ASP Plenary Session December 2, Morning

ASP Plenary Session December 2, 2005 Morning President of the ASP (Costa Rica) The Plenary on the Rome Statute is called to order. Distinguished delegates, allow me first to congratulate the coordinators of the various Working Group for their splendid work and thank all the delegations for their spirit. We are proceeding according to schedule. I hope we are ready to wrap up our order of business by tomorrow at 1 pm. This morning we have a busy schedule and we will begin by hearing presentations on various Working Group reports. We will also hear progress reports of some Working Groups. Subsequently, I attend to give the floor to the Netherlands who has an important announcement to make. Finally, under Agenda Item 24, we will hear statements by delegations. We already have a list of speakers, in the following order: Mexico, Uganda, Kenya, Ecuador, Mozambique, the Congo, Trinidad and Tobago, Lichtenstein, the United Kingdom (on behalf of the EU), Brazil, Canada, Switzerland, Samoa, Germany, and Sierra Leone. I would like to start by discussing Agenda Item 14 to hear the introduction on the special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, contained in document ICC- ASP/4/SWGCA/1. I give the floor to the coordinator of the Working Group on the Crime of Aggression, who will introduce the report. Lichtenstein Many thanks. It is my honor to introduce the report of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression. As you are aware, the Special Working Group was allocated only two half meetings in the framework of last year s ASP meeting, where it wasn t able to discuss the substance of this complex subject matter during the ASP itself. The Working Group limits its consideration to the following three topics: 1. The consideration of the report of the intersessional meeting held at Princeton of June this year. 2. The consideration of the discussion papers prepared by the 3 sub-coordinators of the virtual Working Group, established by the 3. The discussion for a road map to allow for the successful conclusion of the Working Group at least 12 months prior to the review conference. The Special Working Group acknowledged the value of intersessional meetings and expressed its appreciation to member governments as well as to the Lichtenstein Institute and Princeton University. It is understood that more intersessional meetings will be necessary and I m already consulting on holding another round on the holding of such intersessionals early next summer. Despite limited meeting time, numerous delegates did express themselves on specific aspects contained in the Princeton report, among many delegations which are not party to the Rome Statute but which are welcome. The Special Working Group agrees on the value of intersessionals but also emphasizes that these can t substitute formal discussions at ASP meetings. At Princeton, I suggested the

possibility to set up a virtual Working Group to continue communication. I asked three sub-coordinators to take charge of the following aspects of the Crime of Aggression: First, individual criminal responsibility. Second, conditions for the exercise of jurisdiction. And third, the definition of the Crime of Aggression. The discussion papers produced should help us prepare for future meetings. It was understood that the virtual Working Group can only serve as an informal forum for exchange of ideas, but in no way be a body for decision making or be a substitute s for meetings of the Special Working Group. The papers produced by the sub-coordinators are attached to the report for consideration for future revisions. We considered a timetable on how we might get from here to the review conference. As suggested by the timetable, it will be necessary to conclude our work at least 12 months prior to the review conference to allow for discussions to be held at the political level before that conference. The Working Group has agreed with the Chair that 10 full meeting days will be necessary to dedicate to the subject of the Crime of Aggression to allow for the conclusion of its work. The mandate to decide this matter fell on the discussion of the omnibus resolution. We hope for an early, successful conclusion. Mr. President, it is generally understood that the conclusion of this work will have an important impact on future ratifications of the Rome Statute and on the universality of the Court that we all aim for. We hope for positive discussions on the exercise of jurisdiction. I m hopeful that we can present a substantive report the next time we meet in the framework of the ASP. I am grateful to all delegations that participated in the Special Working Group, especially to the three sub-coordinators from Germany, Sweden and Greece and a special thanks to governments who have helped fund the intersession meetings. I hope I can count on continued support to organize future intersessionals. Thank you Mr. Chairman. PRES May I take it that the ASP wishes to take note of the report of the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression? I see no objection. It is so decided. May I take it that the Assembly agrees with the report and the recommendations of the Special Working Group to annex the report of the intersession meeting, outlined in ICC-ASP/4/SWGCA/1 to the proceedings of the 4 th session of the Assembly? I see no objection. It is so decided. May I take it that the Assembly agrees with the recommendation of the Special Working Group contained in paragraph 11 to the effect that the documents introduced in the Special Working Group be annexed to the 2005 proceedings of the Assembly under the heading Discussion papers numbers 1, 2, and 3 on the understanding that they are subject to possible revisions by their authors? I see no objection. It is so decided. We have concluded Agenda Item 14. We now turn to Agenda Item 20, and consider the report of the Working Group on the New York Liaison Office (ICC-ASP/4/WGNYO/1) South Africa Thank you, Mr. President. It pleases me to advise the plenary that after the plenary meeting on the 28 of November 2005, it had decided to adopt a program of work which included a meeting of the Working Group on the establishment of the New York Liaison Office that the Working Group did meet on the 30 of November 2005 and did consider the option paper by the Bureau on the establishment of the New York Liaison Office

