اللجنة السادسة، الجلسة العامة التاسعة والعشرون – الجمعية العامة، الدورة 81
الجمعية العامة
Date: 27 October 2026
Language: Floor (Original)
Transcript: https://transcripts.un.org/ar/ga/c6/81/29?lang=floor
Transcripts available through this tool are created by using automatic speech recognition and are not official records nor official documents of the United Nations. Official records and official documents are available on the Official Document System of the United Nations.

---

6th Committee · Chair [0:03]:

Good morning everyone. I call to order the 29th meeting of the sixth committee for the 81st session of the General Assembly. distinguished delegates, this morning we will continue with the debate on the first cluster of topics concerning agenda item 78. Report of the international Law Commission on the work of its 76th and 77th sessions. The report of the commission on the work of the 77th session was introduced by the chair of the international law commission yesterday. The report is contained in document A slash 801/10. Which is available online. Furthermore, in accordance with resolution 80 slash 164, the sixth committee will also continue its consideration of chapter four of the commission's 2025 report on the topic sea level rise in relation to international. law. As contained in document A slash 80 slash ten. Which is also available online. Before proceeding, I remind of the bureau's recommendation that national state statements should be limited to seven minutes and group statements to 12 minutes. Delegations are encouraged to keep their statements within these time limits and where possible deliver abridged versions of their statements while providing the full statements for posting on E statements and on the website of the sixth committee. This will enable all delegations to deliver their statements within the shed schedule. The first speaker on my list for this morning is the distinguished representative of Chile. You have the floor, madam.


Chile · Representante [1:57]:

Presidenta, permítame comenzar mi intervención expresando mis más sinceras felicitaciones por su reciente elección como presidenta de la 6.ª Comisión que hago extensiva al resto de la mesa. Le deseo el mejor de los éxitos en el desempeño de sus funciones. Del mismo modo me gustaría destacar la labor del señor Andreas Maroriánis, presidente de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional y del señor Rolf Heiner Pfeif, presidente de la del comité redacción por su liderazgo durante la 77 sesión de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional y por los importantes logros obtenidos en este periodo. Chile agradece asimismo a la división de codificación de la secretaría por el valioso apoyo prestado a la comisión y a la 6.ª comisión en su conjunto. Sin el cual no habría sido posible llevar a cabo una labor tan rigurosa. Durante los próximos días mi delegación se referirá a algunos de los temas desarrollados en el informe de la CDI de este año. Hoy lo haré específicamente respecto de la unidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios del estado, los principios generales del derecho y también sobre otras decisiones y conclusiones de la comisión. Señora presidenta, me referiré en primer lugar al capítulo 4.º del informe de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional titulado inmunidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios de estado. Mi delegación desea felicitar al relator especial señor Claudio Gross Maguilov por su destacada labor, dedicación incansable y la consecución exitosa de la adopción del proyecto de artículos en segunda lectura. Así Asimismo hacemos extensible nuestro reconocimiento a los anteriores relatores especiales, señor Roman Kolotkin y señora Concepción Escobar Hernández. Cuyas valiosas contribuciones fueron fundamentales para el desarrollo de este tema a lo largo de los años. Señora presidenta, el estudio y desarrollo de esta materia son de suma relevancia para la comunidad internacional, en tanto busca conciliar el respeto a la igualdad soberana de los estados y la estabilidad de las relaciones internacionales. Con la imperiosa necesidad de combatir la impunidad y asegurar la rendición de cuentas por los crímenes más graves de derecho internacional. Mi delegación toma nota con gran satisfacción de que tras casi dos décadas de trabajo técnico y de la consideración de los comentarios presentados por los gobiernos, la comisión haya concluido con éxito la segunda lectura del proyecto de artículos y sus comentarios. Mi delegación valora especialmente la adopción en segunda lectura del proyecto de artículo siete relativo a los crímenes crímenes de derecho internacional respecto de los cuales no se aplica la inmunidad Rachone Maritae. Así como los proyectos de artículos ocho y nueve referente a las garantías procesales. Finalmente mi delegación apoya la recomendación formulada por la comisión a la asamblea general de conformidad con el artículo 23 de su estatuto orientada a la elaboración de una convención internacional con base en el proyecto de artículos. Estimamos que la codificación de estas normas mediante un instrumento multilateral vinculante otorgará la certeza y la claridad jurídica necesarias para la práctica de los estados. Señora presidenta, de manera similar en relación al tema titulado principios generales del derecho. Mi delegación desea felicitar al relator especial señor Marcelo Vázquez Bermúdez quien en los últimos siete años ha desarrollado una labor tenaz e infatigable para alcanzar la adopción en segunda lectura del proyecto de conclusiones y sus comentarios. Consideramos que se trata de un trabajo relevante que permitirá facilitar el estudio del derecho internacional a las futuras generaciones y clarificar elementos relativos a los principios generales, su creación y funciones. Más allá del importante rol que juegan en el plano jurisdiccional como elemento unificador y de coherencia entre las distintas fuentes del derecho internacional. Señora presidenta, en particular mi delegación valora el comentario de la conclusión siete que explica la metodología que se debe utilizar para identificar los principios generales que se derivan del sistema jurídico internacional. Que utiliza un análisis inductivo de las normas existentes similar a la que utiliza respecto a los principios que se originan en los sistemas jurídicos nacionales. Ello permite establecer una metodología común para ambas categorías de principios unificando las reglas que regulan esta fuente del derecho internacional y permite diferenciar los principios generales originados en el sistema jurídico internacional de las normas consuetudinarias del derecho internacional. Asimismo apreciamos que el comentario incluye ejemplos de estos principios que permiten comprender de mejor manera qué debe entenderse como característica intrínseca del sistema jurídico internacional. Finalmente destacamos que el proyecto de conclusiones mantenga la estructura y siga la misma línea del trabajo previo realizado por la comisión respecto de las fuentes del derecho internacional. Y el artículo 38 del estatuto de la Corte Internacional de Justicia. Por tanto, mi delegación hace un llamado a la 6.ª comisión a tomar nota en una resolución del proyecto de conclusiones sobre los principios generales del derecho según fuera sugerido por la comisión en su informe. Señora presidenta, por último, el día de hoy me referiré brevemente al capítulo 13 titulado otras decisiones y conclusiones de la comisión. En primer lugar, Chile toma nota de que el 77 periodo de sesiones se celebró a lo largo de 11 semanas, lo que supone un restablecimiento parcial de su duración, aunque sigue preocupando que no se alcance las 12 semanas aprobadas por la asamblea general. Como hemos señalado en oportunidades anteriores, cualquier reducción en la duración de los periodos de sesiones tiene repercusiones considerables. Menos Menoscaba las condiciones en la que la comisión desempeña su mandato y debilita la promoción del estado de derecho en el plano internacional. Asimismo reiteramos nuestra profunda preocupación por la reducción de los recursos asignados a la división de codificación En particular por los recientes recortes adicionales en el marco de la iniciativa ONU 80. Que reducen el personal disponible para prestar servicios a la comisión. El trabajo de la referida división en su labor como secretaría es fundamental para correcto desempeño del mandato que la asamblea general ha encomendado a la comisión. Por lo que se deben realizar todos los esfuerzos para que se pueda cumplir con esta tarea adecuadamente en las mejores condiciones posibles. Señora presidenta, Chile desea destacar especialmente la decisión de la comisión de incluir el tema identificación y consecuencias jurídicas de las obligaciones erga omnes en el derecho internacional. En su programa de trabajo. Quisiéramos felicitar al señor Masajico Cajasada quien fue nombrado relator especial en esta materia deseándole el mayor de los éxitos en este importante cometido. Chile espera con interés el resultado de este trabajo y participación participará activamente en los debates que se susciten a propósito de este. Así mismo, en relación a los asuntos del programa de trabajo a largo plazo. Mi delegación desea expresar su agradecimiento al señor Mario Villarzábal por la elaboración de una versión actualizada de la sinopsis del tema jurisdicción extraterritorial. extraterritorial Valoramos positivamente que la comisión siguiendo la recomendación del grupo trabajo, decida incluir esta sinopsis revisada en su informe anual. Valoramos especialmente que se considerara la evolución que se ha registrado sobre esta materia desde el año 2006 y que se reconozca que es la jurisdicción prescriptiva la que admite en mayor medida la extraterritorialidad pues la jurisdicción en materia ejecutiva es estrictamente territorial y está sujeta al consentimiento del estado territorial. Por tanto, coincidimos con el señor Oyarzábal en que cualquier labor futura deberá abordar este marco conceptual y revisar las categorías a fin de llegar a un marco aceptable para todas las tradiciones jurídicas. Igualmente coincidimos en que el trabajo futuro sobre esta materia debe considerar el desarrollo que se está realizando en materias de jurisdicción extraterritorial respecto al daño al medio ambiente y a los efectos del cambio climático y al aspecto jurisdiccional de nuevos espacios como el caso del ciberespacio. Señora presidenta, finalmente y con esto concluyo mi intervención el día de hoy. Chile acoge muy favorablemente que la comisión decidiera incluir también el tema el derecho a regular en el derecho internacional de las inversiones en el programa de trabajo a largo plazo. Nuestra delegación coincide además en que la labor de la comisión no debe limitarse a los temas tradicionales sino también debe abordar aquellas materias que representan la evolución del derecho internacional. Y responden a inquietudes apremiantes de la comunidad internacional en su conjunto. Garantizando que el régimen internacional de inversiones no funcione de manera de forma aislada frente a los compromisos globales, desarrollo sostenible y cambio climático. Muchas gracias.


6th Committee · Chair [10:36]:

The distinguished representative of Chile for her statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Poland.


Poland [10:48]:

Thank you madam chair to start let me congratulate the chair of the International Law Commission, Mr. Andreas Mavroyiannis, for his presentation yesterday of the commission's report from the 77 session. My remarks will cover two issues general principle principles of the law and other decisions and conclusions of the IOC Madam chair, Poland has followed the IOC work on general principles of law very close closely. We have supported the Commission's work on this topic due to its potential importance both in theory and in practice. And we have presented presented extensive comments to the six committee and in a written form. We know that last year's conclusion from the drafting committee were adopted by the Commission without change this year. Poland is not satisfied with this solution as last year we provided sound arguments for changing conclusions 210 and 12 among others on conclusion two Poland and many other states have voiced concerns about the use of the new term community of nations. Instead, we have proposed using a term better known to the ILC, the community the international community as a whole. Unfortunately, the commentary does not explain why this more familiar term, which already functions in the Commission's work on state responsibility was not used in this case. On conclusion seven, seven, we wish to point out that neither the conclusion nor the commentary comprehensively explains how the community of nations can recognize these principles as intrinsic, and how the term intrinsic should be understood. This point becomes even more crucial because the commentary also refers without explanation to general principles of law formed within the international legal system, which are not intrinsic to it. A reading of conclusion seven and the commentary does not appear to give adequate guidance to international and domestic courts on how to identify general principles of law formed within the international legal system. Finally, Poland has consistently favored deleting conclusion ten on functions of general principles of law for several reasons. Allow me to mention one there is no obligation under international law to apply general principles in the manner specified in a draft conclusion ten paratum Madam Madam chair with respect to other decisions and conclusions of the commission, the Commission, Poland welcomes the inclusion of the topic identification and legal consequences of obligations erga omnes in international law in the ALC work program. We see the merit of studying this issue, especially considering the lack of precise parameters on qualifying obligations as having an ergo omnus character. As for the ILC long term work program, we would like to recall our proposal that the commission initiate a study of topics concerning the law of the sea, specifically the protection of critical and undersea infrastructure and the question of ships without nationality or operating under a false flag. Numerous challenges facing states engage in cable and pipeline activities require further reflection and clarification of applicable legal regime. At the same time, the growing use of ships flying unauthorized flags or having no nationality at all, poses a serious threat to global maritime order, including to other vessels, their crews, the marine environment, and coastal states. Thank you very much.


6th Committee · Chair [14:58]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Poland for his statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Belarus.


Belarus · Представитель [15:13]:

