Mr. President,
Distinguished Delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am very honoured to address this United Nations Diplomatic Conference on the establishment of an International Criminal Court.

First of all I wish to convey to the Italian Government through you, Mr. President, our appreciation for the warm welcome and the kind hospitality provided to us by the authorities and people of Italy and, in particular, by this beautiful capital of Rome.

Mr. President,

Our governments have come to Rome to finalise a treaty creating the International Criminal Court. The primary aim of the Court will be to bring to justice persons responsible for the most serious crimes under international law, such as genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and acts of aggression, when domestic criminal justice systems fail to do so. This Diplomatic Conference provides a historic and unique opportunity to create an effective, independent and fair International Criminal Court.

Why does the international community need a permanent International Criminal Court?


The answer is - unfortunately - simple:

Time and again, we have been helpless in the face of the failure of national criminal-law systems to punish the perpetrators of atrocities and those behind them: Genocide, mass executions of political opponents, "ethnic cleansing", systematic rape as a means of "warfare" - the shocking TV reports from Cambodia, Vukovar and Srebrenica, Rwanda, now Kosovo, and elsewhere are fresh in our minds.

A key element in such cases is restoring the rule of law and ending impunity. This is not just a matter of justice, but also of peace and security. The prospects for lasting peace and reconciliation are severely undermined if war criminals remain at large.

As we approach the 21st Century, individuals - of whatever rank in society - who participate in serious and widespread violations of international humanitarian law must no longer act with impunity. The time has come to create an effective International Criminal Court that serves as a deterrent and a mechanism of accountability in the years to come. The frequent calls either for new ad hoc Tribunals or for the extension of the mandate of the existing Tribunals underline the need for a permanent institution. This being said, the permanent court should of course draw on the invaluable experience of the two ad hoc Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda.

Mr. President,

We are pleased with the progress made in the work of the Preparatory Committee. But: To be realistic, much work remains to be done. Quite a number of difficult political and legal issues are still unresolved and choices remain to be made in important areas.

This goes especially for the vital issue of defining the conditions under which the International Criminal Court can actually exercise its powers; its relationship with national courts and its scope for independent initiative.

What is important is not only the creation of an International Criminal Court. The real problem is now to ensure that the Court will be an effective institution, capable of adequately responding to the needs of today's international society. In short: to ensure that we will have a Court that acts in the same way which we have come to expect from national justice systems.

Together with other Court-friendly "like-minded" countries Denmark has come to Rome with a firm commitment to achieve that goal.

Among the principles essential to an effective, independent and fair Court I should like to highlight the following points:

-Complementarity with national legal systems is vital. The Court should not act when national systems are able and willing to do so. But the Court should have the authority to determine when national systems are unable or unwilling to act.

-The jurisdiction of the Court should be limited to the so called "core" crimes under general international law. The crimes should include genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression.

-We are deeply convinced that the Court's statute would be incomplete without the inclusion of the crime of aggression. We will attempt to help finding a balance between the need of the court to be unimpaired by political influence and the Security Council's responsibilities. The inclusion of aggression stands only a chance if the spirit of compromise prevails.

-Further crimes, could be added at a later stage byway of a review-mechanism, which should be included m the statute.

-Most war crimes today happen in internal rather than in international armed conflicts. If it is not to be an expensive irrelevance, the Court must also have jurisdiction over crimes committed in internal armed conflicts.

-Rape and other crimes of sexual violence committed in armed conflict should be properly defined and explicitly listed as war crimes in the Court's statute. We also support the inclusion in the fist of war crimes the recruitment of children under 18 into armed forces or groups.

-States adhering to the treaty must accept the Court's jurisdiction over all the crimes listed in the Statute, not pick and choose among them.

-States' consent should not be required for individual prosecutions or investigations to proceed.

-All States Parties to the statute should have the competence to trigger the Court's dealing with a particular case. In addition, the Security Council must be able to refer situations to the Court when acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Otherwise we make it more likely that ad hoc Tribunals will need to be established.

-The Prosecutor should have the power to start investigations ex officio, that is to say on his or her own initiative, on the basis of information obtained from any reliable source, including NGOs.

-The Court's independence will need to be protected against political influence by states or by the Security Council. As already mentioned, the crime of aggression is something special.

-The Court's statute must ensure the application of all the relevant international standards of fair trial and due process at all stages of the proceedings.

-Strong obligations on States Parties to co-operate with the Court are necessary.

-The International Criminal Court should be in close relationship to the United Nations. It should be financed out of the regular United Nations budget. Despite current problems, this method is most likely to provide the Court with the secure and stable resources that it will need to carry out its mandate.

-There will be no capital punishment, but a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.

Mr. President,

It is of paramount importance that the future International Criminal Court will enjoy universal support. Therefore, where general agreement is absent, compromise is vital. The search for consensus must, however, not be allowed to become a trap in which the lowest common denominator becomes the norm.

Mr. President,

The remaining political and legal hurdles cannot be underestimated. We must strive now to reach agreement, to overcome the differences m our legal systems and approaches, so that this Conference will be fully successful and its work
complete.

Thank you Mr.President.