Security Council meeting 5594

The President

I should like to inform the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Rwanda and Serbia in which they request to be invited to participate in the consideration of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the consideration of the item, without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The President

On behalf of the members of the Council, I extend a warm welcome to His Excellency Mr. Zoran Loncar, Minister of Public Administration and Local Self-Government of the Republic of Serbia. In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council's prior consultations, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend invitations under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to Judge Fausto Pocar, 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; Judge Erik Møse, President of 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 1994 and 31 December 1994; Ms. Carla Del Ponte, Prosecutor of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia; and Mr. Hassan Bubacar Jallow, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

It is so decided.

I invite Judge Pocar, Judge Møse, Ms. Del Ponte and Mr. Jallow to take their seats at the Council table.

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations.

Members of the Council have before them documents S/2006/666, containing a note by the Secretary-General dated 21 August 2006, transmitting the thirteenth annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia; and S/2006/658, containing a note by the Secretary-General dated 16 August 2006, transmitting the eleventh annual report of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

I wish to draw the attention of members to document S/2006/898, containing the text of letter dated 15 November 2006 from the President of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, and document S/2006/951, containing the text of a letter dated 30 November 2006 from the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

At this meeting, the Council will hear briefings by the President of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the Prosecutors of the International Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Following those briefings, I will give the floor to Council members who wish to make comments or ask questions.

I now give the floor to Judge Fausto Pocar, President of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

Judge Pocar

It is a distinct honour to appear before the Security Council for the purpose of presenting the sixth report of the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in accordance with Security Council resolution 1534 (2004). This report outlines the progress made by the Tribunal in achieving the objectives of the completion strategy from June to November 2006. It also describes the remaining steps to be taken and the ongoing challenges faced in this regard. It is my intention today to provide the Council with an overview of the key aspects of the report and to update members on further achievements made by the Tribunal since the submission of the report.

Before doing so, however, allow me to express my gratitude to you, Mr. President, for your country's ongoing commitment to the Tribunal's work in contributing to the maintenance of international peace and justice through the prosecution of those most responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law in the former Yugoslavia.

Mr. President, I recall with appreciation your country's statement before the Security Council this past June, which supported my call for the international community to provide immediate assistance in arresting our six remaining high-ranking fugitives. Qatar also stressed the importance of all Member States of the United Nations to continue meeting their obligation to enhance the work of Tribunal, which is especially crucial at this stage in the Tribunal's history, and for that, I thank you, Mr. President.

By way of preliminary remarks, I note that, as the Council is well aware, the Tribunal has emerged in the past six months from a period wherein it faced extreme difficulties that required rapid response and adjustment to change. In spite of this fact, the Tribunal achieved one of the most, if not the most, productive periods in its history. In July 2006, as a result of significant reorganization of the Trial Chambers and efficient pre-trial management, the Tribunal commenced its remaining two trials of multi-accused six months ahead of schedule, namely Milutinovi et al. and Popovi et al.

Consequently, at one point during the reporting period, the Trial Chambers were able to try an unprecedented number of 25 accused in six trials simultaneously. Furthermore, in the past six months, the Appeals Chamber brought eight proceedings involving 11 accused to a close, marking the most productive year in the history of the Appeals Chamber. In the first quarter of 2007, the Tribunal will finish trials against four accused and close proceedings against five accused on appeal.

The Tribunal's commendable efforts during the reporting period are evidenced by its ever-diminishing caseload. To date, cases against 100 accused, out of a total of 161 indicted, have been closed. While proceedings against 61 accused remain to be completed, out of that number, 13 have already been tried and are at the appeals stage, 24 are currently on trial, only 14 are in the pre-trial stage, four are pending rule 11 bis motions for referral, and the remaining six accused are still at large.

At the current rate of the Tribunal's progress, and barring any unforeseen difficulties, all trials of accused in the custody of the Tribunal are now scheduled to be completed no later than 2009. Furthermore, the Tribunal expects that all appellate work can be concluded within two years of the end of trials.

I stress, however, that the Tribunal is not content to rest with those dates. It is constantly looking for new, creative ways to complete trials even earlier than planned, while upholding due process norms. In that regard, it is with pleasure that I inform members that we have been able to reorganize the judicial workload and allocate Tribunal resources to exceptionally allow for the commencement of a seventh trial, on 10 January 2007, against Dragomir Milosevic. That has been possible because of the flexibility and dedication of the judges of the Tribunal, as well as the cooperation of the parties and the Registry.

The efforts made to run seven trials simultaneously are direct proof that the Tribunal is working harder than ever to ensure that proceedings against the accused will be completed as soon as possible. However, I must emphasize that, for the Tribunal, efficient completion of all trials is not only a matter of meeting completion strategy target dates; it is also a matter of respecting fundamental human rights norms. Because of the increased pace of proceedings before the Tribunal, the rights of the accused to be tried expeditiously, and not to be held in pre-trial detention for unduly lengthy periods of time, are more effectively respected.

On the issue of the detention of our accused, I am also pleased to advise the Security Council that our working group, established for the purpose of implementing the recommendations of the Swedish audit of our Detention Unit, completed its report on 4 October 2006. A public version of that report was made available to States Members of the United Nations on 29 November 2006. The working group reiterated the findings of the Swedish authorities that the conditions of the Detention Unit are of the very highest standards and concluded that the majority of recommendations made by the Swedish authorities were both reasonable and feasible. Some of those proposals have already been implemented by the Detention Unit management, and others are currently being addressed.

In that respect, I have pushed for a policy of expedited transfer of convicted accused to States where they are to serve their sentences. That is not only a matter of improving conditions within the Detention Unit; it is also a matter of upholding human rights norms in keeping the convicted separated from the accused while in detention. To that end, during the reporting period, four convicted were transferred to Austria, Italy and Denmark upon the closing of their cases.

Before providing the Council with an overview of the judicial activity of the Tribunal during the reporting period, I would like to make a few brief remarks about the resolution of the situation with respect to the accused Vojislav Seselj. As members are aware, Mr. Seselj had been refusing to take food and medicine since 11 November 2006 and had refused to be medically assessed by the United Nations detention doctor since that time. As President of the Tribunal, I kept a close watch on the situation and, in the light of Mr. Seselj's refusal to be medically assessed by the doctor of the United Nations Detention Unit, I ordered the transfer of Mr. Seselj to the Dutch penitentiary hospital, where there were better facilities to deal with any medical emergency that might have arisen.

During the period in which Mr. Seselj maintained his refusal, the Tribunal consulted with the International Committee of the Red Cross and arranged for three doctors of Serbian, Russian and French nationality, selected by Mr. Seselj himself, to visit him in the penitentiary hospital. Furthermore, the Trial Chamber issued an order suspending proceedings in his case and also ordered the Dutch authorities to take all necessary action in accordance with internationally recognized standards to preserve his life.

During this time, the Tribunal kept the international community -- in particular the members of the Security Council, through their embassies in The Hague -- fully apprised of developments in an open and transparent manner through meetings, press statements and a diplomatic seminar. I also personally sent written correspondence to the diplomatic community, including the President of the Security Council and the Secretary-General. I am pleased to report that on Friday, 8 December 2006, Mr. Seselj ceased his refusal to take food or medicine and that, since his recovery in a Dutch hospital facility, he has been returned to the Detention Unit. Mr. Seselj's decision to resume taking food and medicine was linked to decisions issued by the Registry and the Appeals Chamber, which addressed some of his demands.

I wish to stress that, at all times during Mr. Segelj's refusal, the Tribunal had all procedural guarantees at its disposal for appropriately handling the situation, and they functioned well. Certainly, the situation posed a difficult challenge for the Tribunal, but it was successfully resolved without sacrificing the integrity of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

Those matters aside, I would now like to continue by providing the Council with an overview of the achievements of the Trial and Appeals Chambers to date. Over the past six months, the three Trial Chambers continued to hear six trials simultaneously and managed 17 cases in the pre-trial stage. The Trial Chambers rendered judgements in the Oric case on 30 June 2006 and in the Krajisnik case on 27 September, and are expected to issue judgements in the Mrksic and Martic cases early next year. In addition, the Trial Chambers rendered judgement in the Jovic contempt proceeding on 30 August 2006.

Alongside that unparalleled caseload, the Trial Chambers were actively involved in preparing new cases for trial. I note in particular that, in July 2006, Trial Chamber II joined the Gotovina case with the Cermak and Markac cases, which was affirmed on appeal. Similarly, the Appeals Chamber continued to function at full capacity, issuing 170 written decisions, including 20 interlocutory appeals, three referral decisions, 131 pre-appeal decisions, one contempt decision and 12 review, reconsideration or other decisions both from the ICTY and from the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). In July 2006, final judgement was rendered in the Ntagerura and Gacumbitsi cases. The Appeals Chamber also delivered final judgments in the Simic and Galic cases in November. Additionally, as a result of efficient pre-appeal management, the appeal pending in the case of Strugar was withdrawn by both parties, owing to Strugar's age and health conditions.

Turning now to address in more detail the Tribunal's proactive approach to implementation of the completion strategy, I will elaborate on the progressive measures taken by the Tribunal towards its achievement during the reporting period.

First, the Tribunal has taken further steps in the past six months to increase the efficiency of its trials and appeals. It has fully embraced the changes advocated by the working groups on speeding up appeals and on speeding up trials, and has consequently seen marked improvement in appeal and trial efficiency. The beneficial results of the policy of the Tribunal are demonstrated by the control being exercised by the Trial Chambers in the cases of Milutinovic and Prlic.

In addition, the judges have remained vigilant in looking for new ways of improving the practices and procedures of the Tribunal's trials, such as by adopting further rule amendments. Rules 92 ter and 92 quater, adopted in September, have increased the ability of Trial Chambers to consider written statements and transcripts of witnesses in lieu of oral testimony where that evidence goes to the acts and conducts of an accused.

