General Assembly Session 63 meeting 24

The President

If there is no proposal under rule 66 of the rules of procedure, may I take it that the General Assembly decides not to discuss the report of the Fifth Committee that is before the Assembly today?

The President

Statements will therefore be limited to explanations of vote. The positions of delegations regarding the recommendation of the Fifth Committee have been made clear in that Committee and are reflected in that relevant official records.

May I remind members that under paragraph 7 of decision 34/401, the General Assembly agreed that when the same draft resolution is considered in a Main Committee and in plenary meeting a delegation should, as far as possible, explain its vote only once. That is, either in the Committee or in plenary meeting, unless that delegation's vote in plenary meeting is different from its vote in the Committee. May I remind delegations that, also in accordance with General Assembly decision 34/401, explanations of vote are limited to 10 minutes.

Before we begin to take action on the recommendation contained in the report of the Fifth Committee, I should like to advise representatives that we are going to proceed to take a decision in the same manner as was done in the Fifth Committee.

The Assembly will now take a decision on the draft resolution recommended by the Fifth Committee in paragraph 6 of its report. The Fifth Committee adopted the draft resolution, entitled "Scale of assessments for the apportionment of the expenses of the United Nations: requests under Article 19 of the Charter", without a vote. May I take it that the Assembly wishes to do the same?

The President

The Assembly has thus concluded this stage of its consideration of agenda item 122.

The President

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to take note of the thirteenth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (A/63/209)?

The President

May I take it that it is the wish of the Assembly to take note of the fifteenth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (A/63/210)?

The President

I call on Mr. Dennis Byron, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Mr. Byron

I am greatly honoured to address the members of the General Assembly. I would like to take this opportunity to extend my most sincere congratulations to you, Sir, on your election as President of this Assembly and to wish you a successful and fulfilling tour of duty.

I wish, with the greatest respect, to invite the Assembly to take a special interest in the Tribunal, as timely action by the General Assembly is pivotal to the completion of its mandate within the projected time frames.

Approximately 14 years ago, the international community responded to the serious violations of international humanitarian law committed throughout Rwanda, which resulted in the killings of more than 800,000 people and in other acts of violence, by establishing the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

The Tribunal's mandate has been to contribute to the process of national reconciliation and to the restoration and maintenance of peace in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region, as well as to ensure that violations of international humanitarian law are halted and effectively redressed.

I have found it remarkable that this political institution considered that the attainment of such a political objective could best be achieved through a judicial process. I am sure that there were those who had questions and doubts about the ability of a judicial institution to address such an objective.

But, today, whatever system is employed to measure the success of the venture, there can be no doubt that peace has been restored and maintained in Rwanda, that there is a credible and ongoing process of national reconciliation, that many of the violations have been addressed and that some have been effectively redressed.

Of course, work remains to be done and circumstances have given the Tribunal new tasks. But there can be no doubt that the Tribunal has been a central and stabilizing instrument that has made major and lasting contributions to the establishment of international justice, peace and reconciliation, which currently prevail in the region.

Among the most basic and important of the Tribunal's achievements has been the accumulation of an indisputable historical record, including testimonies of witnesses, testimonies of victims, testimonies of accused, documentary evidence, and video and audio recordings. That record was invaluable to the Appeals Chamber when it discredited and rejected the theory that genocide and widespread or systematic attacks against civilian populations had not actually occurred in Rwanda in 1994.

In a nutshell, the Tribunal has established an important, judicially verified factual record of those atrocities. The importance and value of that record and the archival collections of the Tribunal to national, regional and international history should not be underestimated. They have contributed and will continue to contribute to the peace and reconciliation process in Rwanda and in the Great Lakes region, and they offer a guide for addressing similar violations of international humanitarian law in other areas of the world.

The Tribunal and its twin sister, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), have been the modern pioneers of a credible international criminal justice system. They have contributed greatly to the development of substantive international criminal law and procedure. The 14 years of our activity have produced a substantial body of jurisprudence, including the definitions of the elements of the crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, as well as of forms of responsibility, such as superior responsibility. Other international tribunals and courts will have a well-established foundation on which to build. The work of the Tribunal has transformed the resolutions, treaties and conventions emanating from the United Nations into practical and effective tools to be used by the international criminal justice system in its efforts to end mass atrocities.

