Mr President,

My delegation congratulates you on your presidency of this historic conference. We are honoured to be serving on the conference bureau, and we look forward to working closely with you in achieving total success on all issues. It is critical that we make this a conference of substantive achievement.

Let me also, on behalf of my Government, thank the Italian Government for its sense of responsibility and its hospitality in hosting this conference.

Mr President,

Very many, Governments and individuals alike, civil and non-governmental organisations in particular, have given much of their industry and imagination to the cause of this conference. Their considerable efforts and talents have brought us to Rome and to this juncture of our work. We think especially of the singular contribution of Adriaan Bos, to whom we send best wishes. It is important also to say that rather than to undermine past efforts and the gains made, that we should build on the progress and the agreements we have established during the preparatory process.

The aspiration for the establishment of a permanent international criminal court has occupied much of this century, a time in which the international community has experienced the horrors of two world wars and the atrocities of countless communal warfare, especially in Cambodia, the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The brutality seen in all these areas and the appalling catalogue of crimes against humanity, of aggression and genocide must remain among the darkest of human legacies. It is legacy made worse by the fact that so many with responsibility for these dreadful crimes have gone unpunished. Worse still, our present century has seen the invention, and the use of weapons of mass and indiscriminate destruction.

For almost fifty years now, the international community has sought within the United Nations system to create a permanent international criminal court. While the need had been acknowledged, sadly the matching will had not been there. With the passing of the cold war the political climate is now opportune. Let us also not forget that in large measure we are here by the force, indeed, by the authority of world public opinion. We must heed their demands and expectations. My Government believes that the moment is right for a permanent international criminal court. Ad hoc measures are never sufficient, and we know from practical experience of the shortcomings of the ad hoe tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda. We believe that a court of  international criminal justice will contribute significantly to the maintenance of international peace and security. Those committing crimes against humanity and other serious crimes must be brought before the court and be
held to account. With clear provisions relating to its powers and jurisdiction, we believe such a court will constitute effective global deterrence. It is unacceptable that very serious crimes are being committed with impunity, and that those with criminal responsibility go without trial and without punishment.

It will, of course, be a mistake to make light of the many difficulties which remain to be resolved in the next five weeks. Nonetheless, we should continue to apply the most serious intent and effort in this critical phase of our work. It is important, moreover, to bear in mind that we are engaged in a process for the further development of principles and norms of international law. As such, the occasion is not so much for the pressing of national priorities, but rather the larger responsibility of creating a new order and regime for the benefit and security of the international community as a whole. We need to do this because there is a vital link between the effective protection of human rights and respect for the rule of law. For small states like my own, the ultimate protection lies in a system of international law which is fully respected and observed by all states. It is critical that all Governments give to the court their fullest co-operation. Equally, it is essential that there be a clear and coherent system of international criminal justice, with clarity and specificity in its provisions and backed by strong and effective measures of law enforcement.

We believe that the court should have inherent jurisdiction over the core crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, no matter where the crime is committed. The court should be an effective complement to national courts when these courts are unable or unwilling to bring to justice those responsible for these grave crimes.

Methods of warfare like the use of nuclear weapons which cause unnecessary suffering or which are inherently indiscriminate are of particular concern to my country. We think they should be covered in the statute of the court. Certainly, we would expect the recent and crucially important advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice in the case concerning the Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, which is relevant on the matter, to be taken into account in the detailed negotiations on this issue.

There is now significant consensus in customary international law for the protection of women and children; and gender-related crime should be included in the court's statute. We would not regard the court as best placed or equipped to deal with the rehabilitation and other requirements of young persons, and therefore consider that the court should have no jurisdiction over those who were under the age of 18 years at the time they are alleged to have committed a crime. There should also be provision for the special needs of victims and the payment to them of reparation, as well as provision for the welfare and security of witnesses.

An independent prosecutor would be essential. The prosecutor should have the power to initiate investigations on his or her own initiative, based on information from any source, subject only to appropriate judicial scrutiny, and present search and arrest warrants and indictments to the court for approval. We should ensure effective judicial independence. It would not be right, in our view to allow any political body, including the Security Council, or States,, the power to stop or to delay an investigation or prosecution.

My delegation believes that by becoming a party to the statute, a State must accept the court's jurisdiction, without reservation. This cannot be a court of choice nor that of expediency. Funding of the court should be arranged through the regular budget of the United Nations according to the set scale of contributions. We believe this carries better prospects for universal participation, and for the court’s financial security in the long-term.

Thank you.