Permanent Mission of Hungary

to the United Nations

Statement

By Dr. Zsolt Hetesy

Sixth Committee

54th Session United Nations General Assembly

Agenda Item: 158

Establishment of an International Criminal Court

21 October 1999

Mr. Chairman,

Let me stress at the outset that the Hungarian delegation fully subscribes to the position of the European Union as contained in its Statement delivered yesterday.

At the 50th Anniversary of the Geneva Conventions there is an overwhelming need

for robust enforcement measures in the area of international humanitarian law.

Those who commit genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity must be

held accountable at all times. Recent tragic events in South-Eastern Europe and

elsewhere also clearly demonstrate that there can be no peace without justice.

Those are the underlying reasons for Hungary's resolute support for the

establishment of the International Criminal Court. Hungary signed the Rome

Statute on 15 January, 1999 and has started the preparatory work for its ratification process. Based on the initial review undertaken by the various

ministries the ratification of the Rome Statute does not require radical changes

in the Hungarian legal system. Thus, the Hungarian Parliament is expected to

consider the issue of ratification in the year 2000.

Hungary, as a member of the like-minded group, has participated actively in

the work of the Preparatory Commission. My country has contributed to the

elaboration of the elements of crimes by joining forces with Switzerland and, more recently, Costa Rica. It gives us great pleasure that in many cases the Swiss-Costa Rican-Hungarian proposals, based on the excellent information

papers compiled by the ICRC, have commanded the support of the Preparatory

Commission.

With all the commendable progress achieved in this area my delegation would

like to voice a word of caution. On some occasions the work of the Commission

was slowed down by extensive debates on various alternatives and proposals that

were more of a drafting nature than of substance. We believe that more flexibility could facilitate the timely accomplishment of our tasks without

hampering the due consideration of the substantive matters. In this connection let me refer to the war crime of rape, sexual slavery, enforced prostitution as an example where the Commission has spent meetings after meetings on differentiating between the crimes, on deciding whether one act is enough or more acts are needed, and finally, on the proper technical terms to be used to describe the act. In this regard we have to keep in mind that the International Criminal Court is, by definition, a complementary tool to national jurisdiction in the fight against genocide, crime against humanity and war crimes. The experience of the ICTY and the ICTR has already proved that this kind of judicial institutions can only concentrate on the most serious crimes. In those cases, however, the gruesome nature and weight of the acts would definitely call for prompt prosecution, no matter which of the proposed, and I readily admit, equally legitimate and valuable, definitions are chosen.

Turning to another important aspect of the work of the Preparatory Commission Hungary would like to reaffirm its position with regard to the need for universal acceptance of the International Criminal Court. We note with

satisfaction that all States participating in the Rome deliberations, including those States which have not voted for the adoption of the Statute, participated actively in the work of the Preparatory Commission. A~ the Hungarian Minister

for Foreign Affairs, Dr. Janos Martonyi has stressed in his statement in the

general debate before the General Assembly, no reasonable effort should be

spared to solve the outstanding concerns. While we join the EU and other States in their call for the preservation of the integrity of the Rome Statute we also believe that the effectiveness and full credibility of the International Criminal Court will ultimately be attained through its genuine acceptance. In this regard, the framework offered by the Preparatory Commission seems to be the most appropriate forum for the narrowing down of the differences.

As it has been already pointed out, much has to be done for the adoption of the

Rules of Procedure and Evidence and the Elements of Crimes. Apart from that,

Resolution F of the Final Act calls for further work on other legal documents that are absolutely necessary for the timely establishment of the Court. Hungary

therefore fully supports the proposal for the three-meeting work schedule of the

PREPCOM for the year 2000.

In contributing to the preparation for the practical implementation of the Rome

Statute Hungary's activities are not limited to the UN framework alone. Here I

would like to refer to the International Conference on the Ratification of the

Statute of the International Criminal Court held in Budapest 1-2 October 1999.

The Conference was organized by the Constitutional and Legal Policy Institute in

cooperation with the Central European University. A number of non-governmental

organizations such as the Lawyers Committee for Human Rights and the Human

Rights Watch have contributed to the organization of the Conference. A large

number of governmental and legislative experts from Eastern and Central Europe,

Germany and other membeers of the EU, along with the representatives of the

European Union and the Council of Europe also participated in the Conference.

Participants shared information on the developments and specific issues related to the ratification process in Europe, and particularly in Central and Eastern Europe.

The possible frameworks for cooperation in criminal matters, extradition and the

issue of immunities were also discussed.

Based on the outcome of this event we firmly believe that similar regional

conferences may also prove to be a successful vehicle for the clarification of some practical aspects related to the Rome Statute and also for the furtherance of the work of the Preparatory Commission.