Statement by the Permanent Representative of Italy to the United Nations

Ambassador Francesco Paolo Fulci

Introducing the revised version of draft resolution A/C.3/49/L.32

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT

December 8, 1994

Mr. Chairman,

I am asking for the floor to briefly introduce a revised version of the draft resolution contained in document L. 32. This revised version has been prepared by the 50 co-sponsors to try to accommodate, in the spirit of compromise, the amendments presented by Singapore and Egypt, with whom we met al lenght this morning.

Mr. Chairman,

Yesterday, we listened very carefully to the suggestions made by the distinguished Permanent Representatives of Singapore and Egypt. We understand the concerns behind these suggestions, although we cannot subscribe entirely to the wording of the proposed amendments. For our part, we tried hard to reconcile the different positions represented in this room, without to the essential points made by both sides.

Therefore, we inserted a new preambular paragraph reflecting what we believe to be the substance of the amendment proposed by Singapore. This paragraph (which would become preambular paragraph 8) would read: "Reaffirming the sovereign right of States to determine, in accordance with international law, including the Charter of the United Nations, the legal measures and penalties which are appropriate to deal with the most serious crimes". In fact, it is our view that the wording of the paragraph should be made consistent with Article 6 of the 1966 U.N. Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which in par. 2 refers to countries which have not abolished the death penalty, and limits them to imposing the sentence of death only for the "most serious crimes".

Furthermore, we felt that it was necessary to add a reference, for the reasons well expressed yesterday by the distinguished representative of France, to the relevant rules of international law, including the U.N. Charter.

With respect to the amendments proposed by Egypt, we accepted replacement of the word "convinced", in preambular paragraph 7, with the word "noting", and of the words "calls upon", in operative paragraph 1, with the word "invites". In operative paragraph 2, instead, we could not accept replacement of the word "urges" with the word "encourages", for the simple reason that you cannot simply encourage States to fully comply with their international obligations. We emphasized, however, that this request is addressed to "States Parties" to the relevant Conventions.

Mr. Chairman,

We think that this revised version of our resolution is the best evidence of our genuine desire to present a balanced, mild and non-intrusive text, as well as of our commitment to bridge the gap with countries having different views on the question of capital punishment. We hope that this new text receive wide support and allow our debate to reach a fair outcome.