The Tribunal has also fostered national compliance with international obligations in the human rights sphere. For example, Rwanda has already abolished the death penalty in order to facilitate the transfer of cases to its jurisdiction. The Trial Chamber's decision not to transfer the Munyakazi case to Rwanda was recently upheld by the Appeals Chamber. The reasons given in the appellate judgement could lead to even further reforms, including a clarification of the applicable punishment for those transferred to Rwanda, the exclusion of life imprisonment in solitary confinement and strengthening the witness protection programme.

The referral proceedings have also put the spotlight on other countries that need to adopt domestic legislation implementing the human rights treaties and conventions to which they are parties. The Tribunal's influence, therefore, extends well beyond the Great Lakes region, spreading what are arguably the highest ideals of this body -- its international standards of human rights -- and transforming them from noble aspirations into enforceable legislation and impartial judicial processes.

I am honoured to present to the General Assembly today the Tribunal's thirteenth annual report, which outlines the Tribunal's activities from July 2007 to June 2008 and reflects those remarkable and ongoing achievements and the Tribunal's unwavering commitment to its mandate. During the reporting period, all sections of the Tribunal worked vigorously, combining their efforts to complete their tasks at the earliest possible date while upholding due process and guaranteeing the right to a fair trial for all those who are accused.

Since July 2007, the Trial Chambers have issued more than 400 interlocutory and pretrial decisions. They rendered judgements and sentences involving four accused. Decisions were delivered in five applications for referral of cases to national jurisdictions. Two were successfully referred, while in three cases the referral was denied. The evidence phase of trials involving seven accused has been completed. Currently, there are 13 accused awaiting judgement. Trials involving 15 accused are in progress. The cases of four detainees, including one case of contempt, are at the pretrial stage. One accused who has been recently transferred to the Tribunal made his initial appearance last week, pleading not guilty on all charges against him. And there is one individual awaiting retrial as ordered by the Appeals Chamber this past August in its Muvunyi judgement.

These figures show that by December 2009 the Trial Chambers will be required to deliver judgements against 34 accused persons. In addition, as a result of the recent Appeals Chamber decision upholding the denial of transferring the case of Munyakazi to Rwanda, that case, along with the cases of Kanyarukiga, Hategekimana and Gatete, may now have to be added to the Tribunal's workload, making the total for adjudication 38 cases.

The Appeals Chamber has also continued to function effectively. It has delivered more than 80 interlocutory decisions and pretrial orders and decisions as well as judgements concerning three individuals. That brings the number of persons who have had their appeals completed to a total of 25. As a result, only one appeal is pending. But I think that the Assembly should take note that the appellate workload is likely to increase dramatically in the near future and that the capacity of the Appeals Chamber may need to be enhanced to cope with it.

During the reporting period, Prosecutor Hassan Jallow and his staff were at full stretch, investigating and developing evidence for cases not yet in trial, presenting evidence in the cases before the Trial Chambers and dealing with matters before the Appeals Chamber. Prosecutor Jallow has continued to devote special efforts to securing the arrest of the remaining fugitives, two of whom were arrested during the reporting period. His Office continued to work to find countries willing to receive cases for referral to national jurisdictions. It has been providing assistance in the two cases that have been successfully transferred. Two additional referrals are now pending before the Appeals Chamber, and two others are pending before Trial Chambers. The Office of the Prosecutor has compiled a significant database of evidentiary material and is continuously assisting national jurisdictions in their investigations.

During the present reporting period, the Registry, headed by Mr. Adama Dieng, has continued to play a vital role by providing administrative and legal support to all the Tribunal's trials. In my last report, I explained that the Tribunal was experiencing difficulty due to the inability to offer long-term appointments, which has contributed to the current high staff turnover. The Registry continues its efforts to retain the competent, knowledgeable and experienced staff members required for the successful completion of the Tribunal's mandate. To cushion the impact of the Tribunal's drawdown plan and address the exceptional situation that comes with it, the Tribunal has engaged the support of the Department of Management, especially the Offices of the Comptroller and of Human Resources Management, to explore and adopt flexible, exceptional measures and a common strategy to address the challenges of downsizing and ensure that the Tribunal completes its work within the set time frames. However, more needs to be done in order to address the issue of staff retention, and we will continue to count on the Assembly's support.

During the reporting period, the Office of the Registrar has also continued to deploy vigorous and commendable diplomatic efforts in the relocation of acquitted persons. As a result of -- and thanks to -- the cooperation of Member States, one acquitted person has been relocated. Now only one acquitted person awaits relocation, and efforts are ongoing to find a suitable resolution.

