ADDRESS BY MARY ROBINSON UN HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS AT THE DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE ON AN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT, Rome, 15th June 1998

15 June 1998



Check against delivery


Secretary-General, excellencies, ladies and gentleman

Your work over the coming five weeks is of crucial importance to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights. When I am asked what an International Criminal Court would do, I have a very simple answer. It would fight impunity. I can think of no greater contribution to the promotion or protection of fundamental human rights.

The tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda were established after the event. It was too late to prevent the suffering and deter the planners of genocide. A strong permanent international criminal court will send out a powerful message of deterrence to all those in positions of power and leadership that they can longer use terror tactics, systematic rape, ethnic cleansing, mutilation and indiscriminate killing of non-combatants as weapons of war or for any other purpose.

All individuals, regardless of official rank or capacity, are legally bound to refrain from committing such horrific crimes as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. This principle is rooted in the ancient laws and customs of almost all cultures and throughout history.

But as we all know, practice has rarely matched principle. In the fifty years since the Universal Declaration set out the basic standards of human rights there has been almost systematic violation of every one of the 30 articles. The same is true of the Geneva Conventions. The lack of real accountability for such crimes has only encouraged the perpetrators, fueled resentment and perpetuated cycles of violence. This is not history .. it is this morning's news - reports from Kosovo, from Sierra Leone, from the Great Lakes region, Afghanistan, Colombia tell the same story - unpunished atrocities result in further atrocities.

We must admit that the international community, through the United Nations has, a poor record in preventing and stopping such acts. We have lacked means, lacked political will and we have lacked an effective weapon against the culture of impunity.

Now we have a chance to break with the past. To do so requires a statute establishing a court which will be truly fair, compellingly effective and which will earn universal respect. You will spend the next five weeks on this great work - let me spend a few minutes suggesting some issues I see as crucial in your task:

The statute will derive strength and respect if there is real clarity and precision in defining the scope of crimes which will come under the jurisdiction of the court. There should be no doubt or confusion about when and where the court will act.

Obviously, the court's role must not be restricted to international conflicts. That would be a recipe for irrelevance and impotence in the face of the worst atrocities which nowdays take place in internal conflicts.

It is important that the draft statute includes "rape" as a crime. This builds on the efforts of the Yugoslavia and Rwanda tribunals to combat the systematic sexual violence used as a weapon of war and as part of genocide.

I am pleased to see paragraphs 9 and 10 of Article 43 of the draft treaty requiring the Prosecutor to "appoint advisers with legal expertise on specific issues, including, but not limited to, sexual and gender violence and violence against children" along with other staff and measures to ensure that these crimes can be addressed without adding to the suffering of the victims. I earnestly hope the brackets around these paragraphs will disappear in the coming days.

I naturally give my strong support to Option 2 of Article 20 - paragraph 3 directs the court to ensure its interpretation and application of law and principles conform fully to internationally recognized human rights.

This is essential - we must safeguard the hard-won gains in international human rights law and protect the right of defendants to the highest standards of criminal justice. This proposal can only enhance the prestige and legitimacy of the court.

In the same spirit, I would look for the court to include provision for efforts to rehabilitate those it convicts. Our aim in establishing this court is to deter and protect, not just to punish. I hope to see the brackets lifted around Article 73 so that the statute provides the possibility of reparations or compensation for victims or their families.

These are just a few of my concerns. My Office has prepared a detailed policy paper for circulation at this conference setting out our considered views on a number of important human rights issues.

I am honoured to have had this opportunity to speak with you today. In closing let me recall a gathering 50 years ago when the members of the Commission on Human Rights met to complete the drafting the Universal Declaration. Those delegations recognised the need to rise above narrow definitions of national self interest and agree on a document which we all recognise as a powerful expression of the longing for peace, justice and dignity that lives in every individual.

I would hope that this conference will be similarly inspired and give to the coming millennium an institution which will make its own singular contribution to protecting human rights.