Sixth Committee (Legal) — 74th session

The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction (Agenda item 84)

«»

Documentation

Summary of work

Background (source: A/74/100)

The item entitled “The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction” was included in the agenda of the sixty-fourth session of the General Assembly at the request of the United Republic of Tanzania on behalf of the Group of African States (A/63/237/Rev.1). The Assembly has had the item on its agenda annually since then (resolutions 64/117, 65/33, 66/103, 67/98, 68/117, 69/124, 70/119, 71/149, 72/120 and 73/208).

At its seventy-third session, the Assembly allocated the item to the Sixth Committee, where statements in the debate were made by 55 delegations (see A/C.6/73/SR.10–12). The Assembly decided to establish, at its seventy-fourth session, a working group of the Sixth Committee to continue to undertake a thorough discussion of the scope and application of universal jurisdiction. The Assembly also decided that the working group would be open to all Member States and that relevant observers to the Assembly would be invited to participate in the work of the working group. The Assembly invited Member States and relevant observers, as appropriate, to submit information and observations on the scope and application of universal jurisdiction, including, where appropriate, information on the relevant applicable international treaties and their national legal rules and judicial practice, and requested the Secretary-General to prepare and submit to the Assembly at its seventy-fourth session a report based on such information and observations (resolution 73/208).

Consideration at the seventy-fourth session

The Sixth Committee considered the item at its 14th to 17th, 34th and 35th meetings, from 15 to 17 October and on 11 and 20 November 2019 (A/C.6/74/SR.14, 15, 16, 17, 34 and 35).

For its consideration of the item, the Committee had before it the reports of the Secretary-General submitted to the General Assembly at its sixty-fifth to seventy-fourth sessions (A/65/181, A/66/93 and Add.1, A/67/116, A/68/113, A/69/174, A/70/125, A/71/111, A/72/112, A/73/123 and Add.1 and A/74/144).

At its 1st meeting, on 7 October, the Committee established a working group pursuant to General Assembly resolution 73/208 to continue to undertake a thorough discussion of the scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction. In its resolution 73/208, the Assembly decided that the Working Group should be open to all Member States and that relevant observers to the Assembly would be invited to participate in its work. The Working Group held two meetings, on 18 and 24 October. At its 34th meeting, on 11 November, the Committee heard and took note of the oral report of the Chair of the Working Group (see A/C.6/74/SR.34).

Statements were made by the representatives of the Islamic Republic of Iran (on behalf of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)), the Gambia (on behalf of the African Group), Sweden (also on behalf of Denmark, Finland, Iceland and Norway (Nordic Countries)), Liechtenstein, Sierra Leone, Australia (also on behalf of Canada and New Zealand (CANZ)), Slovakia, China [in English], Czech Republic, Argentina, Israel, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Sudan, the Syrian Arab Republic, United States of America, Morocco, Thailand, Mexico, Rwanda, Cuba, Kenya, El Salvador, Mali, South Africa, Russian Federation, Libya, Egypt, Ethiopia, Cameroon, India, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Costa Rica, Brazil, the Philippines, Burkina Faso, Algeria, Senegal, Singapore, the Gambia, Gabon, Indonesia, Paraguay, Guinea, Turkey and Myanmar. Statements were also made by the observers for the Holy See and the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

Delegations generally stated that universal jurisdiction was an important, well-established principle of international law aimed at combating impunity. Several delegations noted the exceptional character of universal jurisdiction. Some delegations also highlighted universal jurisdiction as a critical component of the international criminal justice system and its role in promoting the rule of law. It was emphasized that universal jurisdiction was a complementary mechanism to hold perpetrators accountable for the most serious crimes under international law, which should be exercised in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity.

As regards the scope of universal jurisdiction, a number of delegations considered that universal jurisdiction applied to the most serious crimes under international law and provided various examples of such crimes, including war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity, slavery, torture, piracy, aggression and terrorism.  While caution was expressed against the establishment of an exhaustive list of crimes, it was also suggested that an analysis of universal jurisdiction should be based on customary international law.

With respect to the application of universal jurisdiction, a number of delegations reaffirmed their concerns over the uncertain scope of the principle and its potential abuse or misuse. Several delegations stressed that the principle must be applied in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and international law, including respect for the sovereign equality of States, territorial integrity and non-interference in the internal affairs of States. A number of delegations further highlighted the need for its application in accordance with the rules on immunities. In this regard, the importance of cooperation between States in matters such as extradition, mutual legal assistance, information exchange and law enforcement was also stressed.

On the future consideration of the agenda item, a number of delegations supported continued discussions within the Sixth Committee and the Working Group, while some delegations expressed their concerns that such discussions were at an impasse. Delegations also shared diverging views on the decision taken by the International Law Commission to include the topic “Universal criminal jurisdiction” in its long-term programme of work. While several delegations favoured consideration of the legal aspects of the topic by the Commission, some other delegations reiterated their view that it would be premature and counterproductive at this stage for the Commission to undertake such a study. At the same time, support for retaining the item in the Sixth Committee was expressed by a number of delegations.

Action taken by the Sixth Committee

At the 35th meeting, on 20 November, the representative of the Gambia, on behalf of the Bureau, introduced a draft resolution entitled “The scope and application of the principle of universal jurisdiction” (A/C.6/74/L.6). At the same meeting the Committee adopted draft resolution A/C.6/74/L.6 without a vote.

Under the terms of the draft resolution, the General Assembly would invite Member States and relevant observers, as appropriate, to submit, before 24 April 2020, information and observations on the scope and application of universal jurisdiction, including, where appropriate, information on the relevant applicable international treaties, their national legal rules and judicial practice. The Assembly would further request the Secretary-General to prepare and submit to the Assembly, at its seventy-fifth session, a report based on such information and observations. The Assembly would moreover decide that the Sixth Committee shall continue its consideration of the item. For this purpose, a working group would be established at the seventy-fifth session to continue to undertake a thorough discussion of the scope and application of universal jurisdiction. The General Assembly would decide that the working group shall be open to all Member States and that relevant observers to the Assembly will be invited to participate in the work of the working group.

Subsequent action taken by the General Assembly

This agenda item will be considered at the seventy-fifth session (2020).

Full texts of submissions (A/74/144)

State Original submission Translation
Bahrain Arabic English
Belarus Russian English
Bulgaria English  
Cyprus English  
El Salvador Spanish English
Finland English  
Germany English  
Iraq Arabic English
Mali French French
Moldova English  
Qatar Arabic English
Sierra Leone English  
Turkey English  
Ukraine English  
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland English  
 
Relevant observer Original submission Translation
     

Quick Links

Key Documents

Resources