Furthermore, judges have taken action to expedite trial proceedings by placing limits upon the parties' cases. As I reported to the Security Council in June, the judges adopted an amendment to Rule 73 bis authorizing Trial Chambers to either invite or direct the Prosecution to select those counts in the indictment on which to proceed. The Prosecution is responding positively to directions from the Trial Chamber to reduce the scope of its indictments.

Considering that it is critical to the success of the Tribunal for the judges and the parties to work together towards completion of the Tribunal's mandate, trial judges have also made efforts to build consensus with the Prosecution by finding other ways to focus their cases, as well as those of the Defence. That policy has led to limiting the time available to the parties in dealing with their respective cases.

In addition to the concrete measures taken by the judges, the efficient completion of trials and appeals at the Tribunal has been possible during the reporting period in large part because of the dedicated work of its highly competent and qualified staff. In my previous two reports to the Security Council, I underscored the fact that the realization of the Tribunal's completion strategy depends largely upon the Tribunal's improving its procedures until its closing by drawing upon its past experiences. This is possible only if the Tribunal is able to retain its staff, who have the historical experience of the Tribunal's operations and a sense of ownership of the Tribunal's mandate. In order to ensure retention of its best staff, accelerated promotions have been implemented whenever possible.

Secondly, the Tribunal increasingly relied on ad litem judges for realizing completion strategy objectives. As highlighted in my last report, the contribution by ad litem judges to the work of the Tribunal was greatly enhanced by the Council's adoption of resolution 1660 (2006), which increased the number of ad litem judges from nine to 12 and allowed for the assignment of ad litem reserve judges to the multi-accused cases. It cannot be emphasized enough that those judges have been an extremely valuable resource for the Tribunal. In the past six months, four ad litem judges were assigned to two of the multi-accused cases. In addition, four serving ad litem judges were assigned to second cases so as to allow new trials to commence as efficiently as possible.

Thirdly, the Tribunal has continued its work in referring cases involving intermediate- and lower-ranking accused to national courts in the former Yugoslavia pursuant to Rule ll bis, which is vital both with respect to meeting the completion strategy goals and for the legacy of the Tribunal. During the reporting period, two cases involving three accused were transferred to the region. To date, referrals involving 11 accused have been completed, nine of which have been transferred to the Special War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia and Herzegovina and two of which have been transferred to the authorities of Croatia for trial before its domestic courts. Only three cases remain pending before the Referral Bench, and one referral decision has recently been appealed.

I remind the Council that, upon referral of cases to the region, the work of the Tribunal does not end with respect to those cases. Under our Rules, the Tribunal continues to monitor the domestic trials in order to ensure that they are being conducted fairly and with full adherence to human rights norms. It is critical to the success of the Tribunal's completion strategy and to upholding the rights of victims, as well as those of the accused, that all referred cases are conducted in full compliance with the highest standards of due process. I am happy to report that, on 14 November, the trial of the first referred accused, Stankovic, came to a close in the Sarajevo Special War Crimes Chamber, and the Tribunal is satisfied that that trial met the requirements of due process.

On this note, the Tribunal is acutely aware of the need to further the rule of law in the former Yugoslavia by providing continued and sustained support to local judiciaries and prosecutors in the region. Consequently, during the reporting period the Tribunal engaged in numerous efforts to strengthen the capacity of national jurisdictions. Making use of its field offices, the Tribunal liaised closely with the local judiciaries and took part in a number of professional symposiums, which I will not list here.

Access to the Tribunal's website continued to be a key tool for outreach to legal professionals and the general public in the former Yugoslavia.

I urge the Security Council, and the international community as a whole, to protect our achievements thus far in the region and to take the necessary steps to fully entrench the rule of law, particularly by providing continued and sustained support to the local judiciaries and detention facilities. It is those courts that will continue the historic work of the Tribunal in trying perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide long after the Tribunal has completed its mission. Furthermore, it is crucial for reasons of stability and reconciliation in the region that these national trials uphold the highest standards of due process so that justice is done and is seen to be done by the victims and the international community as a whole.

Finally, the success of the Tribunal in the efficient completion of its proceedings has always hinged significantly upon State cooperation and non-interference in cases once they have commenced. During the reporting period, the Russian authorities ensured the transfer of Zelenovic to the authorities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which then transferred him to the Tribunal in June. However, apart from that single transfer, States failed to arrest and transfer the Tribunal's remaining six high-level fugitives.

The Tribunal is deeply troubled by the failure to apprehend these accused, especially Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, and I urge all States to take immediate, concrete measures to actively seek their whereabouts. The judges of the Tribunal remain adamant that we must not close our doors without their arrest and trial. To do otherwise would mean that the International Tribunal would not have fully discharged its mandate, and the message and the legacy of the Tribunal that the international community will not tolerate impunity for serious violations of international humanitarian law will be dangerously undermined.

Let me now provide the Security Council with an updated prognosis for the Tribunal's implementation of the completion strategy. I wish to confirm, as stated previously, that trials will have to run into 2009. Currently the Tribunal has nine trials in the pre-trial stage, in addition to its six ongoing trials and 13 cases pending appeal from judgment. As it is anticipated that all trials currently pending will likely be subject to appeal, the Tribunal will probably have 15 appeals following the conclusion of those trials, which are expected to be disposed of within two years of the end of the trials. There remain, however, a number of key factors that will influence whether the conclusion of trials and appeals within this time frame remains feasible.

First, the primary factor remains the success of the multi-accused trials. Currently, these trials are running very smoothly. However, there are indications that, absent the Trial Chambers' firm control and full cooperation of the parties, these trials may run longer than originally anticipated. As can be observed from the Milutinovi and Prli trials, it is proving to be a running battle to ensure that the proceedings remain within the shortened time frame allotted by the Trial Chambers. Recently, the Prli Trial Chamber issued a further decision reducing the amount of time allocated to the Prosecution for the presentation of its case, which has been certified for appeal before the Appeals Chamber and has to be decided by the Appeals Chamber shortly.

Secondly, while the Judges continue to do everything in their power to ensure the expeditious conduct of proceedings while respecting due-process norms, there are, naturally, factors outside of their control, including illness of the accused or counsel, lack of cooperation by the parties, unavailability of witnesses and the absence of full State cooperation, which may have a negative impact on the speed at which these cases proceed.

Thirdly, completion strategy target dates may be threatened if referrals of cases of lower and intermediate accused to the region were to be revoked and sent back to the Tribunal due to a failure by local courts to uphold fair-trial principles.

Finally, I have already raised the critical issue of the six outstanding fugitives, and in particular, the necessity of apprehending Mladic and Karadzic. For a decade, the Tribunal has repeatedly called on Member States to ensure the arrest of those fugitives, without result. The continued failure to ensure their arrest now renders the 2009 date for the completion of all trials doubtful. Again, the mandate of the Tribunal cannot be regarded as fully implemented without the trials of those high-level accused.

In conclusion, the Tribunal remains entirely committed to meeting the completion strategy objectives while upholding the highest standards of due process, and it continues to forge full speed ahead with its mandate as part of the furtherance of peace and security in the former Yugoslavia. The Tribunal is constantly refining its practices and adopting the necessary mechanisms to improve the efficiency of its proceedings and uphold the rights of the accused to be tried without undue delay. Furthermore, it is exploring new measures, such as its commencement of a seventh trial during the reporting period, to reach those goals and to retain the support of the international community until its mandate is fully completed. The Tribunal is also turning its attention to the future, actively working to secure the rule of law in all the States of the former Yugoslavia through its partnership with local judiciaries.

The Tribunal remains ever indebted to the Security Council for its steadfast support to date. Owing to the Council's visionary thinking in establishing the Tribunal in 1993, it has now become common practice worldwide to hold individuals responsible for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. I call upon the member States of the Council to maintain their support for the Tribunal in the final years of its mandate. As this report indicates, there is still much work to be done. Together, we must see the historic work of the Tribunal through for the cause of international justice, the continued fight against impunity, and the promotion of international peace and security.

The President

I thank Judge Pocar for his important briefing to the Council.

I now give the floor to Judge Erik Møse, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Judge Møse

It is an honour to address the members of the Security Council and to present the updated version of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda completion strategy report, which was submitted on 30 November 2006.

When the ICTR Prosecutor and I appeared before the Council in June 2006, 55 persons had their cases completed or ongoing. That number has now increased to 59. Three further judgments were rendered in September 2006. Since the report was submitted on 30 November 2006, another judgment has been rendered. Thirty-two accused have now received judgments. Let me briefly mention the four Trial Chamber judgments just referred to.

Jean Mpambara, a bourgmestre, was acquitted of all charges against him on 12 September 2006. On the same day, Tharcisse Muvunyi, commander of the École sous-officiers, was convicted of genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, and crimes against humanity. He was sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment.

On 20 September 2006, André Rwamakuba, who was the Rwandan Minister of Primary and Secondary Education, was acquitted of all charges against him. On 13 December 2006, Athanase Seromba, a priest, was convicted to 15 years' imprisonment for genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity.

The judgments in the Mpambara and Rwamakuba trials bring the number of acquitted persons at the ICTR to five.

Let me now turn to the nine trials that are in progress, involving 25 accused. The five multi-accused trials continue to represent our main challenge because of their volume and complexity, and hence the time needed to complete them. It is therefore important to note the progress made.

I am very pleased to report that the Military I case was virtually concluded on 12 December 2006. In that trial, which involves four alleged senior military leaders in 1994, a total of 82 prosecution and 157 defence witnesses were heard in the course of 400 trial days. Three additional witnesses will be heard by video link in January 2007. Following written and oral submissions in coming months, judgment will be rendered in 2007.

Another welcome development since the submission of the completion strategy report is the fact that in the Butare trial, the fourth of the six accused has now commenced presenting his case. The hearing of the evidence is expected to conclude in 2007.

