General Assembly Session 51 meeting 59

The President

This morning, before we take up the items on our agenda, the General Assembly will pay tribute first to the memory of Mr. Ahmed Zaki, who served as Permanent Representative of Maldives to the United Nations from 1979 to 1983 and from 1994 until the time of his death on 15 November 1996.

Ambassador Zaki had a distinguished career as a respected civil servant and an esteemed diplomat. He was Prime Minister of his country from 1979 to 1983, in addition to holding a number of ministerial posts. He will be remembered for the devotion with which he served his country and the cause of the United Nations.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I request the representative of Maldives to convey our heartfelt condolences to the Government of Maldives and to the bereaved family of Ambassador Zaki.

The General Assembly will also pay tribute to the memory of Mr. Paul John Firmino Lusaka, President of the General Assembly at its thirty-ninth session.

Mr. Lusaka, a distinguished diplomat, had a long and outstanding association with the United Nations. As the chief representative of his country, Zambia, to the United Nations during the 1970s and 1980s, Mr. Lusaka, as President of the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the United Nations Council for Namibia played a prominent role in the Organization and made major contributions towards the achievement of the objectives set out in the Charter of the United Nations.

On behalf of the General Assembly, I should like to convey our profound condolences to the Zambian delegation and to ask the delegation to convey our sympathy to the bereaved family of Mr. Lusaka.

I now invite members of the Assembly to stand and observe a minute of silence in tribute to the memory of the late Permanent Representative of Maldives to the United Nations, Mr. Ahmed Zaki, and of the late former President of the General Assembly, Mr. Paul Lusaka.

The President

I now call on the Secretary-General.

The Secretary-General

I was deeply saddened to learn of the deaths of Ahmed Zaki, Permanent Representative of the Republic of Maldives to the United Nations, and of Paul Lusaka, former President of the General Assembly.

Ambassador Zaki gave a lifetime of public service to his country as Prime Minister of the Maldives from 1972 to 1975, Attorney General from 1983 to 1990 and Speaker of the Maldives Parliament from 1990 to 1993. Mr. Zaki was a leading spokesman for the rights and interests of small States and small islands. His domestic civil service and political career spanned more than 40 years.

Mr. Zaki was appointed Permanent Representative of the Maldives to the United Nations in 1994, having also served in that capacity from 1979 to 1983. His death after a long illness is a great loss to the Maldives and to the entire international community.

Mr. Paul Lusaka devoted his life to domestic and international public service. He was a man of great vision and honour, whose dedication and commitment to the cause of peace and development in Africa was an inspiration to all of us.

As President of the United Nations Council for Namibia from 1979 to 1986, Mr. Lusaka worked hard to ensure that the cause of Namibian independence remained at the top of the international agenda.

Paul Lusaka's diplomatic career spanned more than two and a half decades. He served Zambia with distinction as its Permanent Representative to the United Nations on two occasions, in 1972 and 1973 and from 1979 to 1986. He was universally respected and admired by those who worked with him. He was a close and dear friend.

As President of the Security Council in 1979, of the Economic and Social Council in 1981 and as President of the General Assembly in 1984-1985, Paul Lusaka made an immense contribution to the work of the United Nations. His death has robbed the world of a great ambassador for the United Nations ideals of peace, democracy and international understanding.

In his opening address to the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly, Mr. Lusaka emphasized that the United Nations needed a rebirth and a renaissance. He added:

"We have the instrumentality, so we must have the will. We have the dangers, so we must have the courage to overcome them. We have the Charter, so we must have the capacity to implement it." (Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirty-ninth Session, Plenary Meetings, 1st meeting, para. 98)

These words are no less relevant today. Mr. Lusaka will be missed by the entire United Nations family.

The President

I now call on the representative of Cameroon, who will speak on behalf of the Group of African States.

Mr. Mpay (Cameroon)

It is with deep emotion and sadness that the African Group, on whose behalf I speak, has learned of the death on 9 November 1996 in Washington of Mr. Paul Lusaka, who, during his tenure as Permanent Representative and Ambassador of Zambia to the United Nations, assumed the very important functions of President of the General Assembly, of the Security Council, of the Economic and Social Council and, in particular, of the United Nations Council for Nambia.