(ICC-ASP/4/6). The Working Group had the opportunity to hear the views of the Court and address questions to the representatives of the Court at that meeting. After discussion, the Working Group decided to adopt the paper of the Bureau and concurred with its recommendations that a New York Liaison Office be established to serve the purpose and have the essential functions and structure as outlined in that paper. The Working Group requested that the Court ensure that the cost of the NY office be kept to a minimum and that the Court reports to the 5 th session of the ASP on the operation of the NY Liaison office. The financial implications in establishing the NY Liaison office, as outlined in the paper of Bureau (ICC-ASP/4/6) is a total of 339,500 euros for the year 2006. This report is submitted for the consideration of this plenary. I wish to thank you Mr. President for your personal support, the Secretariat s support to the Working Group, and the interpreters. I also thank the members of the Working Group, who ensured a successful outcome. I hereby submit this report to the plenary for its consideration. President May I take it that this Assembly wishes to take note of the report of the Working Group on the New York Liaison Office? I see no objection. It is so decided. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to adopt the recommendation contained in paragraph 3 of the report of the Working Group to the effect that a New York Liaison office be established and to serve the functions as outlined in the paper in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Working Group? I see no objection. It is so decided. We have concluded our consideration for Agenda Item 20. We shall turn to Agenda Item 15 of the Working Group on the Draft Code for Professional Conduct for Counsel (ICC-ASP/4/WGCPC/1). France The Working Group on the Draft Code of Conduct for Counsel has met on three occasions between the 29 th of November and the 1 st of December and had informal consultations on the 30 th of November. The Group examined the Draft Code which was put before the Secretariat and dealt with the budgetary implications. You have the results of the Working Group s work. The Draft Code was amended only at Article 22 and the Working Group issued some recommendations on the budgetary implications. The Working Group recommends that the ASP adopts the Draft Resolution at chapter 3 of this report. There is a translation error on the top of page 4 of the report, in the French translation, which affects this resolution. And we have to include a reference to Rule 20 sub-rule 3 which occurs in the English version, but not in the French version. All states with recommendations regarding translations, please address the Secretariat. I d like to thank all the delegations who took part in the Working Group meetings, especially those able to follow the study groups work in The Hague during the first 3 months. We met regularly and for a long time. There was a spirit of consensus, which animated the delegations during that time. I don t think that the draft could have been achieved otherwise. I would also like to thank you, Mr. President, the Secretariat, and the translators and interpreters. President May I take it that the Assembly wishes to take note of the report of the Working Group? I see no objection. It is so decided. The coordinator of the Working Group has drawn the

attention of the Assembly to the Draft Resolution recommended for adoption contained in paragraph 6 of the report of the Working Group. We shall now take action on that Draft Resolution. Is there any delegation that wishes to explain its position before taking action on the Draft Resolution? I see none. May I take it the ASP wishes to adopt the Draft Resolution, contained in paragraph 6 of the report of the Working Group and to adopt the negotiated Code of Professional Conduct for Counsel? I see no objection. It is so decided. Is there any delegation that wishes to explain its position after the adoption of the Resolution? I see none. We have thus considered the conclusion of Agenda Item 15. We now turn to Items 10 and 11 of our Agenda. Namely, the consideration and adoption of the Budget of the 4 th financial year in consideration of the reports. I give the floor to the coordinator of the Working Group who will make a progress report. Ireland I would like to update you and delegations on the progress of the Working Group and on the Budget. The Group has met 4 times thus far and held 5 informal consultations. After discussions on key important issues to the Court and to delegations, the Working Group was in a position yesterday morning to adopt provisionally its report to the Assembly. All that remains for us to do is to reconvene and to incorporate into the report material reflecting the outcome of the work of other groups and draft resolutions to give effect to the recommendations of the Working Group to the assembly. The Group will meet again this afternoon between 3 and 3:30. If the other Working Groups have completed their deliberations by that time, then we can adopt the report definitively. We will adopt provisionally the material available by that time and meet again briefly Saturday morning. I want to express my gratitude to the Secretariat, the various organs of the Court, the four Facilitators, the External Auditor, the Chairman of the CBF, the Host State and the other States Parties for all their support to me and my team to enable the Group to move towards completion of its mandate. President We shall turn to Agenda Item 21 of our agenda on Permanent Premises. We will defer consideration and adoption of the report on Permanent Premises until the plenary session tomorrow. Netherlands Thank you very much. There is a Chinese proverb that says, Chalk does not cook rice. I have asked for the floor to talk. One may interpret this proverb in saying that it means that instead of talking, one should act. And as paradoxical as it may seem, what I will say is meant to be acted. Last year at its 3 rd session, the ASP endorsed the recommendation of the Committee of Budget and Finance, regarding the desire to establish permanent premises built for the Court. The ASP also endorsed the recommendation of that committee regarding the Court to regard the costs and benefits of continuing to use the current premises or the ICTY premises, in order to assist the Assembly on considering these options. As recommended by CBF and endorsed by our Assembly, the Court prepared and submitted different reports for the ASP. These reports contained estimates of the possible range of costs and furthermore the Court prepared a report on financing methods used for the new premises of other major international

