Sixth Committee, 22nd plenary meeting - General Assembly, 80th session

Distinguished colleagues, good afternoon. I call to order the twenty second meeting of the sixth committee for the eightieth session of the General Assembly. this afternoon the sixth committee will continue and will conclude its consideration of agenda item seventy eight report of the united nations commission on international trade law on the work of its fifty eighth session after which it will undertake its consideration of agenda item one four six administration of justice at the united nations to be followed in turn by the consideration of agenda item 85, the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction. Distinguished delegates, let us now revert to our consideration of agenda item 78, report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its 58th session. I draw your attention to the report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, on the work undertaken during its fifty seventh session which has been issued as document a eighty seventeen which was introduced by the chair of the commission yesterday the report is available on the website of the sixth committee and on the unscitral website distinguished colleagues i therefore give the floor to the first speaker on our list which is the distinguished representative of the islamic republic of iran you have the floor sir

Thank you, Madam Chair. We also extend our condolences for the passing of the Ambassador Tarrio, the late Chair of the 58th session of the UNSCR. Madam Chair, as a member of the UNSCR Commission, we attach great importance to its works and activities. We actively engaged in the 58th session of the Commission. which concluded with the adoption and consideration of several documents, including the draft United Nations Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents, establishing a uniform legal framework for negotiable transport documents covering all modes of transport, including multimodal transport. Madam Chair, with respect to the statute of the Advisory Center on International Investment Dispute Resolution, We acknowledge UNCITRAL's significant progress in advancing the international investment dispute settlement framework, particularly in a manner that benefits developing countries. We would like to underscore that although the statute of the advisory center was adopted in principle by the UNCITRAL commission during its 57th session in 2024, its full operationalization remains a work in progress. This requires further preparatory efforts, which will be addressed through informal consultations, including the upcoming meeting in Paris from one to third of December, 2025, as well as any future ACOP meetings. We welcome the constructive discussions in working group three regarding the establishment of a standing mechanism for investment dispute settlement as a developing country. We underscore the vital importance of designing a mechanism that promotes predictability, fairness, and consistency in the resolution of disputes, while fully safeguarding the sovereign rights of states to regulate in the public interest. In this context, we wish to highlight that inter alia, caution and feasibility, sovereignty and voluntary participation, clear scope of jurisdiction, explicit consent, equity, And a special consideration for developing countries remain among the key principles and elements in relation to the structure and overall design of such a mechanism. Madam Chair, the Islamic Republic of Iran acknowledges the importance of the draft provisions on procedural and cross-cutting issues as part of the broader efforts to reform investor state dispute settlement. We appreciate the valuable work undertaken by UNCITRAL Working Group III to enhance fairness, transparency and consistency in ISDS processes, particularly in ways that could contribute to a more balanced and inclusive system for both investors and states, including developing countries. At the same time, we remain circumspect regarding any efforts to include political considerations. And in this regard, we express our concerns regarding the abuse of unilateral coercive measure, the taking into account political consideration such as unilateral coercive measures as grounds for denying benefits under investment agreements, treaties or any other provision. Such matters fall outside the technical mandate of ONCITRAL and risk politicizing international investment law. Embedding these elements in the ISDS reform could disproportionately impact developing countries and undermine legal neutrality. Reform efforts should therefore remain focused on legal and procedural improvement that promote fairness, predictability, and equal treatment for all parties. Procedural provisions must not disproportionately burden respondent states or restrict their ability to present a full and effective defense. Efficiency and procedural economy are important, but they must not come at the expense of thorough adjudication, access to justice, or the preservation of states' regulatory and policy space in the public interest. Finally, we underscore the need for clear and transparent procedural standards that limit excessive tribunal discretion and guard against abusive or costly procedural tactics. Rules on evidence, document production, and bifurcation should be designed to prevent imbalance and to ensure equitable access for states with varying institutional capacities. Mechanisms should also exist to safeguard against the misuse of evidence or other procedural abuses. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Iran for that statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Belarus. You have the floor.

Madam Chair, the Republic of Belarus read very carefully the report drafted by UNCITRAL. We assess the outcome of the 58th session of UNCITRAL very positively. Belarus commends the efforts of the UNCITRAL Secretariat to maintain a highly professional team and to do its work uninterrupted. We believe that coordination is very good, there's high caliber analytical support to states, and dialogue is unswervingly open and inclusive. This is characteristic of UNCTRACEL. As an active member of UNCTRACEL, Belarus is convinced that the instruments the Commission is developing is, well, they are of exceptional importance, not just for further harmonization of international trade law, but also for enhancing national legislation so as to create investment and trade conditions which meet contemporary, which are in alignment with contemporary trends. Our delegation applauds the work over the last few years done by the working groups under the auspices of the Commission. Some of the key areas of UNCITRAL's work which are of the greatest interest to us are the settlement of commercial disputes, the reform of the investor state dispute settlement system, e-commerce and digitalization, as well as cargo trade documentation regulations. We deem it important and support the work the Commission is undertaking on enhancing the international investor state dispute settlement system. We believe that it is necessary to approach this issue having thought it through in the interests of transparency and predictability of procedures, a fair balance of the rights and obligations of states, respect for the principle of voluntary participation, the equality of states, respect for the sovereignty of states when looking at disputes and appealing arbitral awards. We believe that the appeals mechanism that's being established should be accessible to appeal any arbitral award on the basis of clear-cut criteria. We hope that the decisions being developed will bolster trust in the system, enhance the effectiveness of procedures, while taking into account the diversity of legal systems, all of which will further the development of investment. One of the areas of the Commission's work which is of particular interest to the Republic of Belarus is e-commerce and digitalization. Belarus is actively developing a digital economy, including e-commerce, As well as e-commerce using smart contracts, the establishment of effective and flexible regulations is a priority if our economy is to adapt to the digital sphere. We welcome the fact that Working Group Four has implemented its mandate on... the use of AI and automation, automated systems in the formation of agreements. We are counting on the Commission continuing its work on the implementation of end-to-end digitalization of trade and the switch to paperless as well. We applaud the fact that work on the Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents is being finalised. We believe that this international legal document will be a highly important instrument for streamlining and incentivising trade, helping to unify legal regulations for international cargo trade. We believe that the Commission is doing excellent work on preparing and disseminating materials, including explanatory materials, and they are also building capacity of law professionals by holding training. sessions and ensuring exchange best practices. We unswervingly support the mandate of UNCITRAL as regards the progressive development and the harmonization of international trade law. We stand convinced that documents which have been adopted and are currently under preparation will continue to bolster the predictability of legal proceedings, will also help to cut transactional costs, strengthen trust between those engaged in trade and create a legal environment that meets the needs of the global economy and sustainable development.

I thank you. Thank you very much to the distinguished representative of Belarus for that statement. And I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Ghana.

Madam Chair, my delegation wishes to commend the Secretary of UNCTAD for a sterling leadership and dedicated service at the helm of the Organization over the past few years. We also wish to express our profound gratitude to the Central Secretariat for the comprehensive report and to the Vice-Chair of the 58th Session for his able stewardship. Furthermore, we extend our heartfelt condolences to the Government and the people of El Salvador on the passing of the late Chair of the 58th Session, Her Excellency Julia Emma Vulturo Tarrio. As a longstanding and active member of the Commission, Ghana reaffirms its unwavering commitment to UNCITRAL's mandate of developing and harmonizing international trade law. It is our considered view that a fair, transparent, and modern legal framework is indispensable for sustainable global commerce and development, particularly for developing and less developed countries. Ghana continues to demonstrate its commitment through its active participation in the Commission sessions, inter-sessional meetings, and the work group -- and the work of the working groups. A significant highlight of the past year was Ghana's hosting of the African Group Coordination Meeting on ISDS reform held from 15th to 17th March 2025 in Accra. Organized in collaboration with UNCITRAL's secretariat, the Commonwealth Secretariat, the African Continental Free Trade Area Secretariat, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ghana, The meeting brought together delegates from across the continent to consolidate African positions and strengthen regional engagements in support of UNCITRAL's work. Madam Chair, Ghana takes great pride in being part of this Commission's journey towards the adoption of the Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents, a landmark legal instrument that will enhance international trade facilitation. through the digitalization and harmonization of a unified transport documents. The convention comes as a defining moment, offering a unified legal framework that bridges traditional trade practices with the realities of a digital economy, whilst ensuring that developing and landlocked countries are better integrated into global supply chains. The government of Ghana is pleased to announce its readiness to host the signing ceremony of the convention in the second half of 2026 after its adoption by the General Assembly. This offer reflects Ghana's enduring confidence in multilateral cooperation through law and its desire to advance UNCITRAL's visibility and outreach within the developing world. My delegation therefore kindly requests this august committee to consider Ghana's offer favorably to designate the instrument as, quote, Accra Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents, unquote. Such a designation would acknowledge Ghana's contribution and reinforce the shared commitment of member states to innovation, inclusion, and the efficiency in international trade. Ghana remains firmly committed to working with all delegations to ensure the successful signing and implementation of this convention. We are confident that if Ghana's request finds favor in this committee, quote, of the African, of the Accra Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents, will stand as a lasting contribution to international trade law and to the equitable growth of global commerce. Ghana wishes to reiterate its offer to host the advisory center on ISDS and will, in the coming days, submit a detailed supporting proposal. I thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Ghana for that statement, and I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Chile. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, my delegation wishes to express its thanks for the outstanding work done by the Chair of the Bureau of the 58th session of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNCITRAL, that is Ms. Julia Emma Villatoro Tarrio, Ambassador of El Salvador in Austria and the Permanent Representative to the United Nations in Vienna. We wish to express our deep sorrow following her passing that happened shortly after the conclusion of her mandate. Her leadership was fundamental to ensure the effective discharge of the Commission's mandate, strengthening its impact on Member States and providing necessary legal tools to progress at a time of global change. Her active involvement and steadfast commitment represented an exemplary expression of professionalism, sense of service, and respect for the work of UNCITRAL. Madam Chair, One year from the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the Commission offers us a valuable opportunity to reflect on its achievements, not only over the last year, but rather also over the course of its six decades of existence. It's also a time to look ahead with a strategic and collaborative vision. to ensure that we strengthen its work into the future in an international context that is marked by increasing challenges and transformation. Chile congratulates UNCITRAL following the progress made during this session, in particular within the work of the working groups. We'd like to point to, in particular, Working Group II, progress towards achieving the mandate to ensure that electronic arbitral awards, enjoy the same recognition and enforceability as physical awards, hence reinforcing legal certainty and adapting international arbitration to the digital era. On working group three, progress in the implementation and setting up of the Advisory Centre on International Investment Dispute Resolution. aimed at supporting developing states in particular in preventing and managing investor state disputes, as well as focusing on capacity building. We highlight the work done at the meetings held in Bangkok in December 2024 and in Yerevan in May 2025. We extend our best wishes for success for the next meeting in Paris that will be held in December this year. In addition, the finalisation of the toolkit, UNCITRAL calls it, on the prevention and mitigation of international investment disputes prepared by the work provides guidance to states to allow them to implement preventive mechanisms in their legal and administrative frameworks. hence contributing to effective strategies to prevent and mitigate international investment disputes. Turning now to Working Group 4, we point to the progress made at the last two sessions, including the conclusion of the draft on the UNCITRAL Model Law on Automated Contracting from 2024 and its guidance for domestic incorporation as well as the work on a supplementary set of rules for data supply contracts. Turning now to working group five, we saw the adoption of the UNCITRAL toolkit and background notes on asset tracing and recovery and insolvency procedures. This represents a concrete step towards improving international cooperation in the identification and recovery of hidden or fraudulently transferred assets, promoting more effective, transparent and equitable insolvency procedures. We also highlight the Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents. This will facilitate the safe transfer of goods across all modes of transport, granting legal certainty to negotiable electronic documents. This instrument represents a landmark that will strengthen legal certainty and will improve access to trade funding. Madam Chair, Chile would like to specifically flag the excellent work done by the UNCITRAL Secretariat, which, despite staffing limitations, has continued to meet high standards in all of its roles, including the technical preparations for the meetings, facilitation of inter-sessional meetings, and support for the substantive work of the working groups. We also highlight institutional cooperation and the joint work between UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT, and the Hague Conference on International private law. This we particularly point to the UNCITRAL toolkit and the background notes on asset tracing for insolvency procedures drafted by the Hague Conference and UNIDROIT Secretariats. We also have revised coordination legislative guidelines provided by the three secretariats aimed at improving agenda coordination, guaranteeing the efficient use of resources, and avoiding thematic overlap and preventing fragmentation. We also welcome the fact that Chile will once again host the Latin America and Caribbean Day in 2025. We are also honored to host the ninth intersessional meeting of the Working Group III. This will be held in Santiago from the 5th to the 7th of November this year. welcome the opportunity to welcome delegates to Santiago and to contribute to progress in this important process. We reiterate our steadfast commitment to the mandate and work of UNCITRAL. We value its essential contribution to the codification and progressive harmonization of international trade law as an essential tool for legal stability, trade facilitation and sustainable development at a global level. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Chile for that statement and I will now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Dominican Republic. You have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Dominican Republic expresses its deep concern about the situation in Venezuela and the Our sincere sympathies to the government and people of the Republic of El Salvador following the regrettable passing of Ambassador Julia Emma Beattorotario, who chaired the 58th session of ONZATRA. We pay tribute to her memory and her legacy of leadership, commitment and dedication to the principles of multilateralism. Her work in leading the commission was an example of dedication and professionalism that honours both her country and the whole UN system. We would like to thank the Secretary General for the presentation of the report, the UNCITRAL report, and we thank the Secretariat of the Commission for preparing the detailed document that reflects the achievements made and the pending challenges in the harmonisation and modernisation of international trade law. My delegation recognises the importance of the results contained in the report, in particular the completion and adoption of the draft convention on negotiable cargo documents. This is an instrument that will strengthen legal certainty in international cooperation. Trade transactions will promote the use of negotiable cargo and electronic documents and will facilitate multimodal trade, we believe that this new text represents a significant contribution to modernizing global trade, particularly for developing economies that seek greater levels of integration in international supply chains. Furthermore, we welcome the adoption of the UNCITRAL toolkits on prevention and mitigation of international investment disputes, as well as on asset tracing and recovery in insolvency procedures. These provide practical guidance to states in adopting more effective, transparent and consistent legal frameworks fully in line with the needs of contemporary economies. These instruments, together with the establishment of the advisory centre on investor state disputes, reflect the Commission's ability to comprehensively address the distinct aspects of international trade law, including preventive negotiation and the fair and balanced resolution of disputes. We take note with interest of the working, the work program adopted for the next few years. This includes topics, uh, that are particularly relevant, such as the digital trade, electronic payment, the use of decentralized autonomous, uh, organisations and legal implications of the use of AI on international contracts. These debates are fundamental to guaranteeing that international trade law continues to evolve inclusively, taking into account technological innovation as well as legal and economic realities of developing states. We also welcome the reference in the report to UNCTAD's non-legislative activities, in particular training, dissemination and capacity building. These contribute to ensuring a more effective implementation of the legal texts adopted by the Commission. In this context, we encourage further participation of developing countries in these activities and enhanced cooperation mechanisms with other international academic and regional organizations. In our capacity as a re-elected member of UNCITRAL for 2025 to 2031, the Dominican Republic reaffirms its commitment to the principles that guide the work of the Commission and our readiness to continue participating actively and constructively focused on consensus as we work to codify and progressively develop international trade law. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Dominican Republic for that statement. Distinguished representatives, the distinguished representative of the Dominican Republic was the last speaker on my list for this agenda item. We have thus concluded our debate on agenda item 78, the report on the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its 58th session. I will now give the floor to the distinguished Vice Chair of ANZCTRAL, Mr. Paul Kwabena Nana Se Osei of Ghana, to make some concluding remarks. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you very much, Madam Chair, Excellencies, distinguished delegates. I wish to take this opportunity to express our profound gratitude to the SET Committee.

