Ministry Statements & Speeches:
Thank you Mr President, and we thank Prosecutor Bensouda for her briefing and for the 23rd report on the situation in Sudan. This time last year, New Zealand expressed deep concern and called for accountability for the serious crimes committed.
The situation has not improved notably since then. Civilians in Darfur continue to suffer from the devastating consequences of conflict. The past year has also seen further attacks on peacekeepers, some fatal. And the human rights and humanitarian situations remain dire.
As noted by the Prosecutor, all five ICC indictees remain at large. Resolution 1593 placed an obligation on the Government of Sudan to cooperate fully and to provide any necessary assistance to the Court and the Prosecutor, as well as urging other UN Member States to cooperate. These obligations have been widely ignored. Nor has there been any meaningful accountability at the national level. It is not surprising that victims are losing hope that justice will ever be done.
Sudan’s ongoing non-cooperation with the Court amounts to non-compliance with a Council resolution and its obligations under the UN Charter. While this mostly relates to the four Government of Sudan indictees, Sudan has also not responded to the ICC’s requests for assistance in the case against Abdallah Banda, a rebel group indictee allegedly responsible for a deadly attack against African Union Peacekeepers in South Darfur in 2007.
Over the years, the Secretary-General has relayed eleven findings of non-cooperation to the Council with regard to this referral. During the current reporting period, President al-Bashir has crossed international borders, and further findings of non-cooperation may follow in the coming months. This Council has yet to respond to these findings in any meaningful way.
While not every member of this Council is an ICC State Party, we share a common interest in ensuring that decisions of this Council are complied with. When that does not happen, the credibility and effectiveness of this institution are undermined, and the message is sent that Council decisions can be ignored without consequences. That should be of concern to all those who value the role, reputation and legitimacy of this body.
In December my delegation made two proposals that we believe could help end the current malaise in the Council’s consideration of this issue. We believe they are no less relevant today.
First, as noted by Ms Bensouda, this Council needs to be more structured in its consideration of findings of non-cooperation. There is currently no consistent practice for dealing with these. In most cases, the Council does not even discuss them.
In our view, when a finding of non-cooperation is received, the Council should discuss it. As we would with any other issue, we should consider what tools the Council has at its disposal to deal with the issue - whether it be a resolution or statement, or something short of that, such as a letter from the Council or a meeting with the country concerned – and then the Council can determine, on a case-by-case basis, what response is most appropriate.
We accept that the Council may not always agree on how to respond. But if this Council ignored every issue where agreement is difficult, we would hardly ever meet. Simply continuing to not respond is neither productive nor credible. This goes to the effectiveness of the Council and to its willingness to stand by its own decisions.
The Banda case seems an obvious place to start in implementing a more structured approach. We will continue to work with other Council members on this in the coming months.
Second, we need to give serious thought to how we can achieve a more productive relationship with the Government of Sudan. There is a clear need for the UN, and for this Council, to consider what can be done to change the nature of the current relationship with Khartoum, proceeding from a firm understanding of the current situation on the ground.
We have been encouraged by initial progress made in this regard under UNAMID’s new leadership, in particular with the tripartite meetings between the Government, the AU and the UN. But there is a long way to go. These positive steps have so far done little to resolve the serious issues UNAMID faces with access and visa issuance.
We believe the Council should look at how it can support more constructive engagement with the Government of Sudan, including by considering options such as a Council visit to Sudan.
We are clear-eyed about the challenges involved in forging a new relationship, and we need to see a greater willingness by the Government of Sudan to engage constructively.
Mr President, we have set out some tangible ways that this Council can show it is willing to do more than just talk about the protection of civilians. There is no guarantee they will succeed. But given the alternative – a continuation of the status quo – we believe it’s worth at least trying.