UNITED NATIONS

Department of Public Information

Press Release

L/2804

PREPARATORY COMMITTEE ON ESTABLISHMENT OF INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

EXAMINES MANAGEMENT ISSUES, GROUNDS FOR JUDICIAL DISQUALIFICATION

The registry of the proposed international criminal court, with

responsibility for its overall management, should be subject to careful

oversight mechanisms, the Preparatory Committee on the Establishment of an

International Criminal Court was told this morning. The delegates discussed

various issues pertaining to the composition and organization of the court,

including the mandate of the presidency of the proposed court, grounds for

excusing and disqualifying judges and election procedures for court members.

According to the representative of the United States, the registry should be subject to controls that would prevent arbitrary decisions regarding such matters as court salaries and expenditures. Australia said that if the

registrar was to be elected by the judges, only the most qualified

candidates should be put forward.

The representative of Japan said that terms of the draft statute governing

the role of the registry should be re-drafted along the lines used in the

statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

Judges and prosecutors should enjoy privileges and immunities comparable to

those enjoyed by diplomats under the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic

Relations, he added.

Regarding procedures for excusing or disqualifying court judges, Australia

recommended that the statute enumerate such circumstances, such as serious

illness, threats against a judge or conflicts of interest. The

representative of the United States said that she saw no reason why judges

of certain nationality should be disqualified. Disqualifications should not

be left to the Presidency to make on an ad hoc basis. Italy added that

disqualification grounds for prosecutors should be similar to those for the

judges.

Court judges should be free to undertake other employment provided that it

did not conflict with their judicial duties, according to the

representatives of the United States and of China. The United States

representative noted that judges of the International Court of Judges often

participate in teaching or publishing.

China said that the presidency of the proposed court should limit itself to

the administrative tasks. Trinidad and Tobago said that the presidency could have a hand in other tasks, keeping in mind the need to not overburden that office.

The representatives of the United Kingdom and of Trinidad and Tobago asked

that the term "procuracy" in the draft statute should be replaced by

"prosecutor's office". The United Kingdom noted that for English speakers,

the term procuracy had a "vaguely obscene" connotation. Trinidad and Tobago

also preferred the term "office of the prosecutor", as among other things

the word procuracy was difficult to pronounce. Italy, recalling the proposed term of five years for the office of the prosecutor, suggested that a longer term, with no possibility of re-election, would better ensure the consistency and independence of the office.

The representative of the Russian Federation said that the draft statute

needed greater clarity regarding the terms by which appeals chambers were to be established. Voicing concern about the possibility of concentration of power in the presidency, Singapore suggested that the appeals chamber would be "strengthened" if its members were elected by the judges of the court, rather than through "some sort of appointment by the presidency". A similar procedure might be applied to the members of the trial chamber. Since the draft only specified the presence of three lawyers specialized in

international law in the appeals chamber, the representative added, an

additional provision was needed as "the possibility of a total absence of

criminal law experts in the appeals chamber should not be left open".

Returning to a point raised earlier in the week, Norway said that the court

should seek to achieve gender balance in the designation of judges. The

suggestion, however, should not be a quota for female judges; nor should the employment of female judges be considered a form of affirmative action.

Finland pointed out the need for the judges to be able to adopt

supplementary rules according to the functioning of the court. States party

to the court, as well as the judges, should be able to take part in the

amendment of the rules, he added.