For.

Graciously and overwhelming support that you've given to us and the support you've shown to the report that was presented. It is our fervent hope that this is a testament and a determination of all of us to see a change of the narrative, narrative in the sense that the report, through its implementation, is going to fashion a way out and making international trade, um, um, a great, a great deal for all of us and for us to see that things are moving in the right way and a positive direction. I wish to thank you all and I, I hope that, uh, the issues that were raised, particularly, uh, the idea of, uh, making more funds available to the commission will be greatly adhered to. I thank you and I wish you all the best.

I thank Mr. Paul Kwabena Nana Seowsei for his remarks. On behalf of the Sixth Committee, I wish to congratulate you and your colleagues in the Commission for this year's session of UNCTAD. Distinguished delegates, I understand that Mr. Matthias Etmeyer of Austria will coordinate the preparation of the two draft resolutions under this agenda item and that Mr. Abdulaziz Al-Sulaiti of Qatar will be the co-coordinator for the draft resolution on the United Nations Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents. As agreed at our first meeting, We will provide the coordinators assigned to each agenda item the opportunity to take the floor to give a brief indication of their plans and, if possible, to already introduce the initial draft of their proposals for draft resolutions where applicable. As such, could I ask Mr. Matthias Edmaier of Austria to take the floor on this agenda item?

Madam President, Austria is very pleased to again serve as coordinator for the UNCITRAL resolutions in the Sixth Committee. This year there are two resolutions. Both draft resolutions have been circulated to delegations on 15 October. As usual, the draft omnibus resolution is based on last year's omnibus resolution with necessary updates from the report of the Commission, as well as streamlining. I will let my co coordinator, my distinguished colleague from Qatar, introduce the draft resolution entitled United Nations Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents. On the draft omnibus resolution, the informal consultations have taken place yesterday in this Chamber at 2 p.m.

And started with a briefing by Madam Secretary of UNCITRAL.

I would like to thank all delegations for the very constructive spirit of yesterday's consultations. Delegations may send their written comments until this Friday, 24 October, close of business. We will subsequently work towards circulating an updated draft resolution with the aim to put it under silence procedure. Let me just repeat, delegations may send their written comments until this Friday, 24 October close of business. Finally, let me also remind that the omnibus resolution is a country-led resolution. I would therefore encourage delegations to co-sponsor the omnibus resolution to show the support for the valuable work of UNCITRAL. And we recommend that the Sixth Committee adopt the draft resolution without a vote.

I thank you.

Thank you very much to Mr. Matthias Edmaier of Austria for that. And could I now also ask Mr. Abdulaziz Al-Sulaiti of Qatar, the coordinator of the draft resolution on the United Nations Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents to take the floor on this agenda item.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I have the honor, together with my colleague from Austria, to introduce the draft resolution entitled United Nations Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents as contained in the report of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law on the work of its 58th session. At its 1243rd meeting on 11 July 2025, the Commission approved the draft convention and by consensus recommended its adoption by the General Assembly. The draft resolution before the committee recalls UNCITRAL's mandate to harmonize and modernize international trade law, recognizes the importance of negotiable transport documents in facilitating trade finance and the sale of goods in transit, and underscores the desirability of uniform rules covering all modes of transport, including multimodal transport.

It further highlights the benefits of a uniform legal framework that supports digital transformation in global trade.

It also commends the Commission for its work and authorizes a signing ceremony to be held in Accra, Ghana, where the convention will be open for signatures as the Accra Convention on Negotiable Cargo Documents. In our view, the text reflects a broad consensus among delegations and the shared commitment to advancing legal certainty and efficiency in international trade. We therefore recommend that the Sixth Committee adopt the draft resolution without a vote. Before concluding, Madam Chairperson, I wish to note that we concluded the informal consultation earlier today and received a few minor comments, which will be reflected in the revised draft resolution to be circulated to the Sixth Committee by close of business tomorrow. Alongside this revision, we will also share additional information regarding the silence procedure. The co coordinators remain available to address any further comments or suggestions from delegations. Thank you, Madam Chairperson.

Thank you very much to Mr. Abdulaziz Al-Sulaiti of Qatar and to both coordinators in general. I encourage you to use the e-sponsorship module in the e-delegate portal for the circulation of each draft resolution as soon as possible and to submit them for processing in good time. Dear delegates, the Sixth Committee will now continue with its consideration of agenda item 146, Administration of Justice at the United Nations. I wish to draw your attention to the following documents, which are available on the committee's website. Report of the Secretary General on administration of justice at the United Nations contained in document A/AT/136. Report of the Secretary General on the activities of the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services contained in document A/AT/135. and report of the internal justice council on administration of justice at the united nations contained in document a eighty one three one it should be recalled that at its second meeting the general assembly on the recommendation of the general committee referred the present agenda item to both the fifth and sixth committees. in paragraph twenty seven of resolution seventy nine two hundred and fifty four the assembly invited the sixth committee to consider the legal aspects of the report to be submitted by the secretary general without prejudice to the role of the fifth committee as the main committee entrusted with responsibilities for administrative and budgetary matters. Please be aware that this year informal consultations on this item will be coordinated by Ms. Nataša Šebenik of Slovenia. It is envisaged that, following previous practice, a letter addressed to the President of the General Assembly requesting that she forward it to the Chair of the Fifth Committee will be prepared in the framework of those informal consultations. I understand that the annual briefing on this agenda item was held last Friday. Distinguished delegates, we will now begin our debate. The first speaker on the list is the distinguished representative of Cameroon, taking the floor on behalf of the African Group. You have the floor.

