A/78/PV.19 General Assembly

I now call on Judge Graciela Gatti Santana, President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals. Judge Gatti Santana (International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals): Allow me to start by congratulating His Excellency Ambassador Dennis Francis of Trinidad and Tobago on assuming the weighty responsibilities of guiding the seventy-eighth session of the General Assembly. I had the pleasure of meeting with President Francis earlier in the week, and I found his vision for this session to be most inspiring, particularly his efforts to reinvigorate the Sustainable Development Goals. As I will explain, the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, which I am so proud to head, is currently defining its own vision for the future and refocusing its attention with regard to its mandated functions. Today, when international law as we know it is under threat around the world, and when it is ever-more important to demonstrate that justice institutions can succeed, I am pleased to report that the Mechanism has reached a critical juncture in its lifespan. For the first time since becoming operational  — moreover, for the first time since the very earliest trial proceedings began at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) — we have no more active trials or appeals in relation to the core crimes set out in their statutes and incorporated in the statute of the Mechanism. The hard work and determination over the past 12 months have led to that significant breakthrough. With the delivery on 31 May of the appeals judgment in the case Prosecutor v. Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović, the Mechanism concluded its final core crimes case inherited from the ICTY. It achieved that milestone almost exactly 30 years after the Security Council created the ICTY — a decision that would permanently alter the landscape of international law and breathe life into the concept of accountability. Soon afterwards, on 1 July, the Mechanism marked a decade of operations at its branch in The Hague. Decisive events have also taken place in the ICTR- derived case against Félicien Kabuga. On 7 August, the Appeals Chamber affirmed that Mr. Kabuga was not fit to stand trial and was very unlikely to regain fitness. In addition, it rejected as an error of law the decision of the Trial Chamber to adopt an alternative finding procedure. The Appeals Chamber remanded the matter to the Trial Chamber, which, on 8 September, stayed the final proceedings indefinitely and remained seized of the issue of Mr. Kabuga’s provisional release. In a separate development, it has been determined that Mr. Kabuga is non-indigent and capable of funding his entire defence. The Appeals Chamber’s decision of 7 August triggered the Mechanism’s truly residual mode, and I can assure the Assembly that the impact of that is not lost on any of us. We have long aspired to become the institution that the Security Council originally designed and, through their dedication, our judges and staff have enabled us to finally reach that point. With no more active core crimes trials or appeals, the time has come to think, and do things, differently. As a result, our attention has shifted from in-court proceedings to the longer-term residual functions that were entrusted to us by the Council in 2010, when, it is worth remembering, we were also tasked with assuming the remaining caseloads of two active tribunals. We also recognize and underscore that the conclusion of in-court activity does not mean that we are closing down. Indeed, we still have much work to do, and the Mechanism will continue to fulfil its mandated functions until the Security Council decides otherwise. Those functions include supervising the enforcement of sentences, tracking the remaining ICTR fugitives and responding to national requests for assistance, to name just a few. Nevertheless, we know that, as circumstances change, we must change with them. In that respect, downsizing alone will not be sufficient. We must go further and start to redefine the way in which we work. In order to better reflect our current reality, I considered it imperative to recalibrate the key objectives of my own presidency. I am pleased to announce today the following new priorities. The first priority is to present the Security Council with a framework of operations to complete functions during the Mechanism’s new residual phase. That evinces my commitment to comprehensively responding to resolution 2637 (2022), wherein the Security Council requests the Mechanism to provide clear and focused projections of completion timelines for all activities and, for the first time, options for the transfer of its remaining activities in due course. That framework of operations will encompass our development of a scenario-based workforce plan, arising from a previous recommendation by the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS). My first priority is therefore intrinsically connected with the Mechanism’s future planning activities, which have continued apace since our annual report (see A/78/257) was submitted to the Assembly. In July, the Panel on Judicial Functions, comprising nine Mechanism judges, concluded its report on the nature, duration and potential transferability of our remaining judicial functions, as well as the future of the judicial roster. That document has been useful in informing the scenario-based planning that is being coordinated internally within the Mechanism. As part of that priority, I am also turning my attention to areas where portfolios could potentially be restructured and certain functions absorbed by other sections of the Mechanism to avoid duplication of efforts and deliver greater efficiencies. One example is the enforcement of sentences, but any such restructuring will of course be carefully examined in the light of our legal framework. My second priority is to promote effective leadership and good governance in the performance of mandated functions and residual activities. This priority recognizes that, as the Mechanism further downsizes, those in senior and leadership positions must be vigilant in their responsibilities to manage with transparency, efficiency and accountability. Simply put, we must lead fairly and in good faith, and our dwindling resources must be put to the best and most productive use. It is certainly not easy to steer a downsizing organization, to keep productivity high when morale is low and to reconcile tensions between budgetary constraints and our desire to keep achieving results. Alongside my own efforts, I will therefore be relying on management to help ensure that the Mechanism remains a functional and thriving organization. We owe that to the international community that established us, to our staff members, who work so hard and are directly impacted by downsizing and attrition, and to the affected communities and other stakeholders that are counting on the Mechanism to continue to deliver on its mandated activities. In that context, the periodic review, evaluation and audit processes that the Mechanism undergoes will play a crucial role in ensuring our continued accountability, as well as our responsiveness to change. At present, we are actively engaging with OIOS, which is evaluating the methods and work of the Mechanism. That evaluation will contribute to our fifth biennial review by the Security Council, to be conducted in the first half of 2024. Such processes, however, should not be taken as the sole markers of our performance. A plan for the future, coupled with strong leadership, is needed to effectuate operational change. The third new priority is to continue to consolidate the legacy of the ad hoc Tribunals and the Mechanism and work closely with all main stakeholders. Now that we are focused primarily on long-term residual functions rather than in-court proceedings, consolidating the legacy of the ICTY, the ICTR and the Mechanism becomes even more important. After all, it is the legacy alone  — the landmark judgments, the testimonies of thousands of brave witnesses and all the other records documenting that incredible journey of justice — that will exist far into the future, long after we are gone. In that respect, the Mechanism will continue to support national jurisdictions in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda by responding to requests for assistance, among other activities. In doing so, the Mechanism is essentially passing the baton on to domestic prosecutors and judiciaries. From now on, only they will be responsible for trying alleged perpetrators of crimes that took place during the Balkan conflicts of the 1990s and the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda. The other key component is making sure that our public judicial records are as accessible as possible, not only through the Mechanism’s website and public databases, but also through the establishment of information centres, in accordance with Security Council resolution 1966 (2010). One such centre was opened in Sarajevo in 2018, and we hope that a second can be established in Zagreb in the near future. Disseminating information in that way allows others to understand the judgments and our ongoing work, and it plays a vital role in combating genocide denial and related divisive phenomena. The Mechanism remains committed to cooperating with its key stakeholders towards achieving those and other aims. In addition to Member States and the United Nations bodies to whom we are answerable, we will continue to work closely with our staunch supporters, who strengthen our resolve on a daily basis. I am referring to our enforcement and host States, our affected communities and national authorities, the Office of Legal Affairs, the European Union and independent monitoring bodies, such as the International Committee of the Red Cross, among others. Of course, cooperation does not flow in only one direction. As I have said on previous occasions, the Mechanism relies heavily on the support provided by Member States and others with respect to various functions, and we are deeply grateful for the assistance that we receive. However, there is a pressing need for further cooperation in a number of areas. As the Assembly is aware, one of those is the situation of the acquitted or released individuals who were relocated to the Republic of the Niger more than 22 months ago, and who remain under de facto house arrest following the Niger’s breach of its agreement with the United Nations. That predicament, which is not of the Mechanism’s making, has been exacerbated by the country’s recent political crisis and continues to detrimentally impact the rights of the relocated persons. At the same time, it burdens not only the Mechanism, but also the United Nations more broadly. The other area, which has been mentioned in this Hall on numerous occasions, concerns the arrest and transfer of the accused persons in the contempt matter of Petar Jojić and Vjerica Radeta. Despite the Republic of Serbia having been referred three times to the Security Council for its failure to cooperate with the Mechanism, or, in that case, the ICTY, the arrest warrants remain outstanding. We also urgently need further assistance with the enforcement of sentences. In recent years, we have seen an increased number of convicted persons being returned to the United Nations Detention Unit in The Hague by States that are no longer able to continue to enforce the sentences due to legal or other impediments within their domestic jurisdictions. As a result, in some instances our enforcement responsibilities are becoming long-term detention problems. I once again strongly encourage other States to come forward and volunteer to support the Mechanism with that crucial function. Those examples reveal the considerable challenges that can arise once the main in-court proceedings are completed. They relate to the Mechanism’s longer-term and continuous activities, which, despite being less visible, are no less important and in fact consolidate the full cycle of justice. Let us unite our efforts to see that cycle through in a fair and efficient manner. As the past three decades have demonstrated, when we work together, we can deliver on the promise of justice far beyond any expectations of what the ICTY, the ICTR and the Mechanism itself would be able to achieve. It now falls to all of us to ensure that the Mechanism can carry on towards the final chapter of that historic mission and secure the precious legacies of all three institutions for the benefit of generations to come.

