YouSaid · the spoken record

Jorda

lines on the record: 63
first: 2000-06-20
most recent: 2000-06-20
sittings or episodes: 1
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

“The history of the Tribunal has frequently been marked by texts or decisions, the consequences of which have not always been carefully considered by the various parties. I apologize to some speakers for not having responded to their questions. I wish to thank all those who have offered their unreserved support not to me, but to the Tribunal. I shall convey it to my colleagues. I emphasize that I am very much alive to all the constructive criticism that has been expressed in this very beautiful and prestigious Chamber.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I believe that the idea of the ad [item judges is that they would get involved before the election ofjudges in 2001, whose terms of office will come to an end in November. I wonder Whether I shall have to come to ask the Security Council, as I did in 1997, to anticipate those elections. Why? The Chambers are working full time. In February, Chamber I, for instance, will have concluded two trials and started a third. Those judges will have to remain at the expense, worthy as it is, of the Tribunal. That is why I would say that the timetable of several months which the Council is setting for itself to consider and, I hope, validate our proposals is a good thing. Lastly, I would like to risk saying that we should be very grateful if the Security Council were to consult us on technical matters as it progresses in its work.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“As to the timetable, I believe that it should be quite tight, because any change in the statute takes time. Members of the Council know that better than I do. Moreover, these amendments must be coordinated with the budgetary schedule, which is very heavy. There must be a degree of harmonization in that regard. Let me recall that there is another factor that will have an impact, but that should prompt us to get down to work quickly: 2001 is an election year for judges. Judges involved in a trial who are not re-elected by the General Assembly or who wish to stand down and leave the Tribunal must conclude their trials. That is what happened in 1997. That must be taken into account when costs are being assessed. That is why I wish to offer this modest bit of information.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“What I am saying is that we could perhaps use some additional funds, but on the condition that they be included in a forward-looking plan. We cannot implement never-ending reform. It is easy for judges to ask for an additional Chamber, as we did in 1997, but of course we had reasons then to act that way. Today, however, I cannot come to the Security Council for an additional Chamber without offering some forward-looking context for these three additional judges, only to return two years hence to say that it is not enough and that we want yet another Chamber. That is not my vision of my role as President. I believe that the work of the Security Council's informal group should be forward-looking; that, I believe, is how progress can be made. In conclusion, let me make two points.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I say this for those who may have made critical remarks about our Tribunal. Let me digress here. Those who criticize the Tribunal should come to The Hague and hear the cries of the victims who are turning to us. They should go to the universities to study how the immense body of jurisprudence that we have developed at the Tribunals in The Hague and Arusha has opened up an entire scientific universe of progress in the evolution of international humanitarian law. I had yet another demonstration of this yesterday morning when I spoke before the preparatory committee for the rules of procedure. Yes, we do need the Security Council. I am not asking merely for more and more money. That is not what I am saying.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Regarding whether ad [item judges should be used, there is flexibility in that solution. If the principle of ad [item judges is included in the statute, then the principle may have to be followed even in the Appeals Chamber. But I do not think so, because if ad [item judges make a meaningful contribution, if the mandate of the Tribunal concludes in 2007, then I think the current 14 judges would be able to finish the cases before them without reinforcements. I am not sure if I have answered everyone. I am sorry ifI have spoken at length. Let me conclude on the working group. I support the Tribunal in that initiative, which I think would be the most productive one. We need the Council. I think the Council knows that. It established the Tribunal. We have become increasingly clear, legible.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“If we are to expedite procedure, we must have jurisprudence available in the Appeals Chamber- for example on the idea of internal or international armed conflict. Something of this sort should be carefully defined by the Appeals Chamber. But the changing composition of the Chamber - not to mention our Tribunal's legibility, which, I agree, is not very good- means it cannot always agree on its normative role. That is why we think the proposal of the Expert Group is a judicious one. We also find it judicious from another point of view: how, at the dawn of the third millennium, can we say that the Rwanda Tribunal cannot participate, in one way or another, in appeals as long as the judges are not contaminated? Therefore, I think the proposal for two additional judges is a reasonable one.