organizations. In their preparation for the 4 th session of the ASP, both in The Hague and in New York, and in the meetings this week on the permanent premises under the great leadership of Brazil, States Parties have expressed their views on the issue. The Host State has noted, on several occasions, States Parties have made an appeal to the Host State to be forthcoming in the financing of permanent premises. States Parties also referred to financing methods adopted for other international organizations. The Host State also noted that some States Parties expressed that an offer by the Host State of Financial support regarding permanent premises would be an important element in their preference of permanent premises. In the Conference in Rome in 1998, the Netherlands presented a bid entitled: The ICC, a Bid for Justice. With regard to permanent premises, that bid outlined suitable premises, conforming to the standards of the Dutch building code, and complying with local planning regulations will be made available rent free to the Court for 10 years from when the Statute enters into force (July 1,2002). At the end of that period (July 1, 2012), the ICC may rent the premises, tax free, at the prevailing market rates. Against the background of discussion and bearing in mind the significance of the ICC, the Host State at cabinet level has decided this week to offer an additional financial bid, related to the permanent premises: 1. The bid relates to purposely newly built new premises on the so-called Alexander Kazern site. 2. The Host State offers the land of that site, free of charge. The ownership of land remains with Host State. 3. The costs related to making the site ready for construction works to start will be borne by the Host State. 4. For the financing of the construction costs, the Host state will provide a favorable loan to the maximum of 200 million euros, to be repaid over 30 years, at an interest rate of 2.5%. 5. The Host State will bear the costs related to the selection of an architect. The selection process will be presided by the government state architect of the Netherlands. Savings on the ICC budget, resulting from this financial bid, might be calculated to some 40%, with regards to permanent premises. To conclude, the Host state itself has, on the basis of the documents presented by the Court and based on the recommendations of the CBF, come to the conclusion, that building of the permanent premises on the Alexander Kazern site are the best option for the housing needs of the ICC. The Host State hopes that the ASP in its current session can conclude that the State Parties and the Court be seized with the further planning and begin to work so that we can the process of the selection of an architect. The Host state trusts that with this addition of financial bid, the ASP will be able to complete the preparations of this important matter for a final decision in its 5 th session in 2006. A copy of my statement will be distributed. President This offer could not have come at a more opportune moment. You have provided us with significant elements worthy of the consideration of this Assembly and this welcomed announcement will be worked into the report and the probably the Draft Resolution on Permanent Premises. I thank you again. We now turn to Agenda Item 24.

Mexico Thank you. Mr. President, the Mexican delegation would like to recognize your efforts as President. Thanks to your work and that of the previous President of the ASP, his Royal Highness Prince Zeid, the rhythm of our wok in this session was stable and allowed us to achieve significant successes. It s not surprise that Mexico should express it s pleasure in this session of the ASP, as the 100 th member of the ICC. To convert Mexico into a State Party was no easy task. The deposit of our ratification was a result of complex process of constitutional reform, causing debate within Mexican society. Everyone knows the obstacles Mexico had to face, but what is less known is the participation of government legislative power, universities, NGOs, and civil society altogether which took place in the debate, leading to constitutional reform. Only after this process, can we appreciate the Court as a deterrent to the commitment to the most serious of crimes and also as an engine driving the establishment of law into our country. Mexico is grateful for the States who are Friends to the Court. And is thankful for encouragement we ve received, particularly from the EU, the CICC, the PGA, and the Red Cross. I d like to give special praise to President Kirsch, who came many times to Mexico to talk to our Congress and receive members of Parliament in The Hague. His support was crucial to overcome the last resistance and clarify the last doubts. I d like to express my appreciation to the Vice President. The connection of Mexico with the ICC is the combination of an act of State, which will give rise to more action and bring us closer to the universality of this Treaty. I d like to say that the Court is already up and running at full speed, as was made clear by speeches of President Kirsch, the Prosecutor Ocampo, and the Registrar. The ICC has set in motion the machinery provided to set up its jurisdiction and various countries have made declarations about crimes committed on their territory. Furthermore, the Security Council has used for the first time its powers given by the Statute and has referred to the Court the Darfur situation. Lastly, a State Party has deposited a declaration of the opening of the investigations on the issue of arrest warrants for leaders of the LRA and others saw that the Court is already functioning. My delegation is aware of the challenges still before us. We call upon states to cooperate to guard the integrity of the Rome Stature. President my delegation does note a deep spirit of cooperation thanks to you and support from the Secretariat. The delegations will thus achieve the adoption of not only budget for 2006, but also of important things which will further the Court, for example the reparations for victims. A special thanks to the ambassador of the Netherlands for its generosity. We still have a lot of work ahead, which requires continued and deepening of dialogue between the Court and States such as on the proper selection of cases, based on the gravity of crimes, strategic consolidation of awareness policies among State Parties, and the considerations of the mechanisms of reparations for victims. We emphasize the importance the immediate and long term will have. We need a strategic plan of the Court to give us clearer budgets in the immediate term and give us the tools to function and advance the permanent premises of the Court. Mexico considers it of vital importance to deepen coordination among Working Groups, which have their basis in The Hague and New York and define the problems each headquarters has to deal with and to find solutions to meet the Court s needs. My delegation thinks that meetings should be held in the