In the Government trial, which involves four Government ministers, the second of the fourth accused is presenting his evidence. It is expected that the evidence will have been heard by the end of 2007.

In the Military II trial, involving four accused, the Prosecution closed its case on 7 December 2006, having presented 72 witnesses. The Defence case will commence in the first months of 2007, with conclusion in 2008.

In the Karemera et al. case, involving three accused, the Prosecution is presenting its case. The Trial Chamber has taken steps to ensure that the Prosecution case should be completed before the middle of 2007 in order to conclude the trial in late 2008.

Turning now to the single accused cases, closing arguments were heard in the Karera trial in November this year. Judgment is expected in early 2007. In the Zigiranyirazo case, the Defence is currently presenting its evidence.

During the Security Council meeting in June 2006, I mentioned that three new trials were expected to commence in the second half of 2006. The Tribunal met this target. The Bikindi and the Nchamihigo cases began on 18 September and 25 September 2006, respectively. The third new single accused case, Rukundo, commenced on 15 November this year. All three trials are expected to conclude in 2007.

Let me now address the situation of the detainees who are awaiting trial. Our completion strategy report mentions that there are 11 accused in this group. I am pleased to inform the members of the Security Council that this number is now, in fact, lower. The first of these cases, Renzaho, is scheduled to commence on 8 January 2007. Secondly, yesterday, Joseph Nzabirinda, a businessman and youth organizer, pleaded guilty to a count of murder, as crime against humanity, thereby increasing the number of persons having pleaded guilty to 7. Thirdly, the Prosecutor this week filed a new request to transfer the case of Mr. Bagaragaza to a national jurisdiction. In his intervention, he will provide further information.

I am therefore pleased to confirm that the ICTR is on schedule to complete cases involving between 65 and 70 accused by the end of 2008, as envisaged in our completion strategy.

In order to achieve this aim, continuity is of the essence. On 13 June 2006, the Security Council adopted resolution 1684 (2006), which extended the term of office of all ICTR permanent judges until 31 December 2008. On 13 October 2006, resolution 1717 (2006) extended the terms of office of all ICTR ad litem judges until the same date. I would like to express our appreciation to the Security Council for having granted our two requests. This provides the Tribunal with the continuity, stability and certainty necessary for the efficient planning of trials.

Eighteen indictees are at large. The ICTR will not be able to prosecute all these accused by December 2008, should they be found, but some of them should be tried by the ICTR. It is essential that Member States cooperate in the arrest and transfer of these persons. In June 2006, the Prosecutor and I referred specifically to Félicien Kabuga, who is in East Africa. Since then, many efforts have been made to obtain his transfer to Arusha, but so far without success. The Prosecutor will provide further information about this. Let me simply reiterate, in view of the completion strategy, the importance of Kabuga being arrested and transferred to the ICTR as soon as possible in order to determine his guilt or innocence.

The Prosecutor will address the Security Council on his plan to transfer some ICTR indictees to national jurisdictions for trial. This is an important part of our completion strategy. Member States are encouraged to be receptive to discussions concerning transfer. The Prosecutor will also provide updated information about Rwandan initiatives to abolish the death penalty.

In connection with State cooperation, I have to come back to the situation of acquitted persons. This was raised before the Council in June, as well as in the General Assembly in October, but there is still no progress. As of today, only one of the five persons acquitted by the Tribunal has found a country of residence. The other four are under the protection of the Tribunal in Arusha. Let me reiterate that the situation is particularly serious for André Ntagerura and Emmanuel Bagambiki, who were acquitted by the Trial Chamber in February 2004, and whose acquittals were confirmed in February 2006. The Registry has without success made many attempts to find a country for them. On behalf of the Tribunal, I must again appeal to Member States to receive acquitted persons in their territories. There is a need to find solutions to these problems. Let me add that it may also be problematic to relocate persons who are released after having served their sentences following convictions.

I have now described the high level of productivity in the four courtrooms of the ICTR during the last six months, with the Tribunal conducting nine trials involving 25 accused and rendering four judgments. In parallel with these core activities, all three branches of the ICTR continue to improve their working methods. Some of these processes are described in our report and its annexes.

I am pleased to confirm that Rwanda has continued to cooperate with the Tribunal by facilitating the flow of witnesses from Kigali and by providing documents to the Prosecution and to the Defence.

On behalf of the Tribunal, let me conclude by thanking the members of the Security Council, the secretariat and the Member States for their support to the successful completion of the work of the ICTR.

The President

I now give the floor to Ms. Carla Del Ponte, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.

Ms. Del Ponte

It is an honour to be given the opportunity to report once more to the Council. Appearing before the Council is an important duty and a good opportunity to report on the completion strategy.

This time, however, I believe it is essential to also seek fresh guidance on fundamental issues of the completion strategy -- namely, a strong message is needed from the Council in relation to the fugitives, especially Karadzic and Mladic. And that message should be that their trial can begin in The Hague at any time until 2010, and a mechanism will be established for them to be tried in The Hague after that date.

Since my last assessment, in June, my Office has been working productively with the Chambers to speed up trials, while trying to maintain the highest standards of fair trial and due process. The transfer of cases to domestic jurisdiction has also continued to progress well. In accordance with Security Council resolution 1503 (2003), my Office proposed to the Chambers the referral of all cases involving mid- and lower-level accused. In one case, Dragomir Milosevic, the referral bench denied the prosecution's motion on the ground that the accused was too senior to fit in that category.

Therefore, I believe that we have reached the limits in this matter and, unless the Security Council modifies the seniority conditions under which an accused can be transferred to local courts, there is no legal possibility to transfer more cases. The remaining cases all involve the most senior leaders responsible for the most serious crimes.

Following my initiative to join cases involving similar crimes, two further multiple-accused cases opened in The Hague in July. One case concerns the Srebrenica genocide, with seven accused, all former senior aides to Ratko Mladic. It is very unfortunate that Mladic himself could not be tried with his close associates. The other case involves six top political and military leaders from Serbia for their role in the crimes committed in Kosovo. A seventh accused, Vlastimir Djordjevic, should also be present at that trial. His last known whereabouts were in Russia. In total, we have 24 individuals on trial at present, the largest number of accused on trial at any one time in the Tribunal's history.

More written evidence has been admitted in trials. As a consequence, we have been able to limit the time allocated to the examination-in-chief of prosecution witnesses to a minimum. In a large-scale trial of six accused, for instance, the prosecution has used an average of roughly two court hours per witness, but less than half an hour for crime-base witnesses, which is extremely efficient by any standard. In several trials, the Chambers have also accepted via judicial notice a higher number of facts established in previous trials. Those facts, therefore, do not need to be proven again.

When directed by the Trial Chambers, I have acted in a cooperative spirit to select the counts on which to proceed, for instance in the Perisic and Dragomir Milosevic cases. My Office has also reacted in a helpful way to the directions by the Chambers on time limits set for the presentation of the prosecution case. As long as the measures taken to increase the efficiency of trials do not undermine the prosecution case or the rights of the victims, I will be willing to go along with them.

I wish nevertheless to draw the attention of the Council to some negative reactions from victims' groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I forwarded to the presidency of the Council a letter from the association Women Victims of War from Sarajevo. I have received more such letters in the meantime. On 30 November, I met victims' groups in Sarajevo. Many of them are bitter about the completion strategy because they believe that all high-level cases, including of course Karadzic and Mladic, must be tried in The Hague. Furthermore, they do not understand why some crimes should be removed from indictments. They see the Tribunal as a promise of justice and as a concrete sign that the international community cares about their suffering. They find it profoundly unjust to envisage closing the Tribunal before it has successfully completed its task. Of course, Karadzic and Mladic are, in their minds, the two individuals most responsible for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There is no place other than The Hague to try them.

While the judicial authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia have stepped up their efforts to try war crimes, the political bodies in Bosnia and Herzegovina and in Serbia have not shown the political will necessary to arrest the remaining fugitives. I have explained to the Council in previous presentations the reasons why, in my assessment, six accused are still at large. I will come back to that issue more extensively in the course of my next assessment, which will also be my last.

Over the past six months, Serbia has been busy working out a so-called action plan to capture the remaining fugitives. That initiative has thus far proven to be just another smokescreen. Since I took office in 1999, I have been confronted with the same reality -- none of the successive Serbian Governments has been truly willing to arrest Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic. It has now come to light that most of the detailed information I was passing to the highest Serbian officials back in 2001 and 2002 was accurate, but those officials -- some of whom still hold key positions today -- were simply pretending that my information was wrong. However, history now shows that my information was indeed correct. In 2002, the then President himself signed the decision on the retirement of General Mladic. Therefore, despite his denials at the time, he knew perfectly well that Mladic was being sheltered by the army, just as I was telling him. My assessment remains that the Serbian Government could easily arrest Ratko Mladic should the authorities want to do it. It is simply a question of political will.

There are many reasons why democratically elected leaders pretending to show the utmost respect for the rule of law have been protecting persons indicted for genocide for so long. I will not elaborate on this further at this stage, but the wilful failure of Serbia to cooperate with my Office, and in particular to arrest and transfer Mladic and Karadzic, is a demonstration of utmost disrespect towards thousands and thousands of mainly Muslim, but also Croat and other non-Serb victims in Bosnia and Herzegovina, that is likely to impact on the relations between the various communities within the region for decades. The only way to remove that stain would be for Serbia to arrest and transfer Karadzic and Mladic immediately.

The situation is not much more favourable in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There, the central institutions are not working efficiently and the authorities of the Serb entity, despite some recent improvements, have not shown so far a robust willingness to arrest Radovan Karadzic and Stojan Zupljanin. Those are the fugitives who are most likely to be in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Both at the central and at the entity level, key institutions remain stuffed with individuals who used to be and maybe still are closely connected to Karadzic and his network. As long as Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina do not cooperate fully with my Office and with each other, the most important indictees will continue to escape justice, thus affecting the completion strategy.