Уважаемая госпожа председатель, дамы и господа, делегация Республики Беларусь хотела бы в целом поблагодарить Комиссию международного права за проведенную большую работу в ходе ее 77 сессии по продовжению кодификации и прогрессивному развитию ряду норм международного права, имеющих существенное значение для регулирования современных международных отношений в декаторых областях. В отношении обсуждаемых тем первого кластера хотели бы высказать ряд общих комментариев. Пан пан председатель, Республика Беларусь высоко оценивает работу комиссии, особенно особенности ее исследовательской группы над темой подвищения уровня моря с точки зрения международного права, результатом якої являются правовые концептуальные подходы к континуитету найбольше затронутых подвищением уровня моря государств, определение морских границ в условиях повышения моря и защита пострадавших людей. Отмечаем, что проделана серьезная робота по поиску консолидации и анализу информации в рамках предмета исследования. Беларусь входит в число стран, у которых нет собственного выхода к морю. Несмотря на это, проблема повышения уровня моря касается Беларуси, только косвенно, мы хотели бы также поделиться своими мнением относительно международно правового регулирования обозначенной угрозы. В первую очередь Беларусь исходит из того, что международное право обладает всеми необходимыми инструментами для регулирования данной проблемы. проблемы. Подтверждаем позицию о центральной роли Конвенции ООН по морскому праву, выступающей главным ориентиром при решении возможных вопросов, связанных с делимитацией морских зон при повышении уровня моря. Вместе с тем полагаем важным использовать иные применимые нормы общего международного права с учетом принципов справедливости, добросовестности и сотрудничества в той мере, в которой они имеют отношение к данной теме. Полагаем, что формирование международной договорно правовой базы по данному вопросу эффективнее начинать в рамках двосторонних и региональных форматов. Ввиду этого рассмотренные комиссией руководящие принципы по теме будут востребованы. В частности проекты международной технической помощи в подготовке инструктивных документов для органов власти затрагиваемых государств внесут существенный вклад в формирование стратегии реагирования на повышение уровня моря. Розработка универсального международного правового документа пока видится преждевременною, поскольку несмотря на кажущуюся очевидность глобальных последствий повышения уровня моря, действенное преодоление данных угроз представляется более эффективным в рамках конкретных регионов и групп государств. Как правило, в рамках большинства региональных организаций и объединений уже имеются отлаженные механизмы взаимодействия при наступлении чрезвычайных ситуаций и природных катастроф. Кроме того, как показывает, практика, взаимодействие в региональном формате менее уязвима для излишней политизации и влияния односторонних принудительных и ограничительных мер, которые в настоящее время серьезно подрывают эффективность любого глобального сотрудничества. Хотелось бы обратить внимание на важность осторожного толкования действующих универсальных норм международного права в целях их применения по аналогии к правовым последствиям повышения уровня моря. Погроза подвищения моря находится в международной повестке поривительно недавно. У учасников переговорного процесса уже заключенных международных договоров, содержащих универсальные правовые нормы, не могло быть намерений относительно охвата данной проблемы в период их разработки. Терминология большинства из таких международных договоров довольно точная с учетом их сферы применения, ее расширительное толкование вряд ли будет уместным. В этой связи видится целесообразным дальнейшее правовое регулирование в отношении последствий данной угрозы посредством заключения дополнительных факультативных протоколов к имеющимся международным договорам в сфере защиты прав беженцев, миграции и сокращения лиц без гражданства, а также в сфере морского права и защиты окружающей среды. Что касается вопроса о государственности стран, которые могут остаться в результате повышения уровня моря без достаточной территории, пригодной для жизни, Беларусь поддерживает мнение, что подходить к нему следует весьма взвешенно, с учетом конкретных обстоятельств проблемы и приложения принципа суверенного равенства и права народов на самоопределение. Возвращаясь к тезису о важности заключения двосторонних и региональных международных договоров. Отмечаем, что только в таких форматах могут быть фиктивно определены конкретные практические условия континуитета государственности и иные условия продолжения существования государственных институтов. Господин председатель Госпожа председатель Хотелось бы перейти к теме иммунитет должностных лиц государств от иностранной уголовной юрисдикции. Выражаем признательность специальному докладчику господин господина Клаудия Гроссману Гелоффа за его вклад в подготовку проектов статей по этой теме. Республика Беларусь рассматривает данную тему как носящий принципиальный характер для поддержания стабильных и предсказуемых междугосударственных отношений. Наша страна неодноразно излагала свою позицию по вопросам разработки и содержания положений данных проектов статей, ввиду понимания особого значения института иммунитетов должностных лиц для обеспечения независимого и беспрепятственного представления или выполнения иных функций этими категориями лиц в интересах государств за рубежом. Продолжаем подчеркивать, что рассматриваемый иммунитет имеет своим основанием суверенитет государства, реализуемый им в международных отношениях через должностных лиц в рамках фундаментальных принципов и норм Устава ООН, в первую очередь в соответствии с принципом суверенного равенства государств. В этой связи любое произвольное и существенное ограничение иммунитета должностных лиц в иностранной юрисдикции будет сказываться на нормальном состоянии междержавных отношений и сотрудничества, а также стабильности международного правопорядка. Комиссия международного права и ее специальные докладчики проделали значительную работу по подготовке проектов статей, стараясь разрешить сложные правовые вопросы об объеме иммунитета различных категорий должностных лиц и предоставить предоставлении им процессуальных гарантий, взвешенной оценки фактов его наличия в конкретных ситуациях. 115. Вместе с тем, как представляется, преобладавшее стремление к ограничению действия этого вида имунитету, в том числе для распространения принципа универсальной уголовной юрисдикции на уровне национальных судов применительно к международным преступлениям по аналогии с положением Римского статута Международного уголовного суда не позволило подготовить в полной мире сбалансированные предложения. В результате деякие положения проектов статей выходят далеко за пределы международного звычного права и содержит множество новых элементов правового регулирования. При этом в отдельных случаях возникновения сомнений относительно содержания обычных норм международного права они толкуются узко, а в других случаях наоборот имеет место широкое применение методов прогрессивного развития. В этом отношении показателем является установление весьма ограниченного перечня высших, должностных лиц, пользующихся персональным иммунитетом, и признание его только в отношении большой тройки. Закрепление в статье 3 проекта статей более гибкого подхода, который позволял бы распространять персональный имунитет на деяких других высокопоставленных должностных лиц за рамками Тройки, исходя из их статуса и степени важности выполняемых международных функций, могло бы стать весомым аргументом пользу формирования подлинно универсальных норм. В сложившейся же ситуации вероятно, что отмеченные недостатки проектов статей будут устраняться государствами шляхом двостороннего и регионального правового регулирования соответствующих вопросов для обеспечения необходимой эффективности затрагиваемого института международного права. Ранее выражавшийся в VI Комитете комментарий нашей делегации в отношении проекта статей, касающихся процессуальных аспектов восстановления наличия иммунитета у должностных лиц и закрепления определенных гарантий справедливого обращения с ними, остаются актуальными. 10 Действительно, часть четвертая проектов статей претерпела отдельные изменения, однако по прежнему не принимается в должной степени во внимание то обстоятельство, что иммунитет и предоставляется должностным лицам не для личной выгоды, а в интересах их государств, участвующих в международных отношениях. В проектах статей главная роль в определении наличия или отсутствия у должностного лица государства иммунитета это иностранной уголовной юрисдикции отводится компетентным органам государства суда иностранной судебной системе. Возможности государств должностного лица для отстаивания своих суверенных суверенных прав и защиты проследуемых должностных лиц минимизированы. Так, предварительные консультативные механизмы между государствами по вопросам иммунитетов носят факультативный характер, Предусматривается субъективное изъятие из уведомительной процедуры государства должностного лица о намерении возбуждения уголовного производства в иностранном государстве. Арбитражная процедура разрешения споров не регламентированы, что решает процесс устранения разногласий гибкости необходимой в случае возникновения острых вопросов международных отношений. Республика Беларусь придает ключевое значение проекту статьи статей 5 функциональный функциональный иммунитет распространяется на деяния совершенные должностным лицом при осуществлении государственной власти и сохраняется после прекращения полномочий. Это соответствует самой природе государственного суверенитета акты государства не могут произвольно ставиться под уголовную юрисдикцию другого государства. В то же время Беларусь серьезной озабоченностью относится к статье 6, предусмотряющей неприменение функционального иммунитета к ряду международных преступлений. Мы исходим из того, что данная норма не может рассматриваться как отражение обществознанной и единообразной звычной нормы. Международный практике сохраняется существенное расходение относительно объема, условий и последствий ограничения функционального имунитета. Невизнание имунитета в национальных судах третих государств способно создать серьезную правовую неопределенность, ускладнить міждержавные отношения и открыть простор для избирательного и политически мотивированного правоприменения. Республика Беларусь подчеркивает борьба с безнаказанностью безнаказанности должна осуществляться, прежде всего, через компетентные механизмы самого государства, а также через международные судебные органи, созданы на основании согласия государств. Недопустимо использовать концепцию ограничений иммунитета как инструмент внешнего давления, вмешательства в внутренние дела или подрыву суверенного равенства государств. Все отмечены особенности проектов статей в условиях, когда наблюдается манипулирование системой международного уголовного правосудия и политические соображения порой берут верх вызывает справедливую обеспокоенность. На текущем этапе считаем обсуждение вопроса о будущей форме проектов статей преждевременным. Призываем не рекомендовать проекты статей к применению до устранения противоречий и подготовки сбалансированного текста, содействующего неотвратимости наказания за серьезные международные преступления при одновременном соблюдении принципов суверенного равенства и невмешательства во внутренние дела государств. Пан Председатель, Беларусь благодарит комиссию за работу над темой Общие принципы права и выражает признательность специальных специальному докладчику господину Марсело Васкесу Бермудесу за его личный вклад в разработку темы. Подготовленные комиссией выводы будут способствовать большей определенности при применении общих принципов права к как вторичных и автономных источников международного права в отношениях с участием государств международных организаций и иных субъектов международного права, а также повышению качества международной арбитражной и судебной практики. Приветствуем подготовку проекта выводов в отношении двух видов общих принципов права общих принципов, вытекающих из национальных правовых систем, и общих принципов, сформированных в рамках международной правовой системы. Это отражает доктринальное и практическое понимание общих принципов права, их происхождения и места в системе международного права. Делегация Беларуси поддержала использование в проекте Вывода два понятия понятие международное сообщество вместо цивилизованной нации. Убеждены в необходимости подчеркнуть, что все государства в равной степени без каких либо различий участвуют в формировании общих принципов права в соответствии с принципом суверенного равенства, закрепленным в Уставе ООН. В комментариях к проекту вывода предпринята попытка дать толкування понятиям международного сообщества, провести необходимые разграничения между различными субъектами международного, права и учасниками международных отношений в контексте признания общих принципов, а также выделить необходимость признания общих принципов государствами. В то же время дополнительное подчеркивание необходимости признания общих принципов права большинством государств, непосредственно в самом проекте выводу устраняла бы всякую двусмисленность и противоречия по этому поводу в процессе правоприменения, в частности, в ходе международных судопроизводств. Использование методов устранения нечёткостей и недостатков в международно правовом регулировании путем заимствования норм из национальных правовых систем должно, прежде всего, опираться на применимую практику и позицию государств и объективно их учитывать в соответствии с общепризнанными принципами международного права. Делегация Беларуси в целом позитивно оценивает проекты выводов и надеяться на их добросовестное применение при определении существования общих принципов и их соотнесении системы обычных и договорных норм международного права. Как это предусмотрено пунктом 3 проекта выводов 11 в свете пункта семь комментариев комиссии к нему. Благодарю за внимание.


6th Committee · Chair [30:06]:

I give the floor to the distinguished representative of slovenia


Slovenia [30:13]:

Madam chair we would like to thank the chair of the international law commission Mr. mavroyiannis for presenting the report and commend the members of the commission for their work during the commission's 77th session. Following last year's shortening of the commission session, we welcome the fact that this year's session was extended to 11 years weeks sorry this enabled the commission to make substantial progress across its program of work madam chair on sea level rise. Slovenia would like to express its appreciation for the final report of the study group adopted by the Commission last year and we thank the co chairs Ms. Galvau Teles Ms.. Oral and Mr. Ruda Santolaria as well as the former co chair Mr. Auriscu for their work the report central findings reflect positions that we have expressed in previous years, we share the view that legal stability, certainty and predictability are cross cutting principles relevant to this topic. The report notes strong support among states for the continuity of statehood and sovereignty of states particularly affected by sea level rise. And recognises that such continuity is essential to avoid loss of nationality and statelessness. We also welcome the attention given to the protection of affected persons with human dignity as a guiding principle and to the duty of states to cooperate in addressing the adverse effects of sea level rise. Slovenia will continue to contribute to the consideration of the legal aspects of this topic. Madam Chair, as regards chapter four, Slovenia welcomes the adoption on second reading of the draft articles and commentaries on immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. We thank the special rapporteur Mr. grossman gulioff for bringing this topic to a conclusion and recall with deep appreciation the contributions of his predecessors Mr. kolodki. and the late Ms.. Escobar Hernandez. We welcome the Commission's position that immunity from foreign criminal jurisdiction is procedural in nature and does not exempt a person from criminal responsibility. Slovenia has a long standing commitment to fighting impunity and fostering accountability in the international community, including through its work on the Ljubljana the Hague Convention. We also note with appreciation the inclusion of the crime of aggression in draft article six. The comment commentary further clarifies that the inclusion of a list of crimes seeks to promote legal certainty without precluding the identity, identification I'm sorry of other crimes through further legal development. We take note of the Commission's recommendation concerning the elaboration of a convention. Slovenia considers that the draft articles can provide a sound basis for the negotiation of an international instrument Madam chair as regards chapter five Slovenia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union and we would like to add a few remarks in our national capacity. We welcome the adoption on second reading of the draft conclusions and commentaries on general principles of law and we thank the special rapporteur Mr. velazquez bermudas for his dedicated work since 2018 we agree with the commentary to the conclusion too that recognition by the community of nations is the essential condition for the emergence of a general principle of law, and that states are the primary subjects through which such recognition is expressed. Slovenia has consistently called for a precise methodology to identify general principles of law formed within the international legal system, one that clearly distinguishes them from customer international law. We therefore welcome the further clarification provided in the commentary to conclusion seven, notably that recognition should be wide and representative including the different regions of the world. The commentary also marks and makes it clear that the principle must be shown to be intrinsic to the international legal system. We also welcome conclusion 11 which indicates that general principles of law are not in a hierarchical relationship with treaties and customary international law and conclusion 12, which reflects that such principles may also emerge within regional and subregional legal systems or between a limited number of states. Slovenia supports the Commission's recommendation that the General Assembly take note of the draft conclusions in a resolution, annex them to it and ensure their widest dissemination. Madam chair with regard to chapter 13 slovenian notes with interest the inclusion of the topic identification and legal consequences of obligations ergo omnes in international. in international law in the Commission's programme of work and the appointment of Mr. Assada a special rapporteur. The topic raises important questions one of which concerns the relationship between obligations erga omnes obligations erga omnes partes and preemptory norms we look forward to to his first report. last but not least I have the honor to inform Slovenia has a candidate for membership in the ILC for the period 2028 2032 ambassador Doctor Anna Polak Petric. She's a renowned legal expert and an experienced diplomat. I thank you.


6th Committee · Chair [36:46]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Slovenia for her statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Jamaica you have the floor.