It is with the same emotions and sadness that the African Group has learned of the death, on 15 November 1996 at Mount Elizabeth Hospital in Singapore, of Mr. Ahmed Zaki, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Maldives to the United Nations.

Ambassador Lusaka, to whose memory we pay tribute, was a great champion of the African cause and worked ardently to free Africa, particularly Namibia. His tireless efforts during this period contributed not only to Nambia's accession to international sovereignty but also to Africa's complete liberation from the yoke of colonialism and from apartheid. His death deprives Africa of one of its great sons, who was so dearly cherished and beloved. We will always remember him as a great visionary who loved his country, Africa and the entire world. The African Group conveys its deepest condolences to the Government and people of Zambia as well as to his family, to whom we express our most heartfelt compassion.

Ambassador Ahmed Zaki was still among us not too long ago, and together, we were like a family. He was a political man, a magistrate and a skilled diplomat who was conspicuous by his love for his brethren, his kindness and his generosity. He always worked tirelessly to alleviate human suffering and to bring people together. With his death we lose a guide, a counsellor, a friend, and a visionary for universal causes.

The African Group conveys to the Government and people of the Maldives and to the bereaved family its deepest condolences and sympathy.

The President

I call on the representative of Lebanon, who will speak on behalf of the Group of Asian States.

Mr. Moubarak (Lebanon)

On behalf of the Asian Group of States Members of the United Nations, I wish to pay tribute to the memory of two distinguished and prominent figures in the diplomatic world, whom we lost recently: Mr. Paul John Firmino Lusaka, former Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United Nations, who served as President of the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly; and Mr. Ahmed Zaki, former Permanent Representative of the Republic of Maldives to the United Nations.

Both Mr. Lusaka and Ambassador Zaki played important roles in their countries and at the United Nations. Mr. Lusaka served as a Member of Parliament in Zambia from 1973 to 1978. He was appointed a Member of the Cabinet and served during different periods as Minister of Rural Development, Minister of Power, Transport and Communication, and Minister of Health. He also acted as Minister of Finance, Foreign Affairs, Commerce and Foreign Trade, Lands and Natural Resources, Legal Affairs and Works. He served as Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of his country to the United States and also as Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United Nations for four years. In that capacity he presided over the United Nations Council for Namibia, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly. He also served as a member of the Board of Trustees of the United Nations Institute for Training and Research (UNITAR), to mention but a few of the many activities through which he sought to make a substantive contribution, which will always be remembered and appreciated.

Ambassador Zaki served as Prime Minister of the Republic of Maldives, Minister of Trade and Food, Minister of Justice and Minister of External Affairs. He served as Speaker of the Parliament and also as Attorney General. His untimely passing has deprived us of a friend and of a dear and highly esteemed colleague in the United Nations community, and his country of a very capable diplomat.

In our working environment, which is quite often hampered by diplomatic trimmings that often tend to blur the essence of our work, Ambassador Zaki's calm and resolute approach to all tasks he undertook acted as a a catalytic force around which consensus would develop and progress in our common endeavours would be achieved. His dedication to his work at the United Nations will always be remembered and very much appreciated.

In making these brief remarks about Ambassador Zaki, I would be remiss if I did not mention the many qualities that so endeared him to all who were like me, fortunate enough to know and associate with him. Mr. Lusaka's and Ambassador Zaki's long careers were landmarks in dedication.

On behalf of the Asian Group, I should like to express my deepest sympathy to the family and friends of Mr. Paul Lusaka and of Ambassador Ahmed Zaki and my sincere condolences to the Governments, peoples and Permanent Missions of Zambia and the Maldives.

The President

I now call on the Representative of The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, who will speak on behalf of the Group of Eastern European States.

Mr. Maleski (The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)

On behalf of the States of the Eastern European Group, allow me to express our deepest condolences to the people and the Government of Zambia on the death of Mr. Paul Lusaka, President of the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly.

It was also with great sadness that we heard the news of the passing of our colleague, the Permanent Representative of the Republic of Maldives, Ambassador Ahmed Zaki. We convey our deepest condolences to the family of the late Ambassador and to the Government of the Maldives.

The President

I now call on the representative of Jamaica, who will speak on behalf of the Latin American and Caribbean Group.