Madam Chairperson, I have the honour to deliver a statement on behalf of the African Group. The African Group would like to thank the Secretary-General for his report on the administration of justice at the UN. contained in document A/80/131, A/80/135 and A/80/136. Madam Chairperson, the African Group attaches great importance to an independent, impartial, transparent and professionalized administration of the justice system within the United Nations, at the core of which lie an independent judicial system and is convinced that this will contribute to a responsible management of administrative dispute while appreciating the intricate link between an effective internal justice system and the organization immunity from legal processes. The group support effort to strengthen the UN internal system of justice to ensure that work-related disputes are addressed in a timely and fair manner and is of the view that an effective formal and informal system go hand in hand with informal conflict resolution comprising an equally crucial component of the system of administration of justice and the office of the United Nation Ombudsman and mediation service designated as and remaining the primary tool for informal conflict resolution in the UN. The African group resolved the view that the office can be further strengthened by ensuring that there is timely response to its recommendation before the deadline for the formal submission of a case. While the office lacks decision-making authority, option could be considered for strengthening its recommendation. Strengthening an effective ombudsman office can save cost, particularly in the current liquidity crisis. In this context, We are aware, we are pleased to note that increased use of mediation by the office in appropriate case has contributed to successfully resolving issue without having resort to litigation. We encourage the use of informal conflict resolution. Madam Chairperson, the African group take this opportunity to welcome the new member of the Internal Justice Council. The group take note of the view of the Secretary General and those of the United Nation Dispute Tribunal in paragraph 65 to 78 of document A/AT/136 in response to the request of the General Assembly in paragraph 26 of its resolution 79/254 regarding the recommendation for a pilot project on judicial mediation and the use of conciliatory or other proceeding in accordance with Article 19 of the UNDT rule of procedure. The African group resolved the view that time and cost saving judicial mediation, conciliation proceeding, or any judicial proceeding aim at the fair and expeditious disposal of case pursuant to the exercise of the tribunal of its existing authority under Article 19 of its rule of procedure is desirable. where all other form of informal resolution have been exhausted, including use of the ample service provided by the Office of the UN Ombudsman and mediation services under the informal first approach. Where a matter raises legal issue that will benefit from a formal decision or require a precedent setting intervention, such as a recurring or group issue, direct formal intervention should be more appropriate. Therefore, both judicial mediation or conciliatory proceeding on the one hand, and informal and formal mediation conducted by the Ombudsman Office on the other hand, are viewed as complimentary and not mutually exclusive. Furthermore, giving the voluntary nature of the service provided by the Ombudsman Office, the choice between mediation or conciliatory proceeding conducted by judges And mediation conducted by the ombudsman office should be responsibly left to the party to decide in accordance with the voluntary nature of the ombudsman office and norm of individual autonomy. As it is, informal conflict resolution services are conducted by different offices throughout the administration of justice system. We believe that access to a broad range of services can only strengthen the administration of justice in the UN. We now turn to recommendation four and five of the Internal Justice Council regarding requiring continuing judicial education and training and exposure of judges to operational realities through site visit and the operational realities faced by staff member and the administration, as well as the right of victim and witnesses appearing before the judge. and is further proposed to strengthen the enforcement mechanism by reconsidering the issue of compliance and sanction for judge, along with the council proposed plan to manage the performance of judge and the concern about ethical conduct and impartiality of judge. The African group is of the view that this consideration could be weighed alongside the interest of a judiciary that is independent, including of management as one of the foundational principle guiding the general assembly when establishing the new system under resolution 62/228. We note the concern of the Internet Justice Council regarding the limited availability of representation for staff through the office of staff legal assistance and propose that discussion are held between the council and the office to address the root causes. We also call for swift action to fill the nine vacant position in the Appellate Tribunal and the Dispute Tribunal. Chairperson, according to the Secretary General report, the three dispute tribunal in New York, Geneva and Nairobi disposed of 200 cases in 2024, the fewest since 2009, with gross disparity in the number of cases handled by the different tribunal. While acknowledging the current financial constraint on the organization, the group welcomed the measure introduced by management to increase the handling of the case load and deem it appropriate to maintain the half-time judge model, which has proved to enhance the effectiveness of the system of justice. The African recalls that racism and sexual harassment has been a significant issue over the last several years within the organization and is concerned with the astronomical rise of the number of cases. In this matter, the African group denounced and condemns in its stronger term sexual harassment and racism. Our group also acknowledged the comment from the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and mediation services that there are significant deficiency in the execution of a victim center approach for case concerning sexual harassment. Furthermore, The Secretary General report utilizing data gathered by the Office of Internal Oversight Services indicated that complaint concerning racism or discrimination due to race, ethnicity or nationality rose significantly from 12, from 20 in 2020 to 81 in 2024. Consequently, The group note that awareness initiative and corrective measure might require an alternative strategy and propose that the Secretary General initiate an inquiry to identify the cause of this disturbing trend and take appropriate measure to put an end to it. Chair, Madam Chairperson, in conclusion, The Africa Group wishes to renew its continuing and unwavering commitment to support the organization effort to improve its internal justice system and provide staff member as its most important asset, the justice they deserve in an impartial, accessible and accountable manner, giving that positive work climate also lead to a positive culture. It is equally important that administrator endeavor to create a sound ecosystem at the workplace that value human resources. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cameroon on behalf of the African group. And I now give the floor to the representative of the European Union taking the floor on behalf of the European Union and its member states. You have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have the honor to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member states. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, the Republic of Moldova, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, as well as Armenia and Monaco, align themselves with this statement. We thank the Secretary General, the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services, and the Internal Justice Council for their reports. We also thank them and all those involved in the system of administration of justice at the UN for their dedication and continued efforts to improve its functioning. The latest reports indicate that the system has reached a certain level of maturity with constant progress over the years, which we commend, while noting that certain challenges persist. As the organization navigates significant change, including the liquidity crisis, the UNAT reforms, and evolving workforce needs, we must ensure that the system is equipped to meet these challenges effectively. In this vein, we would like to offer a few considerations as regards respectively the formal system, the informal system, as well as certain general points. First, as regards the informal system, we know that 86% of management evaluation requests did not proceed to the Dispute Tribunal. This data confirms that the management evaluation function continues to play a key role in providing resolution to staff members. and demonstrates the value of addressing disputes early in the process. In this respect, we commend the important role of the Office of Staff Legal Assistance in providing advice and service as an effective filter mechanism, with 89% of cases concluded without recourse to the formal system. We support OSLA's launch of a client satisfaction survey and its efforts to strengthen the voluntary supplemental funding mechanism. However, we know that application to the dispute tribunal focus primarily on appointed related matters, 37%, and separations from services, 20%. With ongoing reforms potentially increasing separations, the system must be prepared for possible increases in caseload and continue in its efforts to improve case management. Access to justice for all categories of personnel remains a priority for the European Union. We welcome the regularization of the pilot project enabling affiliate personnel to access the ombudsman services, whose relevance is confirmed by the 16% increase in cases in 2024. But we know that access to the formal justice system for non-staff personnel remains limited. We continue to advocate for exploring how to improve remedies offered to non-staff personnel, particularly their access to the formal justice system, while taking into account budgetary constraints. As regards restatement and compensation, we take note of the information provided and of the practical challenges in implementing restatement orders, particularly when significant time has elapsed between separation and final judgment. Yet again, it is important to reflect on how to address the possible increase in such cases in light of the ongoing and expected increase in separations from service. Second, as regarding formal system, we reiterate our full support to the continued promotion and expansion of the informal first approach. As confirmed by the high satisfaction survey results, the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services plays an essential role in fostering early resolution of workplace conflict, and we commend the continued outreach efforts to raise awareness of this approach throughout the organization. As noted in the report, unresolved workplace conflict carries substantial costs, diminished productivity, employee disengagement, elevated stress, significant diversion of time, and reputational harm. Investment in informal conflict resolution, therefore, represent not only a commitment to personal welfare, but also sound organizational management. As the UN navigates through organizational change, the ombudsman and mediation function is increasingly critical. We therefore support expanding this approach, strengthening regional presence for equitable access, particularly in remote and hardship duty stations. and enhancing collaboration across the UN system. Third, we would like to provide a few general observations. We note with serious concern the significant increase in complaints related to racism or discrimination based on race, ethnicity or nationality, from 20 cases in 2020 to 81 in 2024, with investigations rising from seven to 23. It is important to understand whether this increase reflects a deteriorating context or increased awareness of available tools to address such unacceptable conduct. We echo the ombudsman's call for creating a safe environment for discussing racial discrimination without fear of repercussion. It would be useful to assess this data alongside protection against retaliation. as ensuring that misconduct can be reported without fear is essential to fostering integrity, transparency, and accountability. We welcome all activities to address racism and support the Anti-Racism Office's work. We appreciate continued multilingualism efforts, particularly the Appeals Tribunal's oral pronouncement in Arabic, English, and French in 2024, and the Ombudsman's services in Arabic. We invite the Secretariat to further explore the use of technology to facilitate multilingualism and reduce costs, in line with the recommendation of the United Nations Strategic Framework on Multilingualism adopted in 2024. We thank the Secretary-General for the proposals for establishing a single database for collecting and analyzing data from various justice system mechanisms, entities, funds, and programs. Improved data collection and analysis capabilities would enhance the ability to monitor trends and make evidence based improvements to the system. We know that the single repository system seems the most desirable in qualitative terms, followed by the scaled down repository system. However, the concrete feasibility of these proposals in light of their cost implication needs to be carefully assessed by the Fifth Committee. Finally, as noted in the report of the Internal Justice Council, The proposals currently being considered for budgetary and organizational changes could have an impact on the system of the administration of justice, which could have fewer resources to deal with potentially increased cases from separations and changing conditions. In future reports, it will be thus important to have more comprehensive information on the evolution of and recourse to the system in the context of the overall UNAT reforms. and how the system is being prepared to address the challenges and uncertainties ahead. To conclude, we express our appreciation for the continued efforts to improve the administration of justice system at the UN, and we encourage all relevant actors to pursue their endeavors to improve the dispute resolution mechanism while addressing the root causes of disputes proactively. A well-functioning, accessible, and adequately resourced system of administration of justice is essential not only for protecting individual rights and the well-being of the personnel, but also for the reputation of the organization and its ability to fulfill its mandate effectively. We remain committed to supporting these objectives and to working constructively with all the member states and stakeholders to achieve them. Thank you.

Thank you to the distinguished representative of the European Union for that statement, and I'll now give the floor to the distinguished representative of New Zealand, taking the floor on behalf of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, Cairns. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair. I have the honour to speak on behalf of Australia, Canada and New Zealand. Cairns countries thank the Secretary General, the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services and the Internal Justice Council for the comprehensive reports. These documents provide valuable insights into both individual justice outcomes and systemic challenges within the United Nations. We reaffirm that the United Nations must exemplify the values it promotes globally: transparency, accountability, equality, due process, and respect for the rule of law. We agree with the Secretary-General that these values remain foundational for the work of the organization and support the work of the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services to ensure these values are reflected in the UN's internal administration of justice system and its administrative decision-making processes. We commend the work of the Dispute Tribunal, Appeals Tribunal, and the Office of Administration of Justice, whose efforts in 2024 resulted in the disposal of hundreds of cases, including through innovative mechanisms such as expedited case disposal plans. CANS countries take note of the Internal Justice Council's recommendations to strengthen informal resolution mechanisms, including mediation, and to empower managers to resolve grievances early. We are encouraged by the Secretary-General's efforts to promote multilingualism and by the Ombudsman's increased outreach to staff in hardship duty stations and remote locations. These steps help ensure equitable access to justice across the UN system. CANS countries commend the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services for its continued commitment to delivering high-quality, accessible and empathetic support to staff across the Secretariat, reflected in its notably strong satisfaction survey participation and positive results. However, systemic issues persist. The Ombudsman's report highlights the impact of financial constraints, high workloads and organizational change on staff well-being. We welcome the organization's efforts to align its mental health and well-being strategy with international best practices, including the WHO/ILO policy brief on mental health at work. We are particularly concerned by the reports of continued prevalence of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation, including among senior staff and in peace operations. We welcome the development of anti racism training and the strategic action plan led by the Anti Racism Office and the steps taken to strengthen a victim centred approach in cases involving sexual harassment. We reiterate the need for effective prevention measures to implemented. We further note the Internal Justice Council's emphasis on sensitising judges to issues including those related to multiculturalism, gender, discrimination and victims' rights. We support further exploration of how victims' rights can be better incorporated into the administration of justice. CANS supports and encourage ambitious, strategic, and cross-system reforms at the United Nations, leading to more accountable, effective, and efficient delivery of the UN's core mandates on peace and security, human rights, and development. CANS supports harmonized data collection across the justice system with a focus on cost effectiveness, especially considering the UNAT initiative. We welcome the Secretary-General's proposals for a unified data repository to connect data and statistics across the UN system and are open to considering effective options to achieve this. This aligns with the Internal Justice Council priorities, including calls to strengthen legal assistance and ensure adequate resourcing for the Office of Staff Legal Assistance, both central to the Tribunal's mandate. CANS countries remain committed to constructive engagement on all efforts to strengthen the administration of justice within the United Nations. We support continued implementation of policies that promote accountability, systemic improvement and fairness, and we reiterate the importance of a justice system that is impartial, efficient, transparent and victim-centred. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of New Zealand for that statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of France.

Madam.

Chair, my delegation would like to align itself with the statement delivered by the European Union. France thanks the Secretary General, the Office of UN Ombudsman and Mediation Services, as well as the Internal Justice Council for their reports published in July of this year. France would like to reiterate its commitment to ensuring the United Nations has a system for the administration of justice that's independent, transparent, professional, endowed with sufficient resources, and decentralized. Such a system is, in fact, the provisor for respecting the rights of people working for the United Nations. It is a guarantor of the integrity, reputation, and credibility of the organization. First, regarding the formal administration of justice system, France welcomes the ongoing reduction in the number of pending cases, which attests to the growing efficiency of the system. We appeal to the organization to continue down this path, in particular on the basis of Secretary-General's proposals to come up with the best technical tool for crafting a comprehensive statistical vision of the system. Furthermore, France would like to welcome all three reports and the initiatives aimed at bolstering multilingualism contained therein, this through providing all personnel and parties with relevant information in the UN's six official languages. Given the central role that multilingualism plays in inclusion, efficiency, and the accessibility of the UN internal justice system, multilingualism should not be the variable that's squeezed in the current context. Second, France would like to express its support for the informal resolution approach that was prioritized in the administration of justice, aiming to favor the resolution of disputes outside formal channels. By detecting systemic elements likely to give rise to conflicts, this approach can generate a solution early on. also has the double advantage of better protecting the rights of persons and reducing the organization's costs. With this in mind, and given that geographical proximity by definition promotes the non-formal settlement of disputes, France would like to welcome the personal visits undertaken in 2024 by the Office of Ombudsman Services to where non-headquarters personnel are stationed. Last but not least, when it comes to workplace disputes, France would like to recall that no inappropriate aggressive behavior, nor discrimination, harassment, including sexual harassment, nor abuse of authority should be tolerated. In particular, we note with concern the considerable uptick in the number of complaints linked to racism or discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, or nationality between 2023 and 2024. France invites the Secretariat to continue its efforts so as to pinpoint and address the root causes of such disputes. Furthermore, France would like to note that in the report of the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services, well, the context of budgetary and organizational uncertainty is a factor aggravating the risk of disputes arising. This circumstance will undoubtedly affect the administration of justice system going forward, especially as regards the increase in the number of disputes. Therefore, we invite the Internal Justice Council to take this into consideration when it devises its programme of work for 2026. We suggest increasing the resources allocated to processing of non-formal procedures. Madam Chair, the current budgetary context is compelling the organisation to adapt. France welcomes the high-calibre collaboration between the Sixth and the Fifth Committees of the General Assembly. We would like to recall that financial constraints cannot result in the principles and guarantees which are the lifeblood of the United nation's administration of justice from being undermined. With this in mind, France invites the authors of the forthcoming reports to provide to the General Assembly detailed information of how developments in this system will play out, especially as part of the UN 80 initiative. France welcomes ongoing efforts to improve the administration of justice system. We place our trust in the organization's capacity to tackle the root causes of such disputes and to dispose of them efficiently. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of France for that statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the United States of America. You have the floor.

Thank you, Chair.