Within the limits set by the interests of justice, my Office is doing its utmost to meet the objectives of the completion strategy. However, unless the Security Council allows the transfer of more accused, we will not be able to achieve the target date of 2008. Furthermore, we have already missed the opportunity to try Karadzic and Mladic with other accused. Strong incentives must remain in place for Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina to fully cooperate with my Office.

The European Union has been a key partner over the past years. Nineteen out of the 24 accused currently on trial were transferred to The Hague as a direct result of the European Union's policy of conditionality. I trust that the European Union will remain a reliable supporter of the ICTY. Despite its clear failure to capture Karadzic and Mladic, NATO over the years has provided useful political support to the Tribunal. The recent decision of NATO to allow Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia into the Partnership for Peace, however, is a powerful signal that international support for the Tribunal is decreasing.

Therefore, I wish to request the Security Council to say whether, as some permanent members have stated in the past, it considers that the ICTY should stay open until Karadzic and Mladic are tried in The Hague. That is very important for the tens of thousands of victims who have placed their hope in the justice provided by the United Nations. They have the right to know whether they can still count on the promises made by the Security Council when it created the Tribunal 13 years ago. As we are all aware, many victims have the perception that the United Nations abandoned the so-called safe areas to the troops of Karadzic and Mladic. Let us not, by our actions, give them further reason to feel that the United Nations and the Security Council did not do everything in their power to ensure that the accused most responsible were brought to justice.

Those are not easy words, and there are not easy times ahead of us. But there are steps that can be taken. First, as indicated, the Council must consider changing the conditions under which an accused can be transferred, so that, if necessary, the Tribunal can meet its objectives in time. Secondly, the political will to arrest remaining fugitives must be strengthened. Thirdly, the Council must confirm that there remains the possibility for the Tribunal to continue its mandate until such a time as fugitives such as Karadzic and Mladic are brought to trial.

The full and forceful support of the Security Council for the Tribunal needs to be expressed now. Strong messages must be passed to Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina so that they finally deliver the fugitives from justice, especially Karadzic and Mladic. Clear guidance must be provided to us so that we can complete our mandate in a dignified and successful manner.

The President

I thank Prosecutor Del Ponte for her briefing.

I now give the floor to Mr. Hassan Bubacar Jallow, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Mr. Jallow

Members of the Council now have before them the revised completion strategy document of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), which is based on developments as of 30 November 2006 and which was submitted by Judge Erik Møse, President of the Tribunal, in consultation with the Office of the Prosecutor and the Registry. The ICTR continues to make steady progress towards the completion of its mandate, in accordance with the deadlines set by Security Council resolutions 1503 (2003) and 1534 (2004). We remain committed to the deadlines and confident of the Tribunal's ability to comply with the completion dates that have been set by the Security Council.

Since our last report to the Council, five cases have been completed -- as mentioned by the President of the Tribunal. Of those five cases three accused were convicted, one of whom pleaded guilty, and two were acquitted. As planned, in the past six months the Prosecution was able to commence trials in three new cases. Those cases are proceeding steadily and satisfactorily. The trials of 25 accused persons are in progress before the Trial Chambers, with 22 accused being tried jointly in five multiple-accused cases. While those cases present a major challenge, they are nevertheless all expected to conclude at various times during 2007 and 2008. None of them is projected to go beyond the end of 2008. The conclusion of any of those multi-accused cases will provide an opportunity to enhance the capacity of the Tribunal to proceed with the trials of additional single-accused cases.

The commencement of the rule l1 bis transfer of indictees to national jurisdictions for trial received a temporary setback when both the Trial Chamber and the Appeals Chamber of the Tribunal rejected the request of the Prosecutor for the transfer of Michel Bagaragaza to Norway for trial. That decision was based on the Chamber's view that Norway lacks jurisdiction to prosecute Bagaragaza for the offences on which he had been indicted. However, I have now filed a second request for the transfer of his case to another European country, which has agreed to take the case and which, in our view, is able to exercise jurisdiction over the offences in the indictment. A decision is pending on the application. Meanwhile, another European country has agreed to take on cases on transfer from the ICTR. Accordingly, I propose, early in 2007, to request the transfer of three other indictees to that country.

The option of transferring cases to African countries other than Rwanda is not likely to be viable. All the African countries that I have approached in that respect --while in principle supporting the sharing of the Tribunal's workload -- have pleaded capacity and resource constraints and overloaded national judicial systems as obstacles to their participation in that exercise. Rwanda therefore remains the only African country willing, although not yet ready in the sense of fulfilling the conditions for transfer, to receive from the ICTR cases of indictees for trial.

Unfortunately, despite the increased activity of the Tribunal's tracking team, in the past six months we have not been able to apprehend and transfer to the ICTR any of the 18 fugitive indictees who continue to evade the ICTR. The evasive strategies of the fugitives -- including their constant mobility across a large belt of East, Central and Southern Africa, their refuge in inaccessible areas of the Democratic Republic of the Congo and changes in personal identity -- have posed severe challenges to the efforts to track them down. So also has the matter of State cooperation and the level of such cooperation.

In the past six months I have continued consultations with officials of the Kenyan Government regarding the case of Félicien Kabuga, who remains at the top of the list of fugitives. Members will recall that in resolution 1503 (2003) the Security Council requested Kenya to cooperate with the ICTR in the matter of his arrest and transfer to the Tribunal for trial. The information available to us continues to confirm Kabuga's connection with the territory of Kenya. In September 2006, I undertook a mission to Kenya to discuss that matter with Government officials. I was assured by officials and ministers of the Government's commitment to collaborate with the Tribunal in searching for the fugitive in Kenya, to have him arrested if found and to investigate his assets in Kenya. A number of measures were agreed upon as a result of our discussions. I was to be advised of the status of the implementation of those measures by the Government of Kenya by 15 November 2006. I am awaiting the report of the Kenyan Government in that respect. The Council's encouragement of Kenya to intensify its collaboration with the ICTR in the matter of Félicien Kabuga continues to be necessary.

I wish to take this opportunity to place on record our appreciation to the group of ambassadors in Kenya known as the friends of the ICTR, which is largely comprised of ambassadors from the United States of America, the European Union and Canada, for their active support in our discussions with the Government of Kenya. I look forward to their continued involvement in this matter.

Looking ahead to next year, our focus will continue to be on the timely and efficient conclusion of the cases of those currently on trial, the preparation and commencement of new trials, the intensification of the tracking programme for the arrest and transfer of fugitives for trial and the referral of cases of indictees to national jurisdictions for trial.

Of the 11 indictees currently in detention awaiting trial, five have been identified for transfer to national jurisdictions. In the meantime, guilty-plea negotiations are ongoing with some of them. The remaining cases from that category will be made trial-ready by my Office, with up to three cases being ready to commence in the first half of 2007, should courtroom space be available.

Of the 18 fugitives who remain at large, a maximum of six, including, of course, Félicien Kabuga, will be prepared for trial in Arusha in the event of arrest. The cases of those 12 accused people -- that is to say as of today, six who are currently in custody and six who are currently at large -- can, we believe, conveniently be concluded over the two-year period 2007-2008. The policy of single-accused trials, together with the space and resources which are progressively becoming available over the same period with the conclusion of the multi-accused trials, would provide an additional advantage in dealing with the remaining caseload.

The Appeals Chamber of the ICTR, in its decision in the case of The Prosecutor v. Karemera et al., delivered earlier this year, ruled that Trial Chambers should now take judicial notice of the occurrence of the genocide in Rwanda as a notorious historical fact that requires no proof. It has recently reaffirmed that decision. By eliminating the need for such proof, that judicial decision has the potential to shorten the proceedings in the remaining cases.

Twelve fugitives have been earmarked for transfer to Rwanda, together with five of the detainees currently in custody. The indications, following consultations in Rwanda, are that the death penalty, a major obstacle to the transfer of any case to Rwanda, will be abolished not just in relation to the cases of the ICTR, but across the board. As soon as that is accomplished, I shall be requesting the transfer of the cases of those 17 indictees -- the 12 who are at large and five who are in custody -- to Rwanda for trial. I hope that can be done in the first half of 2007. The number of cases -- 17 -- for referral to Rwanda may rise to include any of the six top-level fugitives currently earmarked for trial in Arusha, if they are not arrested by the end of 2007.

If, for any reason the referral of cases to Rwanda becomes impossible, then the cases so earmarked will fall back within the workload of the Tribunal, either to be prosecuted in Arusha or to be transferred to another jurisdiction. We hope that the former will not arise and that referral to another national jurisdiction in that event will still be feasible.

Council members are aware that capacity-building is crucial to a successful strategy of partnership with national jurisdictions. Indeed, the Council has, in its resolutions and statements, called for capacity-building assistance to those countries which are willing to share the burden of the struggle against impunity. As members will observe from annex 5 to the completion strategy document (S/2006/951, enclosure), the ICTR in its own limited way has been assisting Rwanda in that respect through its outreach programme. The efforts of the Governments of the United States of America and of the European Union member States to improve the legal system of Rwanda are also to be commended.

I have indicated to the Security Council in my previous reports that my Office has felt it necessary to carry out further enquiries after our evaluation of the material relating to alleged violations of humanitarian law by the Rwanda Patriotic Front. I expect that, in the course of 2007, those enquiries should conclude, enabling us to decide which way to proceed.

The Tribunal has continued to receive substantial cooperation and support from Rwanda and other States Members of the United Nations in many matters. Increasingly, and happily, many States are now willing to share the burden of prosecuting alleged génocidaires. The United States, Canada and several States in Europe have now established special offices to prosecute suspected génocidaires who may have taken up residence within those countries. My Office has been collaborating with such offices by providing them with material evidence and other support to ensure that impunity does not prevail in these instances. I wish to assure them all of our continued cooperation.