Miss Durrant (Jamaica)

On behalf of the member States of the Latin American and Caribbean Group; I wish to pay tribute to the life and work of two distinguished diplomats, Mr. Paul Lusaka, former Permanent Representative of Zambia, and the late Ambassador Mr. Ahmed Zaki of the Maldives.

Ambassador Lusaka was a distinguished diplomat and public servant. He made a tremendous contribution to his country and his region in the many capacities in which he was called upon by his nation and the international community to serve. He committed his life to public service, first as a teacher and then as a civil servant, a diplomat and a Minister of Government. He was part of that generation of diplomats who had to guide their countries on the international stage immediately after independence. His quick rise through the ranks of the foreign service of his young nation was a tribute to his skills and his commitment to service.

The United Nations system benefited from his skills and experience as his country's Permanent Representative to the United Nations on two occasions and as President of the General Assembly at its thirty-ninth session, President of the Security Council, President of the Economic and Social Council and President of the United Nations Council for Namibia. Ambassador Lusaka held other important positions in the bureaux of the Organization. He will be remembered for his keen intelligence, wit and persuasiveness and for the easy manner in which he was able to relate to representatives from all parts of the world. His skill in dealing with a wide range of economic and political issues was legendary.

The United Nations system has certainly been enriched by his contribution and we pay tribute to the Government and people of Zambia and the family of this outstanding public servant and diplomat for his many contributions to the Organization and the global community.

Our delegations also pay tribute to Ambassador Lusaka for his contribution to the strengthening of relations between his country, and a number of our Member States, including my own country, to which he was accredited as High Commissioner and Ambassador.

On behalf of the member States of the Latin American and Caribbean Group, I extend sincere condolences to the family of Ambassador Lusaka and to the Government and people of Zambia. We do so with a sense of gratitude for the contribution he made to the United Nations system and to the international community as a whole.

A distinguished and dedicated public servant, Ambassador Ahmed Zaki of the Maldives served his nation within many sectors of public life. As holder of several ministerial portfolios, he had the honour to serve as Prime Minister of the Maldives and as Speaker of the Maldives Parliament.

The United Nations benefited from his skills and experience during his tenure as Permanent Representative, first from 1979 to 1983 and again from 1994 to 1996. As a representative of an archipelagic and atoll State, Ambassador Zaki took a keen interest in issues affecting small island developing States. We benefited from his continuous emphasis on the need for the international community to understand both the fragility of these States and the threat to their survival posed by environmental damage. Indeed, he was one of the people who have ensured that the Maldives took a leading role on the issues of climate change and global warming.

The member States of the Latin American and Caribbean Group join with the delegation of the Maldives in mourning the loss of our colleague and pay tribute to his life and work, which have helped to enrich this Organization and the nation he served for most of his life.

The President

I now call on the representative of Belgium, who will speak on behalf of the Group of Western European and other States.

Mr. Reyn (Belgium)

It was with sadness that we learned of the death of Ambassador Ahmed Zaki, the Permanent Representative of Maldives. He held many important political functions, including Prime Minister in several of his country's Governments. He had a distinguished career in multilateral diplomacy and in Brussels with the European Communities, but particularly in the United Nations, where his second mandate began in 1994 and where his work was appreciated by all.

On behalf of the Group of Western European and other States, I would take this opportunity to send our most sincere condolences to the delegation of the Maldives, its Government and particularly to the family of Ambassador Zaki.

On behalf of the members of the Group of Western European and other States, I would also like to associate myself with the most sincere condolences that have been expressed on the passing away of a great diplomat, Ambassador Paul Lusaka. We will remember him as an eminent President of the General Assembly and particularly as a President of the United Nations Council for Namibia. With his passing, the United Nations has lost a great statesman and a great friend.

The President

I now call on the representative of the United States of America on behalf of the host country.

Mr. Marrero (United States)

On behalf of the United States, as host country, I would like to express my Government's deep regret at the tragic loss to Maldives and to Zambia, to the United Nations and to the world of two esteemed colleagues and close friends: the Permanent Representative of Maldives, Ambassador Ahmed Zaki, and Zambia's former Ambassador to the United States and to the United Nations, Mr. Paul Lusaka.

