Mr. President,

At the outset, I wish to congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption to the highest office of this Diplomatic Conference. It is indeed a profound pleasure for the delegation, of Indonesia to participate in the Conference and to see you presiding over our deliberations. I would also like to congratulate the other members of the bureau upon their respective elections. I remain fully confident that under your wise and able guidance coupled with the skills of the members of the bureau, the task of the Conference, which is to finalize and adopt the statute on the establishment of an International Criminal Court as mandated by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 52/160 of 15 December 1997, will be successfully accomplished. Allow me to avail this opportunity to convey the sincere gratitude of the Indonesian delegation to the Government and people of Italy for hosting this very important Conference as well as the warm welcome and hospitality accorded us since our arrival here in this historic city of Rome.

Mr. President,

Much have been said on the importance of the establishment of a just, fair and effective International Criminal Court and the benefits that the international community may derive from it. The Court will* not only end impunity for heinous crimes, but also, the presence of the threat of prosecution will deter the perpetration of such despicable adventurism in the future. Moreover, the nature of the permanency of the Court will act as a catalyst hastening the replacement of the rule of force with the rule of law which in turn will contribute to the maintenance of peace and advancement of justice, humanity and democracy at the national as well as the international levels. It is precisely for these reasons that Indonesia attaches importance to the establishment of the Court.

Mr. President,

Through various fora, our diplomats, governments and justice official together with their partners from the civil society have devoted years of discussions, consultations and negotiations to making the Court a reality. Given the complexity and intricacy of legitimate national security interests. as well as political and legal problems involved in creating the Court, their efforts were characterized by prolonged, extensive as well as intensive debates. Still, despite the difficulties encountered, they have moved closer to realizing that shared goal. It is now incumbent upon us in this Diplomatic Conference to advance what they have attained and to bring those achievements to a successful conclusion.

As it well known and in view of the current international system, the eventual' effectiveness of the Court will depend greatly on the universal accession of States to the Statute. And for the Statute to be acceptable, there is a set of fundamental interrelated outstanding issues which should be resolved in accordance with the aspirations of the majority of States. These issues included, among others, the definition and implementation of the principle of complementarity, the so-called "trigger mechanism", the integrity and independency of the Court and the list of crimes under its jurisdiction. At the Ministerial Meeting recently held in Cartagena, the Non-Aligned Countries have emphasized inter alia that the adoption of the Statute by consensus would be the best method of guaranteeing in the achievement of the universal character of the Court. At the very least, therefore, and as called for by the Rule of Procedures, the Conference, throughout the duration of the negotiations, should consistently maintain its commitment to ensure that its work is accomplished by general agreement.

Mr. President,

To maximize progress in our efforts to gamer universal support for the establishment of the Court, the provisions of the Statute should comply with the longstanding recognized principles of international law governing international relations. First and foremost among these, the Conference in the drafting of the Statute must uphold die principle of respecting national sovereignty. Accordingly, the Conference must adhere strictly to the already emerging consensus, that is the nature of the jurisdiction of the Court should be complementary to the national jurisdictions and be based upon the consent of the States concerned. In Cartagena, the countries of the Non-Aligned Movement also underlined the principle of complementarity as fundamental and that the aforementioned principle should be reflected in and observed throughout the formulation of the provisions governing the Court.

As we all aware, the objective of the principle of complementarity is to establish a Court that would only act fill a vacuum when national justice systems are unavailable to bring to justice the perpetrators of heinous crimes. If there are lessons to be learned from past negotiations, the critical challenge facing us is that there still remains an urgent need to define and implement the principle of complementarity without ambiguity. The various options as contained in the draft Statute has indicated that they are based on diverse, if not conflicting, perceptions and concepts, and that further intensive negotiations are still required. In this regard, the most important and relevant issues to. be resolved are the following: when and under what circumstances may the Court's mechanism be activated; should the Court without conditions respect the principle of "ne bis in idem" including decisions already made by then national judicial systems, or should the Court be granted the power to act as an international Supreme Court delivering judgment on the credibility of national courts. These are arduous political, and not legal questions. Since the Court should be prevented from involving itself with politics in order to safeguard its credibility and impartiality, those questions should not be left to the Court to rule, but for this Conference to resolve; and such resolution clearly needs our collective wisdom, creativity and thoughtful compromise so as: to avoid the Conference sliding into a ponderous and unending debate.

Mr. President,

Maintaining the effectiveness of the Court and at the same time preserving its credibility is indeed a fundamental issue. The main point of concern is that the Court will not only demand adequate resources in order to be effective, but its credibility also requires freedom from political intervention. Consequently, without universal support, the Court both in terms of finance or function, will undoubtedly lack the capability and the capacity to discharge its mandate or to enforce its decision..

In this context, it is needless to say that there is a necessity for the solution to the problem to emanate from the cardinal principle to respect sovereign equality of all nations. The Statute must guarantee that all States Parties have equal rights and obligations with respect to the jurisdiction of the Court. In Cartagena, the Non-Aligned Countries reiterated their declaration on the need to ensure that the Court should be impartial and independent especially from political. influence of any kind, including that of the United Nations organs, in particular the Security Council, which should not direct or hinder the functioning of the Court nor assume a parallel or superior role to the Court. In this regard, they also underscored the need to set up a suitable mechanism for the financing of the Court in order to safeguard its effectiveness, independence and impartiality.

Mr. President,

  Another fundamental issue to be resolved with wisdom and foresight, is the question on the need to protect innocent citizens from inappropriate, frivolous or politically motivated allegations. While taking into account the concerns expressed that this issue may pose additional burdens to the already complex negotiations, nevertheless in a world that remains characterized by a multitude of diverse political, economic, and security interest, this question cannot be resolved by simply overlooking it. Given the risk of investigation, even at the. initial stage, to legitimate national security interest and the right to protect sensitive information as well as the personal reputation of the wrongly accused, the Conference should develop an appropriate means to deter the launching of frivolous charges. To ensure that justice is applicable to all, the Court should be equally vigilant in protecting the rights of States and individuals who are wrongly accused like the protection that it accords to the victims of crimes and witnesses.

Last but not least, the principles of "nullum crimen sine lege" should be observed. Thus, the crimes within the jurisdiction of die Court should all be listed and defined with clarity, precision and specificity. Aside from supporting the incorporation of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity into the Statute, Indonesia closely associates itself with die position of the Non-Aligned Countries which firmly supports the inclusion of the crime of aggression and, within war crimes, the use and threat of use of nuclear weapons. It is undeniable will cause excessive injuries, loss of lives and damage to civilian objects beyond any principle of proportionality and military necessity.

Mr. President,

By way of conclusion, I wish to express that the participation of Indonesia in this Conference is to fulfill its obligation as mandated by its 1945 Constitution. The Preamble of the Constitution clearly stipulates that acts which are not in conformity with humanity and justice should be abolished, and Indonesia should contribute to the establishment of a world order based on freedom, genuine peace and social justice. Accordingly, I wish to pledge the unswerving support and cooperation of the Indonesian Government to the holding of this Conference and its endeavours to make the International Criminal Court a reality.

I thank you, Mr. President.