Establishing peace, justice, security and reconciliation in the region remains a central activity of the Tribunal. As a key component of its mandate, the Tribunal provides support in Rwanda to the judiciary, to civil society and to academic institutions through its comprehensive capacity-building and outreach programmes. The Registry in particular has continued to promote the Tribunal's work by carrying out a diverse range of public relations activities, including training sessions and the production of documentaries and other publications, notably in Rwanda and the Great Lakes region.

The Tribunal has worked assiduously in compliance with the completion strategy. The task has been daunting, yet we have tackled the challenge with confidence and determination. However, there have been developments that added to the workload on which the time estimates were initially based. Because of the recent arrests of the three fugitives who have to be tried at the Tribunal, we are now planning trials for which provision had not previously been made. I would like to take this opportunity to call again on Member States to take more active steps in apprehending the remaining fugitives, because the value of our achievements will be diminished unless all those arrests are secured. The inevitable result of those additional undertakings is the need for additional time to complete the proceedings.

At the request of the Tribunal, following its presentation of evidence on the progress of its work and projections, the Security Council extended the terms of office of some judges in July 2008. The Assembly will have to decide on the proposed additional resources in support of the revised judicial workload.

The Tribunal has set for itself a very high standard of performance. The workload for which we are planning is far higher than at any other time in its history. If one uses the number of judgements delivered as a measurement standard, then within the next 14 months the Tribunal will produce a quantum of work almost equivalent to, and maybe exceeding, the quantum of work produced over the previous 14 years. Since 1998, 31 trial judgements involving 37 accused have been rendered. We are now planning to deliver judgements in respect of 34 accused in the next 14 months. The Tribunal must now consider adding to its workload one case the referral of which has not been successful, and potentially three other cases the requests for referral of which are pending before the Appeals Chamber, which concern the same national jurisdiction.

It is true that many of those judgements will be delivered after trials that have taken several years to complete. But the upcoming challenge for the judges and support staff is that the multi-track system devised to expedite the process requires that trial and judgement writing activities in every Trial Chamber overlap during the coming period. That is no easy task.

A workload of such magnitude over a short period will require the continued service of a staff whose experience, competence and dedication were essential to the achievements of which the Tribunal boasts. Unfortunately, our very success in moving towards the timely completion of our tasks leads to the lack of staff whose services are indispensable to continued progress. Unless we can provide our staff with reasonable expectations of secure employment, we will deprive ourselves of the means to achieve the goals and the timetable to which we are committed.

For some time, the Tribunal has been discussing the importance of devising strategies for staff retention with this Assembly. Now the situation is even more critical than before. A continued loss of staff will make the task insurmountable. When it became apparent that there would be no financial incentives for staff retention, the Tribunal adopted a number of alternate strategies. But at present, the most important requirement for the retention of staff is predictability of employment until the completion of our work, and that is within the power of this Assembly to guarantee.

We have applied for a supplementary budget to retain the staff required for the trials planned for 2009. Rapid adoption of the supplementary budget will provide the required predictability for our staff members and allow the Tribunal to move effectively and expeditiously towards a successful implementation of its completion strategy. Without that approval, comprehensive and efficient planning will be impossible.

I should point out that the need for a supplementary budget does not reflect any inefficiency on the part of the Tribunal. It reflects, rather, the fact that this Tribunal, and others like it, are in many ways unprecedented in the history of international jurisprudence. While it was obvious at the outset that funding would have to be provided for its operation, it may not have been so obvious that any Tribunal designed to exist for a limited time would require budgetary adjustments as it approached the conclusion of its mandate. I stand before the Assembly to reiterate that the Tribunal remains committed to its important mandate to bring to justice those most responsible for the mass atrocity in Rwanda during 1994, to restore peace to the Great Lakes region and to facilitate reconciliation between the former combatants.

Finally, it would be remiss of me not to recall that the Tribunal is actively preparing for the period after the completion of its current trial work. Discussions and exchanges of views are under way with the Office of Legal Affairs and other stakeholders to determine the residual functions needed to preserve the Tribunal's legacy, including such important issues as the enforcement of sentences, the protection of witnesses and the maintenance of archives in which so much history is reposed.

I would now like to thank the General Assembly for its unfailing support to the Tribunal, which is paramount to the successful accomplishment of our vital mission. Approximately 14 years ago the international community determined that international justice was an essential component of reconciliation and peace. We think the Member States were right. We must ensure that the next generations will never forget our accomplishments and will pursue the fight against impunity of those who commit the most serious international crimes.

