeting by listening to reports submitted by various working groups. At this point, there are 68 speakers listed to react on the discussion paper on contentious issues related to crime and jurisdiction.

The working group on general principles of criminal law completed its work. The Committee of the Whole decided to create a new working group chaired by Mr. Per Saland to discuss article 20 on applicable law.

For information purposes only - not an official record