headquarters here, without prejudice to the fact that some issues would have to be dealt with in New York. Mexico emphasizes its commitment to the Court and to Human Rights as legal benefits to be cherished by the International Community. Uganda Mr. President, my delegation wishes to congratulate you for your well-deserved election. We look forward to working with you and you have our unwavering support. I d like to express my deepest gratitude to Prince Zeid for his excellent fashion in leading the Bureau. I believe it s proper to thank the members of the Bureau, the CBF, the Friends of the ICC as well as international NGOs and civil society for their support of the Court. On outset, Uganda aligns itself with African statement, which will be made by the distinguished delegate of Nigeria. We d also like to thank the Netherlands for their generous offer as the Host State. The Court has made monumental strides, including the conduct of investigations in the DRC, the Security Council referral of the Darfur situation and subsequent investigations, the commencement of pre-trial proceedings such as the arrest warrents, the establishment of field offices and presence in Uganda and the DRC, as well as the submission of the Ivory Coast, even though it is not State Party. We also saw Austria become the first state to sign an agreement with the Court regarding the enforcement of the sentences handed down by the Court. We hope that more countries will emulate this excellent gesture. We welcome the 100 th ratification of the Rome Statute. Of importance is also the five year strategic plan to shape its future work, to shape the global vision as espoused in the Rome Statute. The people of Uganda have appreciated the careful manner in which the Prosecutor conducted its investigations in Northern Uganda and the time it took to adapting its strategy to the local context. Now that the five arrest warrants for the top leaders of the LRA are issued, the government of Uganda will take every step to ensure that the arrests are executed. Though crimes committed by the LRA are of international concern, as is the solution to ending those crimes, Uganda is ready to work with states and organizations, regionally and internationally, for the warrants to be given effect and suspects brought to trial. We wish to reiterate the provisions of Article 59 of Rome Statute, which makes it incumbent of States Parties to arrest persons against whom warrents have been issued when called upon to do so. It s been reported that Vncent Otti, one of those against which a warrant has been issued by the ICC, is now ready to talk the government of Uganda and is even willing to voluntarily to appear before the Court. As States Parties are well-aware, many efforts were made by the government to hold talks with the leadership of the LRA, including Otti. Such efforts were ignored or frustrated by the LRA leadership. Had the letter been forthcoming in the negotiations, they would have benefited from the amnesty offered at the time. Now, the matter is in the hands of the ICC. Otti should appear before the Court to defend himself. The government of Uganda is ready to negotiate with all other LRA soldiers, except with those against whom warrants of arrest have been issued. Time is of essence, every day Kony and his blood-thirsty commanders continue to roam free, is one day too many for the people of Northern Uganda, whose entire social fabric has been torn a thunder by the daily committing of crimes. The LRA have abducted thousands of children, turned into sex slaves, affected by HIV/AIDS, or converted into killing machines, forced to kill other tribesmen and other families. Over 1 million people have been forced to live in displaced camps, and even then haven t escaped Kony s

wrath. Even after the arrest warrants were issued, the LRA continued attacks. With the movement of the LRA into the DRC, the regional stability has been affected. For security to be restored and justice brought to victims, those named in warrants must be brought to the account. We welcome the signing of the protocol between the Sudan and Uganda, which allows for joint operations between the security forces and empowers the same forces to execute the warrants of arrest of the four remaining suspects. One of the suspects was killed in action. The fact that the LRA has moved into the DRC highlights the fact that the LRA is not only a problem for Uganda, but for the whole region and calls for a regional solution, comprising a joint approach. We need a framework for more cooperation of MONUC, the DRC, the Sudan, and Uganda which calls for joint operations. We welcome the Prosecutor s post-warrant strategy by encouraging the return of those not named in the warrants and cutting off the remaining supply and support. We will work to fulfill out part of this process, including protecting the residents of Northern Uganda at risk of LRA. For those not mentioned in the arrest warrants, the government continues to offer amnesty to create incentives for their return. With the help of the international community, we need to strengthen appropriate mechanisms of re-integration for those who have come back in order to deter them from returning to criminal activities, while addressing the needs of victims. We d like to express our pleasure to Court and its organs in carrying out its duties and in particular we d like to commend the Court for the training of Uganda officials, lawyers, legal aid providers and journalists. We d like to stress the importance of outreach activities. We re happy to note that progress has been made toward finalizing the regulations of the Trust Fund for Victims. The board will soon be able to commence its task. Regarding the holding of meetings, Uganda once again aligns itself with the statement made by the African group to have meetings of the ASP alternate between New York and The Hague. Other issues of concern to our delegation include the staffing criteria on the budget of the Court. We are of the view that the use of the UN system in determining the allocation of jobs that resulted in the Court employing over 70% of its staff from the West and 12% and 3% for Asia and Africa respectively should be reconsidered. As it stands now, there are five times more men than women on the approved list and the West again is predominant. Such revisions must not only look at gender and geographical distribution, but the question of the category of employment, especially for the need for gender balance. To conclude, we stress the need for a comprehensive strategy to achieve peace, justice, and reconciliation, not only in Uganda but in the whole region, based on pursuit of legal channels, diplomatic engagements, military cooperation, cultural and humanitarian interventions. This requires the joint effort of the international community. Thank you. Chair: I thank Uganda for that important statement. The distinguished representative from Kenya is up next. Kenya: Thank you Mr. President. On behalf of my delegation, I would like to congratulate you and the Bureau for your election. We re confident in your able leadership to bring this session to a successful conclusion. My gratitude also goes to the former President Prince