Jamaica [37:03]:

Jamaica aligns itself with the statement delivered by the distinguished delegate of Palau on behalf of the alliance of small island states. My delegation thanks the international law commission for the preparation of the final report of the study study group on the topic sea level rise in relation to international law during its 76 session. We particularly wish to recognize and thank the co-chairs of the study group who have been instrumental in this process. The completion of this report marks a significant step in furthering the progressive development of international law and is of marked marked significance to small island developing states like Jamaica. The importance of this work is already apparent as noted, for example, by the general assembly which took note that the international court of justice had engaged with the final report. There is still, however, a need for states to continue to build upon the work of the study group. We recall that the general assembly invited states to reflect on the subject matter in the ongoing work of the general assembly and to express further views on the legal aspects of this topic during the 81st session of the assembly, during the consideration of the report of the commission on the work of the 70 77th session. In view of the invitation of the General Assembly to further reflect on the subject matter, my delegation wishes to make the following comments to this debate on on the three subtopics advanced by the ILC. the law of the sea, statehood, and the protection of persons affected by sea level rise. Each will be discussed in turn. On the law of the sea, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea has laid down principles by which states may delimit their boundaries, and my delegation is of the view that those boundaries, once established, must be preserved, acknowledged, and respected, including in in the context of sea level rise. This will ensure legal certainty, predictability, and stability under international law, as well as guard against in inequities to coastal states, thereby resulting in the fulfillment of the principle of permanent sovereignty over natural resources. We therefore reiterate the need for cohesiveness and alignment between the application of unclass and the relevant proposed solution solutions to address climate change related sea level rise. Further, the principle of fundamental change of circumstances is inapplicable as per the provisions of the Vienna Convention of the law of treaties, which expressly states that the principle does not apply in the context of treaties that establish boundaries. Chair, my delegation is also of the view that states are not obligated to maintain baselines and outer limits of maritime zones under review or update charts or list of geographic coordinates after depositing the same with the secretary general in accordance with unclass. The rationale for this is that international law does not mandate states to update charts to take into account changes which occurred due to climate change related sea level rise. As was expressed in our intervention last year, this perspective was also a panda at paragraph 359 of the International Court of Justice advisory opinion on the obligation of states in respect of climate change. Madam chair, we now wish to turn to the second subtopic. My delegation wishes to emphasize that the preservation of states maritime boundaries and the rights attendant thereto is interconnected with the preservation of state statehood and sovereignty. To this end, my delegation reiterates that the Montevideo Convention is silent on the subject matter of continuity of statehood within the context of climate climate change related sea level rise. Nevertheless, silence ought not to be concealed as a loss of statehood in the context of climate change related sea level rise. Rather, the continuity the continuity of statehood must be regarded as being critical for the avoidance of loss of nationality and statelessness. Turning to the third subtopic protection of persons affected by sea level rise Madam chair, Jamaica is acutely aware of the importance of international cooperation in protecting and assisting persons affected by natural disasters. Against this background, the Jamaican delegation is still of the view that an appropriate legal framework must be developed to ensure the maintenance of human rights of individuals affected by sea level. rise. This framework must underscore the respect for and protection of human dignity. While the study group's final report acknowledges the application of existing law, it provides practical guidance to states to chart a way forward on this issue. In this regard, my delegation my delegation agrees with and looks forward to the development of needs based and rights based approaches to resolve any human rights related issues. My delegation also wishes to underscore once more its support for consultation pertaining to persons and communities affected by sea level rise within the context of climate change. We also note the relevance of international cooperation among all relevant stakeholders in order to protect persons and communities involved in the decision making. process and with a view to preserve culture, cultural heritage, identity, and dignity, as well as ensure the maintenance of critical needs. Finally, we also underline the importance of and the need for international cooperation to strengthen adaptation measures that seeds need to implement. I thank you madam chair.


6th Committee · Chair [43:02]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Jamaica for his statement and I give the floor to the


France · Représentant [43:07]:

Merci

Madame la Présidente. La délégation française adresse ses remerciements à la commission du droit international et à l'ensemble de ses membres pour son dernier rapport, qui montre les efforts considérables que déploie la Commission pour remplir le mandat qui lui a été confié. La France se félicite du fait que la session de cette année ait pu, contrairement à celle de l'an dernier, se tenir dans des conditions normales. La Commission a pu consacrer onze semaines à ses travaux et grâce aux efforts de ses membres, le retard pris l'an dernier a pu être rattrapé. Il en résulte un rapport d'une richesse et d'une densité remarquables, pour lequel ma délégation renouvelle ses remerciements à la Commission. Avant de formuler des observations sur les sujets figurant dans le rapport, je débuterai mon intervention par plusieurs remarques générales touchant au fonctionnement de la commission du droit international. Madame la Présidente, comme nous avons déjà pu le souligner dans cette enceinte, la France souhaite rappeler son attachement à la commission du droit international et tient une nouvelle fois à saluer l'ensemble. de l'œuvre accomplie par la Commission ainsi que sa contribution décisive à la codification et au développement progressif du droit international. Face à la crise du multilatéralisme que nous traversons, la Commission demeure un cadre de référence d'autant plus précieux que le droit international constitue un langage commun à tous les États. La France restera vigilante à ce que les difficultés budgétaires traversées par les Nations unies ne conduisent pas à des arbitrages qui menaceraient le fonctionnement de la Commission. Ma délégation souhaite également rappeler l'importance qu'elle attache à la diversité géographique et linguistique au sein de la Commission. Cette diversité est la condition nécessaire de la qualité de ses travaux, qui ne peuvent pas et ne doivent pas refléter une seule langue, une seule tradition. juridique. Ma délégation souhaite très sincèrement remercier le président de la commission, Monsieur Andreas Mavroyiannis, pour l'attention qu'il prête à cette question. Madame la Présidente, je ferai maintenant quelques observations sur les différents sujets concernant ce premier groupe. Ma délégation relève que le sujet relatif à l'élévation du niveau de la mer au regard du droit international est inscrit à l'ordre du jour de cette sixième commission, alors même qu'il figure seulement dans le rapport de la commission du droit international de 2025. Concernant ce sujet, je peux renvoyer aux observations faites par la France l'an dernier dans cette enceinte. Nous disposons maintenant d'un cadre juridique précis concernant les obligations des États face aux conséquences des changements climatiques. En plus du rapport final du groupe d'étude de la Commission du droit international sur le sujet, nous disposons des avis consultatifs respectivement rendus par le tribunal international du droit de la mer et par la Cour internationale de justice sur les conséquences des changements climatiques. Les travaux de ces dernières années ont ainsi permis de dégager certains principes juridiques structurants tels que, d'une part, l'absence d'obligation pour les États d'actualiser les lignes de base, les coordonnées géographiques, les cartes ou les limites extérieures des zones maritimes en relation avec l'élévation du niveau de la mer, une fois celle-ci dûment déposée auprès du secrétariat général. D'autre part, l'existence d'une présomption de continuité de la souveraineté de l'État dont le territoire ferait l'objet d'une submersion liée à l'élévation du niveau de la mer. Désormais, chacun connaît le cadre juridique applicable. Comme l'a souligné la récente déclaration sur l'élévation du niveau de la mer, approuvée le 24 septembre 2026 par l'assemblée générale, il convient désormais de passer de la parole aux actes. Monsieur le Président, j'en viens maintenant au sujet relatif à l'immunité de juridiction pénale étrangère des représentants de l'État. Ma délégation remercie sincèrement le rapporteur spécial Monsieur Claudio Grossman-Gilhoff, pour le travail accompli sur ce sujet d'importance éminemment sensible pour les États. La France a déjà eu l'occasion d'exprimer sa position sur ce projet d'article. Nous y trouvons des motifs de satisfaction, notamment dans l'article trois relatif aux bénéficiaires de l'immunité personnelle dont nous estimons qu'il reflète fidèlement l'état du droit international coutumier. Par ailleurs, les clauses dites de garantie procédurale procèdent globalement d'un équilibre satisfaisant entre les droits de l'État dont un agent est mis en cause et ceux de l'État du fort. En ce qui concerne les dispositions relevant du développement progressif, ma délégation souhaiterait revenir sur l'article six, anciennement article sept, relatif aux crimes de droit international à l'égard desquels l'immunité rationnelle matérielle ne s'applique pas. Pour reprendre les termes de la Cour de cassation française, il convient de dresser le constat sur ce sujet d'une évolution de la coutume internationale, laquelle définit un nouvel équilibre entre les immunités et la lutte contre l'impunité. La plus haute juridiction pénale française reconnaît explicitement depuis 2025 une exception à l'immunité de juridiction fonctionnelle des agents de l'État en cas de crimes de guerre, de crimes contre l'humanité et de génocide. Ma délégation reste cependant hésitante quant à la liste des crimes pouvant éventuellement fonder une exception à l'immunité de juridiction. À notre avis, il aurait été plus sage de ne pas s'engager dans un tel exercice, qui ne sera pas de nature à renforcer. renforcer l'autorité de ce projet d'article six. En raison de l'absence de consensus sur le principe même d'une telle liste, il y étant à l'absence de pratique qu'à la nature très spécifique de certains crimes qui y figurent je pense notamment au crime d'agression, une approche plus prudente eut sans doute été indiquée. L'adoption de ce projet d'article six soulève également une observation de méthode, il a en effet été adopté à l'issue d'un vote par 23 voix contre quatre avec trois abstentions. Ma délégation a bien pris note des débats et des explications de vote fournies par les membres de la commission. Je ne peux à cet égard que joindre ma voix à ceux qui ont regretté l'incapacité de la Commission à adopter cet article par consensus. Ce constat pose nécessairement la question de l'avenir qu'il convient de réserver à ce projet d'article. En effet, peut on espérer que la sixième commission trouve sur ce sujet un consensus si les membres de la commission eux-mêmes n'y sont pas parvenus ? En tout état de cause, ma délégation a bien pris note de la recommandation de la Commission pour que, en temps voulu, ce projet d'article serve de base à l'élaboration d'une convention par l'assemblée générale ou par une conférence intergouvernementale de plénipotentiaire. plénipotentiaire Nous estimons à ce stade plus prudent de ne pas s'engager immédiatement dans un tel processus pour trois raisons d'une part pour des raisons déjà exposées, nous ne sommes pas pleinement convaincus qu'il soit aujourd'hui possible de parvenir à un consensus sur un traité relatif à l'immunité de juridiction pénale étrangère des représentants de l'État. D'autre part, l'urgence de conclure un traité peut être relativisée par le fait que nous nous situons situons ici sur un champ juridique en grande partie déjà mis en œuvre par les différents tribunaux nationaux, lesquels appliquent quotidiennement le droit international coutumier relatif aux immunités. Enfin, les négociations en cours, respectivement relatives à la convention pour la prévention et la répression du crime contre l'humanité et la convention pour la protection des personnes en cas de catastrophe mobilisent déjà un nombre considérable de ressources et il ne nous paraît pas opportun à ce stade d'engager un nouveau processus de négociation intergouvernementale. Pour conclure sur la question des immunités, je souhaite de nouveau remercier la commission du droit international ainsi que ses rapporteurs spéciaux qui se sont succédé sur ce sujet pour l'ampleur du travail accompli. Madame la présidente, je serai beaucoup plus bref sur mes quelques observations sur le sujet des principes généraux du droit. Je souhaiterais d'abord remercier le rapporteur spécial, monsieur Vázquez Bermúdez, Bermúdez pour l'adoption en seconde lecture de l'ensemble des projets de conclusion. Ma délégation réitère les doutes qu'elle a déjà pu exprimer dans cette enceinte concernant la catégorie des principes généraux du droit formés dans le cadre du système juridique international. Nous avons bien pris note du commentaire sous le projet de conclusion numéro trois selon lequel cette catégorie de principes généraux du droit fait cependant parfois débat. À notre sens, la consécration de cette catégorie de principes généraux du droit risque d'apporter de la confusion dans la distinction entre les deux sources du droit international que sont les principes généraux du droit et le droit international coutumier. Cette confusion peut emporter de réelles difficultés dans l'identification de ces deux sources, qui reposent sur des méthodologies distinctes. L'inventaire dressé dans le commentaire sur le projet de conclusion numéro sept n'est pas de nature à nous rassurer à cet égard. Outre qu'il aborde certains principes généraux tels que l'égalité souveraine des États ou le principe de spécialité des organisations internationales qui peuvent être rattachés au droit international coutumier, Le commentaire traite également de principes dont la valeur juridique reste débattue. Il en va ainsi notamment de l'équité intergénérationnelle dont la Cour internationale de justice a dit dans son avis de 2025 qu'il devait jouer un rôle infralégueme sans se substituer au droit applicable ni en outrepasser les limites. Le projet de conclusion numéro onze relatif aux relations entre les principes généraux du droit et la coutume n'éclaire en nous pas véritablement la question. En particulier de l'avis de ma délégation, les paragraphes huit, neuf et dix du commentaire sur ce projet de conclusion n'expliquent pas clairement en quoi les premiers seraient différents des secondes. la seconde. Enfin, pour finir, ma délégation a bien pris note de l'inscription du sujet détermination et conséquences juridiques des obligations erga omnes en droit international. Au programme de travail de la Commission, ainsi que de la désignation de Monsieur Masahiko Assada comme rapporteur spécial. Il s'agit d'une question que la France suivra avec un grand intérêt, étant donné qu'il s'agit d'un sujet qui a déjà fait l'objet d'un certain nombre de réflexions de la part de la Commission, par exemple dans ses articles sur la responsabilité de l'État ou plus récemment dans les projets de conclusion sur les normes impératives du droit international, nous attendons de la Commission qu'elle prête une attention particulière à la cohérence d'ensemble de ses travaux sur ce thème hautement sensible pour les États. Madame la présidente, je vous remercie.


6th Committee · Chair [54:35]:

Thank the distinguished representative of France for his statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Australia.


Australia [54:50]:

Thank you Chair. Australia wishes to commend the commission's invaluable contribution to the codification and progressive development of international law. and to express our gratitude for the commission's latest report. Australia's statement will address three topics the legal aspects of sea level rise, immunity of state officials from criminal jurisdiction and general principles of law. Turning first to the legal aspects of sea level rise. Chair, rising seas are no longer a warning for the future. They are a lived reality for millions of people around the world. Sea level rise is a challenge no nation can meet alone. We share the ocean and we share responsibility for its future. This year, the international community has come together at the United Nations to shoulder this responsibility. With the adoption of the landmark declaration on sea level rise, member states reached a consensus on the legal positions that will underpin our global response to sea level rise. Australia, with Cape Verde, was proud to co facilitate the UN's new declaration. It's an outcome that was only possible because of the leadership of states, regions, and institutions in recent years. The leadership of the Pacific, the region that has led the way in bringing the world's attention to this issue. The leadership of the ILC study group on sea level rise, whose innovative ideas on pathways forward this declaration responds to. And the leadership of the International Court of Justice whose unanimous advisory opinion on climate change reinforced the importance of legal stability and certainty in relation to maritime zones established in accordance with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, UNCLO. Chair Australia wishes to make three points regarding international law as it applies to sea level rise. First, we welcome the declaration support for the stability of maritime zones in the face of sea level rise. Our position is that maintaining maritime zones established in accordance with UNCLOS and the rights and entitlements that flow from them, notwithstanding climate change related sea level rise, is supported by both UNCLOS and the legal principles underpinning it. UNCLOS imposes no affirmative obligation to keep baselines and outer limits of maritime zones under review, nor to update charts or lists of geographical coordinates once deposited with the Secretary General of the UN. We are pleased to see widespread support among states for the 2021 Pacific Islands Forum Declaration on preserving maritime zones, as well as state practice consistent with the positions outlined therein. Second, the declaration on sea level rise reinforces that international law supports a presumption of continuity of statehood in the face of sea level rise. This is a welcome elevation of a position long taken by the Pacific Islands Forum, and a position which was recognised for the first time in a legally binding treaty between Tuvalu and Australia in 2024. That the declaration underscores the continuity of UN membership means the UN remains a place where all countries represented in this room have a voice. Finally, the declaration recognizes that sea level rise has the capacity to drive displacement with implications for the dignity, future choices, and enjoyment of rights of those affected. As demonstrated by the Pacific's approach, we must answer this challenge consistent with international law. We encourage states and other relevant actors to take cooperative approaches which center human rights in ensuring the protection of persons and providing pathways for mobility with dignity. The declaration on sea level rise is the international community community's new framework for meeting sea level rise head on. But our but our next steps must be to put this into action. The UN's Sixth Committee must play its part in ensuring legal stability, certainty and predictability as we confront this threat. Chair I now move to the topic of immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. Australia welcomes the commission's conclusion of the work on this topic, and the opportunity to exchange views on the commission's proposal for a new convention. Australia is a strong proponent of accountability for serious international crimes. It is in the interest of all states to ensure these crimes are prevented and perpetrators are prosecuted. As set out in Australia's submission to the commission in 2023 and our previous statements, we maintain that the legal position expressed in draft article six represents progressive development of international law That said, we acknowledge there is a trend of the non applicability of functional immunity for serious international crimes at the national level. Australia maintains any exception to immunity should be limited to serious international crimes as a category rather than developing in respect of particular crimes. We maintain that procedural safeguards are an important protection for state officials from unsubstantiated and politically motivated prosecutions, and Australia would have liked to have seen additional safeguards reflected in the draft articles. Australia submitted to the commission and we maintain that in cases of competing jurisdiction, the state of nationality or the state in which criminal conduct occurred shall be responsible for investigating and prosecuting serious international crimes, provided it does so in a genuine and independent manner. Australia also considers that procedural safeguards should have brought a clearer distinction between their application to functional immunity and personal immunity. Moving forward, Australia will continue to engage in good faith in any discussions on the draft articles. Chair, I move finally to the topic of general principles of international law. Australia welcomes the conclusion of the commission's work and conveys its appreciation to the commission. The commission's work on this topic complements its existing work on other sources of law, under article 38 paragraph one of the statute of the ICJ Australia welcomes the further clarification in the commentaries on the circumstances in which national principles common to various legal systems are compatible with the international legal system. To conclude, Australia would like to reiterate our support for the commission's work on these and many other topics, noting that Australia's position on these other topics is set out in our previous six committee statements. Australia acknowledges the commission's continuing contribution to international cooperation, to the strengthening of national legal capabilities, and to the pursuit of a world where differences are resolved not by power and size, but through agreed rules and norms. Thank you.