As we draw nearer to the end of our mandate, the ICTR will also be paying particular attention to legacy issues, staff retention and residual matters which will remain after closure. The Security Council will receive proposals in due course on some of those matters. Staff retention is, however, a matter of immediate concern. Whilst we do not envisage any need for additional resources beyond current budgetary levels, and may indeed anticipate a decline in some areas eventually, it is probable that the Tribunal will lose some of its most experienced staff, who may naturally be looking for greater security elsewhere. This will come at a critical period of our mandate. It is necessary and urgent that a system of incentives be put in place to enable the Tribunal to retain the staff that it requires from 2007 to completion. We look forward to the understanding and support of Member States in respect of proposals for staff retention which are currently under consideration within the United Nations.

Let me conclude by extending my appreciation to the Security Council, other organs of the United Nations and the Secretariat for the support they have provided to the Tribunal over the years. In that respect, I must single out His Excellency Mr. Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General, who has been a pillar of encouragement, understanding and support not just for the ICTR and the other Tribunals, but for the wider cause of international criminal justice. His commitment to this cause has been a source of great strength to the Tribunals. The Action Plan to Prevent Genocide, launched by the Secretary-General on the occasion of the tenth anniversary of the Rwanda genocide, provides the international community today with an opportunity and a mechanism to carry the struggle against impunity further, in a holistic way combining preventive and remedial strategies. We look forward to the continued support of the international community in the implementation of the Action Plan.

On behalf of my staff and on my own personal account, I wish to sincerely thank His Excellency the Secretary-General for his leadership, and to wish him well in his retirement. I also wish to seize this opportunity to congratulate and welcome the incoming Secretary-General, His Excellency Mr. Ban Ki-moon, and to wish him all the best in the execution of his mandate.

The President

I thank Mr. Jallow for his briefing.

I now invite Council members who wish to make comments or to ask questions to so indicate to the Secretariat.

Mr. Manongi (Tanzania)

I want to begin by welcoming the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Judge Fausto Pocar, and the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), Judge Erik Møse, and thanking them for their respective reports and oral briefings. I also wish to thank Prosecutors Carla Del Ponte of the ICTY and Hassan Jallow of the ICTR for their contributions to those reports.

We are pleased to note that the two Tribunals are steadily working to meet their completion strategies. We welcome the fact that both are increasing the speed of their work by devising various strategies which have proven to be of immense help. However, my delegation also notes that the two Tribunals are troubled, as we are, by the lack of progress in the arrest of the remaining fugitives who are important for the completion of the mandates of the Tribunals.

With regard to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, my delegation welcomes the number of judgements delivered as well as the others to be concluded soon. We commend that progress, as we do the progress being made in the trials before the Tribunal. We find in the report (S/2006/951, enclosure) that the time frame of the completion strategy for the trials still remains 2008, as provided earlier. We have observed, however, a shift in some elements of the strategy, which are now based on specific and updated assessments of the scope and nature of each case, while previously these were based on a statistical average in the light of general experience from completed trials. We view this shift as being prompted by the difficulty of relying on estimates. It is, in our view, a right response to real demands.

It is also obvious that the transfer to national jurisdiction is a very important factor for both Tribunals in fulfilling their completion strategies. For the ICTR, the Prosecutor has already transferred 30 case files to Rwanda and is considering additional cases for such transfer to other national jurisdictions. We support this strategy, but as we have expressed on previous occasions, we have to assist the national jurisdictions by improving national capacities to prosecute cases transferred to them, especially the capacity deficiencies mentioned by the Prosecutor in his presentation. It is in this regard that we commend the special fellowship programme for Rwandan law students.

With regard to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), measures adopted earlier to adopt the completion strategy seem to be on course. These measures, which include the speeding up of trials and appeals, an increase in the number of ad litem judges and referral to national jurisdictions, were the right steps. We commend Prosecutor Del Ponte for her insistence on observing international fair-trial principles and the highest standards of due process in these referrals. Her declaration that she will not hesitate to take the cases back if the standards are not met is an appropriate assurance.

The current ICTY report maintains the Tribunal's completion date as 2009. However, it also lists factors outside the control of the Court that may affect its completion strategy, such as illness of the accused or the defence counsel, availability of witnesses, retention of qualified staff and, most importantly, State cooperation in the apprehension of the remaining fugitives. These factors are real and affect both Tribunals.

We are concerned that Ratko Mladi and Radovan Karadzi continue to remain outlaws. These two individuals, with the other six fugitives, have remained beyond the reach of the law for far too long. The ICTY will not have fully discharged its mandate without the arrest and trial of those indictees.

We are sympathetic to the view that the Security Council may wish to reconsider its position on the completion strategies for the two Tribunals. The arrest and trial of high-ranking fugitives like Mladi, Karadzi and Kabuga must be factored into the completion strategies. These individuals remain fugitives in the hope of outliving the Tribunals. The Council should make it clear that the Tribunals will maintain their jurisdiction with respect to each fugitive's accountability.

We also wish to raise the question of enforcement of sentences of convicted persons and the fate of those acquitted by the Tribunals. States must be encouraged to take up these two categories of persons and share the burden of promoting international justice. We therefore appeal to all Member States to accept the relocation of acquitted persons and to accept enforcement of sentences in their territories for those found guilty. We commend those States that have expressed willingness to take on cases on transfer from the ICTR. We encourage them also to consider accepting relocation of acquitted persons as well as the enforcement of sentences in their territories.

In conclusion, we again appeal to all Member States to honour their contributions to the two Tribunals, which can only discharge their mandates effectively with our full support, including financial support.

Ms. Sanders (United States)

With regard, first, to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the United States expresses its appreciation to President Pocar and Ms. Del Ponte for their reports to the Council. The United States remains strongly committed to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and is pleased to note the increased pace of trials in recent months. The Tribunal is now conducting seven trials simultaneously and has taken other steps that demonstrate its dedication to efficiency. We must continue to work together to ensure the success of the Tribunal's completion strategy, as previously endorsed by this Council, which seeks to conclude trials by 2008 and all work by 2010.

However, we cannot accept the possibility that the outstanding fugitives, notably Ratko Mladi and Radovan Karadzi, might escape justice by outlasting the Tribunal's existence. It is therefore imperative that we begin discussions now on how best to guarantee that they face justice, no matter when they are apprehended. As we have stated previously, the Tribunal's doors will always remain open for Mladi and Karadzi. The Council and interested States must begin to address seriously this and other legacy issues, such as planning for continued witness protection and proper maintenance of archives.

We call on all States to cooperate fully with the ICTY, in particular through the apprehension and transfer of fugitives to the Tribunal. We also call on Serbia and the Bosnian Serb authorities to fulfil their obligations to the ICTY without further delay, including through the apprehension and transfer of fugitives to The Hague.

With regard International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the United States expresses its appreciation to President Møse and Mr. Jallow for their reports to the Council. The United States remains strongly committed to the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and is pleased to note the increased pace of trials under the leadership of President Møse. We must continue to work together to ensure success of the Tribunal's completion strategy, which seeks to conclude trials by 2008 and all work by 2010, as was previously endorsed by the Security Council.

In its last update on the completion strategy, the Tribunal noted various new measures designed to expedite trials. We commend such measures and invite the Tribunal to continue to improve trial efficiency.

The success of the completion strategy does not depend solely on the Tribunal, but requires the continued assistance and cooperation of Member States. The completion strategy will involve the transfer of cases from the Tribunal to domestic jurisdictions. The international community can assist this endeavour by supporting the Tribunal's efforts to create the capacity for domestic trials.

Building this judicial capacity is particularly important in Rwanda, where the Rwandans have urged the ICTR to transfer outstanding cases to their jurisdiction. The transfer of those cases requires Rwanda to have an adequate judicial system to meeting international fair-trial standards. The 1994 genocide seriously devastated Rwanda's judicial capacity. Rebuilding is an arduous process and Rwanda has made remarkable progress, but there still remain critical steps to be completed before ICTR transfers can take place. We urge Rwanda to act swiftly and effectively in fulfilling these steps and to work closely with the ICTR in negotiating these Rule 11 transfers. We also encourage international donors to continue their current support.

We again call on all States, particularly Kenya and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, to fulfil their international obligations to apprehend and transfer to the ICTR all persons indicted for war crimes by the Tribunal who are within their territory. These fugitives continue to foment conflict in the Great Lakes region and must be actively pursued and apprehended, consistent with numerous Security Council resolutions adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, including resolution 1534 (2004) and 1503 (2003).

We also highly commend Mr. Stephen Rapp's dedicated service to the ICTR, particularly since assuming the role of Chief of Prosecution in May 2005. His deft supervision guided the Court toward greater successes and we warmly congratulate him on his new appointment as the Prosecutor at the Special Court for Sierra Leone.

Mr. Oshima (Japan)

I wish first to thank the Presidents of the two Tribunals, Judge Pocar and Judge Møse, as well as the Prosecutors, Ms. Del Ponte and Mr. Jallow, for their reports on the activities of their respective tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR).

Since the last reports, both Tribunals have continued their dedicated efforts to achieve justice and end impunity in both cases. We take note positively of the measures taken by the administration of the Tribunals to expedite the trial processes in an effort to meet their respective completion strategies. We encourage both Tribunals to meet their completion strategies by exploring all measures necessary and appropriate for trial efficiency.

In the report from the ICTR, a need to increase the number of judges in the Appeals Chamber is mentioned. Japan understands that that will be explored by decreasing the number of judges in the Trial Chamber. An adequate distribution of resources, in accordance with the workload, should be duly considered.

With the prospects that both Tribunals will complete their first round of trials within two years, the arrest and transfer of the key remaining fugitives -- especially Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic -- to the ICTY and of Félicien Kabuga to the ICTR becomes a matter of great urgency. We wish to reiterate our strong appeal to all the States concerned -- including Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina -- to take all necessary action and measures to that end. The international community is strongly committed, through decisions by the Security Council, to bringing about justice and ending impunity in both cases. The will of the international community to end impunity must be matched by resolution and cooperation on the part of the States concerned.