I am sure that the international community will miss their positive and pragmatic voice in this Assembly and in the other forums in which they worked. Both Ambassador Zaki and Ambassador Lusaka stood for the highest ideals of their chosen profession and we offer our condolences to the Governments and the peoples of the Republic of Maldives and of Zambia on their passing.

We pay special tribute to their steady commitment to the ideals of peace and non-violence. Both Ambassador Zaki and Ambassador Lusaka's service to Maldives and to Zambia, to the international community and to their people extended many years and is an extraordinary testament to their probity, discretion and dedication.

Finally, I would like to extend a personal expression of sympathy to the families of Ambassadors Zaki and Lusaka. The world shares their sorrow and we ask God to grant them solace, faith and strength at such a difficult moment.

The President

I call on the representative of Maldives.

Mr. Didi (Maldives)

This morning, I am speaking in order to perform a very sad duty. I stand before the Assembly to respond to the moving tribute and the kind words of sympathy that you, Mr. President, the Secretary-General and other members of the Assembly have extended on the occasion of the passing away of our Permanent Representative to the United Nations, His Excellency Mr. Ahmed Zaki.

On behalf of the Government of Maldives and the members of my country's delegation to the fifty-first session of the General Assembly, on behalf of Ambassador Zaki's bereaved family and on my own behalf, I wish to express the most sincere gratitude for these touching expressions of sympathy in this hour of grief to all of us.

Ambassador Zaki was not only a seasoned diplomat, he was a veteran politician, too. Besides being Prime Minister of Maldives from mid-1972 to early 1975, he had also held many other important posts during his four decades of selfless service to the country and the Government. Prominent among them were the posts of Attorney General and Minister of External Affairs. He had also been Speaker of the Citizens' Majlis -- our Parliament -- on three different occasions. In addition to being Permanent Representative of Maldives to the United Nations, Ambassador Zaki was also the High Commissioner of Maldives to the United Kingdom at the time of his death.

As a person, he was very dedicated to his family and was a dear friend to all who knew him well, both at home and abroad. With his untimely demise, Maldives has lost an able statesman and a true son of the country, who will be hard to replace.

In closing, I wish to assure you, Mr. President, that I shall convey the sentiments that you and the other speakers have expressed to my Government, to Mrs. Zaki and to the other members of our late Permanent Representative's family, on whose behalf I thank you once again.

Finally, I should like to associate myself with the words of sympathy that you, Sir, the Secretary-General and other speakers extended on the passing away of Mr. Paul Lusaka, President of the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly and former Permanent Representative of Zambia to the United Nations. On behalf of the Maldivian delegation to the current session of the General Assembly and on my own behalf, I should like to convey our sincere condolences to the Government of Zambia and to the family of Ambassador Paul Lusaka.

The President

I now call on the representative of Zambia.

Mr. Kasanda (Zambia)

I should like to thank the President of the General Assembly for organizing this moment this morning, enabling members of the Assembly to remember and to pay tribute to Ambassador Paul Lusaka, who peacefully passed away on 9 November 1996, in Washington, D.C., after a long illness.

Ambassador Lusaka was born in Zambia in January 1935. He received his basic education in his native country, Zambia. He proceeded to the University of Lesotho, where he obtained an M.A. degree. Later on he moved on to the University of Minnesota and after that received an honorary Doctor of Laws degree from McGill University in Canada.

Paul Lusaka served in Zambia with distinction and courage, having been appointed to several Cabinet ministerial posts: Minister of Rural Development, Minister of Transport and Communications, and Minister of Health. During that period he earned the respect of his Cabinet colleagues for his integrity and honesty.

Paul Lusaka served the United Nations in several capacities, including as Ambassador of his country. From January 1979 to December 1980, he was the chief Zambian delegate to the Security Council. In 1981, he served as President of the Economic and Social Council. In September 1984, Paul Lusaka was elected President of the thirty-ninth session of the General Assembly. This was a great honour accorded to him, as an individual and as a representative of his country, Zambia. From 1979 to 1986, Ambassador Lusaka had the privilege of serving as President of the United Nations Council for Namibia. In each of these capacities, Paul Lusaka served the Organization with commitment, courage and distinction.