6th Committee · Chair [1:02:06]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Australia for his statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Romania


Romania [1:02:14]:

Thank you Madam chair for giving me the floor the delegation of Romania congratulates sincerely the international law commission for the activity during its 76 session. and for making such good use of the 11 weeks it was allocated, reverting to the tradition of having a two part session. This year's impressive report reflects important progress on topics that could not be addressed in the previous year, due to the lack of time, namely non legally binding international agreements, settlement of disputes to which international organizations are parties, and piracy and armed robbery at sea, as well as the conclusion of the work on two major topics which were discussed within the commission for a number of years immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction and general principles of law. We also note with appreciation the visit by the UNSG to the Commission, which underlined not only the fundamental standing of international law as part of the activity and mandate of the UN, but also its essential role in protecting the sovereign equality of states and the international rule of law more broadly. In the same vein, we are happy that the dialogue with the regional formats has been resumed even more interactively, allowing for a genuine exchange of views. I will turn now to chapters four, five, and 13 for specific comments. Madam chair at the outset my delegation would like to express its appreciation for the substantial work done on the topic of immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. The adoption on second reading by consensus of the draft articles and of their commentaries represents an important accomplishment for the codification and progressive development of international criminal law. Romania would like to pay tribute to all the three special rapporteurs who have contributed to this long standing endeavor Mr. Claudio Grossman Gilov, Miss Concepcion Escobar Hernandez, and Mr. Roman Kolodki. Their commitment and honest approach has been instrumental in advancing the commission's work on the topic over nearly two decades. We particularly welcome the provisions which identify the list of crimes under international law in respect of which immunity, ration and materie shall not apply, as well as the inclusion of the crime of aggression in this list. It has always been the position of this delegation that the crime of aggression should be recognized as a crime for which razione immunity materie shall not apply. On the procedural part, while Romania underlies underlines the importance of a legal framework which ensures appropriate procedural guarantees to the state of the official, we note that most of the precision of the provisions included in this part pertain to treaty making, going in some ways beyond codification or progressive development of the law. Ultimately, it is for the states to find the acute balance in between the interest of fighting impunity and protecting immunity. The basis offered by the commission for that purpose is sufficiently generous and thoroughly thought through with respect to the future of the draft articles, we endorse the recommendation of the commission that the general assembly embark on the negotiation of a convention on the basis of the draft articles turning to chapter five general principle of law on behalf of my delegation I commend the special rapporteur Mr. Marcelo Vasquez Bermudez for his hard work and dedication to this topic as well for his efforts to engage with and meaningfully, address the various comments made by state. We also commend the commission on the conclusion of its work on this topic, concretizing the adoption of the 12 conclusions which develop a methodology for identifying general principle of law assessing in this respect the role played by decisions of courts and tribunals as well as by teachings consistent with the remarks we have made when speaking on this topic, we remain unconvinced that the approach followed in the conclusions based on the recognition of a secondary category of general principles, namely those that may be formed within the international legal, system, in contrast to those that are derived from national legal systems, is the right one. We continue to believe that, given the paucity of supporting state practice and jurisprudence, as well as the opposing views expressed by a number of states, the commission should have manifested greater caution and refrained from identifying a distinct group of principles which may be formed within the international legal system as a self-standing category at the same time we maintain our reservation as to the usefulness of conclusion 12, which introduces an additional category of general principles which compounds the risks for the coherence of the structure of the sources of international law. Turning to the last chapter of the IRC report, my delegation would like to make the following three points. First, we salute the introduction of the topic identification and legal consequences of obligations in international law on the active agenda of the ILC and the appointment of Mr. Asada as the special rapporteur. For, Following the previous study of the ILC on the identification and legal consequences of peremptory norms of international law adopted by the ILC in 2022, this new topic will complement it and ensure a comprehensive understanding of this type of international legal obligations by clarifying the concept and the legal consequences. Romania recognizes that the recent state practice has significantly evolved, confirming beyond doubt the interest of states to act in response to violation of ergonomous obligations, be it through judicial avenues or in other manners, including recourse to countermeasures. In this respect, Romania invites the IC to approach in a comprehensive manner the state practice in relation to ergounis obligations, including by studying further in light of this new state practice, the current state of international law and countermeasures taken in the general or collective interest. Second, we welcome the inclusion in the long term program of work of the topic, the right to regulate an international investment law. It is opportune that the IC takes up topics that are niche and look beyond traditional public international law institutions. Third, my delegation is equally grateful to Mr. Mario Oyarzabal for providing a revised syllabus on the extraterritorial jurisdiction capturing the substantial developments in international law and state practice since 2006, when the topic was included in the long term program of work. We acknowledge the complexity of the subject and the considerable challenges involved in addressing within a single topic important substantial legal developments occurring across nine distinct areas out of the approach approaches proposed for the way forward, we favor an intermediate sectoral approach as it seems to strike the appropriate balance between coherence identification of principles of general application and flexibility a more detailed examination of their operation in specific areas and context Madam chair, I conclude here my intervention on cluster one thank you


6th Committee · Chair [1:09:49]:

I thank the distinguished representative

Of Romania for her statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Switzerland.


Switzerland · Représentant [1:09:57]:

Madame la Présidente,

La Suisse tient à réaffirmer son soutien sans réserve à la commission du droit international et à son mandat. Les travaux de la Commission restent essentiels au développement progressif et à la codification du droit international ainsi qu'au renforcement de la clarté, de la cohérence et de la prévisibilité de l'ordre juridique international. La Suisse continuera à suivre de près le travail de la Commission et à y participer de manière constructive, notamment en formulant des commentaires et des observations sur les travaux et en apportant son expertise juridique lorsque cela peut s'avérer nécessaire. À l'heure où l'ordre juridique international est confronté à des défis majeurs, la Suisse estime qu'il est particulièrement important de préserver et de renforcer les institutions qui contribuent au développement et à la qualification du droit international. La Suisse reste donc déterminée déterminés à soutenir la Commission à préserver l'indépendance nécessaire à l'accomplissement de son mandat, ainsi qu'à entretenir un dialogue constructif avec celle ci et ses membres. La Suisse remercie la commission du droit international pour les travaux sur le thème de l'immunité des représentants de l'État à l'égard de la juridiction pénale étrangère et se félicite vivement de l'adoption de leur 77ᵉ session du projet d'article consacré à ce sujet important et complexe. La Suisse se réjouit tout particulièrement que, après de nombreuses années de réflexion approfondies, la Commission ait mené à bien ses travaux. La Suisse accorde une grande importance à la nécessité de trouver un juste équilibre entre, d'une part, le principe de l'égalité souveraine des États et d'autre part, la lutte contre l'impunité. La stabilité et la prévisibilité des relations internationales requièrent que les représentants de l'État agissent pour le compte de celui ci, soient en mesure d'exercer leurs fonctions de manière indépendante et à l'abri de toute ingérence indue d'autres États. Dans le même temps, temps, notre engagement en faveur de la responsabilité pénale pour les crimes les plus graves au regard du droit international doit rester inapprévenable. La Suisse estime que les travaux de la Commission sur ce sujet apportent une contribution importante à la clarification du cadre juridique applicable et au renforcement de l'état de droit. Dans ce contexte, la Suisse fait félicite tout particulièrement de l'inclusion du crime d'agression parmi les crimes pour lesquels l'immunité ne s'applique pas. La Suisse considère qu'il s'agit là d'une avancée importante. Le fait de placer l'agression au même rang que les autres crimes les plus graves au regard du droit international reflète la gravité de ce crime et contribue à la garantie. garantir que l'évolution du droit des immunités ne compromette pas les efforts visant à prévenir et à poursuivre l'impunité pour de tels crimes. La Suisse salue également les efforts déployés par la Commission pour apporter davantage de clarté et de sécurité juridique dans un domaine où l'interaction entre l'immunité et les représentants de l'État, la responsabilité pénale individuelle. à la lutte contre l'impunité soulève des questions juridiques et pratiques particulièrement délicates. L'adoption du projet d'article constitue une étape importante et offre une base précieuse pour la poursuite de l'examen de cette question par les États. La Suisse félicite le rapporteur spécial, les membres de la commission et le comité de rédaction pour l'achèvement de cet important travail et se réjouit de poursuivre son étroite collaboration avec la Commission sur d'autres thèmes inscrits à son ordre du jour. En ce qui concerne le thème de principe des principes principes généraux du droit, la Suisse félicite la Commission pour l'adoption de l'ensemble des projets de conclusion et de leurs commentaires. Madame la Présidente, la Suisse saisit également cette occasion pour formuler des observations sur les deux annexes du rapport de cette année. S'agissant de l'annexe I, la Suisse prend note de la décision de la Commission d'inscrire le thème Le droit de réglementer en droit l'international des investissements à son programme de travail à long terme. La Suisse reconnaît l'importance de cette question celle-ci fait déjà l'objet de discussions approfondies dans d'autres enceintes internationales réunissant un large éventail d'États et de parties prenantes, notamment au sein de l'OECD, sur la modernisation des traités d'investissement mais également au sein de la Commission des Nations unies pour le droit commercial international et la Conférence des Nations unies pour le commerce et le développement. Dans ce contexte, la Suisse considère qu'il est primordial de prendre en compte les initiatives déjà en cours afin d'éviter des duplications et de promouvoir et de promouvoir une compréhension cohérente du droit de réglementer un droit. international d'investissement. Enfin, en ce qui concerne l'annexe deux, la Suisse accueille très favorablement le programme de travail révisé et félicite Monsieur Mario Häuserwald pour son travail sur le thème de la compétence extraterritoriale. Ce thème est particulièrement d'actualité et la Suisse suit de près les développements dans ce domaine. La Suisse soutient la distinction opérée au paragraphe 17 du programme de travail entre les compétences extraterritoriales et la portée extraterritoriale des obligations en matière de droits de l'homme et de l'environnement. Elle partage également l'avis selon laquelle cette dernière question, tout en était liée à la première, devait faire l'objet d'un examen distinct. La Suisse soutient en outre la conclusion du programme énoncé au paragraphe 18 selon laquelle une approche intermédiaire pourrait s'avérer davantageuse car elle permettrait à la commission de se pencher sur des domaines spécifiques nécessitant tout particulièrement un développement progressif tel que par exemple l'intelligence artificielle et tout en commençant ses travaux à un niveau à un niveau général. Je vous remercie Madame la Présidente.


6th Committee · Chair [1:16:54]:

I thank the distinguished

Representative of Switzerland for his statement and I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Cameroon.