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Unless all those accused of a given act are arrested at the same time, the trials begin one after the other, and after a time, since they are dealing with the same context and the same criminal area, the judges have to recuse themselves or are called upon by the parties to recuse themselves. So there is an increasing number of judges who are contaminated. This is a considerable problem for the Appeals Chamber. I will give another example. I am the President of the Appeals Chamber. After I was elected on 16 November, I was almost immediately contaminated vis-a-vis all the ICTY cases because I had participated in those cases at different levels. I had to ask another judge to be the fifth judge in the Appeals Chamber. The problem is the normative role of the Appeals Chamber.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“The ICTY has fewer interlocutory appeals, because we have a better system of selecting appeals, but there are 6 or 7 substantive appeals. Obviously, the caseload is very heavy, since they are the same five judges. There are many problems in the Appeals Chamber, relating to the number of cases and more important matters that the recommendations of the Expert Group could help us resolve. It is a problem of stabilizing the so-called Appeals Chamber. Our Appeals Chamber is not stable as far as its composition is concerned. It is not worthy - and I say this publicly - of a great international system of justice. Please be assured that this is not intentional. We have a problem of contamination in cases related to historical and political matters. Justice and politics eventually merge.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I do not think the President of that Tribunal would have been happy had I done so. But we did take up the Rwanda question in a way that concerns me very directly, as President of the Appeals Chamber. It is true that we met in plenary meeting, since we form part of the Rwanda Chamber. Ambassador Scheffers will remember that in February we convened a plenary meeting of the judges of Rwanda and The Hague with the five judges of the Appeals Chamber. We felt unanimously that the proposal of the Expert Group that two more judges should be added to the Chamber would be the best remedy, or one of the best remedies, to deal with the considerable caseload. I will give an idea of the considerable caseload. The Rwanda Appeals Chamber has 15 or 16 interlocutory appeals and 6 substantive appeals relating to very highly placed leaders in the country.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“It is a very delicate matter. The Expert Group faces a considerable problem, which is that the overall system does not lead to expeditiousness, but to slowness. When positions are polarized, the parties do not think about the cost that this represents in terms of investigative resources for the prosecution or for the defence. It is a very delicate issue. The Expert Group has made a proposal, and we have submitted it to the standing committee on amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence. I will not conceal the fact that opinions are divided to such an extent that I have decided to put this matter on the agenda of our next plenary meeting, on 13 and 14 July. I wish to address the next-to-last point, which is Rwanda and the Appeals Chamber. I have not talked about Rwanda. I am not the President of the Rwanda Tribunal.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“The main ones are those relating to the contamination of judges, which is a very complex matter when there are only 14 judges, or really 9, since 5 are in the Appeals Chamber. But a recommendation was made, and we immediately put that into our Rules of Procedure and Evidence. We have recast the trial preparation procedure. We have also reduced the number of excessive petitions, and most judges of the Tribunal are trying to cut back oral petitions. I do not wish to take up too much time, but to the Ambassador of Canada I will say that I am prepared to write a letter to give clarification on the number of provisions. One or two were not acknowledged by the Tribunal judges, those that are excessively authoritative or peremptory provisions - the Deputy Registrar will correct me if I am wrong - on remuneration of the defence counsel.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“In response to the speaker who said that there should be another expert group - there is the informal working group established by the President - but I do not think that a new expert group needs to be established. The Expert Group, mandated by a General Assembly resolution of 18 December 1998, analysed the Tribunal, the entire range of its operations. To our great satisfaction, the Expert Group did not have any major criticism of our institution. In response to the representative of Canada, there are 46 recommendations stemming from the Expert Group's work. Of those 46 recommendations, I can state - and provide the proof if there is enough time - that all those relating to expediting trials were anticipated by the Tribunal. They were even acknowledged by the Expert Group as being judicious. They were all immediately implemented.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I can tell the Council that this matter has been taken up. This trial preparation phase was conceived before 1998 and institutionalized in 1998, and it has just been improved following the recommendations of the Expert Group; the judges all agree and recognize that the preparatory phase must be suitably carried out if a trial is to be carefully studied and based on the real legal and factual aspects of the case. I would like to refer to the Expert Group. I do not wish to go into excessive detail, but let me say that the Expert Group concluded its work in the period of November-December 1999. It took a long time to have it translated into the various languages. On 30 March I signed a response, on behalf of my colleagues, relating to the recommendations of the Expert Group.