However, we deem it necessary to reiterate our position that if the Tribunals should choose to endlessly await the transfer of the remaining fugitives, it would be very difficult to justify and sustain our support for the Tribunals through the United Nations regular budget. This cannot go on indefinitely. We reiterate our view that possible funding beyond the deadline set by the Tribunals' completion strategies should be met through voluntary contributions by concerned States and particularly interested States.

With regard to the transfer of mid- to low-level accused to the domestic courts, we take positive note of the efforts made to expedite such transfer despite certain legal and technical constraints in the national judicial systems with which both Tribunals must contend. We welcome that step, because we believe that closer involvement by the local authorities and by people in the communities in the process of strengthening the rule of law is vital for real justice and for building confidence in the reconciliation processes in the States and regions concerned.

However, that will require capacity-building where there are constraints in national judicial systems. That is why Japan, in cooperation with the United Nations Development Programme, has launched a project to assist in the capacity-building of the War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which includes training judicial staff members and providing needed equipment. Under that project, more than 630 judges, prosecutors and judicial staff members have been trained in 28 training courses over the past 18 months, since May 2005. The project also includes awareness-raising programmes to help the local population to understand that the accused war criminals are being pursued and brought to justice.

In conclusion, we urge both Tribunals to continue their dedicated efforts to attain their objective of bringing to justice all remaining fugitives by the deadlines of their completion strategies. We reiterate our appeal to the States concerned to provide the necessary cooperation. We strongly hope that the efforts undertaken for more than 10 years by the international community -- supported by the Security Council -- to end impunity will not only constitute a valuable legacy, but will also be fully integrated into community, national and regional capacities.

Mr. Liu Zhenmin (China)

At the outset, I should like to think President Pocar, Prosecutor Del Ponte, President Møse and Prosecutor Jallow for their reports on the work of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). China is satisfied with the progress made thus far in the work of the two Tribunals. In particular, the Tribunals have taken many measures to accelerate the pace of the trial proceedings. That has inspired our confidence in their completion strategies.

The Tribunals' smooth implementation of their completion strategies depends mainly on the following three elements. First, the two Tribunals should organize the trial proceedings with a high level of efficiency. Secondly, the countries in the region must play a role in those proceedings, and thirdly, the countries in the region must cooperate with the Tribunals.

We believe, judging from the reports of the two Tribunals, that there is still much potential in utilizing the capabilities of the countries in the region in the context of participation in the trial proceedings. We continue to urge the two Tribunals to fully consider the referral of cases involving mid- and low-level accused to the judicial systems of the countries in the region for trial.

In that connection, we call on countries with capabilities to provide further financial and technical support, and to assist the countries in the region in building their judicial capacity so that they can meet the conditions for trial at an early date. Likewise, we reiterate our appeal to the countries in the region to continue their cooperation with the two Tribunals.

The positive role played by the two Tribunals in promoting peace and stability in the countries in the region has been widely recognized by the international community. China is closely following the Tribunals' current implementation of their completion strategies. We are prepared to join other Member States in considering the various follow-up options related to the implementation of those strategies as soon as possible.

Ms. Løj (Denmark)

I would like to thank the representatives of the two Tribunals for their reports to the Security Council.

Denmark has always been and remains a strong supporter of the Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. This is the fourth time during our membership of the Council that we have the opportunity to comment on the work of the Tribunals. In looking back on our three previous statements, I realize with regret that I could have used any one of them again today.

We regret that once again we have to insist on the immediate apprehension and transfer of the six indictees at large of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and of the 18 indictees at large of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). That goes for Mladic, Karadzic and Kabuga in particular. We will firmly reject all attempts to outlast the Tribunals, and we call on all States harbouring indictees to cooperate fully with the Tribunals in this crucial matter.

We would also like to impress on the Tribunals once again that it is critical that they finish their work on time. We welcome the additional steps taken and the results achieved by both Tribunals. It is imperative that this work not be done at the expense of serving justice in strict accordance with international standards.

All members of the international community have a large part to play in enabling the Tribunals to finish their work on time. There certainly is the matter of tracking down, apprehending and transferring indictees at large. But there is also the matter of agreeing to witness protection and sentencing agreements and of paying assessed contributions in full and on time.

I would like now to turn to more novel territory. First, on residual issues, the closer we get to the time when the Tribunals have fulfilled their mandates, the more pressing the need for addressing, in a comprehensive manner, a number of judicial and administrative functions that will not automatically terminate with the conclusion of the last appeal against a judgment. This includes witness protection, enforcement of sentences, the maintenance of and access to archives, and so forth. The impact of the Tribunals reaches far beyond the specific cases under their jurisdiction and far beyond the specific countries concerned. There is no question that their legacy deserves and needs to be preserved. We therefore very much encourage all organs of the Tribunals, as well as the Office of Legal Affairs, to intensify their work on this important matter and to engage in early discussion with the Security Council and other interested parties.

Secondly, we have listened carefully to the concerns raised in relation to the ability of the Tribunals to keep functioning at full speed until the so-called close of business. We recognize the difficulty of, inter alia, retaining staff under such circumstances, and believe that careful consideration should be given to suggestions about how the Tribunals can address that challenge.

The Tribunals continue to contribute significantly to the fight against impunity. They are instrumental in the process of national reconciliation that the countries concerned need to go through in order to come to terms with their past and look to the future. Also, after our tenure on the Security Council, we will continue to follow their work with great interest.

Mr. Makayat-Safouesse (Congo)

I, too, would like, on behalf of my delegation, to thank the Presidents of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, as well as the two Prosecutors, for their briefings. My country reaffirms its commitment to the administration of justice in societies in conflict and emerging from conflict.

By ensuring justice for the many victims of grave crimes committed in the territory of Rwanda and in the former Yugoslavia, those Tribunals, in addition to fighting impunity, are helping to consolidate peace and foster national reconstruction and the rule of law. We once again reaffirm our fullest support for them -- support that they need if they are to carry out their work diligently and complete their mandates by 2010, as recommended by the Security Council.

An assessment of the activities of the Tribunals shows that the pace of their work has increased during the period under consideration. A significant number of cases have been dealt with by both the Trial and the Appeals Chambers, thanks to the hard work that has made it possible to substantially reduce the backlog. That is the case in particular with regard to cooperation with national jurisdictions, which has allowed for the reabsorption of a considerable number of cases. Other measures taken up by the Tribunals have allowed for the streamlining of the Chambers. These include internal reforms aimed at enhancing procedural effectiveness in accordance with the recommendations of the working groups, the better use of computerization and modifications to the rules of procedure.

We would like to stress one particular advance: the Rwanda Tribunal's informational programme. We are especially interested in that programme because, above and beyond its purely informative character, it will enable the Tribunal to play a role that includes the fight against impunity, training for students, inter-ethnic reconciliation and, to some extent, help to prevent the recurrence of similar tragedies.

We welcome the progress made, but it is clear from the reports before us that that positive development needs to be strengthened further as the Tribunals approach the final stages of their work. A number of constraints that are having a negative effect on the achievement of the completion strategies must be lifted. First of all, States must cooperate in accordance with their international obligations, both in terms of arresting persons suspected of grave crimes and of pursuing fugitives.

In this regard, we note with regret that, despite the repeated appeals of the international community, those that are responsible for genocide in the former Yugoslavia are still at large. Failure to bring to justice those responsible for the gravest of crimes will mean that the many victims in the former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda will never have the chance to have their suffering acknowledged or their cases heard. We must help the two Tribunals that we have set up to complete their mandates.

We must also ensure that the two Tribunals have sufficient resources, both human and financial, so that they can carry out their activities on a regular basis until they have completed their work.

Finally, my delegation would like to know whether, given the unknown factors to which the President of the Yugoslavia Tribunal referred and the various problems described by the Prosecutor of the Rwanda Tribunal -- in particular concerning the transfer of accused and the search for fugitives -- it would be possible to extend the terms of the judges or to have new elections in order to continue the work of the Tribunals in the future, since in this crucial phase developments over the coming months will be critical for the timely implementation of the mandates that we entrusted to the Tribunals.

We would like once again to pay tribute to the Tribunals for the important work that they have carried out in advancing the cause of criminal justice. The work of the Tribunals will always be a source of inspiration for the United Nations and the rest of international community.

Ms. Pierce (United Kingdom)

I would like to add the United Kingdom's voice to those who have thanked and welcomed the Presidents of the Tribunals, Judge Pocar and Judge Møse, and the Persecutors, Ms. Del Ponte and Mr. Jallow, for their very helpful and informative briefings. It is very good to see the teams back in the Council. We very much welcome the commitment that they and the staff who work for them have shown to the important issue of addressing war crimes.

I would like to begin with the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). We congratulate it for the progress made in completing its considerable caseload. We welcome Judge Møse's confirmation that the completion strategy remains on track. At the same time, we remain deeply concerned that there are still 18 accused at large, including Felicien Kabuga. Those individuals must not be allowed to evade justice. We call on all States to fulfil their obligation to cooperate with the ICTR. We would be interested to hear if there are particular steps that the Prosecutor or the Judge believe the international community could take to assist the ICTR further in its work.

We also note that a significant aspect of the completion strategy relates to the transfer of appropriate cases to national jurisdictions for trial. In this respect, we encourage the ICTR and the Government of Rwanda to work closely together to overcome all outstanding obstacles to the possible transfer of cases to the Rwandan system.

Turning to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), I would like to start by saying that it is welcome news that Mr. Seselj has called off his hunger strike. We urge him to engage constructively with the ICTY and to resolve any complaints he may have through the appropriate legal processes of the Tribunal. We have every confidence in the Tribunal's ability to handle this issue and every confidence in the Tribunal's impartiality and its desire to discharge faithfully the mandate given to it by the Council. We hope that no one in the region will be tempted to exploit this incident for their own gain.