The President

I thank the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

I now call on Mr. Fausto Pocar, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

Mr. Pocar

I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, Sir, upon your election as President of the General Assembly. It is a great honour for me to take the floor under your presidency for the third time as President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and to present the fifteenth annual report of the Tribunal (see A/63/210). I would like to take this opportunity to convey my warmest gratitude to the members of the Assembly for their support of the Tribunal over the years, which is essential to enable the Tribunal to complete its work.

Mr. Pocar

In my address today, I would like to outline the Tribunal's remarkable work and to highlight the significance of its legacy for the future of international criminal justice. Since 2004, the effectiveness of the Tribunal has been measured primarily by the yardstick of the targets established in the framework of the completion strategy endorsed by the Security Council in resolutions 1503 (2003) and 1534 (2004). However, the completion of the cases on our docket is only part of our mission. Our main goal is to ensure that the pioneering role and substantial accomplishments of the Tribunal will continue to inspire future generations in their fight for justice. In other words, the fight against impunity must remain a priority for the international community, and towards that end the international community must continue to support judges, prosecutors and human rights defenders, in particular in the countries of the former Yugoslavia, in order to strengthen the rule of law by bringing to justice those responsible for international crimes.

The Tribunal has been a resounding success in many respects. It has brought charges against 161 individuals and completed proceedings against 116 of them. It has created nearly two thirds of the entire body of international case law dealing with violations of international humanitarian law. It has continuously strived to improve its procedures and working methods and has achieved unparalleled productivity. It has contributed to the exceptional development and unprecedented strengthening of international criminal and humanitarian law. And more importantly, it has brought justice to victims, helped build peace and promoted reconciliation by supporting judicial institutions responsible for pursuing and trying war criminals in the former Yugoslavia.

However, in order to preserve the Tribunal's achievements and to enable it to fulfil its mission, the international community must keep up its support in several areas. First, the Tribunal must be provided with all necessary means to complete its proceedings fairly and expeditiously. Secondly, the remaining fugitives must be arrested, and thirdly, more substantial assistance must be provided to our partners in the former Yugoslavia.

With regard, first, to the completion of trials, over the past year we have greatly improved efficiency and made unprecedented progress. At present, of the 43 remaining accused individuals -- excluding the 2 who are still fugitives -- 22 are currently on trial, 6 are awaiting judgement, 10 are on appeal, and only 5 -- including 4 who were recently arrested -- are awaiting their trials, which will begin shortly.

During the reporting period, the Trial Chambers rendered 213 decisions on pretrial matters in 8 cases, delivered 5 judgements and heard 5 contempt cases. Since October 2007, the Appeals Chamber has rendered 169 decisions comprising 10 appeals from judgements, 43 interlocutory appeals, 90 pre-appeal decisions and 26 review, reconsideration or other decisions.

Those results are the fruit of our steady efforts to identify new concrete measures that would enable us to streamline our work. For that purpose, in April I decided to reconstitute the working groups tasked with speeding up trials and appeals.

The Trial Chambers have been able to conduct simultaneous proceedings in eight cases, thanks to the very effective management of three courtrooms, with all of the empty time slots being used, but also thanks to the appointment of ad litem judges to two or even three cases under way.

As I have already underscored, the contribution made by the ad litem judges remains essential for the Tribunal to complete the cases. To that end, I took the initiative of recommending to the Security Council that it adopt a resolution authorizing the appointment of additional ad litem judges, who already number more than the limit set by the statute, which is 12. Resolution 1800 (2008), which was adopted in February, allowed us to appoint two additional ad litem judges and commence two new trials.

I also wish to draw the attention of the Assembly today to two other issues that are critical to the completion of the cases on our docket. The first, which I addressed before the General Assembly last year, concerns the pension entitlements of permanent judges. I wish to point out that the conclusions of a study conducted by an independent consulting firm, which were endorsed by the Secretariat, confirm our claim that the disparity between the pension benefits of judges of the Tribunal and those of judges of the International Court of Justice is discriminatory and clearly contrary to the Tribunal's Statute. It is imperative that that issue, which will have direct consequences for the completion of the trials, be swiftly resolved.

Thus, we need the Assembly's unwavering support at this stage. There is no doubt that, if the Tribunal's judges do not receive the same benefits as the Court's judges, some of them will be obliged to resign in order to return their countries' jurisdictions and secure their pension entitlements. We would then lose the valuable contributions of experienced judges at a critical time in the Tribunal's mandate, when our objectives demand maximum efficiency. I therefore urge the General Assembly to address this matter as soon as possible by adopting the recommendations set out in the consulting firm's study and those of the Secretary-General.