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“This is the kind of work that I refer to as human costs, and that kind of work means that the trial preparation judge, who would be a trained professional having from 15 to 20 years of professional experience, would be a contribution to the Chamber in the form of support to the judge in carrying out trial preparation activities. We do not wish to take away any jurisdictional powers, to the extent that whenever a dispute or contentious point arises, a trial preparation judge must report them to his chamber. I think that the Council's working group will work on this question, but it seems to me that there is really no danger, and there will be even less danger once this question has been dealt with. I remind members that we are a Tribunal most of whose current members are from common law systems.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Well, it is useful in many ways because, as things stand now, a chamber is assigned about four cases. Currently, Chambers 1, 2 and 3 of the Tribunal have four cases each. There are now four trials under way at The Hague. But each Chamber also has three other cases, so I would say that trial preparation activities are carried out every day. The parties must be convened every day. Motions have to be reviewed every day. Attempts must be made daily to reach agreement and to determine who the witnesses are that the parties plan to call.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“For those who have practised law in countries on the continent, the pre-trial Chamber established in the Rome Statute is a jurisdictional chamber similar to an indicting chamber. The same is not the case in preparations for hearing. Preparations for hearing are a judicial and administrative mechanism aimed at speeding up trials. I will even go so far as to say that I believe that the future Court will need to put in place a pre-trial mechanism. Trial preparation activities focus directly on preparing cases. I would like to point out that our Rules of Evidence and Procedure currently give trial preparation judges certain jurisdictional powers but place them under the control of the chamber to which he belongs. Those powers have never been, and will never, be delegated to the judges. One could ask, what use is that?”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“The question of preparations for hearing - a problem that I believe the representatives of France and the United Kingdom have both touched upon - is one that makes it possible for me to express our thoughts. As the statute sets out in article 65 and others, preparations for hearing at the International Criminal Tribunal have nothing to do with the pre-trial chamber and do not deprive the judge of any of his jurisdictional functions. As a jurist I salute the establishment of a pre-trial chamber in the future permanent court, but especially for the efficiency it will bring to that court. If I recall correctly, the pre-trial Chamber will have numerous jurisdictional powers. In particular, it will be able to exercise control over indictments and make decisions on rules, petitions, inquiries and so on.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I think that in this way training would occur in a very natural way, perhaps even better than in the past. But we also do not hide the fact that whenever new judges are appointed or elected, those judges arrive at a court that is in the midst of activity; nor that new judges are obliged to become engaged immediately in trials. I am thinking in particular of the three latest judges, who joined the Tribunal in 1997. They did not have the luck - or the bad luck - that I had in the same situation in 1993, of arriving in a court where there were, as I mentioned earlier, no accused persons, a situation which is currently completely different.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“But we nevertheless thought that the matter of cost depends on the number of ad [item judges that are employed, which would also depend upon the formula chosen. In this regard, the opinion ofjudges is divided. I will point out that a slight majority - and, at any rate, thinking on this is evolving at The Hague - felt there should be a mix of permanent judges and ad [item judges. I mention this so that it may add to the Council's examination of the issue. In other words, when a three- judge Chamber has concluded with its work, it can then break up and then one or two permanent judges could be paired with an ad [item judge to respond together to questions related to the training of the ad [item judges and their ability to deal with the various very specific areas of international humanitarian law and jurisprudence that may come up.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I think the working group will be addressing many of those points, including the matter of elections or nominations and the drawbacks and advantages of the two methods. Appointment is faster. I would also point out that it is also legitimate. It exists in other international jurisdictions, where ad hoc judges are appointed. It even exists in the Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia itself. When a judge dies or stands down he is replaced through appointment by the Secretary-General, upon the advice of the Presidents of the General Assembly and the Security Council. This has occurred at least five times since 1993 including, I must say, in my own case. The question of costs will also be a subject under the purview of the working group. We did not want to go into a very detailed cost analysis.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Let me touch upon the issue of ad [item judges and their status from the perspective of the conditions of their service and their costs. These questions have been raised. With regard to costs and the status of the judges, this is something that is obviously within the domain of the working group that the Council will set up. Moreover, the Council itself, and we judges, have tried to move forward the thinking process on this issue. In this regard, someone - I do not remember who - said that the judges were not unanimous. That is not true. The judges are unanimous on the principle of using ad [item judges. In fact, as the Council has seen from the document that has been distributed to it, in the course of a whole day of meetings almost half of the judges agreed on some very important points.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“If 22 Serbs were not indicted under sealed indictment, then that demonstrates that the International Criminal Tribunal at some point had to deal with serious matters relating to coercion and the carrying out its decisions. I would emphasize that nothing in the statute or the regulations prohibits the use of sealed indictments, provided they are, like other indictments, confirmed by a judge. In other words, the Prosecutor must not only initiate the giving of evidence that would lead a judge to agree to an indictment - and that applies to all indictments - but he must, above all, show that it is useful to keep the indictment secret. I do not wish to go further into details because there are other questions to be addressed.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“A prosecutor cannot undertake a prosecution unless he has evidence. But in an international jurisdiction evidence is not made available by national investigators, police or police inspectors. It is provided through the cooperation of States. In this connection, we must note that the countries that complain the most about the partiality of the Tribunal - and I am thinking especially of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia - are the weakest when it comes to cooperation. For example, I can tell the Council that of the current 28 fugitives, 27 are of Serb origin. Moreover, of the 27 of Serb origin, 22 were accused without sealed indictments. I will refer later to the issue of sealed indictments.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“But I would also like to say to the representatives who touched on this question that it has never been written anywhere into the rules of procedure nor into the statute that the atrocities were committed in equal proportion throughout the territories in which they occurred. Nor was the number of accused persons ever to be automatically the same in the three groups. But I would especially like to point out something that serves as a response to a question asked of Ms. Del Ponte by the Council, namely, the problem of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) vis-a-vis a report she herself made public a few days ago, specifically on 13 June. I would say that prosecution is one thing - and I was a prosecutor for a very long time during my career - but it is evidence that guides prosecution.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I even have the impression that this is currently the case in Russia. Then the impartiality of judges, I think, is something that should not be called into question because - let me recall it here - the numerous indictments made by the Tribunal on political questions also go through a judge. I will refer later to sealed indictments. In order to give the Council a more specific answer - and without interfering with the policy that Ms. Del Ponte described to the Council - I would simply say that it is true that figures speak eloquently. It is also true that of the 68 current indictments, 45 are of persons of Serb origin.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“The political issue has come up again and again since the establishment of the Tribunal, when it was said that it was a political tool. Consider the nature of an international tribunal that theoretically is established by a political body. However, the issue of this Tribunal's having been set up by a political body has been put to rest by its decisions, in particular - and here I would recall what was mentioned by the Ambassador of Russia - with respect to the Tadic affair. I think that it can be acknowledged around this table that there are two bodies in the Tribunal that work independently. There is the Prosecutor, who is independent, organizes his own work and, above all, has an opportunity to prosecute. As I understand it, prosecutors in all countries have the opportunity to prosecute.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I should like perhaps to offer certain clarifications regarding the ad [item judges and the pre- trial proceedings. This may seem to be a more technical issue, but it does require clarifications beyond those that the Council's working group is to provide. 1 think also that the recommendations submitted by the Expert Group to the Council require a certain amount of clarification - and here I am thinking of the statement made by the representative of Canada. I shall spare the Council the list of 46 recommendations, but I will provide an overview. I think that there is a fourth issue that includes Rwanda and the Appeals Chamber, which was of interest to several delegations. Finally, concerning the working group, perhaps I could ask the Council one or two questions, if the President does not deem it too impertinent.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Thirdly, let me comment on the establishment of a working group, which I think has been agreed to unanimously around the table. Although, of course, I do not have to express a View, because it is not my place to do so, let me say that personally I believe it can only work to our advantage. The reason is that many aspects of the proposals, as representatives have indicated, definitely require deeper reflection. You, Mr. President, mentioned several of these aspects with respect to the concrete proposals I had the honour to put forward. I do not wish to take up too much time, but, having made those three preliminary comments, let me attempt to cluster my responses concerning the political issue, which I think was raised by several delegations, in particular by the representative of Russia.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Let me for a brief moment speak to you directly, Sir - not in your capacity as President - to express my satisfaction at hearing France conclude this very rich exchange of views by stating that it is here that political issues are settled, not in The Hague or in Arusha. I shall nonetheless attempt to respond to those questions relating to criminal policy, because the representative of the Russian Federation touched upon them, as did, more indirectly, the representative of China and, in a more general manner, other speakers. Secondly, I shall group together a number of comments. I apologize beforehand to speakers who had wished to enrich this debate - to which I have attempted to contribute the comments of my colleagues - in case I am not able to respond to all of their comments.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“264) By establishing the Tribunal in 1993, the Security Council took an historic decision, one of the greatest challenges since Nuremberg, stating that crimes against humanity or genocide, conceived and committed by man in the name of racist and xenophobic theses, would not go unpunished. It redounds to the Council's honour that it said and did this. By taking up this challenge, the judges at The Hague feel that, in their courtrooms, they have been able and are able, with impartiality- yes, impartiality- tenacity and conviction, to hear the cries of the victims and contribute in this way to ensuring that, in history's memory, the tragic events which occurred in this region are neither forgotten nor, what is more serious, distorted into a kind of revisionism which, as we know, represents a danger to democracies.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I would quote the most recent observations of our institution, those of the Organization itself- as represented by the Expert Group, mandated in 1998 and reporting in November, just six months ago. "To the extent that there may have been expectations that the Tribunals could spring to life and, without going through seemingly slow and costly developmental stages, emulate the functioning of mature experienced prosecutorial and judicial organs in national jurisdictions in adhering to a high standard of due process, such expectations were chimerical." (S/2000/597, para.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I would conclude my rather lengthy briefing by saying that the judges are not unaware of the difficult and complex effort again being asked of the international community, and the Security Council in particular. They feel that everything which has been accomplished to date argues in their favour, so that the confidence placed in this unprecedented institution will be maintained. We can, of course, continue to make progress amongst ourselves and will continue to do so. However, one must not believe that justice, as rendered in The Hague - which, since 1993, has been bearing, together with Arusha, many of our hopes for the implementation of more permanent and universal justice- can be created and, especially, developed without a sustained effort on the part of one and all.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Not everything must be done immediately, but I believe that, at first, and after some time for reflection, perhaps in the framework of a working group- to which I would wish to participate on behalf of the Tribunal in whatever capacity would be most useful and timely - the Statute could be amended in order to introduce at least the principle of appointing ad litem judges, if not a number of such judges themselves. The mechanisms for selecting and assigning judges to cases present very important problems which the judges themselves have discussed. Recourse to these judges would, of course, remain subordinated to the needs of the Tribunal.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Above all, however, given that our demonstration may not have been entirely conclusive, it appeared especially clear that this solution would make it possible, I recall, to set a reasonable expiration date for our work - at least in the first instance - and that, in budgetary terms, the time differential - permitting savings of almost 10 years of mandate time - when compared to any other solution and, a fortiori, when compared to the status quo - needed to be considered. Concretely speaking, I would ask the Council to review all the problems linked to the operation of our Tribunal, which is also the Council's own.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Del Ponte two weeks ago relating to compensation for victims funded by the seizure of the revenues of the convicted. Subject to the opinion of my colleagues, I fully support those suggestions. Lastly, I would like to add that the document presented to is not a budgetary document. That is true. Such an analysis does not fall within the jurisdiction of the judges. Nonetheless, mindful of the financial burden represented by the Tribunal - $95.8 million per year - the Judges, I can assure the Council, have made their own proposals, always bearing in mind this important aspect of the proposed reform. In this respect, recourse to ad litem judges seems to be the least costly solution, when compared to the creation of additional Chambers with permanent judges.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“I would, moreover, like to state that the proposed changes would require an amendment to the statute. I appreciate how difficult this would be, but an amendment was already made in 1997. I believe it is legitimate for an institution in existence for almost seven years to make adjustments requiring a legal basis, which amendments to the Rules of Procedure alone would not provide. Changes dealing with the establishment of ad litem judges could also be used to introduce into the statute several other modifications dealing, for example, with additional judges for the Appeals Chamber, as recommended by the Expert Group of which I spoke a moment ago; or with the important matter of compensation for persons unjustly detained or prosecuted; or with the suggestions made here by Ms.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“However, while the judges have exceeded their role to a certain extent, they have also presented their reflections on a set of outstanding questions, on which the judges are sometimes divided. The statutory implications were also considered. In this respect, the plan appears to be overly focused on the Tribunal's productivity. It is true that that remains our highest priority. However, other aspects relating to the Tribunal's operation have not escaped our attention. Through two permanent working groups - the rules committee, presided over by the British Judge Richard May, and the judicial practices working group, presided over by the Portuguese Judge Almiro Rodrigues - the judges are constantly striving to improve the way they themselves operate, I can assure the Council.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“That alone presents particular complex problems because it is attached to the appeals proceedings in the Rwanda Tribunal, judges from The Hague will take up the Rwanda appeals. In that regard, we support the idea of reinforcing the Appeals Chamber with two additional ad hoc judges, as recommended by the Expert Group. Let me add that the solution of resorting to ad litem Judges will be valid for the Appeals Chamber because by 2007 first-instance trials will have been concluded. I believe there are 14 Tribunal judges who could complete the cases under appeal. The judges are aware that these proposals will not resolve all the questions. We also know that their implementation raises many questions.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Since the ad litem judges would be called to The Hague for a specific case only, many more judges, and consequently many more States, would participate in the work of international justice. The document that has been prepared shows the high level of productivity that can be expected from the proposed combined solution. In practical terms, the period of the mandate assigned to the Tribunal - at least insofar as the first-instance trials are concerned, and I will return to this later - could be shortened to terminate at the end of 2007, instead of 2016, a gain of 9 years; that is, half the time. We can therefore hope that at the time the International Criminal Court is set up, our International Criminal Tribunal will have completed its task at least in terms of first-instance trials. Of course, appeals would remain.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“In order to deal with the significant number of trials awaiting them - 61, I think - and without formally rejecting the creation of additional trial chambers along the lines of what was adopted at our request in 1997, the judges then also opted for a flexible model adaptable to the necessarily changing situations that the Tribunal has been facing and will continue to face. The creation of a pool of Judges who would be called on as soon as a case was trial-ready, and only for that one trial, seemed to us a solution with merit in several respects. It would be best suited to the irregular pace of the indictments, arrests or even important incidents that may affect the pre-trial phase.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“This pre- trial phase of the case would be - and this is not the least of its advantages - dealt with on a priority basis by the judges right after the accused's initial appearance. The accused would then see his case being dealt with immediately following his arrest, which is not always the case today because of the large workload of judges, whose time is almost completely taken up by hearings. The pre-trial phase would thus be conducted on an uninterrupted basis, free of the chronic bottlenecks in the Chambers. However, the fluidity gained at the pre-trial phase is meaningful only if the many trials - that is, the many hearings - can be held as soon as they ready. This is the second aspect of the proposed reform, which, naturally, complements the first.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“This trend, which began in 1998, relates first and foremost to the pre-trial phase, that phase between the initial appearance of the accused following his arrest and the beginning of the proceedings themselves. This phase was put under the control of a pre-trial judge, a Tribunal judge working in this capacity. In the plan presented to the Council, this phase, known as pre-trial case preparation, would be handled in part by professional legal experts, who themselves would be acting under the authority and control of the judges. I emphasize this point because I know it can raise some questions on the control and authority ofjudges. This phase would make it possible to have an ongoing, fruitful dialogue with the parties, in order to give us a trial pruned of all its useless branches and focused on the real factual and legal issues.