We underline the fact that cooperation with the Tribunal remains an ongoing obligation for all States, as emphasized most recently by resolutions 1503 (2003) and 1534 (2004). The capture and transfer of the six remaining indictees is essential. It should be a top priority for all, and that includes any countries the fugitive indictees might visit.

We understand that the Prosecutor thinks Vlastimir Djordjevic is in Russia. We are confident that the Russian authorities will be investigating that claim and will do all they can to trace his whereabouts and to transfer him immediately to the Hague Tribunal if he is located.

We are disappointed by the lack of progress made by Serbia this year, as reported by Ms. Del Ponte. Full cooperation remains central to the reconciliation that is required for long-term stability in the Balkans, and long-term stability in the Balkans is a crucial part of achieving a Europe that is whole and free.

I would like to reiterate that full cooperation is a fundamental requirement for the countries of the Balkans to make progress towards membership of the European Union (EU). We call on the authorities in Belgrade to increase significantly their cooperation, including through ensuring the arrest of Mladic and Karadzic and their transfer to the Hague Tribunal. Nevertheless, we take some encouragement from President Tadic's recent comments about improving Serbian cooperation with the ICTY.

We also call on the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina, in particular Republika Srpska, to fulfil their obligations to cooperate. As the Prosecutor has indicated, there is much more that the authorities of Republika Srpska can and should do to ensure cooperation with the ICTY and the swift detention, arrest and transfer of Mladic and Karadzic.

We welcome the Prosecutor's comments about the cooperation she has received from Croatia, from the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia and from Montenegro, and we trust that that cooperation will continue next year and beyond.

The question of NATO's invitation of Partnership for Peace was mentioned in respect of Serbia and Bosnia. NATO has offered this to help the countries make further progress on their Euro-Atlantic paths and also to reflect the achievements of defence reform. That invitation should not be construed by anyone -- especially by those in the region -- as a weakening of support for the ICTY. The NATO communiqué makes clear that NATO expects both Serbia and Bosnia to cooperate fully with the ICTY and that it will closely monitor their efforts in doing so. Can I also make clear that further EU and NATO integration will depend on the extent of that progress. We are confident that there are leaders in the region who understand this and who will try to deliver on that goal, but we call on everyone in the region to do their utmost so that further European and NATO integration can proceed, as we all hope to see.

I should now like to turn to the completion strategy. The United Kingdom remains a strong supporter of the ICTY. We believe that the orderly completion of its important work is vital for the region and for international criminal justice. The message of the President and the Prosecutor on this today was very clear. We underscore the fact that all fugitive indictees must be brought before the Tribunal, as emphasized in resolution 1534 (2004). Karadzic and Mladic in particular should not be under any illusion that they can wait out international justice. They will be tried by the Tribunal, as required under the relevant Security Council resolutions.

We recognize and commend the considerable efforts and achievements of all of the Tribunal's organs to increase efficiency and the pace of trials. However, we remain concerned about the slippage in the completion timetable to 2009. We look forward to the Tribunal continuing its efforts in that regard and to hearing of further progress.

I should like to conclude by saying a word about the transfer of cases from the ICTY to national jurisdiction. We note that, in pursuit of the completion strategy, so far nine individuals have been transferred to the jurisdiction of Bosnia. We were also pleased to hear that the Sarajevo Special War Crimes Chamber recently delivered its first judgment on a case transferred by the Tribunal.

The United Kingdom remains supportive of the Special War Crimes Chamber and has to date committed £2.6 million to the project, as well as providing additional ad hoc assistance. We strongly support Judge Pocar's call for other donors to make similar commitments. I would just like to stress that the transfer to national jurisdiction is not to be applied in the case of Karadzic and Mladic.

Mr. Malpede (Argentina)

We would like, along with other members of the Council, to express our gratitude to the Presidents of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), Mr. Fausto Pocar and Mr. Erik Møse, respectively, and to Prosecutors Del Ponte and Jallow for the presentation of their reports, which make it possible for us to continue with our biannual consideration of the completion strategies of the Tribunals.

We also take note of and recognize the steps taken by the ICTY to speed up the pace of work. The figures provided by the Tribunal show that the measures taken concerning productivity, which were referred to in earlier reports, are yielding good results. The Trial and Appeals Chambers are working at full capacity, and the simultaneous trials of multiple accused are being carried out efficiently. It is also very important to note the more active role of judges in the preparation of trials as well as the role of the ad litem judges. We believe that the Tribunal has been able to optimize its operation and working methods without affecting the principles of due process.

We take a positive view of the steps taken to refer the cases of lower- and intermediate-ranking accused to the competent national jurisdictions. There is a need to continue to strengthen, through the provision of adequate resources and capacity-building, national judicial systems as well as detention and witness protection mechanisms.

It is deplorable and unacceptable that there remain six fugitives who have not been brought before the Tribunal, in particular those accused of genocide, Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic. We would highlight the seriousness of the issues mentioned in Prosecutor Del Ponte's report, including lack of political commitment, lack of trust and cooperation among those institutions involved in locating fugitives, and failure to put together an efficient and focused strategy. We appeal to the Governments of Serbia and of Bosnia and Herzegovina to cooperate fully with the Prosecution and with the Tribunal. The completion strategy will not be brought to fruition as long as those accused persons are not brought to trial, nor will the conditions be created that are essential for promoting the peace process, reconciliation and development in the region.

As regards the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, we would highlight the progress made in the context of the completion strategy. We are concerned that the transfer of cases to national courts could mean that the accused might not be tried properly. We endorse the criteria to be used in deciding which accused will be tried in the Tribunal and which will be transferred, in particular the distinction between those that had leadership positions and major responsibility, along with the criteria for such a determination.

While these are reasonable, there are doubts about the capacities of national judicial systems effectively to bring trials to completion. Such limitations relate not only to the judicial systems of African countries, to which we need to provide support and resources; there may also be problems with transfers to developed countries, as in the case of Norway, to which reference was made.

We gather from the report that it is extremely urgent to provide resources to the Government of Rwanda and help it to build capacity, so that it can tackle successfully the legal challenge of trying those responsible for genocide, both in transferred cases and in local cases. We appeal to the Government of Rwanda to effectively abolish the death penalty and do its utmost to ensure that the 18 fugitives are arrested and handed over to the Tribunal.

Lastly, as this is the last statement Argentina will be making on the Tribunals before the end of our two-year term, we would like to say that the work of these Tribunals has been an essential step taken by the Security Council to root out impunity and to affirm the rule of law in those regions.

The problems encountered by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, to which we have referred and which emerge from the report, demonstrate, in our view, that the fragmentation and proliferation of ad hoc tribunals is not the right path through which to deal with cases of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

We believe, therefore, that it is necessary for States and civil society to lend support, political will and the right resources in order to bolster the work of the International Criminal Court, so that in the future a single international tribunal, with robust human and material resources and with universal authority and legitimacy, can be the legal weapon of the international community to try those committing crimes against humanity and to uproot impunity.

Mr. Rogachev (Russia)

Mr. President, allow me to thank the leadership of both Tribunals for their briefings to the Security Council and for the reports on implementing the completion strategy, pursuant to Council resolution 1534 (2004).

We commend, in general, the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). We also welcome the initiative of the Government of Rwanda to abolish the death penalty. We suggest that, in the future, this will remove the concerns that have prevented the transfer of cases of low- and middle-level accused to the national courts in Rwanda. This gives greater importance to the ICTR's work in capacity-building with the judicial system in that country. We continue to believe that the transfer of cases to national justice systems is the main component for the timely completion strategy of the ICTR.

In the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the greatest concern at this stage is the case of the accused Vojislav Seselj. We are thankful to the President of the ICTY for submitting information to the Council on the measures being taken by the leadership of the Tribunal in order to de-dramatize the situation. However, we consider that the responsibility for the current situation and for Mr. Seselj's state of health lies firmly and squarely on the ICTY. The accused has been in prison in Scheveningen since the beginning of 2003. We note that the President of the Court has said that the Tribunal is trying to limit the period of the pre-trail detention, but I repeat that Mr. Seselj has been in prison in Scheveningen since the beginning of 2003. Such a drawn-out process, in our view, is further proof of the unwieldy nature of the work of the Tribunal.

Given the serious harm to Mr. Seselj's health caused by the lengthy hunger strike, this story can still not be considered as closed. The recurrence of such situations would completely discredit this Court, whose reputation has already been hurt by the deaths of Mr. Babic and Mr. Milosevic this year.

Another aspect that negatively affects the image of the Tribunal is the open criticism coming from the Prosecutor's Office on the amendments to the rules of procedure and evidence for the ICTY. We suggest that these amendments are in line with the implementation of the deadlines for the completion strategy, as set out by the Security Council.

We do not believe that the statement by the Prosecutor was appropriate concerning the alleged presence of Mr. Djordjevic on the territory of the Russian Federation and that the responsibility lies with Serbia to arrest him in our country. First of all, on many occasions we have stated that the information provided by the Tribunal on Mr. Djordjevic's whereabouts have not been confirmed. The Russian authorities are making every effort to find him. Secondly, there can be no question of extending the jurisdiction of Serbian authorities to the Russian Federation, a separate and sovereign State. We would like to repeat our proposal that was made in the discussion of the ICTY annual report in the General Assembly, namely that it would be useful and informative to obtain comparative lists showing the number of those convicted by nationality and also the duration of the sentences they received, depending on their nationality, for similar crimes in terms of type and gravity.

We expect that the Tribunal will strictly implement the completion strategy, according to the timetable established by the Security Council. We note here that we cannot see how we can make plans -- and this was said by the President of the ICTY -- for cases that have been scheduled for completion by 2009 -- how can we make such plans in violation of the completion strategy that the Security Council has adopted? That strategy sets out a deadline for completing the work, and the ICTY should base its work on that fact in planning its future work.