The United States thanks the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services and the Internal Justice Council for the reports of their work in 2024. The United States also thanks the Secretary General for his report and for his responses to the General Assembly's requests for consideration. Addressing workplace conflict before it escalates is important to fostering a professional environment and using resources effectively and efficiently. To those ends, The large caseload of the Office of the Ombudsman and Mediation Services demonstrated that individuals are engaging in productive conflict management rather than in protracted litigation. We applaud the office for continuing to work to make its services available to all staff, regardless of their duty station. The Management Advice and Evaluation Section also played an important role in finding solutions before conflicts proceeded to the Dispute Tribunal. The Office of Staff Legal Assistance also provided valuable informal services that precluded the need for more formal procedures. We encourage continued emphasis on informal resolution and stress the importance of timeliness since justice delayed is unfair to staff and costly for the organization. We wish the newly constituted Internal Justice Council well in its work. We appreciate the priority that the Council gave to the important work of assessing applicants for vacancies on the Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Tribunal. Having highly qualified judges in place is essential to the credibility and accountability of the system of justice. We look forward to the Internal Justice Council's consideration for promoting independence, professionalism, and accountability within the UN system of justice. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished.

Representative of the United States for that statement. I'll now give the floor to the distinguished representative of the Netherlands. You have the floor.

Madam Chair, thank you for giving me the floor. The Kingdom of the Netherlands wishes to align itself with the statement given by the European Union on behalf of the EU and its member states. Let me start by thanking the Secretary General for his reports on the activities of the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services, as well as on the administration of justice at the United Nations. Let me also thank the Internal Justice Council for their report. We would like to highlight the following three elements. First, on the report of the Secretary General on the administration of justice at the United Nations, The Kingdom of the Netherlands notes that the UN Dispute Tribunal disposed of 200 cases during 2024. We also note that the UN Dispute Tribunal received more cases than it disposed of, resulting in an increase in the number of pending applications. The Kingdom of the Netherlands continues to encourage the UN Dispute Tribunal to increase its efficiency in line with the measures introduced by the General Assembly in resolutions 73/276 and 74/258. Furthermore, the Kingdom of the Netherlands wishes to express its appreciation to all judges and personnel at the Dispute Tribunal, as well as Appeals Tribunal, for their dedication and the hard work that has been done. The Kingdom of the Netherlands will continue to reflect and engage on the functioning of the system of administration of justice at the UN. Second, the services offered by the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and mediation services provide a safe, accessible and cost effective way for staff members and affiliate personnel to discuss any kind of workplace related concern. The reporting of the office on broad systemic issues provides valuable insights. The Kingdom of the Netherlands notes with appreciation the work of this office, including the work of the regional ombudsman offices. We commend in particular the office's ongoing efforts to promote and advance the informal first approach. Of the total number of 2049 cases handled by the office in 2024, 95 were mediation cases. This is around 4.6% of cases compared to 6.1% of last year. Noting this decrease, the Kingdom of the Netherlands recalls resolution 79/254, which underlines the importance of increasing the use of mediation services, and we encourage the Office to continue sharing information about mediation and to continue to promote mediation and its use. We appreciate and highly value enabling affiliate personnel to access the Office's services within existing resources and thereby note the increase in cases received from affiliate personnel. Third, the Kingdom of the Netherlands takes note of the work done by the Fifth Internal Justice Council so far, in particular the meetings with stakeholders and the identification of overarching issues. In conclusion, The Kingdom of the Netherlands wishes to emphasize the importance of a strong, efficient, and professionalized internal system of administration of justice at the UN, which can be accessed by staff and affiliate personnel. The Kingdom of the Netherlands furthermore welcomes that the Secretary General's report A/80/99 on strengthening and coordinating United Nations rule of law activities contains information on strengthening the administration of justice within the organisation. For the next report, we would very much welcome the inclusion of information on the implementation by the organisation of decisions taken by its judicial institutions. The Kingdom of the Netherlands continues to follow developments with great interest and looks forward to further improvements being made. I thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of the Kingdom of the Netherlands for that statement, and I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Mexico. You have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Mexico is grateful for the introduction of the Secretary-General's reports on the administration of justice at the United Nations, including those on the activities of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Mediation Services, as well as the report of the Internal Justice Council. Administration of justice at the United Nations is not merely a technical or administrative matter. It represents a specific expression of the founding values of the Organization, equality, human dignity, and the pursuit of peace through the rule of law. For Mexico, strengthening the internal justice system is essential to preserving the moral legitimacy of the United Nations. No institution can ask the world to uphold international law without ensuring justice within its own walls at the same time. along these lines we welcome the fact that the office of the ombudsman handled two thousand and forty nine cases in two thousand and twenty four including ninety five mediation cases this speaks to the value of informal resolution as the first resort to avoid unnecessary litigation and improve the working environment. We further support awareness raising measures so that more staff members, including at headquarters and in the field, get to know and make early use of mediation and other informal avenues. Nonetheless, we highlight our concern at the impact of the financial crisis on the administration of justice at the organisation. Austerity must not lead to weaker institutions. Justice systems need to have sufficient resources to be effective and credible. Our delegation supports the Secretary General's recommendation to maintain a regional presence for the Office of the Ombudsman, particularly in contexts of conflict and special political missions where human contact and in person mediation are irreplaceable. Mexico further underscores the importance of guaranteeing full access for non-staff personnel to mediation services in accordance with resolution 78/248. The report shows a rise from 224 to 260 cases brought by this sector, mostly from peace operations. This step forward should be consolidated through communication and support strategies that would ensure equal access and protection from reprisals. We reiterate that, to the extent that non-staff personnel cases are afforded a solution mechanism, we will avoid the difficult situations in which these cases are brought before national courts, generating tension and jeopardizing the privileges and immunities of the Organization. Therefore, it is crucial, in Mexico's view, to maintain the project that provides effective dispute resolution services to non-staff personnel. We regret the persistent gaps in linguistic representation in UN bodies. We reiterate the centrality of multilingualism to ensure equal access and cultural sensitivity, and we urge that Spanish speaking candidates be actively considered in the judicial and key administration of justice posts in the next selection processes. We highlight with concern the significant rise in cases related to stress, anxiety, overwork, and a perception of unfair treatment. Mexico views this trend as alarming. Mental health of UN staff cannot be seen as a peripheral matter. A respectful, healthy working environment is a crucial requirement for institutional effectiveness. Mexico encourages the Secretariat to continue implementing the system strategy on mental health and well-being and guaranteeing the necessary resources for its full implementation. Mexico also believes it is essential to guarantee that United Nations immunities are exercised responsibly and that they do not become obstacles to access to justice. The recent Secretary-General's reports make plain that non-contract personnel face real limitations when it comes to accessing formal redress mechanisms. We encourage the Secretariat and Member States to explore complementary judicial cooperation avenues and to strengthen the protection of victims, whistleblowers, and witnesses. The UN's administration of justice system provides an opportunity to lead by example. The world watches this organisation as much by the norms that it adopts as for how it applies them internally. An independent, multilingual, inclusive justice system with a gender perspective and centred on human dignity will strengthen staff confidence and the legitimacy of the United Nations. Mezaco reaffirms its readiness to continue participating actively in debates and reforms that seek to consolidate a more accessible, transparent and human system. We believe that internal justice, just like at the international level, must be a space of hope, not fear, a space for address and not bureaucracy. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Madam Chair, Sierra Leone aligns its statement with that delivered by the distinguished representative of the Republic of Cameroon on behalf of the African Group and would also like to make the following additional remarks. We thank the Secretary General for his report on the agenda item administration of justice at the United Nations contained in document A/AT136 on administration of justice at the United Nations, A/AT135 on the activities of the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services, and A/AT/130, the report of the Internal Justice Council on Administration of Justice at the United Nations. We support a system-wide approach that views the Office of the Ombudsman, composed of well-trained informal conflict resolution experts, as the primary tool for informal conflict resolution in the United Nations, as envisaged in General Assembly Resolution 62228. We urge the organization to support the office in its role in order to avert recourse to the formal justice system. We take note of the views outlined in the SG's report A/AT/136 on the issue of judicial mediation, including the views of the Dispute Tribunal that a system of judicial mediation would complement current plans for enhanced case management. Conciliation proceedings conducted by judges, such as judicial mediation, on cases that are already inside the formal system and in front of the judges, are characteristically distinguishable from informal conflict resolution processes and mediation conducted by other offices, and the two should be viewed separately. Practiced by numerous member states of the organization, the integration of judicial mediation will align the UN internal system of justice with international standards and the best practices of national judicial systems that have long since effectively complement litigation with conciliatory proceedings. Indeed, a quick review of this room would see that most of the delegations presented here come from countries where judicial mediation is the practice. In cases where all efforts at informal resolution have been exhausted, and the ombudsman has acted as a first safe step to addressing a workplace grievance, and the case has proceeded through other offices like the office of the staff legal advisor and the management evaluation stage and has ended up in the tribunal, justice and expeditious disposal can be compromised if the judge is then required to send the case back to the informal system, which has already acted as a filtering mechanism before the case enters into the formal system. Such an approach, requiring a judge to send a case back to the informal system after a complainant has already proceeded through the Ombudsman's Office and all the other offices, would be antithetical to the voluntary nature of informal resolution services and indeed of the Ombudsman's Office, and lies in direct contradiction with the principles of that office. To the contrary, the choice between judicial mediation and referral back to the informal system should always remain that of the complainant. It must nonetheless remain a choice. Finally, while we note the different views on judicial and other tribunal-led conciliatory proceedings, the view is taken that a pilot project will serve to confirm or dispel many of these varying positions. We thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Sierra Leone for that statement. And I now give the floor to the distinguished representative, Deputy Permanent Representative of China.

You have the floor.

Chair, China welcomes the two reports of the Secretary-General and the Internal Justice Council on Administration of Justice at the UN. and the Secretary-General's report on the activities of the Office of the United Nations Ombudsman and Mediation Services. China views positively the achievements of the UN's internal justice system and the Secretary-General's efforts for greater efficiency in the administration of justice over the past year, particularly the positive measures taken to promote multilingualism, expedite dispute resolution, and clear case backlogs, among others. China notes the Secretary-General's proposals for establishing a single database of data from various justice system mechanisms, entities, funds, and programs. Against the backdrop of the UN 80 reform initiative, China supports the use of electronic forms to collect data, which is the most cost-effective way. China recognizes the important role of informal resolution in avoiding conflict escalation and resolving disputes, and supports the efforts of the Office of the UN Ombudsman and Mediation Services to enhance institutional resilience and mitigate the negative impact of the liquidity crisis on staff. Chair. The General Assembly will hold elections for judges of UNAT and UNDT on November the 17th. Recommended by the UN Internal Justice Council, Judge Zhang Lingling from China will be running for the position of judge at UNAT. Judge Zhang Lingling has served as a senior judge at the Supreme People's Court of China for 15 years, participated in the trials of thousands of cases of various types, drafted multiple judicial interpretations and published over 60 legal papers and monographs. With a solid theoretical grounding and rich practical experience, she is an outstanding representative of female judges in China. Judge Zhang Lingling is the only candidate for this election of UNAT judges from the Asia-Pacific region. If elected, she will certainly make important contributions to the work of UNAT and also help improve the geographical and gender balances of the tribunal. China looks forward to support from all countries for Judge Zhang Lingling in this election. Thank you, Chair.

I thank the distinguished DPR of China for that statement. And I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Switzerland. You have the floor.