Paul Lusaka's life was one of service to his fellow human beings. He employed his diplomatic skills to the improvement of people's condition. As chief spokesman, Paul Lusaka articulated and reinforced the efforts of all his colleagues on the Council in building an international consensus on the right of Namibia to freedom and independence. He also participated in the Commonwealth group that witnessed the historical elections that ushered in a free South Africa.

My delegation is greatly touched by the various tributes expressed this morning, and we undertake to convey to the Zambian Government and to the bereaved family the various kind words of comfort that were expressed this morning.

We are also grateful for the honour bestowed on Paul Lusaka through this ceremony of remembrance for the humble contribution that he made in the service of the United Nations.

I should also like on this occasion to associate the Zambian delegation with the many tributes that have been paid to the delegation of Maldives on the loss of Ambassador Zaki. He was a valuable asset to his country, having served as Prime Minister and as minister with various portfolios.

The President

May I take it that the Assembly takes note of the third annual report of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991?

The President

I call on Mr. Antonio Cassese, President of the International Tribunal.

Mr. Cassese (President of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991)

Let me first of all express my deep gratitude for the signal honour the General Assembly has shown me in once again inviting me to address the Assembly on the activities of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia over the past 12 months.

May I take this opportunity also to express my deep gratitude and that of all the judges at The Hague to the Secretary-General, Mr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, a statesman of great vision and deep moral commitment, who significantly contributed to the establishment of our Tribunal and has supported it consistently and unreservedly.

As members know, The Hague Tribunal has now been in existence for three years. In this third year, much headway has been made. When I last addressed the General Assembly, on 7 November 1995, the war in the former Yugoslavia had just stopped raging and the Tribunal's work was still affected in practical terms by the consequences of the conflict. We had only one of the then 43 indictees in our Detention Unit at The Hague, and no trial had commenced. In the subsequent period, a real breakthrough has occurred. Armed conflict has ceased and violence has been muted, if not in the minds of the contending parties then at least in the streets, towns and villages of the former Yugoslavia. The cessation of hostilities on the ground and the engagements undertaken by the parties to the Dayton Agreement have had a beneficial knock-on effect on the activities of our Tribunal. We now have seven persons in our Detention Unit at The Hague and, what is even more important, we have been able to commence our judicial activities proper.

The first trial, the Tadic case, is about to finish and in another case, where the accused has pleaded guilty, sentencing proceedings are being held today and tomorrow at The Hague, and a sentence will be delivered in a few weeks. Two trials will be initiated in the next few months, one against one accused, the other against four accused. In other words, criminal proceedings against all seven persons in prison have either commenced or have already been held.

Thus, at long last, international criminal justice is being dispensed. For the first time since Nuremberg and Tokyo, individuals have been subjected to the impartial scrutiny of international justice on charges of the most serious crimes known to mankind. International accountability of individuals for breaching the tenets of international law has become a living reality. We envisage and are working towards more trials commencing next year if cooperation from States is forthcoming.

At the same time, the Tribunal, faced with the non-execution of most arrest warrants, has shown its resolve not to be thwarted by the inaction of States or by the attempts of individuals to evade international justice. The Tribunal has thus had to resort on five occasions to the special procedure contemplated in rule 61 of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence. In these five cases, the evidence gathered by the Prosecutor has been made public in open court, the indictments have been confirmed by a Trial Chamber and international arrest warrants have been issued via Interpol. In addition, the Tribunal's President, at the Trial Chambers' request, has brought to the attention of the Security Council the failure of some States or Entities of the former Yugoslavia to execute arrest warrants in these cases, thereby breaching their international legal obligation to cooperate with the Tribunal.

In spite of the progress made, one should not be blind to one major and almost insurmountable difficulty the Tribunal faces almost every day. This is the persistent lack of real cooperation by some States and Entities of the former Yugoslavia: most of them fail to obey the injunctions of the Tribunal to arrest indictees on their territory. This accounts for the huge gap between the number of indictees -- 74 -- and the number of accused detained in our prison at The Hague -- seven.

