Mr. Chairman,
My delegation fully supports the statement made earlier by the Austrian Presidency on behalf of the EU. I wish to make the following additional remarks.
The adoption in Rome on July 17th of the Statute of the International Criminal Court represents an outstanding achievement in the codification and progressive development of international law. Fifty years after the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and fifty years after the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which foresaw such a Court, a long-nourished dream finally came true and a gap in the international legal order was closed. In those years the world continued to witness atrocities, committed in armed conflict as well as in peace-time, with little being done to shoulder the responsibility of States and the international community as a whole to enforce individual accountability for the perpetrators. The resolve of the 1940´s to bring to an end the culture of impunity weakened in the years of the cold war, but was finally renewed when the Security Council, in 1993 and 1994, decided to establish the International Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda in response to the heinous crimes committed there. This was done in the realization that peace and justice are closely interlinked both on the international level and within societies. If justice is not done, societies ridden by conflict and oppression have little hope of reconciliation and a return to peaceful conditions. Durable peace cannot be reached in war-torn regions without those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity being brought to justice.
The hope grew of creating a permanent institution which could contribute to a better and more just future by deterring the commission of the most serious crimes of international concern and administering justice in cases where national legal systems fail to prosecute the perpetrators. An intensive work within the context of the General Assembly followed, and in the remarkably short period of a little more than three years, an impressive and very complex instrument was negotiated, encompassing both a criminal code and a code of criminal procedure. Some 160 States and a number of intergovernmental organizations participated in the ensuing Diplomatic Conference in Rome, and the involvement of an even higher number of non-governmental organizations was conducive to the result. After five weeks of intensive work, virtually day and night, the Statute of the Court was adopted by a very broad majority. We must congratulate ourselves for this remarkable feat.
There are many institutions and persons whose out-standing contributions should be high-lighted. The International Law Commission produced a very workable draft Statute. Adriaan Bos had the skill and perseverance to bring the Ad hoc and Preparatory Committees to a successful conclusion. The Government of Italy very generously hosted the Diplomatic Conference with Giovanni Conso as its President. The Office of Legal Affairs and its Codification Division provided efficient support throughout the process. The ICRC and the International Tribunals shared their experience. Philippe Kirsch had the talent and nerve to tie together the loose ends and develop the negotiating package which finally carried the day. Cherif Bassiouni led the efforts to reach clarity and consistency. The ever-growing Like-Minded Group constantly pushed for a successful outcome, and the NGO:s and their different Caucuses nudged us on and kept reminding us of the standards to be met.
But there were many others as well. Bureau members, chairpersons and coordinators from Argentina, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Finland, France, India, Japan, Jordan, Lesotho, Malawi, The Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Samoa, South Africa, Switzerland, Tanzania, United Kingdom and United States took upon them the key task of coordinating particular Parts, issues or Articles. Sweden is proud that its delegation was associated with this group. Its width and geographical distribution are indicative of the universality of the effort. Virtually everybody who participated in Rome made an input. The result of this global effort belongs to us all.
The Statute adopted in Rome is of course, like every negotiated product, a compromise. A compromise, by definition, leaves everyone a little bit unhappy. Sweden, like any other participating State, is more satisfied with some of the solutions which were chosen than it is with others. However, now is not the time to reopen discussions on the many contagious issues involved. Let me declare: Sweden wholeheartedly supports the Statute in its entirety, as it was adopted, because of our firm belief that, all in all, it represents the best package which could possibly be obtained, under the prevailing circumstances, at this period of time. We truly believe that an efficient, viable institution was decided upon in Rome, a Court that will eventually command a very wide support, a Court which will act as a deterrent and give hope to future victims of oppression and atrocities. Regardless of what position States may have taken under pressure of time in those tense last moments of the Rome Conference, they should sit back for a moment and look at the totality of what was achieved. We sincerely hope that also those who may have held doubts will come to the same conclusion as we have and realize what is now within reach.
The important thing now is to look forward and proceed. We must work on two fronts. First of all, to ensure the earliest possible entry into force. Sweden is gratified that as many as 58 States have already signed the Statute. Sweden is of course among them. We have already started the laborious work of preparing a Bill to Parliament concerning ratification and the enactment of the necessary legislation and will be in a position to adhere to the Statute before the end of the year 2000. It is important that every encouragement and support be given to countries during the ratification process. Our common goal must be to have the Court in place not long into the next millennium.
Secondly, it is essential to push forward with the process of negotiating the necessary secondary instruments like the Rules of Procedure and Evidence so that the time-table set out by the Conference can be met and these draft instruments be ready for adoption by the Assembly of States Parties as soon as the Statute enters into force. We therefore urge this Committee to pass a resolution mandating a Preparatory Committee as decided by the Rome Conference and giving it the necessary meeting time and resources in 1999 and, if necessary, in the first half of the year 2000.
We trust that the Secretariat will serve the Committee as efficiently as they have done throughout the process. We attach great importance to participation in the continuing negotiations by all those who were invited to participate in Rome, States, observers to the General Assembly, intergovernmental organizations and NGO:s. Only through a speedy, inclusive and transparent process can we manage to give the International Criminal Court the necessary tools to function from day one. The success reached in Rome must be maintained.
Sweden pledges its continued active efforts to this end.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman.