YouSaid · the spoken record

Akande

lines on the record
21
first
2022-06-02
most recent
2023-01-12
sittings or episodes
2
sources
un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

  1. “While there is an obligation on the Council to ensure observance with international law, that responsibility ultimately falls on individual Council members, who have a responsibility — together with all States — to observe the law themselves and ensure that the Council collectively does too. Where the Council collectively fails to fulfil its responsibilities, there is a secondary responsibility on the part of other organs of the United Nations to contribute to the maintenance of international peace and thereby to the promotion of the rule of law. States have an obligation under the Charter to cooperate with regard to the maintenance of peace. They also have an obligation under international law to cooperate in order to bring an end to serious violations of the most important obligations under international law.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  2. “Any failure by it to fulfil its responsibilities undermines the rule of law, since maintaining the peace creates conditions in which justice and international law are observed. Secondly, in order to promote the legitimacy of its own activities, this organ needs to ensure that international law is complied with in relation to its own activities, the activities that it authorizes and the demands that it makes of others. In that regard, the regular references to international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights, in resolutions regarding situations of conflict are encouraging. Thirdly, the rule of law requires that the law be applied equally. To continue to be seen as legitimate, the Council must ensure that like situations are treated alike.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  3. “It is a positive sign for the rule of law that States seem more willing than ever to submit cases for adjudication, but it is also important that when courts and tribunals pronounce on those disputes, their decisions are respected and complied with. The notion that it is the law that rules, not arbitrariness or force, applies all the more in situations where one is not in full agreement with the outcome dictated by the law. Let me now turn to the role of this organ and of the United Nations more generally in the promotion of the rule of law in the maintenance of international peace and security. Three points connect the rule of law to the activities of the Security Council. First, the Council has a responsibility to maintain peace and security.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  4. “Similarly, while it used to be routine to include clauses in multilateral and bilateral treaties permitting each party to refer a dispute under the treaty to the International Court of Justice, that has become relatively rare in recent treaties. It has been a trend now for a couple of decades and unfortunately represents a retreat from the idea, emblematic of the rule of law, that disputes involving legal rights should be settled on the basis of law. While courts and tribunals may not be able to settle all aspects of international disputes, they can at least deal with the legal issues. The increased acceptance of the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice and other tribunals would mark an important advance in the rule of law and contribute to the maintenance of peace.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  5. “It would be an important advance in the rule of law among nations for States to increase the range of instruments by which they provide such consent. While many of those courts, including the International Court of Justice, are busier than they have ever been, there is, paradoxically, a declining tendency for States to provide consent to the jurisdiction of the Court. To date, only 73 States have made declarations recognizing the compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice. That is barely more than a third of the membership of the United Nations, and the number has hardly increased in the past couple of decades.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  6. “States have a range of dispute settlement mechanisms available to them, but commitment to the rule of law involves a commitment to the idea expressed in Article 1 of the Charter that disputes are to be settled in accordance with international law. A willingness to settle disputes in accordance with international law should mean that in cases where those disputes involve disagreements relating to the application of the law, States should be prepared to submit their disputes to bodies that are able to pronounce on those legal questions. Today, in addition to the International Court of Justice, we have a range of arbitral and judicial bodies that could, in principle, deal with inter-State disputes that involve questions of law. However, international tribunals can act only where States provide consent to their jurisdiction.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  7. “The use of force in order to advance national policy and interests is clearly inimical to the maintenance of peace and to the rule of law. States have an obligation to fulfil their obligations, including those relating to the use of force, in good faith. While there is ambiguity about some aspects of the law relating to the use of force, it is important to ensure that those areas are not abused for purposes that undermine the rule of law. Together with the obligation not to use force, States also have an obligation under the Charter to settle their disputes by peaceful means and, to cite the Charter again, “in such a manner that international peace and security, and justice, are not endangered”.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  8. “States are not permitted to seek to impose their will on other States by using force. Sadly, the world continues to bear witness to the immense suffering that the unlawful use of force brings to human beings. The basic rules of international law on the use of force, as contained in the Charter and in customary international law, are clear. The threat or use of force in international relations is prohibited. Force may be used lawfully only in two circumstances — when authorized in accordance with the collective security scheme established by the Charter, or when used in the exercise of individual or collective self-defence. In particular, the Charter is clear that force may not be used against the territorial integrity or political independence of another State.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  9. “As the Declaration on Principles of International Law concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation among States, adopted by consensus, stresses, the fulfilment in good faith of the obligations assumed by States, in accordance with the Charter, is of the greatest importance for the maintenance of international peace and security. In order to ensure the rule of law in the maintenance of international peace and security, attention needs to be paid to the observance of international law by States and also by the United Nations as forum for advancing collective security. First, States are the primary addressees of the rules of international law that are aimed at upholding and securing peace. The central rules in that respect are those that seek to restrain the use of force by States.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  10. “We see clearly, in the preamble to the Charter of the United Nations, the determination of the drafters to: “establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained”. One of the main purposes of the United Nations is the maintenance of international peace and security. Article 1 of the Charter clearly links that task of maintaining peace and security with the settlement of disputes and the adjustment of situations in conformity with principles of justice and international law.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  11. “Mr. Akande: I congratulate you, Mr. President, and your delegation on assuming the presidency of the Council. In many of our national societies, we aspire to observance of the rule of law. While there are many ideas as to what precisely the rule of law means, at least one thing is clear: the rule of law requires that those who exercise public power must act in accordance with the law. That, in turn, means that all those who are the subjects of the law are entitled to the protection of the law. Those principles are equally true in the international community. The international community, particularly through the General Assembly and also in this organ, has time and again affirmed its commitment to the promotion of the rule of law in international affairs.”

    2023-01-12 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9241 (2023) · source

  12. “The Human Rights Council regularly establishes various commissions of inquiry and fact-finding missions with a mandate to investigate international crimes. However, with a view to improving the fulfilment of the accountability mandates of these investigations, proposals have recently been made for the creation of a United Nations investigative support mechanism that could provide a coordinating role with respect to the various mandates that have an investigative function or that could itself be triggered by a competent United Nations body to carry out investigations.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  13. “United Nations peacekeeping missions operating in States that are also ICC situations could, and perhaps should, be given an explicit mandate to cooperate with the Court. Finally, even where situations have not been referred to the ICC, steps can be taken to improve the prospects for accountability by ensuring that credible investigations of international crimes are conducted in a way that provides future opportunities for prosecution at either the international or the domestic level. The Council has established the United Nations Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, and similar investigative mechanisms have been established by other United Nations bodies with respect to Syria and Myanmar.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  14. “If the Council refers situations to the ICC, there are ways in which it can enhance the referrals’ effectiveness, for example by imposing obligations of cooperation on all States; not barring United Nations funding for investigations and prosecutions arising from ICC referrals; and not limiting the persons whom the ICC may prosecute as a result of the Council’s referrals. There are also a number of measures that the Council could take to either promote States’ cooperation with the ICC or address cases of non-cooperation when investigations and prosecutions are under way. For example, the Council could establish a process to consider whether to impose targeted sanctions on individuals wanted by the ICC.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  15. “The Council has a special role to play, given its primary responsibility for maintaining international peace and security. The Statute of the ICC provides an obvious vehicle by which the Council can bring about the investigation of international crimes through referrals of situations to the Court. The Council has done that with respect to Darfur and Libya, and should take similar steps where international crimes have been committed and the ICC does not otherwise have jurisdiction. However, referrals of situations of atrocity to the ICC are not sufficient to discharge the Council’s responsibility, because the ICC is dependent on States’ cooperation in fulfilling its mandate. The Council can promote cooperation by States with the International Criminal Court in various ways.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  16. “Some crimes will be prosecuted by international tribunals such as the ICC. However, the ICC can prosecute only a limited number of cases. Typically, accountability will also be needed in the domestic courts of the State where the crimes have occurred and perhaps also in foreign domestic courts exercising universal jurisdiction. In that regard, it should be recalled that the Geneva Conventions not only provide for the right of States to exercise universal jurisdiction over grave breaches of those Conventions but in fact impose an obligation to do so. The ongoing situation in Ukraine shows how efforts concerning accountability will often necessarily be multifaceted. That is not a flaw in the system but an essential feature. Let me now turn to the particular measures that the Council could take to strengthen accountability.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  17. “Five years ago, the parties to the Statute of the International Criminal Court activated the amendments to the Statute that define the crime of aggression and confer jurisdiction on the ICC with respect to that crime. In order to improve the normative framework with regard to accountability for all international crimes, States should consider ratifying the amendments on the crime of aggression so as to allow the Court to be able to exercise jurisdiction over that supreme international crime. I now want to turn to some improvements that could be made with respect to the institutional mechanisms for delivering accountability for international crimes. In my view, it is important to recognize that for accountability to happen, it will require efforts at multiple levels in almost all cases.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  18. “States should begin negotiations with regard to the adoption of such a treaty, which would ensure that the framework for punishing crimes against humanity is put on a similar level to those relating to genocide and war crimes. Most of the attention with respect to accountability for international crimes has focused on the three crimes that I have just mentioned — genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. But that is incomplete, because there is a fourth international crime, the crime of aggression, which often goes unaddressed, sadly. The Nuremberg Tribunal stated that “[t]o initiate a war of aggression is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  19. “Those prohibitions are recognized by all States and clearly form a part of customary international law. There are also established treaty regimes that deal with some of those crimes. However, although crimes against humanity are clearly prohibited under customary international law, there is at present no corresponding treaty that establishes obligations of prevention and punishment with regard to that category of international crime. The International Law Commission has developed a draft convention on the issue that would express the obligation of States not to commit crimes against humanity and create a framework in which States can cooperate to punish and suppress those crimes.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  20. “The reality that impunity increases the risk of cycles of violence and suffering remains as true today as it ever was. In order to strengthen accountability and bring about justice for international crimes, we need to see progress made on two levels. First, it will be important to develop some of the rules that underpin the prevention, investigation and punishment of such crimes, and secondly, we need a commitment to ensuring that the institutions that implement those rules are able to do their work and can function better than they do now. Let me start with the progress that can be made in strengthening the norms on which accountability is based. It is clear that international law prohibits genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of aggression.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source

  21. “Mr. Akande: My congratulations go to you, Sir, and the Albanian delegation on assuming the presidency of the Security Council. I would like to begin by noting that the international community has made important strides over the past few decades in putting the issue of accountability and justice for serious violations of international law on the agenda. A month from now, the world will celebrate the twentieth anniversary of the entry into force of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the first permanent tribunal established to prosecute and punish international crimes. However, it would also be fair to note that the commitment to holding individuals to account for international crimes has wavered in recent years, while the need for justice that can satisfy the demands of the victims of grave atrocities has not diminished.”

    2022-06-02 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.9052 (2022) · source