Madam Chair, Switzerland would like to express its sincere appreciation to the Secretary-General for submitting his report on the administration of justice. This report provides detailed insights into the functioning of the system in 2024. It also constructively responds to the specific requests formulated by the General Assembly. Switzerland would like to reaffirm the importance we attach to transparency and accountability within the United Nations. We are also very much committed to the principle of judicial independence in the system of the administration of justice. Good internal governance enhances the organization's credibility and it is particularly important at a time when the organization faces considerable challenges and when it is also undertaking reforms. Switzerland notes with satisfaction the pivotal role played by the management evaluation function, helping to resolve staff concerns, whether that be through advice provided directly by the office referrals to the competent ombudsman's office, or via other forms of assistance and guidance. Against this backdrop, we value the efforts undertaken by the Secretary-General so as to strengthen incentives for staff to remain within the Voluntary Supplemental Funding Mechanism. as the services provided by the Office of Staff Legal Assistance are essential to the proper functioning and efficiency of the administration of justice system. Turning now to the establishment of a single database containing information compiled from various mechanisms, entities, funds and programs which make up the judicial system, we welcome the various options presented in the report. It's absolutely vital that we ensure consistency in the administration of justice across the United Nations, because this reinforces transparency, strengthens accountability, and is a way of guaranteeing fairness for all staff members. We'd like to underscore that ultimately, the database must strike the right balance between cost effectiveness, practicality, and usefulness, as well as data protection. Switzerland notes with concern the substantial increase in the number of complaints within the organization between 2020 and 2024 related to racism and discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, and/or nationality. We would therefore welcome awareness raising and training efforts undertaken by the new anti-racism office as well as human resources. We urge the organization to continue and to beef up these measures so as to prevent and combat racism and discrimination in all its forms. By way of conclusion, Switzerland would like to express its staunch support for further consideration of issues related to the administration of justice on the agenda of the Sixth Committee. We reiterate our commitment to fostering a robust culture of accountability within the United Nations. We encourage the Secretary-General to continue his efforts so as to ensure that all categories of personnel have access to effective and timely remedies, and to making sure that there is no place for discrimination nor racism within the organization. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Switzerland. I give the floor to Romania. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair, for giving me the floor. Madam Chair, distinguished delegates, Romania aligns itself with the statement delivered by the distinguished representative of the European Union and wishes to make the following remarks in its national capacity. Romania reiterates its firm support for a transparent, effective, and independent system of administration of justice within the United Nations. Ensuring accountability, fairness, and due process across the organization not only strengthens staff confidence, but can also support a culture of professionalism and operational efficiency, which ultimately enhances the credibility of the United Nations. We welcome the reports of the Secretary General and the Internal Justice Council. Romania notes with appreciation the ongoing efforts to enhance access to justice for all staff members, including those serving in field locations and special political missions. We value initiatives to improve informal dispute resolution mechanism through the Office of the Ombudsman and mediation services, as well as progress made in straightening early settlement of disputes. The policy on protection against retaliation for reporting misconduct and for cooperating with duly authorized audits or investigations is a cornerstone of integrity and accountability within the United Nations system. To this end, we highlight the need for its consistent and equitable application across all categories of personnel as an essential tool for safeguarding a culture where ethical conduct can prevail over fear of reprisal. Romania underscores the fundamental role played by the continued professionalism and integrity of the two essential bodies of the internal justice system, the United Nations Dispute Tribunal and the Appeals Tribunal. In addition, it is important to highlight the persistent relevance of gender balance and geographical diversity for the appointments to the two judicial bodies. Madam Chair, against this backdrop, we would like to take this opportunity to remind the distinguished membership that the Internal Justice Council recommend the Romanian national, Judge Adina Elvira Ghita, as a candidate to fill the vacant full-time position on the Dispute Tribunal in New York. In 25 years of judicial experience, among which more than 18 years as a magistrate across various degrees of jurisdiction, Judge Gietse has acquired a wealth of knowledge in judicial issues ranging from criminal and civil liability to public law and administrative litigation. Her latest appointments at the Bucharest Tribunal and the Bucharest Courts of Appeal have cemented her expertise in highly complex litigation concerning employment of high ranking public officials, public servants, and magistrates. The Romanian candidate's solid, rich, and wide ranging experience as a career magistrate and her focus on public law and employment litigation recommend her as an ideal applicant for a full-time position on the Dispute Tribunal. We hope we can count on your valuable support for her candidacy at the elections to be held in the General Assembly on November 17. To conclude, Romania looks forward to the work plan for 2026 and the Internal Justice Council's focus on existing and emerging issues. in the context of budgetary constraints and organizational changes. We need to once again underscore that the process for the administration of justice must be adequately resourced and tailored to effectively manage the application it receives. As a consistent advocate for the rule of law, both within and beyond the United Nations, Romania reaffirms its commitment to a balanced and accountable system of administration of justice, one that embodies the very principles the organization strives to uphold globally. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished

representative of Romania for that statement. And I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Sudan. You have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Madam Chair. We align ourselves with the statements by Cameron on behalf of the African Group. Madam Chair, an effective and independent internal justice system at the United Nations is a key pillar of good governance. and the pivotal factor in safeguarding the rights of international staff and ensuring administrative justice. The administration of justice is not merely a procedural matter. It is a manifestation of an institutional culture that respects human dignity, promotes fairness, contributes to enhancing efficiency and credibility with the member states. Madam Chair, the Sudan attaches great importance to strengthening professional independence and judicial integrity in the internal justice system. The success of the system is contingent upon having a delicate balance between the formal and informal methods to resolve disputes. In this context, We commend the increasing role played by the Office of the UN Ombudsman and Mediation Services as the main mechanism to amicably settle disputes at the UN. Strengthening the ability of this office to address complaints fairly and early and giving due attention to its recommendations before resorting to litigation would reduce the financial and administrative costs to the organization, especially in light of the current financial challenges. The Sudan believes that Using mediation and judicial conciliation in accordance with the existing powers of the dispute tribunal contributes to settling cases quickly and efficiently, provided that this is done after all amicable means have been exhausted. The amicable and judicial methods complement each other. They do not contradict each other. Rather, they enhance the concept of comprehensive justice and embody the spirit of institutional dialogue that underpins the United Nations system. Madam Chair, the Sudan welcomes the appointment of new members to the Internal Justice Council. We value efforts to develop standards for continuous training for judges to enhance their knowledge of the practical reality at the duty stations and in the field. This would enhance their understanding of the challenges faced by staff in the field. The Sudan stresses at the same time that all proposed reforms must take into account the basic principles of the independence of the judiciary. The judiciary must remain immune to any administrative and regulatory influence that might limit their independence. Judicial independence is provided for in the General Assembly resolution 62/228. We express our concern over the limited opportunities for legal representation available to staff through the Office of Staff Legal Assistance. We call for a constructive dialogue between the Office and the Internal Justice Council to address the root causes of this problem to ensure equal access to justice. We also call for expeditiously filling the vacancies at the Dispute and Appeals Tribunal so that the pace at which cases are adjudicated is not affected. Madam Chair, the Secretary-General's report indicated that there is a decline in the number of cases before the dispute tribunals in New York, Geneva, and Nairobi. We notice that the volume of cases varies among duty stations. We do understand the current financial difficulties at the United Nations. We support continued reliance on part time judges. This model has proven to be effective in managing the caseload and ensuring the balance between efficiency and cost. Madam Chair, we have been following with great concern the alarming increase in racial discrimination and sexual harassment cases at the UN. These behaviours are inconsistent with the values and principles based on which the organisation was built. The Sudan strongly condemns all forms of racism, discrimination and harassment. It is important to adopt a victim-centered institutional approach that ensures redress and protection of the victims. We call upon the Secretary-General to undertake a comprehensive review to determine the underlying causes and to propose practical measures to address the roots of these causes. Madam Chair, the Sudan values continued efforts to improve the internal justice system at the United Nations. The administration of justice is closely linked to creating a positive work environment, an environment of trust and mutual respect where staff members feel that their dignity is preserved and their rights are protected. A positive work environment is the foundation to build an institutional culture based on integrity, transparency and accountability. In conclusion, The Republic of the Sudan reiterates its firm commitment to support all efforts to consolidate justice and equality at the United Nations. We believe that people, staff members, are the true capital of the United Nations. Preserving the rights of staff is the best way to build an international organization that is more effective and more just. I thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Sudan. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Greece.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Greece would like to thank the Secretary General for the reports on the present agenda item, aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union, and would like to add the following remarks in its national capacity. Equality, transparency, respect for the rule of law and due process are critical principles in an effective and efficient system of administration of justice for the staff of the United Nations. The reports provide a picture of the challenges and successes at the different levels and stages of conflict and dispute resolution, either informal or judicial, between the organization and its staff or workforce in general. Regarding the Office of the UN Ombudsman and Mediation Services, the increase in the number of the cases submitted to it constitutes a positive sign as to the successful usage and overall responsiveness of the informal dispute resolution processes, in particular mediation. Further steps identified in the relevant report would enhance the continuation of the informal first approach, but also would facilitate in-person access to the office in hardship duty stations. However, recourse to informal dispute resolution could also be enhanced, as suggested in the report regarding the mediation services, with practical measures at the level of the registrar or by practically encouraging the dispute tribunal to further explore mediation services at the tribunal stage of the cases submitted to it. We note that the report on the administration of justice highlights the challenges which the expansion of the conciliation/mediation process at the tribunal stage of the procedure could present for the work of the Dispute Tribunal. However, we underline the recommendation of the Internal Justice Council according to which Should mediation lead to satisfactory outcomes accepted by the parties, judges might suggest that litigants bring their case to mediation. Greece underscores also the significant increase, according to data collected by the Office of Internal Oversight Mechanism, of complaints related to racism or discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity or nationality. Connected to this is the protection of staff from retaliation. Though the Ethics Office, in its review of retaliation allegations, established that in most cases no credible prima facie case was established, we note that the Internal Justice Council considers this issue of critical importance to continue to engage. We also underscore the findings of the report of the Internal Justice Council that there exist cases where staff members are seeking assistance at their own cost outside the system or proceed without legal representation. We encourage further steps which would address this issue in line with the equality of arms. To conclude, Greece would encourage a system of administration of justice which, while remaining within the parameters set by the General Assembly in its relevant resolutions, its informal and formal justice will continue to ensure rule of law and due process. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Greece for that statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Kenya. Distinguished delegates, the distinguished representative of Greece was therefore the last speaker on my list for this agenda item. We have thus concluded our debate on agenda item 146, administration of justice at the United Nations. As agreed at our first meeting, We will provide the coordinators assigned to each agenda item the opportunity to take the floor to give a brief indication of their plans for the remaining consideration of the agenda item. Could I ask Ms. Matija Sibenik of Slovenia, the coordinator of this agenda item, whether she wishes to take the floor on this agenda item at this time?

Thank you, Madam Chair, for giving me the floor. I would also like to thank colleagues for placing their trust in me as a coordinator. I have listened carefully to the debate on the agenda item 146, administration of justice at the United Nations, and I would like to thank all delegations for expressing their views. Last Friday, we had, as customary, informal briefing on the free reports by various units of the Secretariat. At that briefing, I have also outlined my thinking on the way forward. The zero draft letter was distributed last Friday and we ask for comments by 12 noon on Wednesday, 22nd October, which is tomorrow. The zero draft letter reflects technical updates and suggests replacing the term non-staff personnel with affiliate personnel. Our informal consultations will be on Thursday, 21st October from 1.15pm to 2pm. I'm also available for any bilaterals, and I look forward to working with all of you.

Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Slovenia, the coordinator for this agenda item. We will revert to this agenda item. We will continue with this agenda item. And before concluding, I give the floor to the distinguished representative of Kenya. You have the floor.

Madam Chair, Kenya aligns itself with the statement delivered by Cameroon on behalf of the African group and wishes to add the following in our national capacity. The Kenyan delegation expresses sincere appreciation to the Secretary General for his comprehensive report on the administration of justice that the UN, the United Nations submitted pursuant to resolution 79 stock 254 and for his report on the activities of the office of the United Nation Ombudsman and the mediation services. Any judicial or quasi-judicial system of administration of justice should be independent, transparent, professional and adequately resourced and decentralized and be consistent with the relevant rules of international law under the principles of the rule of law. Due process is important to ensure respect for the rights and obligations of staff members and the accountability of managers and staff members alike to be able to inspire confidence in the system. The establishment of the Internal Justice Council was to, among other things, ensure independence, professionalism, and accountability in the administration of justice within the UN. Kenya commends the efforts of the Council in this regard. Madam Chair, it is imperative that sufficient information is provided on a continuous basis to the staff of the organization on the role and functioning of the various parts of the system and the possibility it offers to address work related complaints. Easy and cheap access to justice is the cornerstone of an efficient judicial system. Procedural complexities make the easy access to justice a mirage. Similarly, the use of technology in the legal system need to be alive to the realities of staff who may be having limited access to information technology and ICT services such as access to reliable internet. Madam Chair, although the informal dispute settlement system is crucial component of the internal system of administration of justice within the UN, Where it does not compromise the confidentiality principles of the organization, the complaining parties should be afforded information that was relied upon in deciding if the decision made by line managers is to be sustained, just like any justice system. Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done. Any person aggrieved by any administrative action should be able to avail themselves with a system that is administrative fair, procedurally easy, and inherently transparent. Kenya's one of the UN station has witnessed some cases where staff of the UN resort to unnecessary court litigation because they either felt that the justice system mechanism within the UN was unfair or did not consider their unique situation, or showed their lack of understanding of the dispute settlement mechanism within the UN. This therefore calls for the strengthening and enhancement of outreach activities by the Secretariat. This further presents some challenges where UN staff who feel disgruntled by the administrative decision of UN agencies opt to file cases in courts of law. Despite the existence of internal dispute resolution mechanism, this is complicated when the specialized agency of the UN pleads immunity before Kenyan courts, considering that the court, so the government has entered into a host country agreement or headquarters agreement between the United Nations and the government. And it's part of the Vienna Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of Specialized Agencies of 1947. Madam Chair, even though the host country signs a host country agreement with the specialized agencies of the UN, it is imperative under the convention that the agency sets up a clear dispute resolution mechanism to avoid such eventualities. This is so because privileges and immunities accorded to the UN and its specialized agencies have limitations within the UN. and hosting agreements. A host country, a country cannot therefore contract away the fundamental rights of individuals in a host country agreement. It is in this regard that Kenya aligns itself with resolution 76 stock 42, 242, in which the General Assembly reaffirmed that informal resolution of conflict is a crucial element of the system of administration of justice. And they emphasize that all possible use should be made of the informal system in order to avoid unnecessary litigation without prejudice to the basic right of staff to access the formal system. I thank you.