Cameroon · Représentant [1:17:06]:

Présidente, le Cameroun se rallie à la déclaration qu'il a prononcée au nom du groupe africain et je souhaiterais partager quelques éléments à titre national. Madame la Présidente, ma délégation va s'appesantir sur les thèmes retenus pour le cluster un. Madame la Présidente, pour ce qui est du sujet de l'élévation du niveau de la mer au regard du droit international, ma délégation souligne l'importance particulière de ce sujet au regard de ses conséquences juridiques environnementales, économiques et humaines, notamment. pour les Etats côtiers, les Etats insulaires et les populations dont les moyens de subsistance sont directement menacés. Le Cameroun considère que les travaux du groupe d'étude sur l'élévation du niveau de la mer au regard du droit international constitue une contribution importante à la clarification des questions de droit international soulevées par ce phénomène, notamment en ce qui concerne la préservation de la continuité et de l'identité des États, des espaces maritimes et la protection des personnes affectées. Face à l'ampleur de ces défis, il importe de poursuivre les efforts visant à promouvoir une approche fondée sur le droit international, le multilatéralisme et la coopération entre les États. en tenant dûment compte des préoccupations et des vulnérabilités particulières des pays en développement. Madame la Présidente, s'agissant du sujet l'immunité de juridiction pénale étrangère des représentants de l'État, Cette question demeure au cœur des rapports entre la souveraineté des États et l'exercice de la compétence pénale nationale. Madame la présidente, le Cameroun réaffirme son attachement au principe de l'égalité souveraine des États, consacré par la charte des Nations unies, dont l'immunité de juridiction pénale étrangère des représentants de l'État constitue une garantie essentielle. Elle représente aussi un outil pour le bon fonctionnement des relations internationales. Cette immunité ne saurait être considérée comme un privilège personnel accordé à un individu, mais comme une prérogative attachée à l'État destinée à lui permettre d'exercer ses fonctions souveraines sans ingérence indue d'une juridiction étrangère. Si la lutte contre l'impunité pour les crimes les plus graves du droit international demeure un objectif légitime de la communauté internationale, elle ne saurait justifier une remise en cause des règles relatives à l'immunité sans un fond fondement juridique suffisamment établi. Madame la présidente, ma délégation demeure préoccupée par les questions soulevées par le projet d'article six, Enseignement 7 concernant la non-applicabilité de l'UBM l'immunité rationnelle et matérielle à certains crimes de droit international, notamment quant à sa conformité au droit international coutumier, à la représentativité de la pratique étatique invoquée et à la distinction nécessaire entre les règles établies de codification et les propositions relevant du développement progressif du droit international. Elle souligne également que la détermination des exceptions à l'immunité doit reposer sur des critères juridiques précis, objectif et prévisible afin de prévenir toute application sélective ou politisée de la compétence pénale extraterritoriale. Les divergences qui se sont manifestées au sein de notre Commission sur cette disposition appellent à cet égard à un examen intergouvernemental approfondi qui soit respectueux des différentes positions exprimées par les États. Pour mon pays, il importe également de rappeler que l'immunité n'équivaut ni à une exonération de responsabilité pénale ni à une reconnaissance de l'impunité. Elle constitue un obstacle procédural à l'exercice de la juridiction d'un autre État dans les conditions prévues par le droit international. Les personnes concernées demeurent bien entendu susceptibles de répondre de leurs actes devant les juridictions compétentes, notamment celles de l'État qu'elles représentent, conformément au droit applicable. L'État titulaire de l'immunité conserve par ailleurs la faculté d'y renoncer expressément. Ma délégation insiste donc sur le fait que la renonciation à l'immunité ne saurait être présumée et qu'elle relève de la volonté de l'État bénéficiaire, exprimée conformément aux règles applicables. Madame la présidente, présidente, les garanties procédurales prévues dans le projet d'Artigue revêtent dans ce contexte une importance particulière. Ma délégation estime que l'examen de la question de l'immunité devrait intervenir à un stade suffisamment précoce de la procédure, avant l'engagement de poursuite ou l'adoption de mesures coercitives susceptibles de porter atteinte à l'inviolabilité du représentant de l'État concerné. La notification à l'état du représentant doit permettre à celui-ci d'exercer effectivement ses prérogatives et de faire connaître sa position. Elle ne devrait pas être réduite à une simple formalité dépourvue d'effets pratiques. Le Cameroun souligne également l'importance de la coopération et de l'entraide judiciaire ainsi que du règlement pacifique des différends, conformément à la Charte des Nations unies, dans le respect de la liberté des États de choisir les moyens appropriés. S'agissant du lien entre l'immunité des représentants de l'État et les juridictions pénales internationales, le Cameroun souligne la nécessité de distinguer clairement l'exercice de la compétence nationale de celui des juridictions internationales établies sur la base d'instruments juridiques spécifiques. Les effets de ces instruments à l'égard des Etats devraient être appréciés au regard des règles applicables, notamment celles relatives au consentement et aux obligations conventionnelles, sans nécessairement présumer que les dispositions auxquelles tous les États ne sont pas partis puissent par elles-mêmes produire des effets à l'égal de tous. Il convient également de préserver le rôle des juridictions nationales et de tenir dûment compte du principe de complément complémentarité lorsqu'il est applicable. Toute formulation retenue sur cette question devrait, à notre avis, être suffisamment précise pour éviter des interprétations susceptibles d'affaiblir les garanties reconnues par le droit international. Madame la présidente, au regard de ces considérations, le Cameroun estime que la suite donnée au projet d'article devrait privilégier un examen approfondi des préoccupations soulevées par les États, en particulier celles relatives aux fondements coutumiers des exceptions à l'immunité, à la portée de la renonciation, aux garanties procédurales et aux effets des instruments constitutifs des juridictions pénales internationales. La recherche d'un consensus sur ces questions exige une démarche une démarche inclusive fondée sur le dialogue et sur une appréciation équilibrée de la pratique étatique. Le choix de la forme définitive de l'instrument devra tenir compte de ses préoccupations et être guidé par la recherche d'un équilibre juridiquement fondé entre la préservation des légalités souveraines des États, la sécurité juridique et la nécessité de lutter contre l'impunité dans le strict respect du droit international. Madame la présidente, concernant le sujet des principes généraux du droit, cette question importante dont la Commission s'est activée à renseigner l'usage touche directement à l'identification des sources du droit international et à la détermination des règles applicables dans les relations entre États. Ma délégation estime que l'approche comparative retenue pour l'identification des principes généraux du droit dérivés des systèmes juridiques nationaux constitue un élément utile du travail qui a été accompli. Elle souligne toutefois que cette méthode devrait reposer sur un examen véritablement représentatif des différents systèmes juridiques du monde, tenant compte de leur diversité historique, institutionnelle et normative. La recherche d'un principe commun ne saurait se limiter à la constatation de similitudes terminologiques entre certaines législations ou décisions judiciaires. Elle devrait permettre d'établir une convergence réelle quant au contenu et à la portée du principe invoqué. À cet égard, ma délégation insiste sur la nécessité d'accorder une attention appropriée aux pratiques et aux traditions juridiques de toutes les régions du monde, y compris celles de l'Afrique, afin que l'identification des principes prétendument généraux ne repose pas sur une représentation incomplète et imparfaite de la diversité juridique internationale. Le Cameroun souhaite également appeler l'attention sur les difficultés soulevées par la reconnaissance d'une deuxième catégorie de principes généraux du droit formés au sein du système juridique international. Si elle prend note des arguments avancés en faveur de cette catégorie, ma délégation considère que son fondement et ses critères d'identification appellent une prudence soutenue. La reconnaissance d'un principe comme intrinsèque au système juridique international devrait être étayée par des éléments suffisamment précis et vérifiables, permettant d'établir son existence, son contenu et son autonomie par rapport aux règles conventionnelles et coutumières. À défaut, il existe un risque que cette catégorie serve à conférer une portée normative à des propositions qui relèvent davantage du développement progressif du droit international que de l'identification du droit existant. Le Cameroun estime en conséquence que la distinction entre codification et développement progressif devrait demeurer une préoccupation constante dans l'application de ces conclusions. La reconnaissance d'un principe général du droit ne saurait résulter de la seule affirmation de son utilité, de son caractère souhaitable ou de sa récurrence dans la jurisprudence. Elle doit reposer sur une démonstration juridique suffisamment solide et objective de sa reconnaissance par la communauté des nations, conformément aux exigences propres à ses sources du droit international. Madame la présidente, s'agissant du rôle des décisions des juridictions et tribunaux ainsi que de la doctrine, ma délégation reconnaît leur utilité en tant que moyen auxiliaire pour déterminer l'existence et le contenu des principes généraux du droit. Elle souligne néanmoins que ces moyens ne doivent pas se substituer à la démonstration de la reconnaissance juridique du principe concerné. La répétition d'une même proposition dans plusieurs décisions ne suffit pas nécessairement à établir son caractère général, notamment lorsque cette décision repose sur des références doctrinales communes ou ne procède pas à un examen autonome de son fondement juridique. Il importe donc que les jurés juridictions et les autres organes appelés à appliquer ces conclusions motivent avec beaucoup de précision leurs démarches d'identification et distinguent les principes effectivement reconnus des propositions doctrinales ou jurisprudentielles encore. controversée. Ma délégation relève par ailleurs que les fonctions reconnues aux principes généraux du droit, notamment leur contribution à l'interprétation et au complément d'autres règles internationales, devraient être exercées dans le respect de la structure du système juridique international. Leur recours ne devrait ni permettre de contourner les conditions de formation du droit international coutumier, ni conduire à éclater les dispositions conventionnelles applicables, ni créer des obligations nouvelles sans fondement juridique suffisamment établi. De même, l'absence d'une hiérarchie générale entre les sources du droit international ne signifie pas que les règles qui en découlent soient interchangeables au auxquelles puissent être appliquées indépendamment de leurs conditions propres de formation et d'opposabilité. À cet égard, le Cameroun souligne l'importance du respect de la souveraineté des États et des règles qui gouvernent leur engagement international. international. Si les principes généraux du droit constituent une source autonome du droit international, leur identification ne saurait être dissociée de l'exigence de reconnaissance juridique qui les caractérise. Il importe de ce fait de veiller à ce que cette source ne devienne pas un moyen de contourner les conditions applicables aux autres sources ou de transformer les orientations normatives en des obligations juridiquement contraignantes, sans démonstration suffisante. Madame la présidente, au regard de ces considérations, ma délégation estime que les conclusions adoptées par la Commission devraient être examinées avec beaucoup de discernement, en tenant pleinement compte des réserves doctrinales et des divergences qui subsistent sur certains aspects de la matière. Le Cameroun encourage les États, les juridictions et les autres organes compétents à accorder une attention particulière à la méthodologie d'identification des principes généraux du droit, à la représentativité des éléments pris en considération à la distinction entre les règles établies et les propositions relevant du développement progressif. Le Cameroun considère que l'utilité de ce travail dépendra en définitive de sa capacité à renforcer la prévisibilité et la cohérence du droit international, tout en préservant la distinction entre ces différentes sources et en évitant toute incertitude quant aux conditions dans lesquelles une proposition normative acquiert le statut de règle de droit. La clarification des principes généraux du droit doit contribuer à consolider la sécurité juridique internationale et non à introduire de nouvelles ambiguïtés dans l'identification des obligations des Etats. Je vous remercie.


6th Committee · Chair [1:29:28]:

I thank the Distinguished Representative of Cameroon for his statement and I give the floor to the Distinguished Representative of Guatemala.


Guatemala · Representante [1:29:43]:

Guatemala agradezco al presidente de la comisión Andreas Mavroyiannis por la presentación del informe y expresa su reconocimiento a la Comisión de Derecho Internacional. por la labor realizada durante su 77.º período de sesiones. Nuevamente la 6.ª comisión enfrenta una situación similar a la del año pasado con espacios limitados para it can be a lot of flexion that sober the most the particular relevancia but a humanity. It but a lot of relaciones and the losses. Line plit to the complejity agenda. 12. 12. para las intervenciones de cada delegación dificulta un intercambio sustantivo que contribuya plenamente al ejercicio de codificación y desarrollo progresivo del derecho internacional. Por ello la delegación de Guatemala se referirá inicialmente algunas consideraciones contenidas en el apartado de otras decisiones y conclusiones antes de abordar los temas sustantivos objetos de la discusión. Cabe recordar que la 6.ª comisión no solamente se limita a recibir los resultados de los trabajos concluidos por la Comisión del Derecho Internacional. El proceso de codificación y desarrollo progresivo requiere un intercambio sustantivo entre ambas instancias en el que las posiciones de los estados puedan contribuir al análisis de los temas sometidos a su consideración. De igual manera los temas objeto de estudio no deben concebirse como hábitos exclusivos de cada miembro de la comisión sino en materias que permitan el intercambio de perspectivas y la búsqueda colectiva respuestas jurídicas a los fenómenos que afectan nuestras sociedades. En ese sentido acogemos con interés el trabajo del señor Charles Chernoyallo orientado a preparar un texto de métodos de trabajo y procedimientos de la comisión. Esperamos que este texto ayude a transparentar los criterios de selección de nuevos temas de estudio y motive a buscar la cuidadosa revisión de trabajos concluidos, pues el trabajo de la comisión también debe actualizarse y desarrollarse progresivamente. Asimismo que el nuevo texto fomente el trabajo colectivo tal como sucedió en el grupo de trabajo sobre la elevación del nivel del mar en relación con el derecho internacional Consideramos que no todos los temas deben ser abordados en forma exclusiva por cada comisionado. La comisión trae consigo los ejemplares de cada cultura y tradición jurídica de todo el mundo y su riqueza reside precisamente ahí en su pluralismo. Por otro lado observamos el ejercicio limitado de la comisión con la 6.ª comisión en la semana de derecho internacional y consideramos oportuno explorar nuevos métodos de interacción con los comités regionales de desarrollo progresivo del derecho internacional para fomentar un auténtico y pluralista diálogo de codificación. En atención al tiempo disponible Guatemala concentrará su intervención en dos temas. En elevación del nivel del mar en relación con el derecho internacional e inmunidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios del estado. Señora presidenta con respecto al tema de elevación del nivel del mar en relación con el derecho internacional. Como mencionamos el año pasado, acogemos con beneplácito el informe final del grupo de estudio. Guatemala votó a favor de la declaración sobre elevación del nivel del mar a optar recientemente por la asamblea general que reconoce las dimensiones y pilares sobre cómo enfrentar el fenómeno de la elevación del mar. Luego de analizar la opinión sobre el cambio climático en la Corte Internacional de Justicia El trabajo del grupo de estudio y la reciente resolución adoptada por la asamblea general Guatemala reitera las preocupaciones expresadas en el periodo anterior de sesiones. En específico por la precariedad de la protección de los derechos de las personas en el ejercicio de su autodeterminación y la falta de claridad en torno a la responsabilidad internacional por los daños que sufren los estados mayormente afectados por la elevación del mar. Este es un momento que ningún estado puede resolver por sí mismo. Por lo que se hace necesaria la cooperación internacional en el sentido que contempla el artículo uno de la carta de las Naciones Unidas. En ese contexto las obligaciones de prevención y cooperación adquieren una particular relevancia especialmente la eventual pérdida de elementos de territorio de un estado. Reiteramos que la condición de estado no implica únicamente el reconocimiento a la soberanía de un país sino también de sus instituciones funciones mecanismos y procesos mediante los cuales la soberanía se ejerce. Así como el régimen jurídico que lo sustenta incluidos los de gobierno los parlamentos y las cortes. Debemos estar preparados para contar con un sistema jurídico universal capaz de reconocer el ejercicio de la soberanía en estos contextos de movilidad humana. Evitar situaciones de falta de nacionalidad derivadas de la ausencia de instalaciones físicas de gobernanzas y asegurar que la protección de las personas se refleje igualmente en la continuidad y vigencia de sus instituciones. Ante la naturaleza fragmentada inadecuada los marcos jurídicos existentes para la protección jurídica las personas afectadas por la elevación del mar y otros desastres. Guatemala urge a seguir desarrollando el marco jurídico internacional de manera más específica coherente y completa. Señora presidenta ahora me dirijo al tema de inmunidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios del estado. Guatemala reconoce el trabajo realizado por los comisionados Escobar Hernández y Grossman para avanzar en el estudio de esta materia. Al respecto Guatemala desea plantear una inquietud respecto al artículo 13 relacionado con la determinación de la humanidad y su alcance en sentido práctico. En el marco de la Organización de los Estados Americanos existen antecedentes relacionados con el no reconocimiento de facturas de gobierno el arresto y traslado de jefes de gobierno y de estado a otros países y el procesamiento de personas capturadas en el extranjero mediante métodos cuya legitimidad ha sido cuestionada. Estas situaciones plantean interrogantes para la justicia transnacional cuando no existen estándares suficientemente robustos de protección y certeza jurídica para iniciar una causal penal contra un funcionario sobre la base de razones sustanciales para creer que se ha cometido un delito. Guatemala considera que el artículo 13 debe por tanto ofrecer garantías suficientes o robustas para evitar situaciones como las registradas entre los estados de la organización de estados americanos que puedan conducir vulneraciones al debido proceso de funcionarios estatales y como consecuencia de un ejercicio. discrecional de la jurisdicción penal extranjera. Muchas gracias.