I have the honour to speak today on behalf of Australia and Canada, as well as my own country, New Zealand (CANZ). The CANZ countries reaffirm their continued strong support for the important work of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, which ensures that the legacies of the ad hoc Tribunals  — the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) — endure. The Mechanism and the previous work of the Tribunals have been instrumental in fighting impunity in respect of some of the most serious international crimes, holding perpetrators accountable, bringing justice to victims and contributing to sustainable peace. As mass atrocity violence continues, the Tribunals and the Mechanism stand as a reminder that the international community can respond to crimes committed in complex conflict situations. Together, they shaped the development of international criminal law and exemplify how rules-based institutions can be utilized to realize accountability. We would like to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the memory of Judge Elizabeth Ibanda- Nahamya and her outstanding service and contribution to the work of the Mechanism and, more widely, to efforts for international criminal justice. We welcome the appointment of Judge Lydia Mugambe in May to serve the remainder of Judge Ibanda-Nahamya’s term. We thank President Gatti Santana for her briefing and commend the ongoing dedicated work of the Mechanism to bring perpetrators to justice for atrocities committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. In particular, we acknowledge her work on future planning activities for the Mechanism. We congratulate the Mechanism on the significant progress made on successfully carrying out its mandate, as detailed in its annual report (see A/78/257). The delivery of the appeal judgment in the Stanišić and Simatović case marks a milestone achievement for the Mechanism. We recognize the efforts of the judges and staff involved in that case. As the final case pertaining to atrocity crimes originating from the ICTY, the handing down of the appeal judgment brings to a close the important work of that Tribunal, which began more than three decades ago. The completion of the ICTY’s primary mandate demonstrates that justice and accountability can be achieved with the international community’s enduring and steadfast commitment to ensuring accountability, however long it takes. We reiterate, as we said in previous statements on this item, that accountability plays a fundamental role in sustaining peace. We take this opportunity to recognize and commend the earnest efforts of those who contributed to the ICTY’s landmark achievements over those 30 years, whose work has made a significant contribution towards delivering justice and combating impunity. We recall the mandate of the Mechanism to continue to supervise the enforcement of sentences, in accordance with article 25 (2) of the statute. We note the decision of the Appeals Chamber in the case Prosecutor v. Félicien Kabuga, indicted by the ICTR as one of the alleged architects of the Rwandan genocide, to stay proceedings indefinitely in the light of the determination that Mr. Kabuga is unfit for trial. We stand with the victims, survivors and their families. We are disappointed that the trial proceedings could not be completed. Nonetheless, we recognize the care taken by the Appeals Chamber to achieve a balance between the interests of the international community to prosecute those charged with serious international crimes with the importance of ensuring that that is done consistent with the fundamental right to a fair trial and respect for best practices in the field of international criminal justice. The work and evidence collected by the Office of the Prosecutor and the ICTR constitute a valuable record of the events that occurred, and those records are important for ensuring appropriate recognition of such atrocities. In that regard, we acknowledge in particular the rise in the number of requests for assistance received by the Office of the Prosecutor, which underscores the significance of the support that the Office provides, within existing resources, to national authorities investigating and prosecuting international crimes. We also specifically recognize the immense support provided during the previous reporting period by the Judicial Records and Archives Unit, which processed a significant number of judicial filings, supporting the Mechanism’s mandate for access. Furthermore, we wish to commend the support provided by the witness support and protection units, which ensure the security of the approximately 3,200 witnesses who appeared before the Tribunals and the Mechanism and who benefit from protective measures. The importance of each of the functions I mentioned in the facilitation of the Mechanism’s mandate cannot be understated, and we will continue to fully cooperate with the Mechanism’s activities in that regard. We wish to underline the work of the Mechanism in relation to the location and arrest of the remaining fugitives indicted by the ICTR. In that regard, we particularly welcome the successful arrest of Fulgence Kayishema, and we commend the close collaboration between the Office of the Prosecutor and the South African authorities. That should remind us all of our individual and collective obligations to improve cooperation with the Mechanism, which will ensure closure for victims and their communities and achieve justice for victims of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. That includes assistance with securing the arrest and surrender of the fugitives indicted by the ICTR who remain at large. We note with interest the anticipation for imminent success in those endeavours detailed in the annual report. We hope that, through international and national cooperation in law enforcement, that can be achieved. Finally, Canada, Australia and New Zealand appreciate the meticulous planning of the Mechanism for the next phase of its lifespan. We reiterate our steadfast commitment to supporting the Mechanism, including through its orderly transition and legacy, in line with the completion strategies. We will continue to offer our full cooperation to the Mechanism and its essential work to ensure that international criminal justice prevails.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the three Baltic States — Estonia, Lithuania and my own country, Latvia. We would like to thank Judge Graciela Gatti Santana, President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, for the annual report (see A/78/257). We congratulate her and her team on the progress made during the past year. We commend the important work of the Mechanism in ensuring accountability for the most serious crimes under international law. Now more than ever, a strong multilateral, inclusive, rules-based international order is essential for the maintenance of global peace and security. It must be our joint responsibility to defend and strengthen it with all possible tools. We believe that international judicial institutions such as the Mechanism have a critical role in the establishment and upholding of international peace and security. However, the effectiveness of the Mechanism in conducting its work relies on cooperation from States. All States should comply with their international obligations and fully cooperate with the Mechanism, including in apprehending the remaining fugitives at large. The Baltic States would like to take this opportunity to reaffirm their continued support for the important work of the Mechanism. The ongoing work of the Mechanism ensures that the legacies of the ad hoc Tribunals  — the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda — endure. Furthermore, we reaffirm our strong support to the Mechanism for its work on the peaceful settlement of disputes and congratulate the Mechanism on the significant progress accomplished during the past year, particularly as regards the appeal judgment in the Stanišić and Simatović case. The Tribunals and the work of the Mechanism have been instrumental in the jurisprudence and practice of international criminal law and in ending impunity for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. Together, they have added breadth and depth to international criminal law jurisprudence and administered justice in cases involving some of the most horrific crimes in recent history. We appreciate that the Mechanism focuses on witness support and protection and pays attention to the interests of witnesses and victims when considering early release applications. It is unfortunate that there are several contempt of court cases in which the accused have tried to interfere with witnesses. The rule of law and the maintenance of international peace and security are at the heart of our foreign policy. We take this opportunity to reiterate our unwavering support for international criminal justice in general and for the Mechanism in particular. Lastly, in order to further strengthen international criminal justice mechanisms, we strongly support the establishment of a special international tribunal to prosecute the crime of aggression against Ukraine.

I now give the floor to the representative of the European Union, in its capacity as observer.

I have the honour to speak on behalf of the European Union and its member States. The candidate countries North Macedonia, Montenegro, Albania, Ukraine, the Republic of Moldova and Bosnia and Herzegovina; the potential candidate country Georgia; as well as Monaco and San Marino, align themselves with this statement. At the outset, let me convey our thoughts and heartfelt condolences to all civilian victims of the conflict in the Middle East and to their families. We would like to thank President Graciela Gatti Santana for the eleventh annual report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (see A/78/257). We congratulate her and her team on the significant progress made since the previous report (see A/77/242). With the delivery on 31 May of the appeal judgment in the Stanišić and Simatović case, the final case inherited from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), only one core crimes case remains on the Mechanism’s docket, namely, the Kabuga case. The conclusion of all proceedings related to core crimes brought before the ICTY is important progress towards completing the legacy of the ICTY’s judicial work. With regard to the Kabuga case, we note that, in its decision of 7 August, the Appeals Chamber confirmed that Mr. Kabuga was not fit for trial and remanded the matter to the Trial Chamber with the instructions to impose an indefinite stay of proceedings. The Appeals Chamber was cognizant that victims and survivors of the crimes with which Mr. Kabuga is charged had long waited to see justice delivered, and that the inability to complete the trial proceedings in that case, due to his lack of fitness, must be disappointing to them. Yet it held that the essential interests of the international community to prosecute individuals charged with serious violations of international humanitarian law must be balanced with the fundamental rights of the accused. The European Union and its member States believe that justice can be delivered only by holding trials that are fair and are conducted with full respect for the rights of the accused. The decision is a testimony that the ad hoc Tribunals and the Mechanism are instruments not of retribution, but of justice and accountability. Regarding the remaining fugitives, we congratulate all States that played a critical role in the apprehension of Fulgence Kayishema, one of the genocide fugitives from Rwanda. It is another affirmation that justice has a long arm and, no matter how long it takes, the perpetrators of the most serious crimes are ultimately held to account. The Mechanism continues to make strides in relation to supervising the enforcement of sentences. However, additional cooperation by States is required to ensure that all convictions are enforced. The cooperation of States is also needed to resolve the situation of the eight acquitted or released persons who were relocated to the Niger in December 2021. We encourage the Mechanism and Member States to continue their efforts to find a permanent solution for those individuals. We recall that States are required to cooperate with the Mechanism in the investigation and prosecution of persons and to comply with orders and requests for assistance in relation to cases before the Mechanism. We regret that the accused persons in the Jojić and Radeta contempt case have not yet been arrested and surrendered. The Mechanism continues to receive requests for assistance from national authorities in relation to proceedings before domestic courts. We encourage the Mechanism to continue to assist, within its mandate, national judicial authorities in prosecuting serious international crimes in order to continue to deliver justice for victims. The work of the Mechanism proves that ensuring accountability is not a soundbite. The pursuit of justice forms an essential part of lasting peace. We commend the efforts of the Mechanism to pursue that path, while downsizing and transitioning to a real residual institution. In conclusion, the ultimate aim of international criminal justice is accountability. We hope that the current and future generations will assess history for what it is, without any attempts to revise it. We trust that they will continue to be inspired by justice and reconciliation with the past in order to build a peaceful future. The European Union and its member States have a strong conviction that the work and legacy of the Mechanism make an indispensable contribution in that regard.

