18TH SESSION OF THE ASSEMBLY OF STATES PARTIES TO THE ROME STATUTE
Day 1 (2 December 2019)
Name of the Event: Second Plenary Meeting (General Debate)
Overview by: Tanushree Nigam, Signe Wolf Børm, and Leonore ten Hulsen, Junior Research Associates PILPG-NL
Main Highlights:
Topics discussed by States Parties included:
Cooperation
Independence and impartiality of the Court
Review of the Court by independent experts
Elections of the new Prosecutor and Judges
Threats against the Court
Summary of the Event:
During the first part of the General Debate, common topics discussed by States Parties were cooperation, complementarity, and universality of the Rome Statute. Various States Parties thanked the Court, ASP, and other States Parties for their long-term commitment to the court and the international criminal order to ensure international justice. South-Africa, however, expressed apprehension at the role of the Court as it believed that its peacemaking efforts in Africa were being hindered by the Court’s active role in the region. South Africa also mentioned that its proposal to withdraw from the Rome Statute is still under deliberation by its parliament.
Almost all states urged non member states to sign the Statute. Many States Parties congratulated Kiribati on acceding to the Rome Statute. Additionally, several states, including Austria, Luxembourg, Sweden, and Ireland expressed support for the amendment proposed by Switzerland to include the starvation of civilians in non-international armed conflict as a war crime under Article 8 of the Rome Statute.
Zambia pointed out that the contradictory interpretations of Article 27 and 98 of the Rome Statute should be settled to ensure effective cooperation between the parties. In this regard, it called for the creation of a working group of experts to look into the interpretations.
Palestine's Minister of Foreign Affairs expressed concern at the length of the preliminary examination in Palestine. He stated that the protracted nature of the examination has contributed to impunity for atrocity crimes.
States, including Bangladesh and Sweden, noted the atrocities committed against the Rohingya people and lauded the ICC for its action in the situation in Bangladesh/Myanmar.
Many states also underlined the importance of victim participation and reparations and welcomed the increased focus on victims and reaffirmed their commitment by announcing their voluntary contributions to the Trust Fund for Victims.
Some States Parties referred to the efficiency and budget of the Court. States Parties spoke about the fact that the budget should be clear and sufficient. Korea argued that budgetary effectiveness and discipline must be a core priority. Slovakia mentioned that effective means for financing should be ensured, because without resources the Court will not be able to fulfill its global justice goals.
Moreover, the idea of an independent review of the ICC was welcomed by various states, including Slovenia, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, Denmark, and Vanuatu. Korea argued that the review of the ICC should be state-party driven. States including Botswana and South Africa also expressed support for the Resolution in this regard to improve the performance of the Court.
The election of the next Prosecutor and Judges in 2020 was touched upon by several states, including Ireland, Uruguay, France, Norway, Malawi, Germany, Ecuador, Denmark, Austria, the UK, and The Netherlands, urging for the election to be fair and transparent. Ecuador proposed having public hearings as a part of the process of electing judges.
A number of States Parties, such as The Netherlands, Austria, Iceland, Ireland, Trinidad and Tobago, Sweden, Uruguay, and Slovenia referred to the Court’s work with regard to sexual and gender based violence, and stressed the importance of eradicating SGBV.
Finally, Vanuatu called for the “radical idea” to amend the Rome Statute to include ‘ecocide’ as a crime under ICC jurisdiction. Vanuatu requested other member states to consider this idea and to give it proper consideration. They argued that it is in the interest of the international community to prosecute climate damaging acts as climate change poses an existential threat to humanity.
Points of action for the next meeting:
States Parties Colombia, Sierra Leone, El Salvador, Bulgaria, Timor-Leste, Australia, and Andorra were supposed to make statements at the second plenary meeting but their statements are postponed to tomorrow’s third Plenary Meeting.