Oct. 28, 1996

Statement by Ambassador Park Soo Gil

Mr. Chairman,

[...] The success of the Preparatory Committee rests on how we can prepare a draft to strike a subtle balance between two conflicting goals: the early establishment of the Court, and the adoption of a well-orginized Statute. To set up the Court as early as possible, we must not aim too high. If we concentrate on preparing a perfect Statute, we may lose momentum. We should be practical so as not to get lost in a maze. My Government believes that the division of work between the Preparatory Committee and the diplomatic conference will facilitate the final adoption of the Statute. The Preparatory Committee should concentrate primarily on the matters that do not call for political decision. Issues requiring a political decision should be entrusted to the diplomatic conference. The mandate of the Preparatory Committee must be limited to what it is able to do: to prepare plausible alternatives to matters of political weight for the diplomatic conference.

Mr. Chairman,

Let me now turn to the issue of how to proceed in the coming session of the Preparatory Committee. The Government of the Republic of Korea supports the proposal to convene nine week-long sessions before April 1998. Given the efficiency of the work and the convenience to delegates, three sessions would be more desirable. Remaining nine-week sessions of the Preparatory Committee before April 1998 are crucial to the Court's prospects. To facilitate the deliberation in the Committee, its mandate should be focused on consolidating various concrete proposals of Member States to complement the ILC draft, taking into account the work done at the Ad Hoc and Preparatory Committees. [...]