Sixth Committee
6 November
Comprehensive review of the whole question of peacekeeping operations in all their aspects
Statement by Ben Playle
First Secretary and Legal Adviser
of Australia to the United Nations
On behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand
(Check against delivery)
Mr Chairman,
I have the honour to speak on behalf of Canada and New Zealand in addition to Australia.
CANZ welcomes this opportunity to discuss peacekeeping issues in the Sixth Committee. We reaffirm our strong support for the fundamental role of peacekeeping operations in discharging the responsibilities of this organisation under the UN Charter. We are proud to have been contributors to many peacekeeping operations since the UN was established. It is therefore of great concern to us when the reputation and critical contribution of peacekeeping is undermined by the criminal acts of a few.
Preventing peacekeeping personnel from committing crimes is, of course, the most desirable outcome. We acknowledge the good work of the Secretary-General in establishing in 1999 the Bulletin entitled ‘Observance by UN forces of International Humanitarian Law’, and establishing in 2003 the Bulletin entitled ‘Special Measures for Protection of Sexual Exploitation and Sexual Abuse’, which mandates measures for UN staff and forces. We welcome the introduction since August 2005 of conduct and discipline teams in UN peacekeeping operations.
But when prevention fails, we cannot allow peacekeeping personnel to enjoy impunity for crimes of which they are accused. CANZ highly commends the Secretary-General for highlighting the importance of this issue. We welcome his appointment of an adviser, and the Group of Legal Experts, the report of which is before us today. We also welcome moves to include specific provisions in the draft model MOU between troop contributing countries and the UN, which would require troop contributing countries to take action to investigate and prosecute any crimes committed by their personnel.
Mr Chairman,
CANZ believes the report of the Group of Legal Experts makes a significant contribution to identifying solutions. While we will reflect further on the specific recommendations made by the Group, we fully support appropriate measures to overcome obstacles to holding peacekeeping personnel accountable where, regrettably, crimes are committed. This is a pressing issue, and such measures should be instituted as soon as possible.
While we see a role for Sixth Committee in examining several recommendations made by the Group of Legal Experts, we think this Committee should focus on recommendations contained in Chapter IV relating to jurisdiction of States other than the host State, and, in particular, on issues relating to the draft treaty annexed to the report. CANZ has not yet formed a view on the desirability of a treaty which, as it has been proposed by the Group, would oblige States Parties to extradite or prosecute UN officials or experts who commit serious crimes while deployed as part of a UN peacekeeping operation.
The draft treaty annexed to the Group’s report would cover only UN ‘officials’ and ‘experts’, as those persons are defined in the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the UN. As proposed by the Group, the draft would not affect the immunities those persons enjoy under that Convention, and in particular immunity from legal process for acts committed in the performance of their duties, which can only be waived by the UN Secretary-General. In practice, the draft would cover civilians, military and police who are employed by the UN and deployed as ‘officials’ or ‘experts’, but it would not cover military personnel of national contingents assigned to the military component of a peacekeeping operation.
The draft treaty would apply only to ‘serious crimes’, of which the Group has proposed two possible definitions. The first would cover actual or attempted murder, serious injury, rape, sexual violence and sexual offences involving children. The second would cover actual or attempted crimes of intentional violence against the person and sexual offences, but only such crimes which are punishable under national law of the relevant State by imprisonment of at least one or two years. We should all be able to agree immediately that these are indeed crimes for which no impunity should be permitted.
Prosecution of serious crimes committed by UN officials or experts in the host State is one option. But CANZ recognises that the legal system in the host State may not be in a position to respond. The Group of Legal Experts, for example, identifies problems with gathering evidence in the host State that would be admissible in criminal proceedings. We would also note that potential concerns with due process standards could make extradition problematic. Measures to bolster the capacity of host States may assist. But we should also explore other avenues.
Prosecution by the State of nationality of the alleged offender, or by the State in which the offender is located, are other options contemplated in the text of the draft treaty proposed by the Group of Legal Experts. Our States have already enacted extra-territorial laws to cover certain, relevant crimes committed by our respective nationals overseas. We also have systems in place to investigate misconduct by our police and military officers, wherever that misconduct might take place. CANZ would urge all States to consider enacting similar laws to cover crimes which may be committed extra-territorially by their nationals during peacekeeping operations.
Mr Chairman,
CANZ firmly believes that UN officials and experts must be held accountable for any serious crimes they commit in the field. Most importantly, in the eyes of the host State and its people, justice must be seen to be done. At the same time, investigations and prosecutions must ensure respect for the human rights of the alleged offender.
CANZ looks forward to ongoing discussions with all States, and the UN Secretariat, to determine the most appropriate measures to address crimes committed by UN staff and experts on mission during peacekeeping operations. I can assure you that we will engage actively and constructively in this important debate.
Thank you, Mr Chairman.