In my two previous addresses to the General Assembly, in 1994 and 1995, I emphasized that the Tribunal lacks any enforcement agency of its own. Therefore, its orders can be executed only if the States and Entities concerned are willing to do so. Time and again, I have appealed strongly to all States, and more particularly to those of the former Yugoslavia, to put in place all the measures necessary to enable the Tribunal to fulfil its mission. The Dayton Agreement restated, strengthened and spelled out the already existing obligation of States to cooperate with our Tribunal. In addition, it extended that obligation to the two Entities composing Bosnia and Herzegovina, namely the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Republika Srpska. However, as far as the Tribunal is concerned, since its signing in Paris nearly a year ago, on 14 December 1995, most of the Agreement's promises have remained a dead letter. Some parties to the Agreement have simply failed to implement it in a crucial area: the apprehension of persons indicted by the Tribunal and their surrender to The Hague.

This applies, in particular to Serbia and Montenegro and to Republika Srpska. They have refused so far to arrest any indictee on their territory on the pretext that the arrest and surrender of indictees having their nationality would be contrary to their constitutions, which prohibit the extradition of their nationals to other States. In this regard, I would like to say most emphatically that this argument is utterly fallacious. First, the surrender of indictees to the Tribunal, an international judicial body established by the Security Council under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, has nothing to do with the extradition of nationals to other States.

Secondly, there exists in any case a universally accepted principle of international law whereby States cannot claim that their national legislation, including their constitution, prevents them from complying with international legal obligations. Were States to be allowed to depart from this fundamental principle of international law, total anarchy would ensue, because quite a few States would try to hide behind their national legislation to evade international legal obligations.

Other States and entities of the former Yugoslavia have instead passed legislation implementing the Tribunal's statute and permitting the arrest and delivery of indictees, including their own nationals. This holds true for Bosnia and Herzegovina and for Croatia. The attitude of Bosnia and Herzegovina is cooperative. Notably, the Sarajevo authorities have arrested and delivered the only two indictees on their territory. It is to be hoped that this attitude will survive the transition to common institutions under the Dayton peace agreement. It is a matter of regret that the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina has so far failed to execute our arrest warrants. Similarly, it must be regretted that Croatia has failed both to exercise its indisputable influence and authority over Bosnian Croats to apprehend and deliver them to the Tribunal and to execute arrest warrants in Croatia itself, notably in the case of two leading figures, Ivica Rajic and Dario Kordic.

Clearly, if this lack of cooperation were to continue, the very credibility of international institutions would be at stake. Why create a new international body, endowed with the exalted aim of rendering justice, and then withhold the means necessary for it to fulfil its mission? Unlike Nuremberg, the present Tribunal was not established to do victors' justice, but to dispense victims' justice. How shall we heed the demands for justice of the victims and their relatives if we are not enabled fully to discharge the judicial mission vested in us? I therefore ask the Permanent Representatives of Serbia and Montenegro and of Croatia whether their Governments intend to cooperate with the Tribunal. If they do, let them demonstrate their good faith by arresting and delivering those indictees who are on their territory.

In the next few months, I propose to report, in a formal meeting to the Tribunal's parent organ, the Security Council, on the current complex problems besetting our work at The Hague. I trust that many States Members of the United Nations will participate in such a future debate.

I will now mention three major criticisms which have been made of our Tribunal and endeavour to respond to them. The Hague Tribunal has sometimes been accused of being biased. In particular, some States have argued that we show prejudice against the Serbs. In this regard, I would like to make two points. First, much of the Tribunal's investigations so far into crimes in which Serbs are the victims have been substantially hampered by the very refusal of Pale and Belgrade to cooperate with our Tribunal.

My second point is more general and goes to the heart of the very nature of international criminal justice. The Tribunal tries individuals. It does not try peoples, nations or States, although, of course, its trials may involve factual determinations as to the behaviour of States or Governments. Individuals are prosecuted when the Prosecutor has evidence that they have committed crimes within the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Prosecuting individuals on this basis is by definition even-handed and non-discriminatory, because it does not involve an enquiry as to the religion, nationality or ethnicity of an accused person.

It is axiomatic that the Tribunal, a judicial organ, is absolutely impartial. The question bears asking: "What could the Tribunal possibly hope to gain by adopting a biased or partial approach?" We at The Hague are ever conscious in this respect of the words of the Chief United States Prosecutor, Justice Robert Jackson, at Nuremberg, when he said:

"We must not forget that the record on which we judge the defendants today is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow. To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our lips as well".