Thank you very much. This is the English representative of Kenya. He was indeed the last speaker on my list for this agenda item. And we've already heard the coordinator for this agenda item, Ms. Natasha Shebanik from Slovenia. So we'll revert to this agenda item at a forthcoming meeting. Distinguished delegates, the Sixth Committee will now commence its consideration of agenda item 85 entitled, "The Scope and Application of the Principle of Universal Jurisdiction." I draw your attention to the report of the Secretary General on the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction contained in document A/80/274. This report is available on the website of the Sixth Committee. The first speaker on my list for this agenda item is the distinguished representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. You have the floor.

Madam Chair, I have the honor to deliver this statement on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. While the Non-Aligned Movement continues to diligently follow agenda item 85 entitled, the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, the movement also reiterates its call upon all states to seize this opportunity to consider its various aspects in order to identify its scope and limits of application, as well as prevent any inappropriate resort to it. Moreover, the movement takes note of the Secretary-General's report contained in document A/AD/274, prepared pursuant to General Assembly resolution 79/127, on the basis of information and observation received from governments and relevant observers. The Non-Aligned Movement firmly believes that the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations, particularly the sovereign equality of states, as well as their political independence and non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, should be strictly observed during any judicial proceedings, including the exercise of universal jurisdiction. In this regard, the involvement of incumbent high-ranking officials should be addressed in conformity with international law. By invoking universal jurisdiction, the exercise of criminal jurisdiction by national courts over high-ranking officials, enjoy immunity under international law, violates one of the most fundamental principles of international law, namely the sovereignty of states. The movement therefore submits that the immunity of the state's officials, which is deeply rooted in the Charter of the United Nations and firmly established in international law, should be fully respected. In this regard, it is important for the Sixth Committee to be cognizant of the context in which this item was included in the agenda of the Sixth Committee. As you may recall, the African Group requested the inclusion of this agenda item in the Sixth Committee to address the issue of the uncertain scope and application of this principle, as well as its abuse, in February 2009. Although universal jurisdiction provides a tool for the prosecution of the perpetrators of certain serious crimes under international treaties, there are questions and controversies concerning universal jurisdiction, including understanding the range of crimes that fall under this jurisdiction, as well as the conditions for its application. Furthermore, The Non-Aligned Movement is alarmed regarding the implications of the application of universal jurisdiction on the immunity of states officials, and consequently. on the sovereignty of the states concerned. The invocation of universal jurisdiction against some member countries of the Non-Aligned Movement in violation of the principle of immunity of state officials before the courts of other states has generated significant concerns over its legal and political implications. Further clarification is also needed in order to prevent any misapplication or improper utilization of universal jurisdiction. The decisions and judgments of the International Court of Justice and the work of the International Law Commission are among the sources which might be useful in our discussions in the Sixth Committee. The Non-Aligned Movement cautions against the unwarranted expansion of the crimes under universal jurisdiction. The non-aligned movement members will actively engage in the deliberations on this agenda item, including within the working group established in accordance with paragraph two of the General Assembly resolution 79/127. As such, we encourage all member states of the United Nations to ardently participate in these discussions as well as in order to identify the scope and limits of the application of universal jurisdiction, as well as to consider establishing a mechanism to monitor such application and prevent its abuse in the future. With respect to the discussions in the working group, the movement reiterates that universal jurisdiction shall not replace other jurisdictional bases, namely territoriality and nationality, and only assert it among the most serious crimes. Expansion of the principle to include anything less than the most heinous crimes could risk calling into question its very legitimacy. Moreover, it cannot be exercised in isolation or to the exclusion of other relevant rules and principles of international law, including not only state sovereignty and the territorial integrity of states, but also the immunity of state officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction. The member countries of the movement remain open to sharing information and practices with other member states in this regard. We are also of the view that it is premature at this stage of discussion to request International Law Commission to undertake a study on the different aspects of universal jurisdiction. We look forward to reaching our common goal of mutual respect, which includes maintaining rule of law around the globe, as well as the proper application of universal jurisdiction without its abuse, while reiterating that the legitimacy and credibility of the use of universal jurisdiction would be ensured by its responsible and judicious application consistent with international law. I thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Iran on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement. And I now give the floor to the representative of the European Union, taking the floor on behalf of the EU and its member states. You have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. The candidate countries Montenegro and Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as Monaco, align themselves with this statement. We thank the Secretary General for his report on the scope and application of principle universal jurisdiction. We also thank those Member States that have provided additional relevant information since the previous sessions, offering important elements for our discussion today. Madam Chair, our discussion takes place at a distressing time for international justice and accountability. International crimes continue to be committed across multiple regions, causing immense suffering and threatening international peace and security. Faced with these ongoing atrocities, the international community must redouble its efforts to combat impunity. Accountability is not only a matter of justice for victims, It is essential to prevent the repetition of these heinous crimes and to defend lasting peace. In this context, we reaffirm that universal jurisdiction remains an exceptional but important tool in our collective fight against impunity for core international crimes, a tool that should be exercised as a subsidiary measure when territorial states or other more closely connected jurisdictions are unwilling or unable generally to prosecute, or the International Criminal Court or the other relevant international courts and tribunals lack the necessary jurisdiction, still a tool that serves an indispensable function in closing the accountability gap. We recognize and respect the diversity of views and conditions that exist among states regarding the scope and application of universal jurisdiction. National legal systems differ and the modalities of exercising universal jurisdiction vary across jurisdictions. This diversity reflects legitimate specificities while demonstrating a shared commitment to ensuring that the gravest crimes do not go unpunished. Given these differences, it becomes even more important that we focus on areas where we can strengthen our collective capacity with the twofold goal of, first, limiting the need to resort to universal jurisdiction, and second, ensure legal certainty in the exercise of universal jurisdiction. In that respect, we believe that we should continue to prioritize efforts to harmonize the criminalization of international crimes. This would create a stronger foundation for accountability, regardless of jurisdiction. Equally important is strengthening international cooperation in all its dimensions. Effective prosecution of international crimes require robust mechanism for interalia, mutual legal assistance and evidence sharing, coordination of investigations across borders, extradition of suspects, protection of witnesses and victims, sharing of forensic expertise and best practices. In this respect, we welcome the conclusion in 2023 of the Ljubljana The Hague Convention on International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of the Crime of Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes, and other International Crimes. The convention was signed already by 40 states, and recently Latvia was the first state to ratify it. Moreover, we reiterate also in this context the importance of the negotiations for a convention on the prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity as an important opportunity to promote further harmonization of national criminal laws and strengthen interstate cooperation. Within the European Union, cooperation with and among the national authorities of the EU member states is facilitated through the European Union Agency for Criminal Justice Cooperation, also known as Eurojust, and the networks it hosts and supports, such as the Genocide Prosecution Network, the Consultative Forum, and the European Judicial Network. In particular, the Genocide Prosecution Network facilitates cooperation and coordination among its members and provides a platform for sharing best practices and expertise in the investigation and prosecution of these crimes. We stand ready to continue to share our experiences and support similar regional cooperation mechanisms developing in other regions. To conclude, the European Union and its Member States remain committed to contribute further to discussions on this topic to advance our shared objective of accountability for the most serious crimes. Universal jurisdiction, while exceptional, remains an important tool in this collective effort. Thank you.

I thank the representative of the EU for that. And I now get the floor to the distinguished President of Brazil to talk on behalf of a group of states.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It is an honor to deliver this statement on behalf of Brazil, Colombia, Egypt, Indonesia, Lebanon, Mexico, and South Africa. Our countries share a deep commitment to ending impunity for the most serious crimes under international law and are thus keenly interested in discussions on the concept of universal jurisdiction. While there is no uniformity of state practice on the matter, we believe that the treatment of this topic should be guided by certain fundamental parameters. Universal jurisdiction is premised on a commitment undertaken by states to punish the most serious crimes of international concern resulting from serious violations of pre-emptory norms of international law such as genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and torture as proscribed in relevant international law. It is an exceptional tool designed to fulfil an exceptional role, ensuring that those responsible for grave violations of international law are brought to justice. when the ordinary mechanisms to achieve this have failed. This exceptionality entails the need to act in accordance with fundamental principles of international law, such as sovereign equality and non intervention, when resorting to such particular instrument. Otherwise, its use may be subject to political abuse or misuse and serve purposes foreign to those of international justice. Madam President, the principle of universal jurisdiction is subsidiary to more direct connecting factors. Primary jurisdiction must always be accorded to the state with the closest link to the crime. This ensures a balanced and effective exercise of criminal jurisdiction. Factors such as territoriality and nationality are relevant to establishing this link and must be observed when assessing primary jurisdiction. Only when the state of territory or nationality is unwilling or unable to exercise its jurisdiction may a third state resort to universal jurisdiction. Likewise, universal jurisdiction may be exercised only when the accused is present within the territory of the forum state. Madam Chair, our countries believe these parameters are essential in any serious discussion on universal jurisdiction. as they reflect the need to balance it with fundamental tenets of international law. By building on these principles, we can achieve an understanding of universal jurisdiction that is fair, effective, and fully consistent with the UN Charter. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished.

Representative of Brazil for that statement on behalf of a group of states. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Sweden.

I will take the floor on behalf of the Nordic countries, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the five Nordic countries, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Denmark and my own country, Sweden. The Nordic countries welcome the continued inclusion on the agenda of this important topic. We would like to extend our thanks to the Secretary General for his annual report on the scope and application of the principle of university jurisdiction and to the Member States and observers who contributed to it. The report provides valuable insights into developments in national legislation and judicial practice. Madam Chair, In the 2025 report of the Secretary General, Norway contributed with insight into the form and function of universal jurisdiction in its domestic legal order. The Nordic countries all have similar systems as regards universal jurisdiction. The Nordic countries recognize universal jurisdiction as a well established principle of international criminal law. and have all incorporated it into our respective domestic legal frameworks, enabling prosecution for the most serious international crimes, regardless of where they were committed and the nationality of the perpetrator. The direction must be crystal clear there can be no safe havens for those responsible for serious international crimes. We encourage States who have yet to do so to incorporate the principle of universal jurisdiction into their domestic legal order. Madam Chair, the International Criminal Court remains of paramount importance in the global strive to end impunity. The Nordic countries reaffirm our unwavering support for the independence and impartiality of the ICC. When states are unwilling or unable to exercise jurisdiction over perpetrators of international crimes, the ICC can provide an alternative avenue for prosecution. When the ICC lacks the necessary jurisdiction, universal jurisdiction can close a gap in the existing international legal order by allowing third states to prosecute the most serious international crimes. We also acknowledge the role of international mechanisms in supporting national and international investigations and prosecutions the International Impartial and Independent Mechanism for Syria, IIIM, the Independent Investigative Mechanism for Myanmar, IIIM, and the now concluded mandate of UNITAD. have all contributed significantly to the collection and preservation of evidence, it is crucial that the international community ensures continued access to such evidence for future prosecutions. Madam Chair, the increase in the application of the principle of universal jurisdiction in the last decades and indeed in recent years demonstrates how the principle contributes to ensuring accountability. In that regard, we note recent and ongoing investigations and prosecutions in several national jurisdictions for serious crimes committed in Syria and Iraq, as well as serious crimes committed in Ukraine as a result of the Russian illegal aggression. These efforts, in addition to other examples of such prosecutions, highlight the principle's practical importance in closing accountability gaps. Universal jurisdiction contributes to ensuring justice for victims and accountability for perpetrators, and with every prosecution a clear message is sent those who commit atrocities must be held accountable. Justice may be delayed, but it must not be denied. We look forward to continued engagement in the Sixth Committee and other UN fora on this important issue.

I thank the distinguished representative of Sweden for that statement, and I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Australia, taking the floor on behalf of Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, Kans.

