LEGAL COMMITTEE HEARS CALLS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN UNITED NATIONS AND INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
Delegates Urge Mandate for Secretary-General; Debate on
Terrorism Concluded, Implications of Human Cloning Taken Up
The Secretary-General must be given a mandate to conclude a relationship agreement between the International Criminal Court and the United Nations, the Netherlands delegate told the Sixth Committee (Legal) today as it met twice to take up the debate on the Court. The Committee also completed its debate on terrorism, considered the administration of justice at the United Nations and began its debate on cloning.
The Sixth Committee (Legal) met this morning to complete its debate on measures to eliminate international terrorism. [For details, see Press Release GA/L/3233 of 15 October]. It was also to start discussions of two new items concerning the administration of justice at the United Nations and the newly established International Criminal Court based at The Hague, the Netherlands. This afternoon, the Committee was expected to continue debate on the International Criminal Court and to begin deliberations on the question of an international convention against the reproductive cloning of human beings.
Statements on International Terrorism
MOHAMMED HAJ IBRAHIM (Syria) called on all States for real cooperation in giving legitimacy to the fight against terrorism through the lead of the Counter-Terrorism Committee. He said some States acted under the pretext of fighting terrorism while continuing terrorist practices on the ground. Israel committed actions that constituted a persecution of Palestinians, by carrying on illegal settlements, as an example. Palestinians had the right to protest illegal occupation of their land by the principles set out in the Charter. That was not terrorism. Any people whose land was occupied had the right to fight that injustice through any means, and such action did not warrant isolation or segregation.
Calling for a definition of terrorism in the comprehensive convention that was in line with the right of people to struggle against occupation, he said no actions taken by armed forces should be exempt from the convention unless they were in accordance with the United Nations Charter. Syria was ready to combat terrorism in all its manifestations and forms. It was ready to cooperate with the national community in the fight. His country had called for a high-level conference to clarify the definition. Holding that conference now was more critical than ever.
Rights of Reply
The representative of Israel said he had not identified any country as a supporter of terrorism although there were a number of candidates present. Political sides of issues did not belong in the Committee. The statement by Syria’s representative, however, compelled him to respond. How could Syria defend itself against its known behaviour of harbouring terrorists even as it sat on the Security Council? Syria was the last State to be lecturing anyone on international law or on the Charter.
Syria’s representative said the Zionist entity had just stated that political aspects of issues had no place in the Committee. In fact, acts perpetrated on the ground in the occupied territories derived from State terrorism and genocide. Israeli used United States-built aircraft to target civilians in his own country, among many other actions condemned by the international community. To call Israel the victim was to reverse reality. Israel claimed democracy but had sown the seeds of terrorism in the region and it continued to pursue that policy. The Prime Minister boasted of it and pursued the plan to build the wall destroying any chance of the two-State plan for the region. The Prime Minister was torpedoing any chance for peace in the region. Those bombarded from aircraft had no choice but to protest and resist in exercise of a right guaranteed by the Charter.
Israel’s representative said he did not blame the Syrian representative for the misrepresentations he had just stated on instructions from Damascus. Delegations needed only to consult the Internet to see what kind of democracy was practised in Syria.
Syria’s representative said he was used to the kinds of lies being spoken by the other delegate. The fact was that half a million Palestinians in Syria could not return home because their land had been taken from them. The representative of the occupying forces was the last to be talking about democracy. The kind of suffering meted out to Arabs by Israel in history was well known and the corruption occurring in Israel now was indicative of the form of democracy there. All took pride in carrying out the directives of their countries; it would be more prideful if all countries’ views received equal acceptance.
* *** *