Another issue that has arisen is the retention of highly qualified staff. As the Tribunal's work nears completion, staff members will have to seek new career opportunities, and many are already doing so. We must ensure that our staff members, who have dedicated many years of service to the institution, benefit from training and career counselling and that measures are adopted to enhance their career prospects as the Tribunal completes its work. Such measures are essential so that we can manage departures of staff and retain key personnel without whom the Tribunal will not be able to complete its work on time.

Mr. Pocar

Let me now turn to the second point for which Member State support is essential: the arrest of the remaining fugitives. As Members are well aware, positive developments have taken place during the reporting period. The arrests of Stojan Zupljanin and Radovan Karadzi were particularly important milestones, and we commend the Government of Serbia for the critical cooperation it provided in that respect. However, we cannot successfully accomplish our work if the last two remaining fugitives, Ratko Mladi and Goran Hadzi, are not arrested immediately. I must emphasize once again that, while the Tribunal has done its utmost to expeditiously conduct and complete its cases, the late arrests of fugitives -- for which the international community must take responsibility -- will inevitably lead to slippages in the scheduled end of our proceedings. Thus, while we are ensuring that the trials of the four recently arrested accused will all start in 2009, the arrests of the remaining fugitives might oblige us to push back even further our target dates for the completion of all trials.

I also wish to reiterate that the obligation of all States Members of the United Nations to cooperate with the Tribunal, pursuant to article 29 of the Statute, is not limited to the arrest of fugitives. That obligation is, in fact, much wider and also entails the provision of assistance in all aspects of the ongoing proceedings before the Tribunal, including access to archives, the production of documents and access to and the protection of witnesses. I must note, in that respect, disturbing incidents of witness interference that have occurred during the reporting period, as well as delays in the service of documents, which have affected the expeditious conduct of our proceedings.

Finally, State cooperation also entails cooperation in the relocation of witnesses and the enforcement of the Tribunal's sentences. While the Registry has managed to finalize seven agreements on the enforcement of sentences, further support from States is required with respect to the relocation of witnesses.

The third and final point that I would like to raise with members today is, to my mind, equally important. It concerns the legacy that we will leave for international and domestic courts in the conduct of complex criminal cases dealing with serious violations of international humanitarian law and, in particular, the continuation of our mission by judicial institutions in the former Yugoslavia.

Allow me to recall, in that respect, that the Tribunal was never intended to serve indefinitely as a substitute for national courts, in particular in the region of the former Yugoslavia. Those domestic courts have an essential role to play in ensuring that justice is served and in promoting reconciliation. Thus, our strategy for the future must not only include the completion of the cases on our docket; as I said earlier, we must also strive to secure the continuation by local actors of our mission to fight impunity. In other words, we will satisfactorily fulfil our mandate only if domestic judicial institutions are ready to take on the task that we will leave behind.

That strategy also makes sense in the context of a more prosaic, cost-benefit analysis: a failure to adequately support domestic rule-of-law institutions will, in effect, diminish the impact of Member States' significant financial investments in international justice made through their contributions to the Tribunal budget. The capital invested thus far will not yield the expected return if the international community does not continue to support our legacy projects.

As detailed in my report, during the reporting period we have taken and supported multiple initiatives to strengthen our partnership with domestic judicial institutions and to establish close communication channels with our interlocutors in the region. Following the amendments in July 2007 and February 2008 of rule 75 (H) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence -- which allows parties, judges, victims and witnesses to directly petition the Tribunal for variation of protective measures ordered by the Tribunal -- we have handled a large number of applications from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia. To ensure expeditious processing, I established a special bench to deal with some of those applications.

In previous reports, I have emphasized the Tribunal's referral of the cases of 13 mid- to low-level accused to domestic jurisdictions in the region, pursuant to rule 11 bis of our Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The referral procedure has been very successful so far, and the trials of the individuals who have been transferred are being closely monitored by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe on behalf of the Office of the Prosecutor.

However, one must not forget that, in addition to the cases referred by the Tribunal, thousands of war crimes cases are currently pending or being investigated by domestic judicial institutions. Therefore, the continuing support of the international community for domestic institutions remains absolutely essential to guaranteeing the lasting establishment of the rule of law.