Zeid and the outgoing Bureau for their outstanding performance that has steered the Court through its beginning. My gratitude also goes to the President of the ICC Judge Kirsch for the excellent manner in which he has led the Court and Prosecutor Ocampo for his dedicated work. We re happy to note the transitioning to a fully functional Court. My delegation would also like to associate with the African Group statement that will be made tomorrow. We are pleased that the number of ratifications has reached 100 and is closer to the goal of universality. I am happy to note we ratified the Rome Statute this year and deposited our instrument of ratification early this year on May 15, 2005. We have now embarked on implementing legislation, which is before the Parliament in Kenya. To that effect, Kenya has published the international crime bill. We are dedicated to the ICC and have followed keenly the developments even before, when we participated as observers. We have been very happy with the ICC since its establishment especially the progress in judicial activities in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, Darfur/Sudan and Central African Republic. These are test cases whose determination will test the ability of the Court to function in a fair and impartial manner. We urged that the perpetrators are brought to justice and provide timely execution of justice. We welcome the Court s efforts in negotiating with organizations like the African Union. We urge that the Court take into account any extra financial requirements. My delegation commends the ICC for the various efficiency measures, the strategic plan, the work on the agreement with the United Nations. We are also pleased with the setting up of coordination council, progress made in formulating the draft code of professional conduct for counsel, and the field presences in the areas of operation. Once trials begin, the Court should hold hearings throughout the region that maximizes the participation of victims. Mr. President, we appreciate the building of administrative and technical capacity of the Court but we are concerned with the makeup of the Court. For the court to be more representative, due regard to this principle. Victims rights is an important element. The Victims Trust Fund has been regarded as recognizing the need to ensure that victims needs are met throughout the judicial process. Negotiations surrounding the Victims Trust Fund and its draft regulation should reflect Article 70 of the Rome Statute. My delegation is of the view that victims in this respect should be given due consideration as should the entire peoples who are affected by the crimes. We re confident that the Board of Directors of the Victims Trust Fund will fully carry out its duties. I would like to reiterate Kenya s support for the process of defining crimes of aggression. The ICC will not fully realize until we can arrive at the definition. In this respect, more time should be allocated to the Special Working Group to make progress and we should redouble efforts for that. We should master the requisite political will. We will continue to participate in the deliberations.

Mr. President, let me briefly touch on an issue many States Parties have been reluctant to touch regarding Article 98 of the Rome Statute and the Bilateral Immunity Agreement implications under this article. The number of states that have signed is perhaps over 100, more than the number of States Parties. What is worrisome is that it includes States Parties. While we recognize states sovereign rights to make their own decisions, we as the ASP need to protect the integrity of the Court. We need to come up with regulations outlining the nature of these agreements. We have been discussing the question of a New York liaison office for some time now. We continue to see merit in this proposal and as it will enhance cooperation with the UN and state representatives in New York. The cost implications appear reasonable. We shall move forward. Mr. President, in conclusion, let me reaffirm Kenya s support to the Court and the objectives it tries to achieve. In this connection, there is a need for States Parties to honor their financial contributions to the ICC. I am happy to report that Kenya has already made its contributions to the first assessments for the new year. Chair: Thank you for your statement, Kenya. Ecuador is next on the speakers list. Ecuador: Thank you very much, Mr. President. We join previous speaker in congratulating you and the Bureau for the excellent work. This young institution is a response to global conscience and also demands reparations and due protection for victims. It is extremely important that the trust Fund has a capacity to respond. Mr. President, the ICC has moved beyond the initial stages and has entered the substantive issues of investigations and cases. Another substantial step occurred with the Cote d Ivoire s acceptance of jurisdiction of the ICC. The subsequent referral by the Security Council to the ICC on the Darfur situation demonstrates that this is now a fully operating international judicial body. Therefore we need more cooperation with the UN Security Council. The Court is founded on the basis of respect for human rights and the fight against impunity found in the Rome Statute. Therefore it is necessary to seek universality. We congratulate Mexico on becoming the 100 th State Party to the ASP. We would also like to highlight efforts of least developed countries for their support to the ICC despite possible pressure and fear of retaliation. We consider that the State Parties should be aware of this. The Assembly should work against weakening the work of the Court. Therefore, we need to strengthen cooperation between State Parties and non-state Parties so that we can overcome impunity and thus strengthen international peace and security. Chair: Thank you for you participation. I now call upon the distinguished representative from Trinidad and Tobago.