These words are equally true of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

I shall now move on to a second criticism levelled at the Tribunal by a number of non-governmental organizations and some segments of public opinion. They have assailed us for trying only the so-called "small fry", rather than the principal architects of the appalling atrocities in the former Yugoslavia. It is indeed true that the Tribunal's jurisdiction pre-eminently involves the prosecution of crimes that form part of a systematic policy, rather than isolated acts of individual viciousness. The Tribunal aims to reach those who orchestrated crimes committed on the ground -- that is, military and political leaders. For this purpose, however, it may prove necessary to try both the subordinates and their superiors. When the trials of so-called "small fry" take place, therefore, they are designed not only to render justice for atrocious crimes allegedly committed by those persons, but also to produce evidence against the higher echelons of the military and political command structure.

A third criticism that has been levelled at the Tribunal is that its Rules of Procedure and Evidence have been overamended. Before I rebut this criticism, let me remind the Assembly that the passing of rules to govern the conduct of criminal proceedings is among those functions that are not normally exercised by judges. In all our national legal systems, the legislature enacts laws or codes on criminal procedure and the judges interpret and apply them. The judiciary is quite distinct from the legislative branch. However, the situation is quite different for us at the international level. The Security Council rightly entrusted the judges with this novel task, in an area where there were few or no precedents. Let me stress, however, that, whenever our Judges are called upon to fill in the gaps left by the statute, they do so within the limits set by the Security Council. No rule of procedure, nor any amendment to such a rule, may infringe the principles laid down in the statute of our Tribunal.

Turning now to the specific criticism about overamending our rules, I should point out that it was essential, in the interests of justice, to amend the rules in the light of new problems that arose or unanticipated situations that occurred. Our Rules of Procedure have been amended for a variety of reasons: to enhance the rights of the accused; to help to better protect victims and witnesses; to take account of the views of the host country, the Netherlands; to improve the consistency, clarity and comprehensiveness of the rules; and for many other reasons. One might ask: Why were the rules not perfectly comprehensive, consistent and clear in the first place? To ask this question is to answer it. It would have been simply impossible for the first truly international criminal tribunal to have adopted the first ever international criminal procedural and evidentiary code from a first draft dealing perfectly with all the diverse issues with which the Tribunal has to cope: namely, all the stages of a criminal trial -- investigations, indictment, pre-trial hearings, trial, appeal, review.

By way of conclusion, let me revert to a point I made earlier. Despite its indisputable and significant accomplishments, the Hague Tribunal is grappling every day with a huge problem: the lack of real cooperation by some States and entities of the former Yugoslavia. This is a massive stumbling block on our path towards justice. We at The Hague fervently hope that this attitude will be discontinued very soon.

It will be recalled that under Article 227 of the Treaty of Versailles the Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany was arraigned for

"a supreme offence against international morality and the sanctity of treaties".

Yet, he was never tried. The message to the international community at that time was clear: individual leaders were immune from prosecution. In this climate, Hitler, if questioned as to whether he thought he could get away with his genocidal policies in Europe, could have said with confidence: "But who remembers the victims of so many crimes committed during the First World War?" Fortunately, the spark of Versailles was rekindled after the Second World War, when the major Axis war criminals were brought to justice at Nuremberg and impunity was checked.

Now, again, the supreme bodies of the United Nations have pledged to punish, at the international level, egregious offenders. And yet, that pledge, too, is currently in danger of being undermined by the persistent refusal of some States and entities to arrest and bring to justice those allegedly responsible for massive violations of international law.

Members of the General Assembly, I must ask you: Did you not pledge in 1993, on behalf of the innumerable victims of atrocities in the former Yugoslavia, that the culprits would be brought to book? I must ask you: Does the Tribunal still have your support to carry out this mission? Let us ensure today that no future leader can say with impunity: "But who remembers the war crimes and genocide perpetrated in the former Yugoslavia?"

At The Hague we are, of course, aware that the International Tribunal cannot escape the harsh realities of the present world community. In 1947, Henry Stimson, who had served as United States Secretary of State and Secretary of War, reflecting on Nuremberg, wrote:

"International law is still limited by international politics, and we must not pretend that either can live and grow without the other".

