At its night meeting yesterday, the Committee of the Whole concluded its first examination of the question of the role of the Security Council in referring situations to the Court. It also began consideration of the issues of admissibility of cases by the Court (articles 14 to 19).

 At the outset of the evening meeting the Acting Chairman of the Committee, summarizing the views expressed in the afternoon, said that many delegations felt the Security Council should be authorized to refer issues to the Court; some felt that they should be dealt with only under Chapter VII of the Charter and others also mentioned Chapter VI.  It was stressed that whatever Council action in relation to the Court, such action should always be taken in a formal meeting and by means of a resolution. Some delegations expressed the view that the Security Council should be involved only with matters related to the crime of aggression.  It was also suggested that other bodies, including the United Nations Commission on Human Rights and the International Committee of the Red Cross should be able to refer situations to the Court.  The delegations that did not favour Security Council involvement stressed that the Court is a judicial body which should not be influenced by the Security Council which is a political body.

Articles 14 to 19 on admissibility were introduced by John Holmes of Canada, Coordinator of negotiations on those articles.  Those articles refer particularly to the commonly known principle of complementarity, a basic principle of the draft statute as the Court is supposed to complement and not replace national judicial systems.

This morning the Committee of the Whole continued to discuss articles 14 to 19.  Later in the morning, the coordinator for article 20, Par Saland of Sweden introduced article 20.  He stressed that it is a key article because whenever in the statute there is reference to the word "law", it will provide a meaning.  The article, which concerns applicable law, has at this point 3 paragraphs.  Paragraph 3 is a consensus text.  Paragraph 1 has 2 options: option 1 supported by the majority and option 2 that is the view of the minority, according to Mr. Saland.

The Committee of the Whole adjourned at 3:45 p.m.  It will meet tomorrow morning to consider Part 4 of the draft statute on "Composition and Administration of the Court".