Trinidad and Tobago: Thank you, Mr. President. In 1989, during the 44 th UN General Assembly session, we participated in the political initiative for the establishment of a permanent international criminal court. We are pleased that the court has become fully functional and is a position to go after impunity along the lines of atrocities of WWII, which the international community had hoped never to see again. We were confronted by horrible crimes which have resulted in the created of ICTY and ICTR, both on an ad-hoc basis. With a permanent ICC, the international community now has at its disposal elements of international justice and determination. We welcome the referrals made and view them as legal important steps for the pursuit of justice. The ICC needs and require of all States Parties to protect and honor the Rome Statute. The ICC is not immune to those trying to frustrate it. We believe the IC has created an instrumentality whose officers will act properly and which will only act with the principle complementarity, when states are unable or unwilling to prosecute the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. It is our view, that the Rome Statute is an invaluable tool and we should work towards universality. Mr. President, the ICC has been innovative in approaching the issue of victims rights. With the draft regulations of the Victims Trust Fund, its Board of Directors will now be in a position to provide for targeted human relief. Trinidad and Tobago has also made a financial contribution to the Trust Fund and we hope that other major global donors do so as well. In conclusion, we reiterate our support for upholding the Rome Statute, and express deep satisfaction at progress made in a constructive spirit with a wide range of issues. Thank you Mr. President. Chair: Thank you Trinidad and Tobago for you statement. The distinguished representative from Brazil is next. Brazil: Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to start by congratulating you in the competent and diligent manner in which you have addressed several of the important areas of our agenda. I would like to express my congratulations to Prince Zeid as well for the efficient manner in which he conducted the Assembly through since its inception. Our compliments also go to the Bureau for their indispensable work. Mr. President, I would like to say that Brazil is supporter of the ICC. We support this new institution which has been established in Rome and devoted to becoming universal with the aim to provide justice, avoid impunity of perpetrators of the most heinous crimes and also to have deterrent effect on the repetition of those crimes, which would be a great benefit for preserving international peace and security. We think it is very important in the course of the consolidation of the ICC to have in mind and preserve the integrity of the mandate of the ICC and the Rome Statute. We support the statement made by Kenya with regard to the issue of Bilateral Immunity Agreements under Article 98.

In the last year, we have witnessed the entry into action of the ICC as a judicial institution discharging its mandate with the 3 referrals by the States Parties, of cases in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Uganda, and the Central African Republic, the referral of cases from Cote d Ivoire as a non-state Party as well as UN Security Council s referral of the situation in Darfur which proves that the ICC is accomplishing its mission and discharging its role in the international sphere. I would like to say with regard to the referral of the UN Security Council, as it was stated in the Security Council by Brazil, that we have reservations about certain provisions of the resolution then adopted which do not take fully into account the mandate of the ICC as approved by the Rome Statute. We also consider that in referring the case, it would be better if the general membership of the UN could also cover the part of the financial burden that the consideration and fulfillment of the ICC will incur. We would also to express the support of my delegation to the judges of the Court and the Prosecutor for the work they have performed so far and will in the future in the context of the ICC. We will work for the ICC to fulfill its promise of universal ratification with satisfaction. The ASP now has its 100 th member. We are happy it s Mexico but would like to welcome the other states as well. I d like to thank the Host State for the declaration they have made, regarding the financial conditions for the purpose of finding permanent premises for the International Criminal Court. We take a positive view of the statement. We should also look into the complete consequences of the package presented the Host State with regard to the construct of premises as well as financial effects of contributions for maintenance of the ICC. The consolidation of the ICC at The Hague depends, inter alia, on an agreement between the Host State and the ICC. We would like to see that the ICC receives the most favorable international organ clause. On the issue of venue, we think it is important that the seat of the Court becomes the seat of annual ASPs. This is efficient for dialogue between States Parties and the ICC. This would be without prejudice to New York for the specific topics that must be addressed there. I thank you Mr. President. Chair: Thank you for you comprehensive statement, Brazil. The distinguished delegate from Lichtenstein is next. Lichtenstein: Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to make a few remarks. First of all, I am very happy to see you preside and I m thankful that you have taken on the task of guiding the ASP. I would also like to thank Prince Zeid for his work. To our mind, this has been a very productive session and we re pleased with the progress. We have certainly improved our budget process thanks to Ambassador Ryan (Ireland). We have also found solutions on a number of substantive issues like the draft code of professional conduct for counsel and certainly the decision to establish a liaison office in New York is an important one. Plus obviously a number of administrative and other matters. We are also confident that the draft regulations for the Victims Trust Fund will be ready for a solution later today or tomorrow. We think the work has been very constructive.

