Event to Commemorate the 20th anniversary of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

Video Statement by UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra'ad Al Hussein

15 February 2018

Excellencies,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Friends,

I am both delighted and honored to provide some brief reflections on this important occasion commemorating the 20th anniversary of the Rome Statute’s historic adoption in 1998.

I care very deeply for both the International Criminal Court as an institution and the fight for accountability for horrific international crimes. I, along with the many of the other individuals involved in the Rome Statute negotiations, hoped back in 1998 that the Court would be progressively strengthened over time to allow it to serve its unique and essential role in the pursuit of justice for generations to come. Unfortunately, the last two decades have been wrought with challenges not only to the institution of the Court itself but also challenges undermining the general accountability regime for appalling international crimes that strike at the Court’s very reason for existence.

Today, there are renewed threats by some States to withdraw from the Court. While one State has successfully completed its withdrawal, another State party reaffirmed its intention to abandon the Court just two months ago. In addition, Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir – a fugitive from the Court – recently urged African States to withdraw from the Court if it does not meet the demands of some, but not all, African States. This is tantamount to holding the Court hostage by attempting to modify key provisions of the Rome Statute under the threat of withdrawal.

The façade of so-called principles and legal reasons advanced in support of withdrawing from the Court crumbles upon closer inspection. Deserting the Court results in granting de facto immunity to alleged perpetrators of international crimes. It promotes the voices of the few over the voices and needs of countless victims. It champions impunity over accountability and deterrence. It abandons victims in their hour of need. I believe that States taking this path are marching against the clear trajectory of history since Nuremberg toward a universal international order predicated on the ideals of international law, justice and the rule of law. They are simply on the wrong side of history – a history that I hope will continue to vindicate the principled and tireless efforts of everyone involved in the Rome Statute’s adoption, its ratifications, the Court’s establishment and its work to ensure that international norms are respected.

The calls by some States to leave the Court is not the only challenge it has faced nor will it be the last. Such calls are merely part of a larger systemic threat posed by the rising tide of isolationist, authoritarian, oppressive and unprincipled leadership to the global order based on multilateralism and a respect for international law. In such a world, unfortunately, the future challenges that the Court will face and must overcome may be far greater than those of the last 20 years.

To overcome the challenges of the future, our shared resolve to hold all perpetrators of international crimes accountable regardless of their official position or nationality must be maintained and even strengthened. Now is not the time for us to abandon the victims of horrendous international crimes. We must rather use the 20th anniversary of the Rome Statute to reaffirm our collective commitment to the principles of justice and the rule of law – principles that form the keystones of this Court as an essential global institution. We must take this opportunity to renew our shared commitment to provide victims with the justice and remedy they deserve, including full and effective reparations for the unimaginable suffering they have endured. Despite all odds, we must also continue our mutual efforts to strengthen Court by, among other things, seeking universal ratification to the Rome Statute and continuing to expand the scope of the Court’s jurisdiction.

In this context, the recent activation of the Court’s jurisdiction over the crime of aggression is a beacon of light. The activation underscores the progress that has been made since the adoption of the Rome Statute 20 years ago, when negotiations over the crime of aggression almost derailed the Court’s creation. Now, nearly 72 years after Nuremberg, the Court will finally have jurisdiction over a crime that, in the words of the judges at Nuremberg, “differ[s] only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” Firmly cementing Nuremberg’s legacy, the Court’s new-found jurisdiction is a historic step that represents the international community’s desire to shun war for peace. This positive development provides some measure of hope in a world seemingly filled with ever-growing strife.

In the words of William Lloyd Garrison, a prominent American slavery abolitionist, we must not think, speak or write with moderation in the face of injustice. We must rather be as harsh as truth, and as uncompromising as justice. We cannot equivocate, we can never excuse. We must not and will not retreat one single inch in our collective struggle on behalf of victims everywhere.