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“After having considered the entire range of possible solutions - at least those falling within their province, the non-political solutions - and after having analysed all the advantages and disadvantages, the judges unanimously supported a flexible, pragmatic solution that combines internal procedural, practical and organizational reforms and, of course, reforms that would reinforce the Chambers' trial capacity. I would like to generally describe what is proposed. The idea is simple: the practice of an initially highly adversarial procedure has shown us that more initiative and manoeuvrability should be left to the judges, who in the final analysis are the sole custodians of the universal values that underpin the missions assigned to them.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“International justice would not be any grander as a result. What should be done then? What should be proposed? I did not come before the Council to offer only a diagnosis. Far from wanting to paint an overly dramatic picture, I believe that things should instead be properly considered. By that I mean that we must be aware that problems exist that are related to the very Vitality of the institution and not to any type of possible debility. We are faced with a "growing pain" that we must control rather than letting it control us.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“They also explain why the procedural system, despite the many changes designed to accelerate matters, still leaves trials too much in the hands of the parties. We must be clear. The prospective study that the Tribunal has just conducted shows that if nothing changes - either with regard to criminal policy, the rules of procedure or the Tribunal's format and organization - and that if, conversely, all the elements, especially the political ones, are moving towards an unavoidable increase in cases, then there is no doubt that the Tribunal's original 1993 four-year mandate, which was renewed in 1997 for an equal duration, will need to be extended not once, not twice, but at least three or four times. But from my point of View, this situation would penalize both the accused and the victims.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“It is true that although the need for expeditiousness is an excruciating problem for all advanced legal systems, the need in an international criminal justice system is even more critical, because crimes recede into the past and are increasingly removed from the commission of the criminal acts themselves. The collection of evidence is often in the hands of the States involved in the conflict or, as the Council is aware, even in the hands of other States involved in the interposition or peacekeeping forces. The diplomatic and political component inherent in an unprecedented judicial institution creates the major problems facing the Tribunal. These are all factors that do not contribute expeditiousness.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“A failure of the Tribunal for whatever reason would deal an extremely heavy blow to the future Court at the very moment that many States are on the verge of ratifying the treaty that established it. It must be noted that the Tribunal's prospects are worrisome and that it is now necessary to anticipate what may happen. The workload of the Tribunal is currently so heavy that, if no remedy is found immediately, the institution's very credibility will be called into question. We owe the accused a trial that is of course fair, but also one that is expeditious. We owe expeditious trials to the victims and also to the international community, which has placed its faith in us.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Lastly, and not least important for both us and the Council, the place the Tribunal now occupies within the mechanism of international humanitarian law, especially in View of the establishment and implementation of the International Criminal Court, places a degree of responsibility on the Council and on us. In this regard, there is no question that much of what is being done in The Hague will serve, at best, as an example of what should be done and, at worst, as an example of what should not be done. By demonstrating that universal criminal justice is possible and feasible the Tribunal has in some respects assisted in the putting in place of a more permanent judicial organ. Still, this demonstration must continue until the end.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source
“Several dozen investigations are ongoing, which, when added to those already conducted and completed, will bring almost 200 accused persons to The Hague. Ms. Del Ponte confirmed this figure to the Council two weeks ago. Is it conceivable that high-level political and military officials - whether they have surrendered or have been arrested - would spend long months in detention awaiting trials? Pre-trial detention has already become lengthy, which has given rise to disputes over requests for provisional release. As the Council knows, and I shall not go into detail, some of those requests have been granted by judges. It is paradoxical that such a situation should arise at a time when the Tribunal is pressing for the arrest of all those it has indicted.”
2000-06-20 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4161 (2000) · source