6th Committee · Chair [1:36:23]:

Estimished Representative of Slovakia, you have the floor Madam


Slovakia [1:36:32]:

Madam Chair

At the outset I wish to express our sincere congratulations to Mr. Andreas Mavroyiannis on being elected as the chair of this year's session and thank for his diligent leadership throughout the session. We know the conclusion of consideration of three topics as well as the initial consideration of two new topics added to the Commission's programme of work last year Madam chair in my statement I will focus on chapters 123, 12345 and 13 of this year's report, namely on the topics immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction and general principles of law, as well as make make some comments on other decisions and conclusions. With regard to chapter five of last year's report, namely, sea level rise, in relation to international law, I refer to our intervention at the previous session Madam Chair Slovakia welcomes the conclusion of work on the immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction after a very extensive elaboration and comments the special rapporteur Mr. Claudio Grossman as well as the previous special rapporteurs. We further welcome the draft articles which we consider to be the appropriate final outcome and express our support for the eventual elaboration of a draft convention on the basis of the draft articles. We will give due consideration to the timing of the proposed proposed conference proposed conference, drawing upon experience from similar processes applied to other outcomes of the Commission's work, which aim at the progressive development and codification of international law in the form of an international. convention. Turning to specific provisions, we welcome draft article six on crimes under international law, in respect of which immunity ratione materiae shall not apply. We welcome the inclusion of a list of crimes in this draft article, including the crime of aggression, which enhances the comprehensiveness and legal certainty of the provision without prejudice to possible future identification of other crimes reflecting further development of international law. We know that progressive development is particularly prominent in this draft article. The degree to which the non-applicability of immunity rationa materia reflects existing customer international law may not necessarily be identical in respect of every crime included in the list. Madam chair Slovakia welcomes the adoption of the draft conclusions on general principles of law and thanks the special rapporteur Mr. Marcelo Vasquez Bermudes for his work on the. topic. Having analyzed the final outcome, we continue to open that the practical benefit of the work on this topic is rather limited. Moreover, while the draft conclusions have undoubtedly been adopted with the aim of bringing clarity to the issue, we believe that some concepts do the opposite. Specifically, we have consistently supported the view whereby general principles of law can only be derived from national legal systems, and expressed our principled concern about the notion of their formation with an international legal system. Our position is supported by the text, historical context, and drafting history of article 38 paragraph 1C of the statute of the ICJ, which provides strong support for the identification of general principles through comparative examination of national legal systems. While we agree with the paragraph three of the commentary to the draft conclusion seven, whereby the international legal system is subject to evolution and development, the commission doesn't provide any evidence that such development or evolution has indeed taken place. The list of principles supported supposedly formed within the international legal system included in the commentary has only exacerbated our doubts, as in our view, several examples are not general principles of law, but principles of international law, a rather general laws contained in customary international law and treaties. Turning to draft conclusion ten, we considered that the gap filling function of general principles of law may in practice of often be the primary one. Having regard to the primary function of general principles of law, as well as to their high degree of abstraction, it is difficult to conceive a situation where a general principle of law would be the basis of substantial rights and obligations without any corresponding treaty or customary rules. Madam chair, and I wish to comment on the other decision of the Commission. We take note of the inclusion of the topic identification and legal consequences of obligations ergo onus in international law in the program of work. The topic should be addressed in a way that offers practical usefulness to states and, at the same time, is not prescriptive for international judicial institutions that may make final decisions on disputes involving erga omnis obligations. Furthermore, the commission should clearly distinguish between the substantive characterization of an obligation as erga omnis, the entitlement of states to invoke responsibility, questions of standing before particular courts and tribunals, and the legal consequences of a breach. It should also avoid assuming that all obligations, erga omnes, necessarily arise from peremptory norms of or vice versa. We take note of the inclusion of the topic, the right to regulate in international investment law in the long term program of work. In Investment law is characterized by considerable treaty diversity and ongoing reform process. The commission should therefore identify more clearly the legal question to be addressed. The representative practice on which the work would be based and the added value of the project in relation to existing treaty practice and work undertaken in order for in other forum. Specifically, we do not see merit in analyzing the right to regulate. States as the primary subjects of international law inherently process and exercise that right, while any limits thereto stem from their sovereign decisions. To free freely enter into international obligations by becoming party to treaties. The central issue is therefore not the existence of regular authority in the abstract, but the interpretation and application of the international obligations by which states have conceded to limit or structure its exercise. I thank you Madam Chair.


6th Committee · Chair [1:43:42]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Slovakia for his statement I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of India. You have the floor.


India [1:43:54]:

Thank you madam chair. At the outset India would like to thank chair of the 77 session of the International Law Commission for his comprehensive introduction to the Commission's report and for guiding its work during the session. We also extend our appreciation to all members of the Commission for their valuable contribution.


6th Committee · Chair [1:53:45]:

I thank the distinguished representative of India for his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Maldives. You have the floor.


Maldives [1:54:01]:

Thank you chair. The Maldives aligns itself with a statement delivered

By Palau on behalf of EOSIS.

The Maldives comments the international law commission and thanks the co chairs of the study group for six years of rigorous work on sea level rise in relation to international law. For the Maldives, sea level rise tests a basic proposition of international law. Physical changes to territory must not strip a state of its sovereignty, maritime rights, or the legal protection of its people. In November 1989, small island states gathered in Male, the capital of the Maldives, for the first conference dedicated to climate change related sea level rise. The purpose was simple, to bring international attention to a threat that could alter the physical foundation of our states. Nearly four decades later, that concern has moved from the margins to the center of international law and policy. On 12th October, the General Assembly adopted the UN declaration on sea level rise. It is also recognized the enduring significance of the 1989 Mali declaration What began as a call for political recognition must now become a lasting commitment to legal certainty, international cooperation, and protection of our peoples. The ILC's work is important to that task. Its final report addresses the three questions that matter most to affect affected states. The law of the sea, continuity of statehood and protection of persons affected by sea level rise. The Maldives therefore makes three calls to action. First, we must safeguard the continuity of statehood, sovereignty and maritime zones. Rising seas must not diminish a state's maritime zones or end its statehood. The physical transformation of territory must not become a pretext for legal disappearance. The recent declaration gives political expression to that certainty. It affirms the stability of established maritime zones and the presumption of continued statehood and sovereignty. including continued membership of the United Nations. The IOC's work provides important legal grounding. The study group recorded a convergence of views that unclose does not prohibit the preservation of baselines and maritime zones and that states are not obliged to update baselines because of sea level rise. Legal certainty must also be usable in practice. Affected states need the hydrophic data, coastal mapping, scientific monitoring, and legal expertise required to document and protect their maritime rights over the long term. Second, Second, we must prevent statelessness and protect the rights and dignity of persons affected by sea level rise. The Maldives supports the global principles for addressing climate mobility, strengthening resilience must remain the first priority so that displacement can be prevented wherever possible. Where movements become unavoidable, people must retain their nationality, identity, rights, and connections to their state. Existing international and regional frameworks provide important protections, but they do not yet offer a comprehensive response. response. Cooperation must therefore prepare before displacement occurs. Third, we must strengthen international and regional cooperation, including through capacity building and technical assistance. The duty to cooperate must be reflected in practical support. Affected states need sustained access to legal, scientific, and technical expertise, stronger national institutions, institution and the capacity to maintain essential government functions and plan for the long term needs for their populations. This is also a question of sovereign choice. International cooperation cooperation should leave affected states more capable of protecting their rights, serving their people, and determining their own future. In Mala in 1989, small island states asked the international community to recognize the danger. Today, the task is more precise, ensure that change in geography does not erase legal identity, diminish sovereign rights, sovereign rights or reduce the capacity of any any state to shape its future. I thank you.


6th Committee · Chair [1:58:51]:

I think the distinguished representative of Maldives for her statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Lichtenstein. You have the floor madam.


Liechtenstein [1:59:05]:

Thank you madam chair. The International Law Commission plays a crucial role in the development and codification of international law, and liechtenstein comments the publication of the commission's 2026 report regarding the progress made by the commission on the immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction, we are pleased to see that the Commission adopted and second readed the entire set of draft articles. The immunity of state officials is granted on the principle of sovereignty equality sovereign equality of states. As established by the International Court of Justice and outlined in the Commission's report, state officials enjoy immunities not only for their personal benefits, but also to endure not for their personal benefits, but also to endure their ability to represent their state or to exercise state's functions. The draft articles endure that the immunity of state's officials do not result in impunity for the most serious crimes under international law. And in doing so, they strike a careful balance between the principle of sovereign equality and the imperative of accountability, while preserving the coherence and consistency of the international legal framework. Draft article six in that regard, which includes the list of crimes in which respect of immunity rationing material should not apply, is an important achievement. It is supported by the Nuremberg and the Tokyo trials, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, and the International Court of Justice. It also reflects the jurisprudence of national jurisdictions on the prosecution on the prosecution of foreign state officials for international crimes during the Second World War. The inclusion of the crime of aggression in draft article six is a significant contribution to the fight against impunity. As a leadership crime, its prosecution necessarily involves the immunity of state officials. Recognizing an exception to immunity in such cases is consistent with both customer international law and contemporary international criminal law. Moreover, aggression is amongst amongst the four core crimes listed in the Rome Statute and reflects the undering legacy of Nuremberg. which remains a cornerstone of the contemporary international legal order as embodied in the Nuremberg principles. The adoption of the draft articles is a significant step towards a more consistent implementation of the law towards the immunity of state official. However, Liechtenstein believes that the recommendation of the commission to elaborate at the appropriate time a convention by the General Assembly or an international conference of planning potentiaries on the basis of the draft articles is at this stage premature. In our view, a dedicated convention on immunities will not necessarily provide a significant added value beyond the framework that is already provided by the ILC draft articles, and rather we would encourage states to focus on drawing up from those articles when negotiating future instruments, including the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of crimes against humanity. Madam chair, another important milestone that demonstrates the impact of the Commission's work is the adoption by consensus of the political declaration on sea level rise this year. The declaration reflects key elements of the work of the study group on sea level rise in relation to international law, its legal dimensions and the score states commitments to the continuity of statehood in the face of sea level rise, including the important presumption of the continuity of membership in the United Nations. This provides a practical safeguard to ensure that states affected by the loss of territory can continue to participate in multilateral institutions and exercise their sovereign voice. Madam Chair, this year states were invited to reflect on the relationship between the International Law Commission and the Sixth Committee. The two examples that we've discussed today provide a compelling answer, whether clarifying the rules governing the immunity of state officials or helping states address the unprecedented legal consequences of sea level rise, the Commission demonstrates its unique capacity to combine legal vigour with practical relevance. Liechtenstein therefore remains committed to strengthening this partnership and ensuring that the Commission's words continue to serve the need. of the international community I thank you


6th Committee · Chair [2:03:33]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Liechtenstein for his statement I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Thailand you have the floor.


Thailand [2:03:44]:

Thank you Madam chair. Thailand expresses its appreciation to the National Law Commission for its important contributions to codification and progressive development of international law, we thank President Andreas Mavouranis for the comprehensive introduction of the paper yesterday. Turning first to the sea level rise in relation to international law. Chair, Thailand welcomes the final report of the study group, which addresses important questions of international law, including the preservation of maritime entitlement entitlements, the continuity of statehood, and the protection of persons affected by sea level rise, particularly in low lying coastal states and small island developing states. We welcome the emphasis on legal stability, certainty and predictability, which is consistent with international court of justice advisory opinion on obligations of states in respect of climate change. According to the court, UNCLOS does not equire states parties in the context of physical changes resulting from climate change related sea level rise to up update the chart or list of geographical coordinates showing the baseline and outer limit lines of the maritime zones once duly established. While recognizing that state practice has not conclusively established a corresponding customary rule, Thailand maintains that maritime boundaries established by treaty or judicial decision should likewise remain final and unaffected by sea level rise. We also welcome the court's recognition that once a state is established, the disappearance of one of its constituent elements would not necessarily entail the loss of its statehood. Equally important is the protection of affected persons, including those facing displacement, The commission's work on the protection of persons in the event in the event of disasters offers useful guidance here, including the situations of slow onset disasters, Thailand is proud to contribute to the develop to the advancement of this important legal framework, including through its chairmanship of the PREPCOM and the forthcoming hosting of the conference of the plenipotentiaries in January next year in Bangkok. I will now move on to immunity of state officials from foreign criminals criminal jurisdiction. Madam chair, my delegation congratulates the commission on completing the second reading of the draft article. Thailand recognizes the importance of a careful balance between combating impunity for serious crimes under international law and respecting the sovereign equality of states regarding exceptions to immunity, Russia Harashawnee Materiae, particularly caution in warranted is warranted for the crime of migration, given its inherently interstate character and the fundamental principle of sovereign equality. This meaning that an official has committed this crime presupposes a finding that the state of the official has committed an aggression which would require the forum state to pass judgment on the conduct of another state. Thailand therefore proposes that the non application of immunity in cases involving the crime of aggression should be subject to appropriate safeguards. It may require a prior determination by the competent international court, tribunal, or organ that the state of the official concerned has committed the relevant act of aggression. Such safeguards would help prevent politicization and unilateral determinations by national authorities while preserving accountability under international law. More broadly, we attach importance to the procedural provisions and safeguards that ensure fairness and legal certainty and stand ready to engage constructively on the draft articles and the way forward. Madam chair, turning to other decisions and conclusions of the commission, Thailand welcomes the inclusion of identification and legal consequences of obligations, earger omnets in international law in his program of work and the appointment of Mr. Masayko Azada as a special rapporteur. This work could clarify obligations owed to the international community as a whole and their legal consequences. We also welcome Mr. Mario Oyazabao's updated syllabus on extra territorial jurisdiction which could clarify the scope and limits of state jurisdiction. Thailand also welcomes the inclusion of the right to regulate internet in international investment law proposed by doctor Willawan Mangkalatana kun in the commission's long term program of work, amid challenges including climate change, public health and sustainable development, states must balance investment protection with their legitimate right to regulate in the public interest. Due regard should be given to the common understanding and intentions of treaty parties when interpreting and applying investment treaties. We look forward to Doctor Mankalata Kun's further contributions as the commission advances on this topic. Beyond these substantive developments, Thailand also welcomes the commission's continued efforts to improve its working methods and strengthen cooperation with other values particularly regional legal organizations, to reflect diverse legal perspectives and practical needs of states. In addition, Chummy documentation, it access through digital resources including the website, webcasting, and the UN audio visual library of international law remain important. We emphasize the indispensable role of the codification division in assisting the commission and chair the commission's concern about the recent further reductions in its resources, including under the UN 80 initiative. We hope that the division can continue providing its invaluable support. Mindful of the United Nations financial challenges, Thailand encourages prudent use of resources without compromising the work of the commission. We value capacity building through the trust fund for assistance to special rapporters and the international law seminar and encourage equitable support based on merit diversity and need, particularly for young professionals and scholars from developing countries. We will also continue to support the UN Regional Course on International Law to be held this year in Bangkok again for the 12th time. Madam chair, in closing, Thailand reaffirms its full support for the commission. At a time when international law faces growing challenges, the commission's independent legal expertise, ground Grounded in state practice and informed by the diverse perspectives of member states remains indispensable to strengthening the rule of law and maintaining confidence in the international legal order. I thank you madam.