Mr. Pocar

On the occasion of my visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina in May, I saw for myself the extent of the task that remains to be achieved. Cooperation between States of the region in the investigation and prosecution of alleged war criminals, such as the extradition of nationals who are alleged war criminals to another jurisdiction, remains problematic. In addition, there are still dire needs with respect to the security of detention facilities, in particular in Bosnia and Herzegovina. That was unfortunately highlighted by the escape from prison of Radovan Stankovic, whose case was referred by the Tribunal to Bosnia and Herzegovina under rule 11 bis. The escape happened less than two months after Stankovic was convicted of systematic rape, torture and enslavement of women and underage girls and sentenced to 20 years' imprisonment. The fact that, a year and a half later, he has not yet been apprehended is regrettable.

The lack of progress made by the relevant authorities in apprehending Stankovic and in prosecuting those who assisted his escape at all levels has been a cause of serious concern for the Tribunal. We cannot afford to let the valiant efforts of domestic judiciaries to strengthen the rule of law be tarnished by the inaction of Governments and local authorities. It is thus essential that the international community continue to press those authorities to address that failure.

In that regard as well, I must take this opportunity to raise the issue of the presence of international staff in the State Court and Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina. During my visit to Bosnia and Herzegovina, various actors voiced concern about the impending departure of that staff, given that their mandate is due to terminate at the end of 2009. Victims' groups, for instance, have indicated that it will have a detrimental impact on the willingness of witnesses to testify. I therefore urge the international community to support an extension of the mandates of the international members of the State Court and Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

We have also initiated two joint projects to ensure the preservation of the Tribunal's legacy. One project, which should be completed before the end of the year, was undertaken with the assistance of the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute and consists of compiling a manual of the Tribunal's best practices, which will be of great value to other international and domestic jurisdictions involved in the prosecution of war crimes cases.

Another project, launched in partnership with the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, involves assessing the impact of capacity-building efforts and identifying what remains to be done to ensure that local judiciaries have the capacity to continue the work of the Tribunal long after it completes its mandate.

Let me, finally, touch briefly on the ongoing discussions on residual mechanisms. As I previously reported, we submitted our final report on residual mechanisms in September 2007. Since then, we have met with the Security Council Working Group on the ad hoc Tribunals and provided several clarifications in response to the questions of Working Group members. We also welcomed members of the Working Group to the Tribunal on 1 and 2 October. That visit gave members the opportunity to meet our judges and senior staff and gain a more practical understanding of our work, which I am sure will prove helpful when determining the features of the Tribunal's residual mechanisms.

With respect to the specific question of the Tribunal's archives, we just received a report from the Advisory Committee on Archives set up by the Registrars of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, which will soon be considered by the Tribunal with a view to submitting its recommendations on that question. I must, in that regard, take the opportunity to emphasize that, irrespective of the political decision on the physical location of the Tribunal's archives, it is of critical importance that open access to the archives be guaranteed. For that purpose, a suggested approach would be the creation of memorial centres in the main cities of the region, offering access to archives, historical information on the Tribunal's proceedings and cases, as well as interactive debates on international criminal justice and reconciliation in the former Yugoslavia. That would not only meet the primary objective of the archives project, which is easy and open access to our work by the interested public; it would also guarantee the seamless continuation of the long-standing work and achievements of the Tribunal's outreach programme, which are described in my report.

The Tribunal's achievements would not have been possible without the vital support of the members of this Assembly. The creation of the Tribunal in 1993 heralded a new era in international affairs. It led to the establishment of many other international criminal justice institutions, which together work towards a single goal: fighting impunity and bringing justice to victims of gross violations of international law. But the Tribunal's work has also had a deep impact on domestic judiciaries, particularly in the former Yugoslavia. Those judges, prosecutors and defence lawyers are the actors that will most fundamentally contribute to the lasting development of the rule of law in the region, which, 15 years ago, was still the scene of one of the most brutal conflicts of the twentieth century. Once the Tribunal completes its cases, those are the people whom the international community must continue to support if it truly wants to guarantee long-term peace and prosperity in that part of the world.

I call upon all Member States to assist us in our commitment to seeing the work of the Tribunal successfully through to the end and to provide support to those institutions in the former Yugoslavia which will carry on our mission to fight impunity.

Mr. Ripert (France)

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 3544: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg009-bk01-pa01">I have the honour of s...punity and the will for justice to be served.</p>', 3544, 3545, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 3545
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg009-bk01-pa01">I have the honour of s...punity and the will for justice to be served.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 3544