Thank you, Chair. I have the honor today of speaking on behalf of Canada, New Zealand, and my own country, Australia. As strong supporters of accountability for serious international crimes, CANZ countries welcome this opportunity to once again engage in dialogue on the scope and application of universal jurisdiction. A well-established principle of international law, universal jurisdiction confers on every state the ability to exercise criminal jurisdiction over those individuals responsible for the most serious crimes of international concern, irrespective of where that conduct occurs, irrespective of the nationality of the perpetrator and irrespective of any other links between the crime and the prosecuting state. As a general rule, the state in which any alleged serious international crime occurs has the primary responsibility to investigate and prosecute such crimes. The territorial state is usually best placed to obtain evidence, secure witnesses, provide for the interests of victims and enforce sentences, and in turn serve the interests of justice. We acknowledge, however, that the territorial state is not always willing or able to investigate or prosecute serious international crimes. Given the exceptional gravity of the serious international crimes attracting universal jurisdiction under customary international law, which include piracy, genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, slavery, and torture, all states have a responsibility to help ensure that they do not go unpunished. We encourage member states which have not yet done so to fulfill that responsibility by incorporating universal jurisdiction into their domestic legislation, just as we have. The domestic legislation of Australia, Canada, and New Zealand respectively establishes universal jurisdiction in our domestic courts over the most serious international crimes. The exercise of universal jurisdiction is, in our view, not without limits. We consider that states exercising universal jurisdiction must do so in good faith, consistent with the rule of law and the right to a fair trial. They must do so freely from political motivation, discrimination, and arbitrary application. States must also operate in accordance with laws relating to diplomatic relations and privileges and immunities. We thank member states and observers for their contributions to the Secretary General's annual report on the topic. We note with interest the submissions which report recent developments in case law on universal jurisdiction. The numerous investigations and proceedings underway in France in particular, including the sentencing of an individual to life imprisonment for genocide and crimes against humanity committed in Rwanda, demonstrate the importance of universal jurisdiction in the fight against impunity for serious international crimes, including as a mechanism complementary to ad hoc international criminal tribunals. Cairns countries look forward to continuing this valuable discussion on the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction. We reiterate our willingness to work constructively with all states and observers in the working group. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished representative of Australia for that statement on behalf of Cairns. And I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Slovakia, taking the floor on behalf of the S3, Austria, Czechia and Slovakia. You have the floor.

Madam President, I have the honour to speak on behalf of the countries belonging to the Slawko trilateral format Austria, the Czech Republic and my own country, Slovakia. We also align with the statement delivered on behalf of the EU and its Member States. Our delegations have repeatedly stated that universal jurisdiction is an important instrument in the global fight against impunity. Through this jurisdictional basis, states seek to punish the most serious crimes irrespective of the place where they occur or of the nationality of the perpetrator and the victim. Rather, the source of universal jurisdiction stems solely from the gravity of the crime committed. It does complement the territorial and personal basis of jurisdiction tightening the net around perpetrators of the most heinous crimes under international law. At the same time, it must be distinguished from the jurisdiction of international courts and tribunals. It therefore serves as a vital fail safe mechanism designed to ensure that justice is not denied when other avenues remain closed, always bearing in mind that relevant procedural rules, guarantees of a due process, and other applicable norms of international law must be strictly observed. The deplorable proliferation of armed conflicts around the globe, as well as the continued impunity of perpetrators of past atrocious crimes, remind us that the aspirations for international justice remain far from fulfilled. This even more underscores the need to utilize all tools that the international community has at its disposal. Against this backdrop, we note with interest that a growing number of state practice of national courts exercising universal jurisdiction to prosecute crimes under international law. This trend offers a timely opportunity for the Committee to advance its consideration of such an important topic. In this regard, we wish to thank the Secretary-General for the preparation of the latest report compiling comments submitted by governments and other observers on the relevant applicable international treaties, national legal rules and judicial practice with respect to the scope and application of universal jurisdiction. Of particular relevance, we deem the table of crimes incorporated in domestic criminal codes that may be prosecuted under universal jurisdiction. Together with the reports from previous sessions, these documents form a useful foundation for further analysis of this topic. As the SLaCo States have consistently emphasized, we believe that in view of diversity of positions expressed by States in this forum, The consideration of the topic would greatly benefit from being entrusted to the International Law Commission. Such a step would help to depoliticise the discussion and allow for a thorough examination of this issue on its strictly legal merits. In line with its mandate of promoting progressive development and codification of international law, The Commission's rigorous analysis of relevant applicable treaties, national legal rules and judicial practice would enable it to clarify the definition, scope and limits of universal jurisdiction and to identify possible ways forward which would remain within the competence of the States and the Sixth Committee. In that regard, we note that the topic universal criminal jurisdiction has already been included in the Commission's long term programme of work. We also believe that such a step would contribute positively to strengthening the relationship between the Commission and this committee. Madam Chair, To conclude, we reiterate our firm view that universal jurisdiction represents an important jurisdictional basis in the fight against the most serious crimes under international law. To advance this important discussion, we consider that the input of the International Law Commission in this regard would promote informed deliberations in the Sixth Committee and advance our common understanding of this topic in view of finding convergences. In the meantime, our delegation stand ready to continue engaging constructively in the further consideration of this topic. We thank you for your attention.

I thank the representative of Slovakia for that statement on behalf of the S3, and I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Lithuania, taking the floor on behalf of the Baltic States, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. You have the floor.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Distinguished delegates, I have the honor to speak on behalf of the three Baltic states, Estonia, Latvia, and my own country, Lithuania. The Baltic states align themselves with the statement by the European Union and its member states. Madam Chair, the Baltic states view today's discussion as part of broader conversation. One about our shared efforts to strengthen the rule of law and ensure accountability for the most serious international crimes. We recognize that states may differ in their understanding or application of the principle of universal jurisdiction. Yet, the goal remains the same, to ensure that those responsible for atrocity crimes can be brought to justice wherever they may be found. The principle of universal jurisdiction stems from a simple truth. that certain crimes shock the conscience of humanity. They offend not only the victims, but the international community as a whole. This principle therefore empowers and indeed obliges states to act where justice would otherwise fail, ensuring that those responsible for cannot find refuge from responsibility. It gives effect to shared commitment to end impunity and uphold international law. Today's topic is also deeply anchored in treaty law, a growing body of instruments dating back to the Genocide Convention and the Geneva Conventions and their additional protocols, and reaffirmed ever since. Together, they strengthen cooperation and promote harmonization, both essential to the suppression of serious international crimes. It is in this context that we also look forward to the future Convention on the Prevention and punishment of crimes against humanity. Madam Chair, the pursuit of accountability for the crime of aggression against Ukraine stands as a living example of universal jurisdiction in action. Through the joint investigation team within Eurojust and the International Center for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine, participating states have demonstrated the value of cooperation, evidence sharing, and coordinated national investigations. These efforts are exceptional, both because of the gravity of the crime, which violates jus cogens norms and strikes against the very core of the UN Charter, and because of the determination to act swiftly as the aggression unfolded. All these efforts will contribute to the work of the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine. We look forward to its swift operationalization as it will mark a decisive step towards comprehensive accountability. At the same time, accountability efforts must not stop with the investigation and prosecution of the crime of aggression. Under the principle of universal jurisdiction, justice can also be pursued at the national level for other international crimes committed against Ukraine, including war crimes such as the forcible transfer and deportation of Ukrainian children. Madam Chair, Universal jurisdiction remains an exceptional but indispensable tool in the collective efforts to combat impunity. It operates when those with primary jurisdiction are unwilling or unable to prosecute, ensuring that justice knows no borders. By strengthening national legislation and international cooperation, states can make this principle a sound instrument for accountability and deterrence. We encourage all states to adopt and strengthen national legislation enabling the effective exercise of universal jurisdiction in line with their international obligations, fair trial guarantees, and relevant instruments, such as the Ljubljana-The Hague Convention on the International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of the Crime of Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes, and Other International Crimes. We also see value in continued discussion within this committee and in due course engaging the International Law Commission to promote clarity and consistency in the application of this principle. For the Baltic States, the fight against impunity is both legal and moral imperative. It is rooted in our history and in our unwavering commitment to an international law-based order. We remain steadfast in our support for justice. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you very much to the distinguished representative of Lithuania for that statement. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Germany.

Madam Chair, distinguished delegates, Germany aligns itself with the statement made by the European Union and would like to make the following additional remarks. Since 2002, German prosecutors can exercise universal jurisdiction over the most serious crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes under the German Code of Crimes Against International Law. Different investigations are ongoing, including on crimes connected to the war of aggression against Ukraine. Many cases deal with the crimes committed in Syria or against Yazidis. This is due to the fact that many Syrian and Yazidi refugees, as well as a number of suspected perpetrators, have come to Germany since 2015. German courts therefore bear a special responsibility in bringing accountability to these acts and have been doing so when the suspected perpetrators are in Germany. Since our last update one year ago under this agenda item, three more individuals were convicted, Three new cases were brought before the courts, and three more individuals were arrested under the principle of universal jurisdiction. Four trials are continuing with oral hearings, and in two instances, courts have acquitted the suspects of international criminal law charges. The success of these proceedings hinges on the prosecutorial strategy of the Office of the Federal Prosecutor. Since 2019, the Office has initiated more than 150 investigations of core crimes against international law. A central element of the strategy are so-called structural investigations relating to crimes committed in Ukraine, by the former Syrian regime, by rebel groups in Syria, and by the Islamic State, ISIS. The main focus remains on proceedings against individuals for crimes committed during the Syrian civil war. These cases contribute to the development of substantive international criminal law. The competent courts and authorities have acquired the necessary experience in handling various practical challenges of these complex proceedings in the German legal system. Let me provide you with the main insights from the three convictions in the past year. First, in a landmark trial, the Higher Regional Court in Frankfurt convicted a former Syrian doctor in June 2025 to a lifelong sentence with following preventive detention. After 188 days in court and more than 50 witnesses heard, the judges in Frankfurt established the guilt of the defendant for his acts in notorious torture facilities of military hospitals as crimes against humanity and war crimes. The Court provided media representatives and the public present with the simultaneous translation of the pronouncement of the judgment into Arabic, an important step to make Court decisions more accessible to the affected communities and to move towards a more survivor-centered justice. The Court thus implemented last year's reform of the Court's Constitution Act by the Act on the Further Development of International Criminal Law that aimed to improve access for a non-German speaking audience to legal proceedings. Based on this reform, the judgment also clarified the legal distinction between sexual violence and reproductive violence as crimes against humanity. The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, highlighted this case in his update to the Human Rights Council in September as an example of the importance of universal jurisdiction. Second, in December 2024, the Higher Regional Court in Hamburg convicted a member of the Shabiha militia for crimes against humanity and sentenced him to a 10-year prison term. The decision adjudicated acts for enslavement, forced labor, and torture. The defendant had forced various individuals to carry sandbags close to the front line under shelling and threat to their lives. The decision provides an example of how to interpret the element of enslavement as crime against humanity. To establish the criterion of a widespread and systematic attack, video footage of the Tadamon massacre, in which more than 46 civilians were killed, was introduced into the main hearing. Third, In a ruling in June 2025, the Higher Regional Court in Stuttgart convicted a Syrian national who had joined a militia group with ties to Hezbollah for crimes against humanity, including a killing and torture to a lifelong sentence. A unit of that militia had shot an unarmed student and raided his house. Several victims of the crimes were heard as witnesses in the proceedings. Finally, let me highlight that a judgment by the Higher Regional Court in Celle issued in November 2023 became final in April 2025, after the Federal Court of Justice had dismissed the defendant's appeal. The Higher Regional Court in Celle found the defendant guilty of crimes against humanity and murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment. The judgment not only dealt with the guilt of the defendant, but also established that a systematic and widespread attack against the civilian population occurred in the Gambia during the presidency of Yahya Jammeh. Let me draw your attention to two other recently initiated proceedings, as they are very likely to have a significant impact on the jurisdiction of international crimes. German authorities continue to investigate and prosecute the genocide and international crimes perpetrated against the Yazidi community. Since 2012, seven female and one male individual have been sentenced for atrocities committed against the Yazidi community. In February 2025, the Higher Regional Court in Munich initiated the trial against a former couple, both ISIS members, who had held two girls, then five and 12 years old, as slaves and subjected them to sexual violence. The couple is charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. In June 2025, the Office of the Federal Prosecutor charged four alleged members of a Syrian militia and one secret service agent with crimes against humanity and war crimes concerning cordoning off the Yarmouk district of Damascus. One of the suspects is charged with the war crime of starvation, for trying to prevent the distribution of food by beating civilians lining up for humanitarian aid in an effort to starve the local population. As far as we know, this is the first case to investigate the deliberate starvation of Syrian civilians. Germany cooperates actively with various NGOs. It is our understanding that the effective prosecution and the efforts to make these court proceedings more accessible rely on a strong network of multiple actors. Our practice of universal jurisdiction ensures that we do not provide a safe haven for perpetrators of crimes under international law. Germany will continue in its efforts to bring justice to the victims. It will ensure that those responsible are held accountable. Thank you very much.

I thank the distinguished representative of Germany for that statement. And I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Slovenia.