As a co-founder of the tribunals created after the Second World War to condemn the most heinous crimes in the history of humankind, our country was at the origins of international criminal justice. We have always proceeded from the fact that the objective of international criminal justice is not only to administer justice, but also to restore justice and trust among peoples and to promote national reconciliation. Today international criminal justice does not live up to those ideals. For 30 years now, we have been witnessing the rapid erosion and politicization of the relevant institutions. Established by the Security Council in 1993, the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) became a political tool in the hands of the countries that bombed Yugoslavia as part of the NATO coalition. The Tribunal served as a vehicle for the West’s geopolitical ambitions, and it was used to settle political scores with some parties and completely vindicate others. The principle of equality before the law and courts was undermined by the anti-Serbian bias in the activities of that body, and non-Serb defendants walked away scot-free. NATO’s crimes during the bombings of Yugoslavia also went unpunished. Bias, partiality, legal ambiguity and the failure to apply uniform standards to all have become the hallmarks of the so-called “Hague justice”. Changing the name of that so-called tribunal from the ICTY to the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals has not changed its nature. Against that backdrop, it is particularly strange to hear talk about the preservation of the so-called legacy of the international criminal tribunals, with which the United Nations should supposedly deal. It is worth taking a closer look at what that legacy is. To start with, I would like to recall the forgotten story of how the ICTY dealt with NATO crimes in Yugoslavia. In the case of NATO, the Prosecutor, who had full authority to open an investigation and refer the case to the judges, decided to set up a committee, not provided for by any rules of procedure, to review the NATO air raid on Yugoslavia. The Prosecutor could not decide without the committee whether it was worth investigating the deaths of civilians if they were victims of NATO’s use of force. The committee relieved the Prosecutor of the burden of deciding alone that the situation warranted investigation. The committee’s report explicitly stated that, in the case of NATO, the law was not sufficiently clear. I recommend that those who are interested study or refresh their memory of that report. It contains much of interest to researchers of the legacy of the ICTY. But let us turn back to exactly what the ICTY and the Mechanism did. Approximately 60 per cent of the convictions were against Serbs. Croats made up no more than 20 per cent of the total number of defendants. The number of convicted Kosovo Albanians, Bosnian Muslims and Macedonians can be counted on one hand. It was within the framework of the ICTY that General Ante Gotovina, Naser Oric and Ramush Haradinaj were acquitted. Hashim Thaçi’s activities were not of interest to the ICTY. Such protection by the ICTY helped Western countries to turn former militants into respectable politicians, travelling around the world and shaking hands with European leaders. Amid such goodwill, the 2008 publication by former ICTY Prosecutor Carla del Ponte, who first alleged mass killings for the purpose of organ removal, which, according to her book, took place in Albania and were carried out by the Kosovo Liberation Army, was truly chilling. It is remarkable that the former ICTY Prosecutor did nothing to investigate that situation when she was in office. Moreover, the Swiss Government ordered Ms. Del Ponte to keep silent on the matter. It was only three years later that the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe issued a report on the crimes of members of the Kosovo Liberation Army between 1998 and 2000. It brought to the international community’s attention horrific claims of trafficking in people and human organs, murders, torture and other forms of inhumane behaviour. But, even after that, nothing happened. It took another five years for the European Union to establish the Kosovo Specialist Chambers in 2016 to investigate the heinous acts to which the ICTY chose to turn a blind eye. The very fact that there is a need for that separate court for matters directly under the ICTY’s jurisdiction is all that one needs to know about the effectiveness and impartiality of the ICTY/ Mechanism and its legacy. In order to complete the picture, it should be noted that, having already been in operation for seven years, the Specialist Chambers has never convicted anyone. It has become clear that it is just another political tool. Its task is to ensure the obedience of the authorities of so- called Kosovo to Brussels and, if necessary, to clean up the local political landscape. The problem is that the ICTY and the Residual Mechanism are not an isolated phenomenon. Those bodies set a vicious trend, which has been followed by other institutions of international criminal justice. Today international criminal justice has become synonymous with bias, unprofessionalism, corruption and double standards. Another persistent trend is the attempts by the ICTY and the Mechanism to prolong their existence as long as possible. This year, we are marking the thirtieth anniversary of that institution. In a rough approximation, they have spent more than $3.5 billion on their activities — an amount that is comparable to the annual budget of the United Nations as a whole. By way of comparison, the well-known Nuremberg Tribunal, of which our country was one of the founders, functioned from 20 November 1945 to 1 October 1946. In less than a year, it uncovered the most heinous crimes of the Nazis and sentenced the criminals. Its legacy is truly great. Scholars around the world study its judgments. All that was done without the help of the United Nations. But let us return to the Mechanism. If it were not for the timely intervention of the Security Council Informal Working Group on International Tribunals, the Mechanism would now be engaged in a sham trial of facts in the case of Mr. Kabuga, who was officially declared unfit to stand trial for health reasons. The trial judges were not at all embarrassed by the blatant discrepancy between such an outlandish trial and the Mechanism’s statutory documents. The case of Félicien Kabuga is also noteworthy from the point of view of highlighting the double standards of the ICTY and the Mechanism. For example, he was ordered to undergo one medical examination after another, while Serbian General Ratko Mladić was denied a health check year after year. When he was finally examined by Russian doctors, it was not taken into account by the Tribunal. By their very nature, ad hoc international tribunals cannot, and should not, replace existing bodies of national justice. They must strictly comply with their statutes, including the time limits for their work. In accordance with the founding Security Council resolution 1966 (2010), the Residual Mechanism is a purely temporary structure, with a small number of staff commensurate with its reduced functions. However, it is only now, after 13 years, that the leadership of the Mechanism has come forward with a plan to transform it into a truly residual structure. Despite the fact that such an action is more than a decade late, we welcome the efforts on that track. We look forward to further measures to reduce the number of staff and close units of the Mechanism, in full compliance with the Security Council’s directives.

I want to thank President Gatti Santana for the report (see A/78/257) and her briefing on the ongoing work of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT) to bring perpetrators to justice for atrocities committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. Malta aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union and its member States. As the President said recently at the conference entitled “30 Years of the ICTY — legacy and current challenges”, against all odds, the Tribunal went beyond developing substance and procedure and helps to create a new legal culture — a culture against impunity. The legacy of the ad hoc Tribunals must be that — a culture against impunity. In that regard, we commend the Mechanism’s activities and accomplishments over the past year, and we welcome the President’s attention to carrying out future planning activities and to moving forward with the transition from an operational court to a truly residual institution. Restructuring and streamlining cannot wait any longer, and any duplication of effort must be avoided. We thank the President for her leadership and commitment in that regard and commend the focus on the new priorities, which the President announced earlier. However, we recognize that that does not mean that the Mechanism will close down. There is a need to continue its work on the enforcement of sentences, the preservation of archives, the protection of witnesses and, in particular, assistance to national jurisdictions. We want to assure the President of our full support. We also welcome the Chambers’ progress in the completion of the judicial work, including the delivery on 31 May of the appeal judgment in the case Prosecutor v. Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović  — the final case inherited from the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. We note that the proceedings in the case against Félicien Kabuga are indefinitely stayed. Malta fully supports the priorities of the Office of the Prosecutor, with a focus on locating and arresting the remaining fugitives and assisting national jurisdictions prosecuting international crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The arrest of Fulgence Kayishema in May this year is attestation of the determination and work of the Office, which we applaud. Moreover, by assisting national authorities, the Office of the Prosecutor continues to play a critical role in facilitating the rule of law and accountability globally. The Mechanism and its predecessors have made significant steps in establishing the facts and providing the historical record of atrocity crimes committed in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. In that context, we agree with the President about the critical importance of making the public records of the ad hoc Tribunals and the Mechanism more accessible. Regrettably, we continue to confront the dangerous denial and revisionism of facts. National authorities must carry on with the important work of reconciliation and healing, meaningfully addressing the root causes of conflict, and move forward to a peaceful, stable future. Ensuring robust victim and survivor-centred approaches that reflect input from affected communities is an essential aspect of that work. Taken together, such actions of the IRMCT are important steps towards securing justice for the victims of atrocity crimes, their families and their communities. Additional steps can, and should, be taken to ensure justice for all and to prevent future atrocities. That includes the swift apprehension of the remaining Rwandan fugitives. We call on Member States to cooperate with the Prosecutor and his Office in that regard. There is undoubtedly more work to be done, but each of the steps taken by the IRMCT that I highlighted moves us closer to fighting impunity and to honouring the victims’ memories.