6th Committee · Chair [2:12:24]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Thailand for for his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Nigeria. You have the floor sir.


Nigeria [2:12:39]:

Madam chair, Nigeria aligns itself with a statement delivered by Cameroon on behalf of the African group and wishes to make the following remarks on the first cluster in its national capacity. We thank the chair of the commission, Mister Andreas Devoyaranis, for introducing the report contained in document A slash 81/10. And we also commend the members of the commission. The special rapportoirs and the codification division for their valuable contributions. We welcome the return of the commission's 77th session to a duration close to its usual format. And support the provision of stable and predictable working conditions for future sessions. Nigeria warmly congratulates Mister Olufemi alias on his election to the commission on 5th May 2026. We are proud that a Nigerian national has the opportunity to contribute and hopefully will continue to contribute to the commission's work and express our sincere appreciation to member states for their continued support. Madam chair, turning to this topic, sea level rise in relation to international law, air slash ten slash ten 80 slash ten chapter five. Nigeria welcomes the final report of the study group adopted in 2025. As a coastal state whose populations and economic activity are concentrated along the along the Atlantic coast and in the Niger Delta. Nigeria has a direct and substantial interest in the topic. We support the legal stability and certainty in respect of maritime zones including the preservation of baseline baselines and maritime maritime entitlements established in accordance with the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea. As well as the presumption of the continuity of statehood. We further emphasize that the protection of persons affected by sea level rise should be addressed through strengthened international cooperation and appropriate support for the most severely affected developing states. Madam chair, on the topic immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction chapter four, Nigeria takes note of the adoption on the second reading of the 17 draft articles and commentaries and of the commission's recommendation that a convention be elaborated on their basis at the appropriate time. Nigeria's position on this topic remains consistent. Immunity derives from the sovereignty from sovereign equality of states and remain essential for orderly conduct as well as stability in international relations. In Immunity rational personnel of heads of state, heads of government and ministers for foreign affairs is firmly established in customary international law. And must be fully respected. At the same time, Nigeria is equally committed to combating impunity for the most serious crimes. We believe that accountability is best secured through national courts and where states have consented to international jurisdictions. Nigeria continues to have concerns about draft draft article seven which identifies crimes crimes in respect of which immunity ration material will not apply. We note that the provision was adopted by a recorded vote of 23 in favor, four against and three abstentions. In Nigeria's view, it does not reflect a settled rule of customary international law and should be regarded as a proposal for the progressive development of international law. Its application would expose officials to politically motivated proceedings. Accordingly, the procedural safeguards contained in the draft articles including notification, consultation, and consideration of immunity by the competent authorities at the highest level are therefore indispensable to ensuring fairness, legal certainty, and the prevention of abuse. Given these differences, Nigeria considers that a decision on a convention at this session would be premature at this session. States should be afforded adequate time to examine the draft articles and commentaries and any future instruments should be negotiated with a view to achieving the broadest broadest possible consensus consensus. Madam chair, on other decisions and conclusions of the commission chapter 13, Nigeria, Nigeria takes note of ah takes note of the inclusion of the topic identification and legal consequences of obligation ega omnis in international law. In its program of work, and congratulate Mister Masahiko Asada on his appointment as a special repertoire. The topic should build on the commission's previous work including on preemptory norms of general international law and be grounded in state practice. Nigeria also welcomes the inclusion of the right to regulate an international investment law in the long term program of work. The topic is of direct relevance to developing countries that seek to attract investment while preserving the policy space to regulate in the public interest. We also note the updated syllabus on extra territorial jurisdiction. Any work on that topic should give full weight to the sovereign equality of states and non-interference in their internal affairs. Nigeria welcomes the establishing establishment of the working group on cooperation with regional legal bodies and the resumption of exchanges with the Asian African legal consultative organization of which Nigeria is a member. We congratulate we encourage the commission to include the African Union Commission on international law in these exchanges. So that African practice and perspectives are more fully reflected in its work. Nigeria also shares the commission concern about the discontinuation of the live webcast of its plenary meetings. Which allowed smaller delegations to follow its work and supports the provision of resources for its rest. restoration. Nigeria affirms its support for the commission and will continue to contribute its work including by responding to its request for information. I thank you.


6th Committee · Chair [2:19:16]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Nigeria for his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of New Zealand. You have the floor ma'am.


New Zealand [2:19:27]:

Thank you chair. New Zealand thanks the international Law Commission for its report on the work of its 77th session. We appreciate the commission's continued contributions to the progressive development and codification of international law. And we also record our gratitude to the secretary secretariat for its support of the commission's work. Today, New Zealand wishes to comment on two topics under this cluster of work sea level rise in relation to international law and general principles of law. Firstly, New Zealand reiterates its appreciation to the co chairs of the study group on sea level rise in relation to international law for their final report, which helped to identify broad areas of legal convergence that have emerged in recent years. New Zealand again wishes to highlight the report's observation that general state practice exists as evidenced by statements expressing widespread and consistent support regarding the preservation of baselines and the outer limits of maritime zones, notwithstanding sea level rise. We also wish to reaffirm the report's conclusion that in the context of the preservation of statehood, the principle of cooperation implies a duty for all states to cooperate to address the adverse effects of sea level rise. In this regard, New Zealand recalls the long standing leadership and cooperation of Pacific Island Forums members and the Alliance of Small state small island states in advance and consideration of the legal dimensions of sea level rise. We were pleased that the 2025 advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice affirmed an approach consistent with the Pacific Islands for members declaration on preserving maritime zones in the face of climate change related sea level rise. In addition to these developments, New Zealand was pleased that the UN member states adopted have adopted the recent UN political declaration on sea level rise by consensus. This landmark declaration affirms the preservation of maritime zones and the presumption of continued state would notwithstanding sea level rise. The declaration also emphasizes the need for states to respect, protect and fulfill human rights in the context of protection of persons affected by sea level rise. This echoes the acknowledgement by Pacific Island Forum leaders in 2023 that protecting persons and communities affected by climate change related sea level rise involves protecting, promoting and fulfilling their human rights and meeting their essential needs, including through international cooperation. We encourage all states to continue engaging constructively with Pacific led efforts and to ensure sea level rise continues to be considered across all relevant UN processes. This includes during the fourth UN Ocean Conference, the open ended informal consultative process on oceans and law of the sea, and through implementation of the declarations commitment to convene a further high level meeting ahead of the General Assembly's 84th session. While international consensus on this topic continues to solidify, the Sixth Committee remains an important forum for consideration of its legal dimensions. New Zealand welcomes continued discussion of the commission's work on sea level rise in relation to international law. Chair, New Zealand welcomes the successful complete completion of the general principles of law topic. We thank the special rapporteur for his work and commend the commission on its adoption of the draft conclusions. New Zealand welcomes the confirmation that recognition by the community of nations as essential to the existence of a general principle of law. We support the retention of a two step methodology for identifying general principles of law derived from the national legal systems. first, determining the existence of a principle common to the principal legal systems of the world, and second, ascertaining its transposition to the international legal system. New Zealand further welcomes the requirement that principles derived from national legal systems must be compatible with the international legal system before they be transposed. We consider that compatibility should be assessed carefully and consistently with due regard to the distinctive structure of the international legal system, including its consensual basis and the principle of sovereign equality. Lastly, New Zealand continues to attach importance to maintaining a clear distinction between gender general principles of law and customary international law particularly in relation to principles formed within the international legal system. Chair New Zealand thanks the commission for its valuable work on these topics. Each topic is of significant relevance to states and will assist in the progressive development and application of international law. Additionally, New Zealand commends the work of the commission in presenting the draft articles on the protection of persons in the event of disasters in 2016. New Zealand has engaged constructively in the preparatory committee recently held in New York, and we look forward to working with all member states to elaborate and conclude a legally binding instrument on this topic by the end of next year I thank you


6th Committee · Chair [2:24:33]:

I thank the distinguished representative of New Zealand for his statement I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Spain you have the floor sir.


Spain · Representante [2:24:41]:

Señora presidenta, es un honor dirigirme a esta 6.ª comisión para abordar los trabajos de la Comisión de Derecho Internacional en su 77 periodo de sesiones. Nos referiremos, en primer lugar, al proyecto de artículos sobre inmunidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios del Estado, para felicitar a la Comisión de Derecho Internacional y en particular al relator especial, don Claudio Grossman, por la aprobación de sus conclusiones y de sus comentarios en un tema crucial para el Derecho internacional público. Consideramos que nos hallamos ante un texto llamado a ejercer una gran influencia, por lo que España, que ha intervenido en sucesivas ocasiones sobre este texto y ha presentado observaciones cuando le ha sido requerido, España desea manifestar que comparte la recomendación de la Comisión de que, en el momento oportuno, la Asamblea General o una conferencia internacional de plenipotenciarios elabore una convención basada en el proyecto de artículos. Señora Presidenta, España desea, en segundo lugar, felicitar a la Comisión de Derecho Internacional y en particular al señor Marcelo Vázquez Bermúdez por la aprobación en segunda lectura del proyecto de conclusiones sobre los principios generales del derecho, que consta de 12 proyectos de conclusión y sus comentarios. El proyecto de conclusiones se une a los relevantes trabajos realizados por la Comisión hasta la fecha en materia de Derecho internacional consuetudinario y especialmente sobre el Derecho de los Tratados. Desde este punto de vista, el proyecto es una importante contribución de la Comisión a la codificación y al desarrollo progresivo de las fuentes del derecho internacional mencionadas en el artículo 38.1 del Estatuto de la Corte Internacional de Justicia. Estos trabajos se complementan con los dedicados al tema medios auxiliares para la determinación de las normas de derecho internacional, respecto de los cuales el Reino de España desea confirmar que, conforme a lo solicitado por la Comisión, España remitirá al secretario general los comentarios y observaciones sobre el proyecto de conclusiones aprobado en primera lectura a realizar antes del 1 de diciembre de 2027. Señora presidenta, mi delegación, que ha expresado anteriormente su acuerdo general con el texto del proyecto de conclusiones relativo a los principios generales del derecho, mi delegación desea reiterar su acuerdo, en particular con la categorización de los principios generales del derecho que hace el proyecto en su conclusión número tres, es decir, con la distinción entre los principios generales del derecho que se derivan de los sistemas jurídicos nacionales, por una parte, y los que pueden formarse en el sistema jurídico internacional por otra. También desea expresar su ratificación con la metodología en dos etapas prevista para la identificación, determinación y transposición de un principio general del derecho derivado de los sistemas jurídicos nacionales. En concreto, también España considera correcto que el método para determinar la existencia y el contenido de un principio general del Derecho formado en el sistema jurídico internacional consista en cerciorarse de su, reconocimiento por la comunidad internacional, de tal modo que se evite toda referencia a su aceptación o vinculación, que son más propias de otras fuentes del derecho internacional como la costumbre o los tratados. A diferencia de estas dos últimas fuentes, los principios generales del derecho no son resultado del acuerdo entre los Estados a los que no imponen obligaciones concretas en sus relaciones mútuas ni les reconocen derechos subjetivos. Los princípios generales del Derecho, expresión de los valores jurídicos deben ser ciertamente reconocidos por la comunidad internacional. Por último, señora Presidenta, el Reino de España comparte con la Comisión las tres últimas conclusiones del proyecto. Primero, la conclusión 10.ª, relativa a las funciones de los principios generales del derecho. Ciertamente, el artículo 38.1. 81C del Estatuto de la Corte contempla los principios generales del derecho como una herramienta para facilitar del juez, de modo que pueda encontrar criterios para decidir y evitar el non-leaked en los casos difíciles. En segundo lugar, España celebra que las conclusiones se refieran a la relación entre los principios generales del Derecho con las otras fuentes del Derecho internacional conclusión 11. Y finalmente España comparte también la inclusión del proyecto de conclusión número 12 principios generales del derecho con un ámbito de aplicación limitado pues la práctica refleja, en verdad, la existencia de principios aplicables únicamente a las relaciones entre determinados sujetos de derecho internacional, como un número determinado de Estados, pero también la existencia de principios existentes en determinados regímenes del derecho internacional o que tienen un ámbito de aplicación material más limitado.


6th Committee · Chair [2:30:51]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Spain for his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Germany. You have the floor ma'am.