We are confident about the mechanism to distinguish between those countries whose non-payment is due to circumstances beyond their control, which we think is important. The decisions regarding exemptions under Article 112, para 8 should not be taken lightly given that amounts due for most countries are relatively small. Of course, as we go on, budgetary discipline will be a very important element. Now on a less positive note, we have witnessed yet again a controversy again on venue, namely New York and The Hague, which we regret but still believe that ongoing discussions will be successful. We would have preferred to tackle this issue of venue in a less ad-hoc manner than proved to be possible and we would have preferred a more comprehensive approach. The primary consideration in deciding must be the Court and universality. The venue should not in any case place a specific group at an advantage or at a disadvantage. In general terms, we are greatly satisfied with the ICC s progress. Within only a few years, this Court has turned from paper to reality in very few years and it has more work to do than most of us would have thought. It is remarkable that the situations before the ICC are those we probably had the least in mind when we negotiated the Statute in Rome, namely the States referring their own situations to the Court and the Security Council which many of us, certainly myself, would have thought impossible probably 2 years back. So these are great developments. It goes to show very clearly that the world was in dire need of a permanent ICC and it is an achievement we can be proud of. The ratification procedure has slowed down recently but the overall record is still very impressive. We think that the reaching the threshold of the 100 th ratification will hopefully enhance existing ratifications. Now all this is only reason to redouble our efforts. We are on the right track to achieve our goal but as we all know, the opposition is still out there. We must therefore not waiver in our support for the Court and taking administrative, budgetary and other matters are very important but let us also not forget about our vision, which is also very important. We do have an opportunity to do this in New York when we consider the report of the Court in plenary, as was the case when we met. It is also extremely important that we do this, if and when we do meet again at The Hague. The quest for justice for the worst crimes requires our full commitment. We all know for instance that it was not possible to include any reference to the ICC or to impunity in the UN September conference document, which we thought it was one of the more shameful deficiencies to the outcome document. But it does illustrate the difficulties that are still there which we all know was the reference to the ICC. In the immediate future, the main issue is of cooperation of State Parties, also other states, also of international organizations. We hope in particular that the relationship agreement with the UN will come to fruition in the very near future, which will allow the ICC to take the work to the next level.

The review conference is crucial with a view of attracting more State Parties. The question of crime of aggression will be an important one since many states are observers to the developments during the brief time we met here at the Special Working Group. Indeed, a few non-state Parties participated in the discussions. As the Chair of that group, it has been possible to bring the work on crimes of aggression to the forefront of states attention and the ASP has agreed in principle to devote exclusive meeting time from today to 2008. It would allow us to present proposals at least 12 months prior to Review Conference in 2009, which we have agreed is indispensable in order to allow discussions at the political level on this extremely difficult topic. I m grateful for the agreement on the roadmap for the work of the Special Working Group. We should start our collective thinking about the Review Conference and its preparation in a manner which allows for the greatest possible participation of all interested states and certainly with a view to fulfilling the mandate given to us in Rome for preserving the integrity of the Rome Statute. This is all I want to say. Thank you very much, Mr. President. Chair: I want to thank the distinguished representative from the Canada will speak for CANZ (Canada, Australia, and New Zealand). Canada: Thank you Mr. President. I have the honor this morning to take the floor to speak on behalf Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. I d like to thank you for your wise guidance and direction of work. I want to thank very much the Host Government for their generous offer and we look forward to work with them over the next year. Mr. President, just a month ago, Mexico became the 100 th State Party to the Rome Statute. This marks a significant milestone in the campaign for universal ratification. We congratulate Mexico warmly for taking this important step. We also congratulate the Dominican Republic and Kenya, which became parties to the Rome Statute in the last year. All of our countries look forward to future ratifications, particularly countries in our regions. We are pleased to see progress made by the Court in the past year. This assembly, in another step forward, the spirit of cooperation demonstrates a strong commitment to the development of the Court. Far too often, war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity have been perpetrated with blatant impunity. Bringing perpetrator of these crimes is the key to long-term peace and reconciliation in any conflict. We are pleased to see the progress we have made in finalizing the regulations of the Victims Trust Fund in a manner that will allow both the Fund and the Court to fulfill important responsibilities to the victims of the crimes within the jurisdiction of the Court. It is critically important that all States Parties be able to participate fully in the work of the ASP. Finally, We look forward to reviewing the Strategic Plan from the Court in the spring and we urge all States Parties to find ways to continue to strengthen the institutions that is at the forefront of the campaign against impunity. Through such support, we ll be