To some extent these words hold true for our Tribunal as well. We are aware that we are different from domestic criminal courts, which may and indeed must be blind to any political reality, because the executive and legislative branches of government take care of political problems ancillary to the administration of justice. By contrast, the International Tribunal has no executive or legislative branch of government to turn to, and, in addition, it tries large-scale crimes such as genocide committed during prolonged internal and international armed conflicts. Consequently, the Hague Tribunal cannot ignore the general political context within which its action unfolds. We think. however, that international justice must not be conditioned by, let alone capitulate to, political exigencies. It is our pledge that we shall do whatever is legally permitted to international judges to ensure that the long-term demand for international justice of all States prevails over the short-term political interests of a few States.

Mr. Fulci (Italy)

First I would like to thank the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, Judge Cassese, for the statement he has just delivered, which provides a clear and insightful account of the Tribunal's activities during the past year. We were particularly pleased to hear about the many achievements of the Tribunal. As the President has rightly pointed out, for the first time since Nuremberg and Tokyo, international criminal justice is now being dispensed concretely by the Yugoslav Tribunal. Trials against a number of accused persons are about to finish or will be initiated shortly. Impressive work has been done towards subjecting other individuals to the scrutiny of the Tribunal. Since last year's report, other indictments have been handed down and confirmed by the judges. Several international arrest warrants have been issued. The Appeals Chamber has rendered a judgment that has come to be regarded as a fundamental pronouncement on the current status of international criminal law and humanitarian law. Italy wishes to commend here the skill and dedication of all members of the various organs of the Tribunal, who made it possible to obtain these results.

At the same time, the report underlines the difficulties which lie ahead in the performance of the Tribunal's functions. Although the Dayton Agreement confirmed and reinforced the obligation of States to cooperate fully with the Tribunal, failure to comply with this obligation by some States and Entities in the former Yugoslavia still represents a major obstacle to prosecution and punishment of those responsible for some of the most serious crimes against mankind. In particular, the report raises the issue of the apprehension of persons indicted by the Prosecutor and their consequent surrender, pointing out the enormous gap between the number of indictees -- 75 -- and the accused already detained -- only seven.

As a country that has constantly supported the activities and role of the Tribunal, Italy must reiterate that it is incumbent upon all the parties concerned to cooperate with the Tribunal in the most complete and effective way. This is also a clear priority for the consolidation phase in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as emphasized at the recent Paris meeting of the Steering Board of the Civilian Implementation Conference. There is no justification for not executing the arrest warrants that have been issued, and thus jeopardizing the credibility of the Tribunal.

In this respect, it is also essential that States adopt the legislative, administrative and judicial measures necessary for prompt implementation of the Tribunal's decisions. The report indicates that although a number of additional States have enacted implementing legislation to carry out their responsibilities, the situation on the whole remains unsatisfactory. We hope to see improvement in this area in the near future.

Adequate financial support for the Tribunal remains equally imperative, as does with the cooperation of States in enforcing the sentences of imprisonment imposed by the Tribunal. Italy, among other States, has indicated its willingness to carry out the enforcement of prison sentences pursuant to article 27 of the Tribunal's statute.

As stated in the Tribunal's report, international accountability of individuals for breaching norms of international humanitarian law has become a reality. The establishment by the Security Council of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991 and the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 has been decisive in producing this important result. The action carried out by the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia since 1993 stems from the determination of the community of States to avoid impunity for the most heinous crimes of international concern. This action must continue. We are committed to its success.

At the same time, there is a need to complete the institutional framework for prosecution and punishment at the international level of serious violations of international humanitarian law, wherever and by whomever they are committed. Italy has consistently advocated the creation of a permanent international criminal court, and has recently renewed its offer to host a conference in 1998 to adopt the statute for such a court. The experience and achievements of the Yugoslav Tribunal will, of course, be of crucial importance for the establishment of a permanent international criminal court. This is another reason for our full, unconditional and unreserved support for the Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

Mr. Sucharipa (Austria)

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe9' in position 6012: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg011-bk01-pa01">There is no peace with... the most able guidance of President Cassese.</p>', 6012, 6013, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 6013
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg011-bk01-pa01">There is no peace with... the most able guidance of President Cassese.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 6012