I thank Judge Graciela Gatti Santana for having presented the eleventh annual report (see A/78/257) on the activities of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT) to the General Assembly. On behalf of my Government, I also commend her and Prosecutor Serge Brammertz for their remarkable work to ensure that the Mechanism fulfils its mandate, thereby upholding the primacy of international law. Since the beginning of its current mandate on the Security Council in January 2022, Brazil has had the privilege of reading the semi-annual reports to the organ on the activities of the IRMCT, participating in its debates on the Mechanism and engaging with their principals in the less formal settings of the Informal Working Group on International Tribunals. For that reason, we were able to have an optimal vantage point from which to examine the challenges that the IRMCT faces in terminating its functions despite the efforts being undertaken to that end. The Security Council conceived the IRMCT to be temporary and its functions to diminish over time. Therefore, there must be clear timelines for the completion of its activities — an undeniably complex task. The establishment of the Panel on Judicial Functions last January to assess the nature and duration of the Mechanism’s remaining judicial functions was an important step in that direction. We were also satisfied to learn about the progress achieved by the Mechanism in its remaining core judicial cases. That was illustrated by the conclusion of appeal proceedings in the Stanišić and Simatović case on 31 May. At the same time, we took note of the Appeals Chamber’s decision on 8 August to impose an indefinite stay of proceedings in view of Mr. Félicien Kabuga’s lack of fitness to stand trial. Despite the progress towards the conclusion of the IRMCT’s core judicial cases, Brazil is aware that there are long-term residual functions that the Mechanism is expected to perform. That is the case regarding the supervision of the enforcement of sentences. That task must be carried out until the last convict passes away or finishes serving his or her sentence. Victim and witness protection may be necessary until the last member of their immediate family deceases. Convicted persons may also request judicial reviews of their cases at any time if new facts arise. The Mechanism still receives a significant number of requests for assistance from national jurisdictions. It is also crucial to preserve its archives, and we welcome the IRMCT’s efforts to disseminate information about its legacy. Furthermore, the tracking of fugitives is a key function of the IRMCT to ensure punishment for serious crimes. In that context, we reiterate our appreciation for the decisive contribution of the Office of the Prosecutor to the arrest of Fulgence Kayishema, who had remained at large for more than 20 years. That achievement notwithstanding, we must not forget that there are still three remaining fugitives. The IRMCT needs the support of the international community to discharge its mandate. Therefore, we call for full cooperation with the Mechanism in the tracking of fugitives, the execution of outstanding arrest warrants and orders of surrender and the relocation of acquitted or released persons. The IRMCT inherited judicial cases and the residual functions of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). Those former Tribunals are landmarks in the history of international criminal justice. One cannot overstate their invaluable contribution to the development of the jurisprudence on international criminal law and their role in providing accountability for the most serious crimes of international law committed in the territories of the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. It is of the utmost importance to preserve their legacy. By adopting resolution 2637 (2022) in the year 2022, the Security Council allowed the IRMCT to continue its work for two years. Ahead of the expiration of the current mandates of its Prosecutor and judges next June, we must acknowledge that the IRMCT still needs time to complete its mandated tasks regarding the ICTY and the ICTR. Brazil reiterates that States bear the primary responsibility for holding accountable those who perpetrate crimes in their territories. International tribunals are supplementary to the national judiciaries. They must act when national institutions are unable or unwilling to adjudicate those crimes themselves. The principle of complementarity ensures that States retain ownership in their right and, above all, duty to provide justice to their citizens. Strong national institutions that ensure accountability for serious crimes make their societies more resilient against crime.

At the outset, the United States expresses its condolences to Uganda regarding the passing of Judge Elizabeth Ibanda- Nahamya. We welcome the Secretary-General’s appointment of Judge Lydia Mugambe and wish her well in that role. We are grateful to President Gatti Santana for her leadership of this important institution. Every year, the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals makes enormous strides in delivering justice with respect to some of the gravest crimes of the past century. Notably, in May, the Office of the Prosecutor‘s fugitive tracking team and the South African authorities finally captured Fulgence Kayishema, who had evaded arrest for more than 20 years. Kayishema was a significant figure in the Rwandan genocide, and he was charged with genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity for his alleged role in the murders of more than 2,000 Tutsi men, women and children at the Nyange parish church. His arrest cannot restore what was lost in April 1994 in Kivumu, but we hope that it will provide victims some comfort that the fight for justice for their loved ones will continue and the facts surrounding their death will be fully brought to light. We look forward to the expeditious and fair conclusion of the legal proceedings surrounding the Mechanism’s request to transfer him into its custody. Almost three decades after the crimes were committed, time is particularly urgent in the remaining cases. The recent determination by the Appeals Chamber that Félicien Kabuga, captured 26 years after he was indicted, is not competent to stand trial, highlights the urgency of accountability and the risk that justice delayed can be justice denied. Additional steps must be taken today in the name of justice and the prevention of future atrocities. That includes the swift resolution of the cases of the three remaining Rwandan fugitives. We call on Member States that may be harbouring them, or that may be aware of their last known whereabouts, to cooperate with the Mechanism and its investigations. With respect to the former Yugoslavia, we appreciate the significance of the Mechanism’s recent appeals judgment in the case Prosecutor v. Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović. That long-awaited judgment, which recognizes the responsibility of those former Government officials for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia, is the final case involving core crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and closes an important chapter in the history of international criminal justice. Just over 30 years ago, the Security Council adopted resolution 827 (1993) to establish the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the first international tribunal since Nuremberg and Tokyo to address genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. That Tribunal demonstrated that even the most senior military and political leaders can be held accountable for atrocity crimes. We are grateful for the decades of work by the judges, attorneys and other court staff of the ICTY and the Mechanism and for their immense contributions to the rule of law and the fight against impunity in the former Yugoslavia. As the work of the Mechanism on cases involving core international crimes draws to a close, we appreciate President Gatti Santana’s expressed priorities, including to streamline the functions of the Mechanism. Along those lines, we also appreciate the work of the Mechanism in responding to national authorities’ requests for assistance and in supporting their efforts to advance justice in their own systems. The Mechanism has served an indispensable role in carrying out the legacy work of the ICTY and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, but national authorities must bear the primary responsibility for providing justice to victims. The success of the Mechanism at all phases of its life cycle depends on the cooperation and support of all States. We are grateful in particular for the role played by South Africa in the capture and arrest of Kayishema and to the 13 countries that serve as enforcement States, holding those who have been convicted, as a fundamental pillar to the successful operation of the Mechanism.