continuing to support the entrenchment of the culture of accountability against the world s most serious crimes, ultimately to universal respect the common humanity that binds us all. Thank you Mr. President. Chair: I thank the distinguished representative from Canada for that statement on behalf of CANZ. I now give the floor the distinguished representative from Switzerland. Switzerland: Thank you, Mr. President. I d like to thank you. You have been able with your presence and prestige to create an atmosphere which has facilitate the effecting work of our Assembly. The Court has developed its activities in a very impressive way. Since the Rome Statute came into force, three States Parties one non-state Party, and the UNSC have taken notice of the Court. The ICC has become a pillar in the architecture of international peace and security. Our ASP has also matured. We have together made progress in the joint construction of this great work. This allows us to envisage new methods and above all, it seems to me that this is a time for preparing at the next ASP. It ought to be possible to intensify all the mechanism we have available for consultations and negotiations. We also would like to thank Host State for the offer made recently that allowed us to clarify our views on the permanent premises for the Court. I will finish Mr. President with my most sincere thanks to all the work done to allow us to come to a satisfactory conclusion. My thanks to the Bureau, the brilliant chairs of various Working Group, the facilitators and the members of the Committee on Budget and Finance. Finally, my specific thanks to those responsible for the various organs of the ICC who have given us all the tools necessary for our success. I am talking about the Secretariat of the ASP, the Registrar, the Prosecutor, who are window of the ICC to the world, and the President, whose role will grow in the coming years. Our recognition also goes to all the staff of the Court. Without their motivation, their devotion, and their tenacity, the ICC would not be the way it is today. Chair: Thank you Switzerland for your statement. The next speaker is the distinguished representative from Germany. Germany: Mr. President, let me at the outset congratulate you on the assumption of this important office and assure you of the unreserved support of my delegation for the time of your tenure. At the end of a week of intensive work of this Augustus assembly, it seems appropriate to look back not only at our deliberations, but also at what was achieved in three and half years of the Court s existence. Many of us do share the view that we have reason for some satisfaction: we were able to finalize the last outstanding instruments, we shall adopt the budget for the forthcoming year with a reasonable increase which also will

allow the Court to tackle the challenges it faces in the coming months and we were able to acknowledge that the Court has reached its operative phase in the shortest possible time. Without the full commitment and dedication of all involved, the representatives of States- Parties, Judges and Court officials this would not have been possible and therefore it is highly appreciated by my delegation. We congratulate Mexico which joined the Rome Statute as the 100 th State-Party and welcome also Kenya and Dominican Republic amongst us. Mr. President, let me highlight only a few issues. In the opinion of my delegation, the Court has made great progress since this Assembly met for its 3rd session in September 2004 by still recruiting personnel for its core functions; it began with 3 investigations to situations where conflict is still ongoing and where it had established a field presence for the first time. The dedication and commitment of the investigation teams, which are sometimes exposed to extraordinary risks, deserve to be given special recognition. The Court has also made progress in implementing the one court principle, thereby fostering team spirit within the institution and creating a common identity towards the outside world. My delegation where comes the intention to provide States-Parties with a comprehensive strategic plan based, amongst others, on the Court capacity model to facilitate proper medium-term planning. However, in our understanding, this plan should not serve only as a means for financial and administrative purposes, but enable States- Parties to discuss the mission for and the future perspectives of the Court during the 5 th Session of the Assembly. Mr. President, Germany gratefully acknowledges the well structured and effective approach taken by the working group on the Budget, under the leadership of Ambassador Ryan and his team, including the facilitators from Austria, Kenya and Mexico which allows us pass a well done budget for 2006. In our view, this approach can serve as model for future ASPs when we face a number of challenges, especially with regard to the interim and permanent premises. The Court provided us with a comprehensive background of information on options at hand and the Host nation made an offer to facilitate this financial aspect of this major project, which deserves our full recognition. On the basis of the Court s strategic plan, we ought to be in a position to take a well-informed decision on future premises, based on the advice of the CBF and, if necessary, assisted by an independent adviser. Mr. President, my delegation is very pleased to know that, in a spirit of good will and compromise, it was possible to finalize the Regulations for the Victims Trust Fund, under the excellent leadership of the Ambassador of Mexico, many delegations moved more than one step from their original positions with the intention to make early interventions of the Fund possible without touching upon the independence of the Court and the integrity of its proceedings. This will hopefully motivate both States-Parties and private donors to contribute to the Fund in order to allow the Board of Directors to make use of it in the interest of those who suffer most under crimes which fall under the jurisdiction of this Court. My delegation is convinced that the Board of Directors will identify projects where the Fund can prove its value added. The establishment of the New York liaison office of the Court will, no doubt, have an important impact on the work of all 3 organs of the Court, the Bureau and the ASP, above all, the Office of the Prosecutor. The OTP in its field operations will benefit from the opportunity to liaise with UN institutions on a daily basis, as well the Office can provide valuable support to the ASP, the Bureau and their respective