In our view, the fact that Mr. Mladic and Mr. Karadzic and other accused have not been brought to the ICTY cannot justify the indefinite continuation of the work of this Court.

Mr. de La Sablière (France)

First of all, I would like to thank the Presidents and Prosecutors of the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda for their reports, for the briefings on their work and also on the difficulties they have encountered in fulfilling their mandates. I would like to reassure them of the full support that they enjoy from France.

Both Tribunals have achieved remarkable progress to ensure the respect of the completion strategy for their work, which was set out by this Council. I would like to commend the combined efforts of the Judges and the Prosecutors. We encourage both Tribunals to continue in this way. Greater efficiency in the conduct of trials would favour the respect of the completion strategy. This strategy must ensure, above all, that finally, after so many years, justice is rendered to the victims, and, on this basis, the societies concerned can move on.

The objective of efficiency and of speeding up the trials should serve the purpose of justice and should take account of the fact that these were mass crimes. The requirements for justice and the need to protect the interest of the victims and to respect the rights to a proper defence must be respected. The two ad hoc Tribunals are pioneers, and their legacy must in no way be the subject of controversy.

One way of completing their mandate was to make it possible to transfer low-level accused persons to national justice systems. We welcome, therefore, the fact that the special tribunal for the war crimes in Sarajevo was able to complete its first trial satisfactorily one month ago. Such transfers can only contribute to the local development of the rule of law, provided that it is accompanied by the necessary guarantees that ensure fair trials and the non-application of the death penalty. And they certainly deserve the support of the international community. We welcome with satisfaction the initiatives of the two Tribunals in this area.

The Presidents and Prosecutors have pointed out a number of difficulties that could increase as the end of their work approaches. The loss of qualified staff is one problem, and this should be looked at, because it could slow down the pace of work. A possible uncertainty with regard to the resources available could also make things difficult, and I note also that the management of the detention unit and the attitude of some detainees are serious concerns for the ICTY. We note the efforts that have been made to overcome these concerns.

However, the main challenge to both Tribunals and to the Council that established them is the fact that some of the principal perpetrators are still at large. Their number is decreasing, of course, since Mr. Dragan Zelenovic has finally been transferred to the Tribunal in The Hague by Bosnia and Herzegovina after having been handed over by Russia. Yet Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic, who, alongside Mr. Slobodan Milosevic -- who unfortunately died before the end of his trial -- personify the hateful policy of ethnic cleansing, remain at large. That is true also of Mr. Félicien Kabuga, 10 years after the genocide.

However, the arrest and transfer for judgement in The Hague and Arusha of those accused by the ICTY and the ICTR represent an international obligation for the countries of the regions concerned. My country reiterates that cooperation with the ICTY by the Balkan States is also a prerequisite for integration into the European family. Therefore, like the Prosecutor, we are disappointed that the plan of action established by Belgrade has yet to achieve the desired goals. It is critical that Serbia and the Republika Srpska of Bosnia and Herzegovina cooperate fully with the Tribunal.

With respect to the ICTR, I wish to thank its Prosecutor for providing more detailed information to the Security Council on the cooperation that the Tribunal is receiving with regard to the accused who remain at large and to ongoing investigations.

While the dates that we have given the Tribunals by which their work should be complete are approaching, it seems to me that the Council should consider the purpose of those dates. Through our resolutions, we have requested the Tribunals

"to take all possible measures... to complete all trial activities at first instance by the end of 2008, and to complete all work in 2010" (resolution 1503 (2003), para. 7).

We established a goal at that time, but no cut-off dates. The briefings that we have just heard clearly indicate that some critical factors in adhering to that timetable do not depend on the Tribunals. Some people, however, seem to consider the timetable to require the Tribunals, regardless of what may occur, to shut down in 2010, whether or not they have tried the principal fugitives. That is, indeed, what the fugitives are hoping.

The very high cost of the Tribunals is often referred to. That is a valid concern, but what would be the purpose of all the United Nations Member States investing so much over so many years if, at the end of the day, the main suspects accused of crimes of genocide were to escape international justice? What would the legacy of such justice be? What credibility would it enjoy among the victims and their communities? Would the Tribunals have completed the missions entrusted to them? What impact would it have on international efforts to counteract impunity?

The Council, which established the Tribunals, must ask those questions. To France, it is clear that the missions of the ad hoc Tribunals cannot be considered complete so long as the principal fugitive accused -- Mr. Karadzic, Mr. Mladic and Mr. Kabuga in particular -- have not been judged by those Tribunals. We must not yield on that demand.

Mr. Bartho (Slovakia)

We are grateful to Judge Fausto Pocar, President of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and to Judge Erik Møse, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), as well as to the Prosecutors of both Tribunals, for their assessment reports concerning the progress made towards the implementation of the completion strategies set out in Security Council resolutions.

Slovakia welcomes the progress made in recent months and wishes to express its full support for the Tribunals' undertaking their tasks under the mandates given by the Security Council. We consider the completion strategies to be crucial documents for streamlining the final phase of the functioning of both Tribunals. In that regard, we appreciate all measures taken by the Tribunals to meet the time frames and deadlines for the completion of their work, as determined in the Security Council's resolutions.

We commend the cooperation of the Tribunals with respective national authorities, in particular with the domestic courts of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Serbia and Rwanda. We highly appreciate the increasing number of referrals by the ICTY of cases involving intermediate and lower-ranking accused to national courts, and the intention of the Prosecutor of the ICTR to request the transfer of some persons and cases to competent national jurisdictions for trial. Those measures will enable both Tribunals to concentrate on the prosecution and trials of the most senior leaders suspected of being most responsible for crimes under international law.

Slovakia insists on the strict compliance of trials at the national level with international standards of fair trial. We reiterate the appeal to States to cooperate fully with the Tribunals, in particular in the tracking, arrest and transfer of remaining fugitives to the Tribunals. We praise the effective assistance of States in the area of witness and victim protection and the enforcement of the sentences imposed by the Tribunals. The conclusion of respective legal instruments for that purpose is essential to the full implementation of the completion strategies.

Noting the serious problems and obstacles that both Tribunals have to address on a daily basis, Slovakia welcomes and strongly supports their ongoing commitment to making every effort within their power, including exploring new measures, to fully discharge their mandates to meet the target dates of the completion strategies.

We believe that the Security Council should maintain its strong support and close attention to the implementation of the completion strategies of the Tribunals. If necessary, it should be ready to take the appropriate measures required for a successful completion of the work of both Tribunals.

Mr. Tachie-Menson (Ghana)

I wish to thank the Presidents and Prosecutors of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), not only for their detailed reports, but also for their resourcefulness, professionalism and commitment to duty under difficult conditions, which have contributed to justice and a large measure of peace and stability in two troubled regions of the world.

We appreciate the integral role being played by the ICTR in the reconciliation and reconstruction process in Rwanda. It is undeniable that the Tribunal has made an invaluable contribution to the restoration of democracy and the rule of law by bringing to justice to the victims of the genocide. We are also impressed by the progress being made with regard to the prosecutions and trials of the accused persons. We are confident that all this puts the ICTR on course to meeting its completion strategy. To that end, the Tribunal must continue to receive the necessary resources.

In that connection, we welcome the referral of less serious cases to national jurisdictions. Those referrals are not only essential to easing the Tribunal's work load, but also necessary in helping with the capacity-building of the domestic judicial system, and at the same time infusing a sense of ownership of the judicial proceedings among the local communities. If the psychological wounds of the genocide are to heal, the participation of local communities in the judicial process can act as a catalyst.

On the issue of genocide, the Tribunal's efforts, which culminated in the completion of investigations, are to be commended. It is important that the genocide trials, which form the core of the Tribunal's mandate, be completed within the timeframe established in the completion strategy. We hope that a shift of focus from investigations and arrests to trials will enable the Tribunal to complete its work on time.

With regard to the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the assessment in the reports by the President and the Prosecutor indicate the steady progress that has been made in the disposal of cases since the last report to the Council. We are also pleased to note that the proposals of the working groups on speeding up trials and on appeals are being implemented, hence the hectic pace of the cases being handled by the Tribunal. On that point I wish to reiterate the position of my delegation that unreasonably lengthy trials bogged down by delays and complicated rules of procedure do not project the required image of transparency and efficiency.

The Tribunal's outreach programme, which has brought to the population of the affected areas insight into the workings of the Tribunal, will no doubt play an important role in the healing and reconciliation process. By demystifying the Tribunal, the outreach programme has assisted in remedying the sense of remoteness of the judicial process that may be felt by victims in affected communities.

We agree with the report's prognosis that the failure to secure the arrest and trial of six high-level fugitives who are wanted for the gravest crimes within the target date of the completion strategy may undermine the legacy of the Tribunal as far as the fight against impunity is concerned. The fact that some high-level fugitives are still at large is a matter of great concern to my delegation. Certainly, the fugitives cannot be hiding without some sort of assistance or tacit support from certain quarters. We call on the relevant States to exercise the necessary political will and to do whatever is in their power to bring those fugitives to justice. There can be no closure to the traumatic period in which those fugitives played an ignoble role if the culprits are not brought to justice.

On the completion strategy, we hope that with the streamlining of the Court's procedures, a mode of operation for the targets dates will be met. We feel that the Council should consider extending the period to enable the trial of high-level fugitives who are still at large to take place.

Mr. Voto-Bernales (Peru)

I would like to thank the Presidents and Prosecutors of the two Tribunals for their detailed and comprehensive reports to us this morning.

We welcome the efforts of the Tribunals and the Prosecutors to meet the deadlines set out in the completion strategy. Although we recognize the difficulties they face -- especially the lack of cooperation faced by the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia -- we urge them to continue to do what is necessary to meet the deadlines set while observing the strictest standards of due process. Meeting those deadlines is essential to the credibility of the system, because justice should not just be impartial but also rendered as speedily as possible. The full cooperation of States is essential in order to achieve the goal of providing justice for the victims before both Tribunals and to ca