I want to join the speakers who spoke before me in thanking the President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals and all the principals of the court for their tireless efforts in seeking justice for the victims of the 1994 genocide against the Tutsi. In particular, we also want to thank and commend the Office of the Prosecutor for its tireless efforts, including particularly in the recent arrest of Mr. Kayishema, who was arrested in South Africa. We hope that his trial will be as expeditious as possible within the time limit. The fugitives should know that there is no expiration date for justice. Let me turn my attention to what has repeatedly been said here regarding the trial of Mr. Kabuga, who was arrested in France in 2020 and taken to The Hague. His arrest was an operation. He was taken to The Hague for trial. A few years later, the man who was arrested in an operation was deemed unfit to stand trial. Mr. Kabuga is just 88 years old, according to the records that we have. The suspension of Mr. Kabuga’s trial indefinitely is a mockery to the victims and survivors of the genocide against the Tutsi. It is also a very dangerous precedent set by the court. We can only express our dismay. The excuse that he is unfit because of his age challenges our collective commitment to fighting impunity. Le me cite a few cases. Not so long ago, in Germany, a court found a 97-year-old woman guilty for her role as a secretary in a Nazi concentration camp during the Second World War. In addition, a 98-year-old and even a 101-year-old former Nazi camp guard stood trial for their roles during the Holocaust. A 101-year-old stood trial not so long ago. If a 101-year-old man or woman stood trial for the consequences of their actions, why would it be different in the case of Mr. Kabuga, who is 88 years old, arrested in his own apartment in an operation, having been running away from justice for nearly 30 years? That is not the only matter of concern. The fact that the United Nations system deems it appropriate to allocate Member States’ taxpayers’ money to go directly into the hands of those who orchestrated and perpetrated one of the most heinous crimes in our history is a concern. I do not know if Member States are aware that their taxpayers’ money is paying for sustaining the well-being of former genocide convicts, who are now in the Niger. Yet no funds from all the taxpayers have ever been directed to the survivors of the genocide against the Tutsi. In Rwanda, we believe that all such former convicts, who are in the Niger or elsewhere, should not continue to be a burden on the United Nations system. Rwanda has repeated several times that those people are welcome home. We agree with the court. If they do not feel as if they would like to come to Rwanda, any other member country can take them. That takes me to another issue — genocide denial. The issue has been raised in the Security Council, at the African Union and in several forums, where genocide denial is on the rise, and reversing judicial judgments is also increasing. Since such early released convicts have been set free, they are on a journey to rewriting history, not only for survivors and victims, but also for the court. As mentioned before, some of those who seek to rewrite the history of the court, as well as that of our countries, the victims and the survivors, are receiving taxpayers’ money. Another issue to which I want to turn the Assembly’s attention is that Rwanda sent more than 1,000 indictments to 34 countries. Since those indictments were sent to the countries, we have received only a few responses. In conclusion, allow me to stress a few recommendations that we have mentioned before. First, strengthening the force and effect of international criminal law by instituting a comprehensive provision for early release for convicted persons remains paramount. We welcome the efforts made by the court thus far. Having a comprehensive and rigorous approach to conditional release ensures that the court grants conditional release only to those persons who have demonstrated rehabilitation. That must be based on their successful completion of any remedial and educational programmes, as determined by the court. The second recommendation is to combat genocide ideology in all its manifestations, including genocide denial. A standard and rigorous conditional early release provision can help to combat genocide ideology and denial, considering what the reports of the Residual Mechanism have been indicating  — “those granted early release often deny the crimes and their criminal responsibility immediately upon release” (S/2018/1033, annex I, para.30). The third, and final, recommendation is to step up efforts and collaboration among States to apprehend fugitives who remain at large and wanted by the Rwanda judicial system. It is incumbent upon all Member States to cooperate in locating and apprehending the wanted criminals to face justice. Those fugitives have not left the planet; they are hiding in countries. We strongly urge Member States to exercise their international obligations to cooperate with Rwanda, the Mechanism and the fugitive tracking units in order to apprehend the remaining fugitives.

Japan appreciates the briefing by the President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT), and welcomes all the progress made by the IRMCT to date. Strengthening the rule of law is conducive to sustainable growth and the effective development of the international community. Through its investigation, prosecution and execution of judgments already made, the IRMCT has been contributing to promoting the international concept of human rights and advancing the fight against impunity and the pursuit of transitional justice, thereby realizing the rule of law. In particular, Japan welcomes the arrest this year of Fulgence Kayishema, who had long been sought for the alleged atrocious murder of more than 2,000 Tutsi refugees. We commend the Prosecutor and his team for their efforts, as well as the important support provided by South Africa, Eswatini, Mozambique and Rwanda. We hope that the remaining three fugitives will be held accountable in the near future. Another important development is the conclusion of the Stanišić and Simatović case, which is one of the remaining two cases dealt with by the Mechanism. Thirty years after its inception, we have finally witnessed the completion of the mandate given by the Security Council to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. We commend the IRMCT’s tireless efforts. Japan understands that fair and legitimate due process requires time. On the other hand, for victims and societies, justice needs to be done as expeditiously as possible. We encourage the Mechanism to advance its proceedings under a clear and reasonable timeline and to use its accumulated information, evidence and expertise in cooperating with national authorities in their endeavour to end impunity. In that regard, we acknowledge that the Mechanism continues to fulfil a limited, but indispensable role to hold those responsible accountable. Japan also calls on all Member States to support the IRMCT by complying with their international obligations, including those derived from Security Council resolutions. During the general debate of the high-level week of the General Assembly last month, Prime Minister Kishida stressed that, “[b]ased on the principles of freedom, the rule of law, inclusiveness, openness and diversity, Japan will work with countries that share a vision of a world where diverse nations coexist and prosper together.” (A/78/PV.5. p.50) Japan continues to attach great importance to promoting the rule of law and accountability. We hosted a Security Council open debate on the rule of law in January this year (see S/PV.9241), organized a side event on the promotion of the international judicial institutions, including the IRMCT, in March and co-hosted an Arria Formula meeting on the International Criminal Court in July. We look forward to further discussions on how we can fortify the rule of law, in which the IRMCT obviously plays an important role.

