October 23, 1997

Statement by H.E. Ambassador Svein Aas. Deputy Permanent Representative

Mr. Chairman,

Norway remains a strong supporter of the establishment of a permanent international criminal court. We believe such a court would be instrumental in providing a judicial response in cases where gross violations of human rights have occurred and where national jurisdictions do not prove adequate. In our view, an international criminal court could contribute to peace-building and the process of reconciliation in the aftermath of armed conflict, and help to create a rule of law in situations where a call for revenge would otherwise easily be echoed.

Norway is of the opinion that the Preparatory Committee has made considerable progress on important issues, and we wholeheartedly welcome the generous offer of the Italian Government to host a diplomatic conference in Rome from 15 June to 17 July 1998 on the establishment of an international criminal court.

We would like to recall, Mr. Chairman, the core elements of an international criminal court as we see it:

First, it is of the utmost importance that the criminal court obtains broad-based support and participation from Member States. This is essential for legitimacy and effectiveness. The increasing number of delegations which have contributed actively to the work of the Preparatory Committee is thus highly encouraging. The establishment by the Secretary-General of a Trust Fund for the participation of the least developed countries in the work of the Preparatory Committee and in the Conference is in this context important. Against this background Norway has contributed to the Fund, and we would encourage as many states as possible to provide such contributions.

Second, in order to achieve a truly operational court with a clear mandate and effective powers, in our view the jurisdiction of the court should focus on the

most severe international crimes, in particular, genocide, crimes against humanity and serious war crimes. In our opinion, Mr. Chairman, a broader range of crimes may be considered a certain number of years after the entry into force of the Statute, on the basis of a review clause.

Third, inherent jurisdiction for such core crimes should be vested in the court, giving it jurisdiction in the absence of an effective national apparatus for the prosecution of these crimes. In this connection, Norway fully endorses the formula that was worked out at the August session of the Preparatory Committee on complementarity between the court and national jurisdictions. Hopefully, similar progress may be achieved in the near future on the issue of triggering mechanisms, including the relationship of the court to the Security Council.

Mr. Chairman,

My delegation is confident that the remaining sessions of the Preparatory Committee will make it possible to consider a list of clear options which can only be settled at the Diplomatic Conference itself. We are persuaded that the December session will bring further clarity on several topics, ranging from the difficult questions of the definition of war crimes and State cooperation to the choice of applicable penalties.

The work of the Preparatory Committee has made significant progress under the able leadership of Dr. Adriaan Bos. Whilst we are aware of the challenges ahead, we firmly believe that we have come a long way towards the completion of the framework for a truly effective international criminal court.