Germany [2:31:12]:

Madam president, regarding the first cluster Germany would like to address the topic of immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. First of all, Germany would like to take this opportunity to warmly be warmly congratulate the Commission on the adoption of the draft articles on second reading. We thank the special rapporteur Mr. Claudio Grossman as well as his predecessors Mr. Roman Kolotkin and Ms. Concepcion Escobar Hernandez and the Commission for their dedicated work on this topic which remains highly relevant to Germany. Germany welcomes the clarification provided by the draft articles on the scope of the immunities of state officials from criminal jurisdiction. We take note of the Commission's recommendation to the General Assembly to consider the elaboration of a new international convention on the basis of these draft articles. We are convinced that this topic should continue to be approached cautiously. It is of great importance to strike a careful balance between the need for legal accountability and the need to ensure the stability of official international relations. On the question of exceptions from immunity rationa materie reflected in draft article six, Germany would like to reiterate its unwavering commitment to combating legal impunity and its strong support for international criminal law. Germany clearly recognises the existence of exceptions to the principle of functional. immunity. The German Bundestag, our national parliament, has adopted legislation to the effect that functional immunity cannot prevent the prosecution of core international crimes in Germany. Such crimes are of concern to the international community as a whole. We are pleased to see these developments reflected in the Commission's commentary. We concur with the observation that there is a significant trend in the practice of states towards exceptions to the principle of functional immunity Germany therefore welcomes the inclusion of the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, against humanity, war crimes, the crime of apartheid, torture and enforced disappearance in draft article six. We consider these exceptions to reflect customary law. Regarding the additional inclusion of the crime of aggression, slavery and slave trade, we take note of the Commission's reasoning based on the nature of these crimes as U.S. Kogan's norms and the need for coherence with other provisions of international law. Germany notes that draft Article six was adopted by a vote rather than by consensus. Given the sensitive nature of this topic and the divergent views among states, we remain of the view that a consensus based and unified approach is generally preferable to ensure the broadest possible acceptance of the Commission's work. In this context we would also like to reiterate the importance of a clear distinction between the codification of existing customary law and the progressive development of international law. We believe that the difference between what the law is and what the law ought to be should be clearly reflected in the Commission's work. Finally, I would like to briefly comment on other decisions and conclusions of the Commission as noted under chapter 13 of this year's report. Germany welcomes the decision by the Commission to establish a working group on cooperation with regional legal bodies. The Commission exchanged views with the Committee of Legal Advisers on Public international law of the Council of Europe, the Inter American Juridical Committee and the Asian African Legal Consultative Organization. Dialogue with regional legal bodies facilitates mutual exchange on the development of international law and strengthens its acceptance and Germany will continue to to support such dialogue Thank you


6th Committee · Chair [2:35:16]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Germany for. his statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ecuador. You have the floor ma'am.


Ecuador · Representante [2:35:31]:

De la Comisión de Derecho Internacional, señor Andreas Mavroyiannis, por la presentación del informe sobre la labor desarrollada durante el 77 periodo de sesiones de la comisión. Este ha sido un periodo de sesiones especialmente productivo, en el que se han aprobado dos temas en segunda lectura, al igual que un informe final sobre otro tema, se han aprobado en primera lectura otros dos temas y avanzado en el tratamiento de otros. La CDI viene cumpliendo así con mucho éxito su importante labor de desarrollo progresivo del derecho internacional y su codificación. Señora presidente, deseo comenzar reiterando la felicitación a la comisión por su trabajo completado en 2025 sobre la elevación del nivel del mar en relación con el derecho internacional. El Ecuador valora y apoya las conclusiones del grupo de estudio de la comisión. Asimismo expresamos nuestro beneplácito por la reciente aprobación de la declaración de las Naciones Unidas sobre la elevación del nivel del mar. La protección de las personas afectadas por la elevación del nivel del mar como consecuencia del cambio climático es un aspecto central que debe ser tenido en cuenta. En este contexto, debo recordar que el Ecuador junto con República Dominicana, Bahamas, Cabo Verde, Chipre, Maldivas y Malta como miembros del Core Group lideraron la negociación y adopción por parte del Consejo de Derechos Humanos el 7 de octubre de 2025 de la resolución 60 20 sobre el aumento del nivel del mar y sus efectos sobre el disfrute pleno y efectivo de los derechos humanos. Señora presidente, el Ecuador expresa su felicitación a la comisión y en particular al relator especial, señor Claudio Grossman, por la aprobación en segunda lectura del conjunto de artículos sobre la inmunidad de jurisdicción penal extranjera de los funcionarios del estado. Este es un tema especialmente sensible que ha estado en el programa de trabajo de la comisión durante muchos años pero que ha llegado a buen término. La práctica de los estados será fundamental para su consolidación. Consideramos que dichos artículos pueden servir de base para la negociación de una convención. El Ecuador expresa asimismo su reconocimiento a la Comisión de Derecho Internacional por la aprobación en segunda lectura de un conjunto de 12 conclusiones acompañadas de comentarios sobre los principios generales del derecho y en particular al relator especial señor Marcelo Vázquez Bermúdez por su valiosa contribución desde la inclusión de este tema en el programa de trabajo de la comisión en 2018. Las conclusiones y sus comentarios brindan una clarificación autoritativa de la naturaleza de los principios generales del derecho como fuente del derecho internacional. Su ámbito o categorías en función de dónde surgen estos principios, sus funciones y su relación con las otras fuentes del derecho internacional, los tratados y la costumbre internacional. Es útil que se haya recogido en los comentarios al proyecto de conclusión uno, que la expresión fuente del derecho internacional se refiere al proceso jurídico por el que surge una norma de derecho internacional y a la forma en que lo hace. Las normas de derecho internacional efectivamente surgen en el sistema jurídico internacional a través de los tratados de la costumbre internacional y de los principios generales del derecho. Si bien los estados son los principales actores en el reconocimiento de los principios generales del derecho, los comentarios a la conclusión dos reflejan correctamente la contribución al reconocimiento de los principios generales por parte de las organizaciones y entre internacionales Internacionales a través de sus instrumentos internos, los alegatos y declaraciones presentados en procedimientos judiciales, así como mediante su práctica en materia de celebración de tratados con otras organizaciones internacionales y con estados. Valoramos que las conclusiones y comentarios contengan la metodología para identificar a los principios generales del derecho derivados de los sistemas jurídicos nacionales y a los principios generales del derecho formados en el sistema jurídico internacional. Consideramos de gran utilidad que en los comentarios a las conclusiones se hayan incluido, para fines ilustrativos, ejemplos de principios generales de cada una de las dos categorías de principios generales. La conclusión 210 aborda adecuadamente las funciones de los principios generales del derecho. Concordamos en que los principios generales del del derecho pueden contribuir a la coherencia del sistema jurídico internacional y que sirven, inter alia, de base de derechos y obligaciones sustantivos, así como de normas secundarias y procesales y se utilizan para interpretar y complementar otras normas de derecho internacional. Estamos de acuerdo con la afirmación de la conclusión 11 de que los principios generales del derecho no están jerárquicamente subordinados a los tratados ni al derecho internacional consuetudinario, que pueden coexistir con normas consuetudinarias y contenidas en tratados de contenido similar y que cualquier conflicto entre las fuentes del derecho internacional se resuelve mediante técnicas de interpretación y resolución de conflictos generalmente aceptadas. Apoyamos también que se haya incluido la conclusión 12 a manera de cláusula sin perjuicio, a fin de tener en cuenta principios generales del derecho con un ámbito de aplicación limitado, ración de persona, ya sea regional, subregional u otro, a fin de reflejar la existencia de esta clase de principios dentro del sistema jurídico en el cual surgen y se aplican. Señora presidente, el Ecuador apoya la recomendación de la comisión de conformidad con el artículo 23 de su estatuto que la asamblea general a tome nota en una resolución del proyecto de conclusiones sobre los principios generales del derecho. Adjunte el proyecto de conclusiones a la resolución y vele porque tenga la máxima difusión posible. B. Señale el proyecto de conclusiones con sus comentarios a la atención de los estados y de todos cuantos pudieran estar llamados a identificar y aplicar principios generales del derecho y se tome nota de la bibliografía preparada por el relator especial y presentada en su 4.º informe. Acogemos con beneplácito que se haya incluido en el programa de trabajo actual de la comisión el tema identificación y consecuencias jurídicas de las obligaciones ergaomnes en el derecho internacional y que se haya nombrado al señor Masohiko Asada como relator especial. Acogemos también con beneplácito que con base en la recomendación del grupo de trabajo sobre el programa de trabajo a largo plazo de la comisión presidido por el señor Marcelo Vázquez Bermúdez, se haya incluido en dicho programa el tema el derecho a regular en el derecho internacional de las inversiones, propuesto por la señora Bilawan Manclandatakul, así como una versión actualizada elaborada por el señor Mario Oyarzábal, del tema jurisdicción extraterritorial que ya se había incluido en el programa de trabajo a largo plazo de la comisión en 2006. Consideramos que ambos temas constituirían una aportación útil al desarrollo progresivo del derecho internacional y su codificación. Señora presidenta, antes de concluir permítame recordar que el grupo nacional del Ecuador de la Corte Permanente de arbitraje y otros grupos nacionales de otros países han presentado la candidatura del embajador Marcelo Vázquez Bermúdez a la corte internacional de justicia para el periodo 2027 2036. Su amplia experiencia de más de 35 años como académico y practicante del derecho internacional su contribución como miembro de la comisión de derecho internacional durante dos decenios y su comprobada capacidad de trabajo jurídico colaborativo con juristas de todas las regiones lo convierten en un candidato excepcionalmente bien calificado para servir en la Corte con profesionalismo, profundo conocimiento jurídico, imparcialidad e independencia. Me permito invitar respetuosamente a las distinguidas delegaciones a apoyar esta candidatura que además busca preservar la representación de América Latina y el Caribe en la corte. Deseo concluir mi intervención reiterando mi reconocimiento a la Comisión de Derecho Internacional por la encomiable labor cumplida durante su último periodo período de sesiones Muchas gracias


6th Committee · Chair [2:44:30]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Ecuador for his statement I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Austria. You have the process.


Austria [2:44:51]:

Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, let me begin my statement by commending the commission on the adoption of the draft articles on immunity of states from foreign criminal jurisdiction on second reading. The set of draft articles and the commentaries thereto are a significant step towards bringing more clarity into an increasingly important area of international law. Austria particularly approves the procedural provisions and safeguards in part four, which ensure a balancing between the interests of the state of the official concerned and those of the forum state. Part four thus enhances legal clarity and compliance with the rule of law. However, for some issues, we would have preferred different solutions. As regards the definition of the terms state official and act performed in an official capacity, Austria would have favored aligning the terminology used to that resorted to by the commission in the articles on responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts, which refer to state organ and exercise of governmental authority. For reasons of consistency, it is advisable to use the same terminology in comparable situations. Furthermore, draft article two raises the question whether the person seemingly acting as a state official must be entitled under the domestic law to exercise state functions or whether it suffices that the person does so as a matter of fact. The latter variant has, after all, become highly relevant in international proceedings involving the commission of serious crimes, particularly at the International Court of Justice, as for instance in the Bosnian genocide case. Finally, the phrase, who represents the state is unfortunate as any state official who acts in that capacity will automatically represent the state. According to the commentary, whether a de facto official is covered or not depends on national legislation and the practice of each state, but then explains that the definition would not cover all de facto officials. Austria would like to emphasize that it considers article six of great significance and commends the Commission for its diligent drafting of this crucial provision. As regards the future of the draft articles, Austria supports the recommendation of the Commission to elaborate a convention, preferably by a diplomatic codification conference. The Austrian government would be willing to consider the possibility of hosting such a conference in Vienna. It has always been our assessment that a binding treaty based on the draft articles can be the only feasible outcome of the Commission's work on this topic. We've taken note of the cautious wording in the IOC's recommendation, namely the addition at the appropriate time. We agree with such an approach insofar as we also see a need for further discussion on the relationship of a future convention, and in particular the procedural provisions and safeguards we with existing international treaties and for the development of a provision addressing this relationship appropriately. To this end, the sixth committee should mandate a structured process allowing for the necessary deliberation by states. Madam President, the Austrian delegation wishes to congratulate the special rapporteur Marcelo Vasquez Bermudes on the topic of general principles of law for his successful work. The draft conclusions now adopted on second reading at the commission 77 session provide a highly useful instrument on fundamental aspects of this source of international law. They are concise and well formulated. Allow me to add a few remarks on some of the conclusions. As Austria has said in the past, we would have preferred the expression international community over the term community of nations in draft conclusion too. This would not only have aligned better with the Spanish equivalent Comunidad international and earlier outcome texts of the ILC like for instance the articles on responsibility of states for internationally wrongful acts. It would have avoided complicated explanations as in paragraph five of the Commentary to Draft Conclusion two, which make clear that international organizations may also contribute to the formation of general principles of law. In this regard, we appreciate the examples provided in paragraph six of the commentary to draft conclusion two. However, these examples are exclusively drawn from the practice of the United Nations. Austria considers that also the practice of regional or other organizations would have been worth mentioning. In regards to draft conclusion seven, which specifies the methodology of identifying the controversial category of general principles of law formed within the international legal system, Austria remains skeptical as to their existence. appreciate appreciate the special rapporteurs and the Commission's effort in providing examples for such category, ranging for instance from sovereign equality, utiposititis, the duty to cooperate and human dignity to international intergenerational equity. While highly useful in its illustrations, it remains questionable to what extent their legal existence can be shown by the methods advocated in draft conclusion seven, namely for the following reasons. Paragraph four of the commentaries to draft conclusion seven, suggests that the necessity to ascertain that the community of nations has recognized a principle as intrinsic to that system is to be achieved by analyzing all available evidence of the recognition of such principle. It then continues to characterize as available evidence international instruments reflecting the principle resolution resolutions adopted by international organizations, and statements made by states and international organizations. The commentary does not provide any examples for instruments that would recognize a principle as a principle intrinsic to the international legal order, or a resolution that would similarly do so. It rather appears that binding and non-binding nonbinding instruments, as well as resolutions, may invoke certain principles, but that they hardly ever contain any indication of recognizing them as intrinsic to the international. legal order and thus as constituting general principles of law formed within the international legal system. Even more fundamentally, we question the reasons provided in paragraph two of the commentary to draft conclusion seven, in favor of the existence of general principles of law formed within the international legal system. The fact that judicial and state practice may support the existence of these principles of law is hardly a convincing and sufficient reason. In particular, if the examples do not prove the intrinsic nature, similarly, the suggestion that the international legal system must be able to generate general principles of law that are specific to it does not seem to be a cogent real. reason. And finally, the fact that the wording of article 38 paragraph one literacy of the statute of the international court of justice does not expressly limit general principles of law to those derived from the national legal system. In our view, there is in any event no scope of application in practice for such general principles. as the relevant rules are already contained either in treaties or in customary international law. For the sake of time, Madam President, I will cut short my statement. I would have had some more comments on the identification and legal consequences of obligations erga omnis in international law but those are submitted in writing to you thank you very much.


6th Committee · Chair [2:54:09]:

I thank the distinguished representative of Austria for his statement. Distinguished delegates, the distinguished representative of Austria was the last speaker for this morning. According to our program of work, we will continue the discussion on the first cluster of topics tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. This afternoon at 3 p.m., the legal advisers will continue their customer meeting. please note that the meeting will take place next door on the site in the ecosoc chamber the meeting is adjourned.