I am particularly pleased to address this Conference on behalf of the Inter-Parliamentary Union at a time when the international community here represented is set to finalise arrangements for the establishment of an International Criminal Court.

This is the fulfilment of a wish that is close to the heart of IPU which, since the very beginning of its existence last century has seen the development and codification of international law as an essential part of international co-operation for peace and security. It has time and again repeated the call for a stable regime of international law to govern relations between States which provide for the judicial settlement of disputes that constitute a threat to peace and, if necessary, also methods of execution and of sanction.

That is also why very early on the Union sought to advance international legal norms relating to the rights and duties of States, to the outlawing of wars of aggression, and to the protection of national minorities. And of course, the very first objective for which IPU was originally set up and for which its members worked hard was the establishment of the Permanent Court of Arbitration. Shortly after the end of the first world war the organisation turned its attention to the establishment of an international criminal court and worked on this subject closely with the International Association of Penal law.

I make this point not so much to illustrate the IPU's long-standing commitment to the idea of an international criminal court and advocacy for its establishment, but more so to argue that we need to work together in the months and years ahead to convert this idea into reality.

At the end of your deliberations next month you will have taken a major step towards attaining that goal by adopting the Statute of the International Criminal Court. The Statute is however subject to ratification, acceptance or approval and indeed, it will only enter into force after a minimum number of instruments of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession have been deposited with the UN Secretary-General. In most countries this will require action by national parliaments.

This is only natural. The decisions which are taken by governments at the international level are decisions they take on behalf of the State. And as such they can only be put into practice with the consent of the other fundamental institution of the State - the Parliament which also incarnates the sovereignty of the State. Indeed, 'in a democratic system, Parliament is the most legitimate institution representing civil society as a whole.

As we all know, one of the key issues which Parliaments examine when considering the ratification of an international agreement is the question of how and to what extent national sovereignty is affected. Therefore members of Parliaments will pay particular attention to the concept of complementarily which will govern the International Criminal Court's relationship with national courts.

Most of us will agree that alleged criminals should normally be tried by their own national judicial institutions. It is precisely because this does not always work that we need an international court. The draft before you from the International Law Commission lays down in the preamble of the Statute the principle that the proposed court is intended to be complementary to national criminal justice systems in cases where such trial procedures may not be available or may be ineffective. This is indeed an innovative and very important concept.

Let me make a plea here for the greatest possible clarity with regard to both the intent and content of the principle in question. Every State - and therefore also every parliament - will want to know in which circumstances its citizens may be brought to justice before the international criminal court. To achieve early ratification of the Statute we must therefore also ensure that it provides clarity without for that matter emasculating the proposed court. This leads me to make another plea - that all efforts during your conference will be made so as to avoid the International Criminal Court being a token mechanism and to make it an efficient and effective tool for the defence of the rule of law all over the world.

To this end, it is extremely important that the Statute you will work out should not be yet another diplomatic document, with its dose of ambiguities resulting from learned compromise; on the contrary, it should be a precise and juridically perfect text. This high juridical standard will condition the chances of gaining the adhesion of national parliaments which will expect the Statute to be of a technical quality that is at least equal to that of the legislative texts which they consider daily, and ultimately condition also the extent of its implementation and the functioning of the Court.

With these few words I wish you every success in your deliberations and I look forward to the successful conclusion of your work in the form of an agreed Statute for the International Criminal Court.

In closing, I hereby declare that I intend to recommend to the Union's governing bodies when they next meet in Moscow in early September this year that the Inter-Parliamentary Union - the world organisation of national parliaments - undertake a campaign among all its members to achieve early ratification and entry into force of the proposed Statute.