I thank President Gatti Santana and Prosecutor Brammertz for their insightful report (see A/78/257) and unwavering commitment to pursuing justice in full compliance with their mandates. Albania reaffirms its full support for the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals as an international judicial body designed to fight impunity and preserve the legacy of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. We commend the determination that the Mechanism has demonstrated in implementing its mandate by prosecuting and bringing to justice those charged by the ad hoc Tribunals. As a member of the Security Council, Albania applauded the Mechanism’s ruling on 31 May, which decided to expand the conviction for Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović, two allies of former President Slobodan Milošević, rather than exonerating them (see S/PV.9344). We considered it a milestone in the quest for justice in the Balkans, 30 years after the creation of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. We believe that accountability and delivering justice have never been easy, and that Member States’ cooperation and support for the Mechanism are vital. It is the only way to ensure that the voices of thousands of victims and their families do not remain unheard. Member States have the moral obligation to cooperate with the Mechanism to arrest, surrender and execute arrest warrants without delay. Albania urges all States to collaborate with the Mechanism, in accordance with their international obligations, and to support its work. We regret that certain members are still refusing to do so despite the repeated appeals by the President of the Mechanism, the Prosecutor and numerous Member States. In that regard, we call on Serbia to cooperate with the Mechanism and execute the arrest warrants for Petar Jojić and Vjerica Radeta, ensuring that they face justice. It is the only way to somehow ease the suffering inflicted on civilians during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990s and to honour the memory of the victims of genocide in Bosnia and Herzegovina, as well as the massacres in Kosovo. Before I conclude, I would also like to bring to the Assembly’s attention the fact that the Russian Federation decided to again raise unsubstantiated allegations to divert the focus of today’s discussions by presenting a distorted narrative as the factual reality. Let me bring to the attention of Member States the fact that in 2011, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted the report of Dick Marty accusing the Kosovo Liberation Army of despicable crimes. That report, in pursuit of justice, generated the establishment of the Kosovo Specialist Chambers. Even though the work is still ongoing, not a single piece of evidence or proof was ever provided regarding those allegations. Before I end my statement, allow me to emphasize that we are deeply concerned by acts glorifying convicted war criminals in public spaces, the rise in hate speech and the denial of genocide and other atrocity crimes in the Western Balkans. Such trends are particularly worrisome, as they deepen divisions and constitute incitement to violence. In that respect, we support the Mechanism’s efforts to combat revisionism in all its forms. In conclusion, Albania reaffirms its strong support for the Mechanism’s determination to conduct its work as efficiently as possible not only by bringing perpetrators to justice, but also by supporting and protecting many witnesses in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

Germany aligns itself with the statement delivered on behalf of the European Union. First, we would like to thank President Graciela Gatti Santana for her briefing today and for the eleventh annual report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (see A/78/257). Since its establishment, the Mechanism has made remarkable progress in our common fight against impunity. With the activities of the Mechanism being further consolidated and more proceedings coming to a close, it is important to note that crucial functions of the Mechanism, particularly in the form of assisting national jurisdictions and the monitoring of cases referred to national jurisdictions, will continue. Currently four prison sentences imposed by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia are being enforced under German jurisdiction. Germany uses this occasion to emphasize its willingness to continue to provide such enforcement assistance in the future. Germany will continue to support the Mechanism, both politically and financially, in fulfilling its mandate and remaining tasks. Germany endorses the priorities of Prosecutor Brammertz, being, first, the expeditious completion of trials and appeals; secondly, locating and arresting the remaining fugitives indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda; and, thirdly, assisting national jurisdictions in prosecuting international crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. In May this year, we witnessed the importance of continued cooperation among States with regard to the apprehension of fugitives still at large when Fulgence Kayishema was successfully arrested in South Africa. We urge all States, particularly those where fugitives of international justice are suspected of being at large, to fully cooperate in order to bring an end to impunity. Protecting the remarkable legacy of international tribunals and accountability mechanisms must be our goal, especially at a time in which current events remind us of the importance of accountability for crimes committed, in particular during armed conflict. Germany would like to take this opportunity to reiterate its unwavering support for international criminal justice in general and for the Mechanism in particular.

At the outset, allow me to thank the Honourable Judge Gatti Santana, President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, for the annual briefing and regular briefings on the activities of the Mechanism. Allow me also to congratulate her, together with the Prosecutor, the Registrar and the Mechanism’s staff, on their discharging of their noble duties effectively. My delegation also notes with appreciation the report to the General Assembly and the Security Council on the work of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, contained in document A/78/257. Before I share Tanzania’s comments on the report, my delegation wishes to pay tribute to the Mechanism, the Government of Uganda and the family and the people of Uganda for the passing of the Honourable Judge Elizabeth Ibanda-Nahamya, who passed away on 5 January this year. The international community has lost a committed judge, who served with passion and devotion to upholding the rule of law and the administration of international criminal justice. We commend the Government of Uganda for recommending another equally competent judge  — the Honourable Judge Lydia Mugombe, who was subsequently appointed by the General Assembly to serve for the remaining term. Tanzania is a steadfast proponent of the rule of law, and it is within that understanding that I wish to reaffirm the strong commitment and unwavering support of the United Republic of Tanzania to the work of the United Nations and, in particular to the Mechanism in fulfilling its mandate. My delegation wishes to remind all Member States that the administration of international criminal justice cannot be fully attained without significant cooperation from all stakeholders. That includes assisting in tracking, locating, arresting and surrendering fugitives. In that regard, Tanzania commends the Mechanism, through the Office of the Prosecutor and in support of South Africa, Mozambique, Rwanda and Eswatini, for the arrest of Mr. Fulgence Kayishema in May this year. Mr. Kayishema is expected to stand trial in Rwanda any time from now, and we applaud the Mechanism for that decision, which aims to bring him to justice. As envisaged in the report, the Trial Chamber and the Appeals Chamber ordered the provisional release of Mr. Félicien Kabuga on the grounds that he is unfit to stand trial. In a way, that decision led to the end of the court function of the Mechanism. With the decision, the Mechanism is transitioning to its full residual operations, which include the protection of witnesses, the monitoring of cases referred to national jurisdictions, the enforcement of sentences, the management of archives and assisting national jurisdictions. In that regard, Tanzania remains committed to supporting the Mechanism in implementing its residual mandate. As of January, the United Nations Detention Facility in Arusha housed no detainees following the transfer of the last convicted person to Senegal on 17 July 2021. The Facility was handed over to the Government in February. The Detention Facility had a unique status, as it was the first and only one that was owned and managed by the United Nations. Although it was in Arusha, it operated smoothly without any interference. I would like to extend our appreciation to the United Nations for giving Tanzania the opportunity to facilitate the implementation of Security Council resolution 1966 (2010). The handing over was also complemented by a three-day training course for 30 senior-level prison correction officers, organized by the Mechanism. Tanzania expresses its gratitude to the United Nations for the training course, which equipped our prison staff with valuable skills. In addition, Tanzania thanks the United Nations for offering more than 500 Tanzanian prison officers the chance to serve in the Detention Facility at various times, which has helped them to gain more experience in discharging their duties. In line with that, my delegation wishes to express its profound appreciation to the Mechanism for the reopening of the library in April and for the hiring of a Tanzanian national to manage it. The library’s collection has a significant value for students and scholars of international human rights and humanitarian law in the region and in the globe at large. With regard to the activities of the Registry, my delegation will engage constructively in examining the proposed budget, administration, staffing and facilities of the Registry to ensure that they reflect the requirements for an effective mandate delivery, particularly for the Arusha branch, during the upcoming deliberations in the Fifth Committee. In conclusion, my delegation wishes to reiterate Tanzania’s unwavering support and commitment to the work of the Mechanism. Tanzania will continue to comply with its obligations according to the Charter of the United Nations, the constitutive statute of the Mechanism and the host agreement.