Madam Chair, Slovenia aligns itself with the statement delivered by the European Union and wishes to make a few additional remarks in its national capacity. We would like to thank the Secretary General for his comprehensive summary report on the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction and the Member States and observers for their contributions thus far. Madam Chair, In light of the growing number of violations of international law, universal jurisdiction is an important tool for promoting and ensuring international accountability and justice. When the most serious crimes occur, they must be investigated and, if appropriate, punished. In this context, universal jurisdiction is one of the tools used to prevent the most serious international crimes that affect the international community as a whole. Slovenia believes that It is necessary to protect the shared values of member states and to take action in response to acts that, due to their gravity, could endanger international peace and order. Furthermore, the nature of such crimes calls for measures to serve as a deterrent, safeguard victims' interests, and address their pursuit of justice. The state, with a direct connection to the crime, bears the primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting it. Nevertheless, universal jurisdiction is a useful tool for bridging jurisdictional gaps and overcoming the obstacles that prevent individuals from being held accountable for the most serious crimes under international law. The impact of crimes is not always confined to one territory. The perpetrators are often found in third countries. Universal jurisdiction is particularly valuable in cases where the relevant state is unwilling or unable to exercise its jurisdiction effectively. This requires a response at the international level. While we strongly support the work of international criminal tribunals, we are aware of their limited capacity to deal with only the most serious cases. Thus, universal criminal jurisdiction as exercised by individual states remains a crucial instrument in the fight against impunity. It complements the unwillingness or incapacity of the territorial state or the state of nationality to prosecute and reflects the global interest in this fight. Madam Chair, states have continued to adopt legislation reflecting universal jurisdiction as a means of ending impunity for international crimes. It is encouraging to see national and international endeavors intensifying to prosecute such crimes and hold the perpetrators to account. International cooperation is essential to achieving these goals and ensuring the effective implementation of universal jurisdiction. Slovenia calls on states to enhance the international accountability framework by ratifying the Ljubljana The Hague Convention on international cooperation in the investigation and prosecution of the crime of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other international crimes, which was adopted in May 2023. This universal legal instrument provides the legal basis and the tools necessary for effective cooperation and the fight against impunity. This includes the principle of universal jurisdiction, which is enshrined in Article 8, paragraph 3. Slovenia reiterates its readiness to contribute to further discussions on this topic with the aim of reconciling the differing views on the definition, scope and application of universal jurisdiction. Finally, we would like to repeat our proposal to bring this topic to the attention of the International Law Commission. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I thank the distinguished representative of Slovenia for that statement. I'll now give the floor to the distinguished representative of Sierra Leone.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The delegation of Sierra Leone aligns itself with the statement to be delivered by the distinguished representative of Cameroon. On behalf of the African group, we offer these additional remarks in a national capacity. Sierra Leone thanks the Secretary General for his report prepared pursuant to General Assembly Resolution 79127. The report remains a valuable resource for identifying convergences and divergences on the scope and application of universal jurisdiction and a light new legislative and judicial developments. including recent trials under universal jurisdiction, which demonstrates both its potential and the challenges that remain. My delegation remains concerned that, after more than a decade of debates, this agenda item has not achieved the desired level of progress in the Sixth Committee. While the establishment of a working group at the 84th session is a welcome step, Sierra Leone believes that more substantive engagement is required to clarify the contours of the principle, its relationship with immunities and its practical condition of application. Madam Chair, Sierra Leone views universal jurisdiction as an essential mechanism for ensuring accountability for the most serious crimes of international concern. Our national experience demonstrates that robust legal frameworks, when combined with political will and international partnership, can end cycles of impunity. Sierra Leone also recalls that our Geneva Convention Act of 2012 gives effect to the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I, and allows for the prosecution of grave breaches by any person regardless of nationality. We also recall our experience with the Special Court of Sierra Leone, which worked with the United Nations to prosecute those bearing the greatest responsibility for atrocities committed during a civil conflict. These experiences confirm the importance of strong legal frameworks and cooperation in bringing perpetrators to justice. On the scope of the principle, Sierra Leone believes that universal jurisdiction must focus on the gravest crimes that affect the international community as a whole. In line with the work on the agenda item, the report of the work of the International Law Commission, we stress that slavery and the slave trade, as recognized under the 1926 Slavery Convention and the 1956 Supplementary Convention, should be included in this category. The recognition will strengthen accountability and affirm the commitment that such crimes must never be repeated. We also take note of the effort made in this committee to distinguish universal jurisdiction from other bases of jurisdiction, including extraterritorial application of national law and the jurisdiction of international tribunals. This conceptual clarity is important But the committee must now move beyond definitional debates towards practical outcomes. On the conditions of application, Sierra Leone share the same concern shared by the African group regarding the misuse or politically motivated application of universal jurisdiction, especially where proceedings have targeted African officials contrary to the principles of sovereign equality, non-intervention and the immunities of heads of states and senior government officials under international law. My delegation stresses that immunities and universal jurisdiction are distinct legal issues and must be addressed carefully to avoid eroding the stability of international relations. Legitimate prosecutions must be distinguished from exercises of jurisdiction that risk politicization, or selective enforcement. Sierra Leone further emphasizes the need for procedural safeguards and complementarity. Universal jurisdiction should operate as a mechanism of last resort, exercised only when the states of territoriality or nationality is unwilling or unable to prosecute. We support safeguards such as prior consultation with the states concerned, the requirement of the actual presence of the accused and the obligation to avoid selective application. We further call for investment in capacity building for national and regional judicial systems to ensure that primary responsibility for prosecution remains with domestic jurisdictions. Madam Chair, Sierra Leone notes with appreciation the inclusion of the universal of universal criminal jurisdiction in the International Law Commission's long term programme of work and reiterates its support for referring the technical legal aspects of this topic to the Commission. Such a referral could assist the Sixth Committee in developing a clearer, more coherent normative framework. We also highlight the need to address jurisdictional gaps in relation to sexual and gender based crimes. As co-sponsor with Japan of the General Assembly resolution A/RES/76/304 on survivors' access to justice, Sierra Leone continues to encourage the development of provisions that ensure these crimes are not excluded from the scope of universal jurisdiction. In conclusion, Madam Chair, Sierra Leone reaffirms its principal commitment to the rule of law and the fight against impunity. We call for a balanced approach that preserves the integrity of universal jurisdiction while preventing its misuse. Sierra Leone stands ready to engage constructively with all delegations to develop a shared understanding that is fair, clear and universally acceptable. I thank you.

I thank the distinguished.

Representative of Sierra Leone for that statement, and I now give the floor to the representative of Cameroon. You have the floor.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair, for giving me the chair and giving me the floor. Madam Chair, Cameroon would like to align itself with this statement delivered by the Islamic Republic of Iran on behalf of the NAM, as well as the statement which will be delivered on behalf of the African Group. We would now like to make a number of remarks in a national capacity. Madam Chair, my delegation has taken note. of the Secretary-General's report on the topic under consideration. Madam Chair, the principle of universal jurisdiction can be used as an effective tool for combating impunity for the most serious crimes and for ensuring the perpetrators of such crimes are held to account, but only on the proviso that the universal jurisdiction is applied objectively in keeping with international law as well as the principles governing the proper administration of justice. My delegation notes and could applaud the fact that states are exhibiting heightened interest in the fight against impunity for the most serious crimes. States are also invoking the principle of universal jurisdiction as an adequate means to achieving the aforementioned objective. The fact remains that serious doubts and practical difficulties continue to plague the scope and the application of universal jurisdiction. We'd now like to make a number of observations. Some of them were already expounded on during previous sessions, but taking into consideration these observations, we hope will help the committee to make headway. Madam Chair, my first observation is the following: universal jurisdiction should remain a subsidiary mechanism, jurisdiction by default, if you will, but it should not be exercised unless the territorial state or the state of nationality do not wish to or cannot exercise their jurisdiction nor discharge their international obligations. Thus, it is desirable for any prosecution initiative to be part and parcel of a logic of consideration within the framework of international mutual legal assistance on criminal matters. and not on the basis of prejudice or subjective considerations. It is only through sustained cooperation in this area that we'll be able to tackle such sensitive topics such as cross-border investigations, jurisdictional immunities, evidence gathering and witness protection. My second remark is the following. The use of universal jurisdiction as a principle should at all times be... taken within the broader context in which other norms and principles of international law are also taken into consideration, especially the principle of the sovereignty of states, non-interference in the internal affairs of states, and the immunity of state representatives. This will promote recourse to universal jurisdiction that is underpinned by the law, avoiding any abusive, arbitrary, instrumentalized, or political use of that principle, as we've seen over the last years, something that only serves to undermine the international momentum towards prevention and punishment of the most serious crimes. My third remark is the following. The physical presence of the alleged perpetrator on the territory of a state is a key component for that state to be able to exercise universal jurisdiction and to trigger any prosecution. The approach according to which the lack of the physical presence of the perpetrator allows for a sentence to be handed down in absentia, a judgment to be handed down in absentia, is not something that's universally accepted under international law. Fourth, universal jurisdiction should be exercised with due respect for the principle of double criminality. In other words, the offense must be punishable both in the requesting and the requested state. This condition is essential for triggering any extradition procedure. Fifth, The principle of universal jurisdiction has taken on the characteristics of customary international law. Well, this is a moot point. My delegation's position remains unchanged. We believe that there are serious discrepancies in state practice and the opinio juris related to how customary international law in this domain is forged. Thus, instead of using discretion and a unilateral foundation for universal jurisdiction, universal jurisdiction should be rooted in existing legal instruments, including the Geneva Conventions of 1949, 1982 UNCLOS Convention, and the Convention on the Prevention of Torture and Other Forms of Inhumane or Degrading Treatment, 1984. Last but not least, the exercise of universal jurisdiction. should be circumscribed to the most serious crimes, as the Group of African States has already stated here during previous sessions. As the past has shown, my delegation deems it inappropriate to make attempts to draw up an exhaustive list of corresponding offences. This runs the risk of universalization and the establishment of a hierarchy on the basis of national criminal Madam Chair, by way of conclusion, my delegation will continue working hand in hand with other delegations constructively so as to make headway on this question.

I thank the distinguished representative of Cameroon for that. I now give the floor to the distinguished representative of France. You have the floor.

Madam Chair, my delegation aligns itself with the statement of the European Union. France reiterates its interest in having the topic of universal jurisdiction be discussed within the context of the Sixth Committee, and we thank the Secretary General for his report. Universal jurisdiction is founded solely on the nature of the offence, which is so grave that these crimes affect the fundamental interests of the international community as a whole. In the case of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, torture or forced disappearance, Neither the venue where the crime was committed nor the nationality of the perpetrator or the victim should be an obstacle to combating impunity. Alongside the action of states and national courts, the International Criminal Court and hybrid courts, universal jurisdiction does pose certain challenges. Firstly, investigations are difficult where there is no connection with national territory, that is why the attachment criterion might be necessary. Next, universal jurisdiction requires effective international cooperation in investigations, prosecutions and judgments of international crimes at the national level. The signing of the Libyana The Hague Convention for International Cooperation in Investigations and Prosecutions of International Crimes has bolstered the international legal framework here. We therefore call on all states to sign and ratify this convention. Finally, universal jurisdiction requires specialized investigators and judges able to grasp the complexity of these crimes. With this in mind, France set up a unit dedicated to combating crimes against humanity and war crimes, working within a specialized jurisdiction under the national counter-terrorism prosecutor's bench, as well as a specialized investigation office. Thanks to these services, France has developed the capacity to try the perpetrators of these crimes and has been able to strengthen its cooperation in international criminal assistance. Universal jurisdiction allows us to deliver recognition and redress to the victims where no other basis of jurisdiction is available to prosecute the alleged facts. Our delegation stands ready to continue constructive exchanges and discussions within the working group of the Sixth Committee aimed at conducting an in depth review of the scope and application of universal jurisdiction. Thank you.

I thank the distinguished.

Representative of France for that statement. Distinguished representatives, the distinguished representative of France was the last speaker on this agenda item for this afternoon. Tomorrow morning, the agenda will be completed. No meeting of the Sixth Committee is scheduled in order to allow delegations to attend the debate in the plenary of the General Assembly on the report of the Residual Mechanism. We will continue our debate on agenda item 85, the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction, at our meeting tomorrow at 3 p.m. Finally, I wish to remind delegations that tomorrow from 1.15 to 2 p.m. Informal consultations will be held on agenda item 84, the rule of law at the national and international levels, to be followed by consultations on agenda item 83, report of the special committee on the charter of the United Nations and on the strengthening of the role of the organization that will be held from 2:00 to 2:45 PM. Thank you very much to the interpreters for a few extra minutes of their time. The meeting is adjourned.