UNSC Open Debate on

“Strengthening accountability and justice for serious violations of international law”

[Thursday, 2 June 2022; 1000 hrs]

Statement by

Mr. R.R. Singh, Minister for State for External Affairs

Thank you, Mr. President,

Let me begin by congratulating Albania for its first ever and historic presidency of the United Nations Security Council. I also take this opportunity to convey best wishes and greetings of my Prime Minister to Prime Minister of Albania His Excellency Edi Rama. It is indeed a singular privilege to represent my Prime Minister Shri. Narendra Modi, at this important High-Level Debate on such an important topic.

2. I thank Ms. Joan E. Donoghue, President of the ICJ and Ms. Michelle Bachelet, United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights for their respective briefings. I also thank Professor Dapo Akande for his insights into the issue.

3. India, as the world’s largest democracy, and one of the founding members of the United Nations, has consistently displayed its commitment to uphold the purposes and principles of the UN Charter as defined in Articles 1 and 2 respectively. India has followed the path of ‘Dharma’ or ‘righteous conduct’, whose tenets are based on the principles of humanity and humanitarian norms. India firmly believes that the rule of law is a necessary precondition for sustainable peace and development in any society. Indeed, justice and the rule of law are preconditions for the maintenance of peace and security at the international level as well.

4. The objective of international law is upholding the age-old universal value of humanity. Thus, any serious violations of international law are contrary to the spirit and aims of the United Nations. The Member States have the responsibility and obligation to ensure justice and accountability for gravest violations of human rights and mass atrocities, in line with their national legislations.

Mr. President,

5. The UN Security Council, having bestowed with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, has acted several times in the past to address the serious violations of international law. The International Court of Justice has also been approached over alleged violations of the Genocide Convention. These instances offer several key lessons pertinent to today’s debate.

6. In this context, let me offer the following observations:

i) First, the tools to address the serious violations of international law need to be used judiciously, without any selectivity, in line with principles of the UN Charter. The efforts of the international community should aim towards supporting the member states in ensuring justice for victims, through an accountability process based on nationally accepted norms of jurisprudence. The process should also promote national reconciliation and inclusive future. The International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and Special Court for Sierra Leone, did help in contributing to the fight against impunity and complimenting the national justice. India had extended financial assistance to the work of these tribunals.

ii) Second, post 2005, the referrals of situations to International Criminal Court, especially the haste with which such referrals have been made, have come under criticism. The acquittals in recent years have also cast a shadow on the credibility of the ICC. These developments appear to substantiate the view that when cases are referred to ICC primarily for political reasons, the ICC mechanism may not serve the larger purpose of justice. Moreover, several countries in Africa and Asia, including India, are not parties to the Rome Statute. Independence of a judicial body is the sine qua non for impartial dispensation of justice and in no circumstances the discretion of a judicial body should be subordinate to any political organ. By giving a role to the Security Council to defer the investigation and proceedings of the ICC under Article 16, the Statute violates this cardinal principle.

iii) Third, terrorism today is the greatest threat faced by humankind that exacerbates social tensions, pushing societies towards instability and violence. When we speak of accountability, it is indeed a sad state of affairs that States sponsors of terrorism have been allowed to go scot-free. Therefore, any debate on accountability would be incomplete without taking into account the carnage wrought by terrorist forces, particularly those which are backed by State actors for pursuing political objectives. Having suffered the scourge of cross border terrorism for decades in which thousands of innocent civilians have lost their lives, India has always been at the forefront of global counter-terrorism efforts. The international community should stand firm on its opposition to terrorism in all its forms and manifestations and reject any attempt to provide any justifications for terrorist acts. Recently, India extended financial assistance to support to the investigations of UN Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da’esh/ISIL in Iraq.

iv) Fourth, the decades of practice have shown that Responsibility to Protect (R2P) cannot be used to address all violations of human rights and humanitarian law. Rather it must only be confined to the four identified crimes, i.e., genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Further, practice has also shown that the default response of the international community cannot be coercive measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, nor can it be seen as a pretext for humanitarian intervention.

v) Fifth, the issue of accountability cannot be discussed in isolation; nor can it be seen from the narrow perspective of alleged acts committed only by the State, where foreign forces are actively involved, including where they have a physical control and presence, we need to factor these in, when accountability issues are discussed. The imposition of universal jurisdictions on alleged acts of atrocities, committed in the territory of a sovereign state, need to be avoided as well.

vi) Sixth, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the principal judicial organ of the UN, has the role to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies. ICJ has a crucial role in the interpretation and clarification of the rules and principles of international law, as well as, in the progressive development and codification of the international law. India has been supportive of the ICJ.

vii) Finally, it goes without saying that an atmosphere of inclusivity and transparency almost always helps in strengthening accountability and justice for serious violations. Strengthening the fabric of democracy is akin to strengthening the guarantee against serious violations of international law.

Mr. President,

7. In conclusion, the accountability for serious violations of international law is a noble objective and needs to be pursued with due respect for sovereign equality of states. The international community should always encourage states concerned to have an inclusive and transparent process to establish accountability for serious violations of international law committed in its jurisdiction. The pursuit of accountability and justice cannot be linked to political expediencies. The process, in order to succeed, should be nationally owned, and inclusive with active participation of women. The accountability process should enable justice, promote reconciliation, and achieve long term peace.

I thank you Mr. President.