I would like to start today by thanking President Gatti Santana for her briefing and the most recent report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (see A/78/257). I would also like to thank the Prosecutor, the Registrar and all those working at the Mechanism for their continued dedication to international justice. Their work has led to a number of notable successes over the past year. In particular, we commend the fugitive tracking team and the South African authorities for their success in arresting Fulgence Kayishema. We also saw the conclusion of the final appeal relating to the crimes committed by Jovica Stanišić and Franko Simatović, who were found responsible for violations of the laws or customs of war and crimes against humanity. As the final appeal relating to the crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia, its conclusion marks a defining moment for the Mechanism and for international justice. The Mechanism has shown that impunity is not, and will not be, allowed to prevail. Separately, we note the recent news that the trial of Félicien Kabuga has been indefinitely stayed following numerous medical assessments, and we underline our commitment to holding the perpetrators of the genocide against the Tutsi to account. Rwanda will commemorate 30 years since the genocide against the Tutsi in April next year. The United Kingdom stands shoulder to shoulder with the Rwandan Government and people in its ongoing commitment to accountability for the appalling crimes committed during the genocide and in promoting continued reconciliation. We are saddened to see that the glorification of war criminals, the denial of the genocide and the promotion of genocide ideology continue. That is unacceptable and increases the suffering of the victims. We condemn the denial and glorification of the perpetrators of war crimes and genocide and call on all Member States to do so. However, despite those successes, as mentioned earlier, we remain concerned by two issues in particular. First, Serbia’s failure to cooperate with the Mechanism and arrest and transfer Petar Jojić and Vjerica Radeta following years of requests, considerations and discussion represents a serious threat to meaningful reconciliation. We once again urge Serbia to comply with the Mechanism’s order. Secondly, while the Mechanism continues to engage in important work to assist with justice at the national level in the Western Balkans, a lack of regional judicial cooperation continues to hinder long-term stability and all victims’ ability to achieve justice. We call on all States in the region to increase their efforts to provide justice for those heinous crimes. Looking forward, the Government of the United Kingdom is working with political parties, the media and civil society organizations in the Western Balkans to decrease the use of hate speech in political discourse. When politicians seek to exploit existing divisions or drive deeper wedges for their own gain, they are moving the region further away from being the safe place that its citizens deserve. They are making it less stable and are creating a climate of fear and insecurity. Finally, President Gatti Santana has moved the Mechanism into its post-trial phase and completed its core trials. But we stress that that is not the end of the Mechanism’s work. Sentences need to be supervised; witnesses need to be protected; and domestic proceedings need support. It is nevertheless important that such remaining work be done as efficiently as possible. We therefore welcome the President’s focus on the future strategy of the Mechanism as it transitions to becoming a fully residual institution. We commend the detailed work being done in that respect, as we heard earlier, and we look forward to the Mechanism’s proposals.

I thank President Gatti Santana for presenting the eleventh annual report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (see A/78/257). France supports the approach adopted by the President and the Prosecutor, who have devoted their efforts to completing trials, arresting fugitives indicted before the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and assisting the national jurisdictions responsible for prosecuting the perpetrators of international crimes committed in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. With regard to the former Yugoslavia, the delivery of the appeal judgment in the Stanišić and Simatović case on 31 May marks a crucial stage in the Mechanism’s judicial activity. For the victims, it represents the victory of justice over impunity 30 years after the establishment of the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Turning to Rwanda, in their decision of 6 June, the judges of the Trial Chamber concluded that Mr. Kabuga, arrested by France in 2020 and remanded to the Mechanism, was not competent to stand trial. On 7 August, the Mechanism’s Appeals Chamber called for an indefinite stay of proceedings and the rapid settlement of the matter of Félicien Kabuga’s pre-trial detention. We encourage the Mechanism to find ways of responding to the victims’ quest for justice. France urges all States to cooperate with the Mechanism, in accordance with their international obligations, and to support it in its activities to bring justice to victims and achieve justice and reconciliation. It is essential that the remaining fugitives indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda be brought to justice. The death of the alleged perpetrators of the most serious crimes will not bring justice for the victims. In that regard, we welcome the arrest of Fulgence Kayishema on 24 May thanks to the collaboration of the Office of the Prosecutor, the South African authorities and other countries. That arrest is an example of efficient and effective international cooperation and assistance in combating impunity. We welcome the efforts to streamline and consolidate the Mechanism’s activities. We encourage it to pursue its efforts in the next stages of the transition from a functioning tribunal to a truly residual institution. The Mechanism must continue to carry out its important tasks, which in particular includes assisting national jurisdictions, protecting victims and witnesses, managing archives and supervising the enforcement of sentences. In that respect, France welcomes the contribution of the President of the Mechanism to the development of international criminal justice in the context of the adoption of ethical principles for international criminal judges in Paris on 15 May, to be introduced in New York on 24 October during International Law Week, with the participation of Ms. Gatti Santana. Finally, remembrance work is also essential to reconciliation. However, we deplore the fact that the glorification of war criminals continues, sometimes with the support of national and local authorities. No lasting reconciliation can take place without the acknowledgement of crimes and responsibilities, and that is where the Mechanism’s work is crucial.

We have heard the last speaker in the debate on this agenda item. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to take note of the eleventh annual report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, contained in document A/78/257? It was so decided (decision 78/506).

The exercise of the right of reply has been requested. May I remind members that statements in the exercise of the right of reply are limited to 10 minutes for the first intervention and to five minutes for the second intervention and should be made by delegations from their seats. I now give the floor to the representative of Serbia.

My delegation wishes to exercise the right of reply to the statement delivered by the representative of Albania. Allow me to clearly state the position of the Republic of Serbia. The Republic of Serbia completed many proceedings in which it imposed severe punishments for crimes committed on the territory of the former Yugoslavia, in particular to its citizens and all compatriots. A large number of proceedings and investigations are ongoing. The available data clearly show that Serbia implements a policy of punishment for war crimes committed. The Republic of Serbia cannot be attributed a policy of denying crimes or of glorifying them. Regarding the Petar Jojić and Vjerica Radeta case, which was mentioned, let me be clear and repeat what has already been stated several times, namely, that Serbia’s action in connection with that case does not represent a violation of the international obligations of the Republic of Serbia, but an effort to act in accordance with Security Council resolution 1966 (2010). After the end of the last procedure before the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, we express our expectations and efforts to achieve effective cooperation between Serbia and the Mechanism in the manner provided for by the relevant resolutions of the Security Council.

We have heard the only speaker in the exercise of the right of reply. May I take it that it is the wish of the General Assembly to conclude its consideration of agenda item 126?