31 January 2003

The elections next week are yet another reassuring step toward the establishment of an International Criminal Court. The election is an opportunity for States Parties to ensure that the substantive work of ICC as an institution of doing justice begins with a strong foundation by electing individuals with high personal integrity, credible legal experience and required qualifications.

NGOs have advocated all along that States parties exercise due diligence in selecting their candidates and nominate only those candidates that meet all the requirements in the Rome Statute for the positions of judges. We have also advocated that the process nationally to select candidates for nomination be transparent and in consultation with local NGOs and groups. While some nominations are not the result of such processes nationally, it is nevertheless encouraging to note that fifty per cent of voting State Parties have nominated candidates. This factor contributes to competition among candidates and after the first round likely to compel states parties to look beyond the interest of getting their respective candidates elected.

As the elections are drawing close, the temptation to horse-trade is high. The rules for nomination and elections of judges have limited the possible outcome of such unethical practices to some extent by requiring minimum voting for ensuring regional representation and a fair representation of female and male judges. Some states opposed these rules during the negotiations stating concerns that such requirements would compel them to vote for unsuitable candidates in order to fulfill the requirement. The CVs and the qualifying statements of most, if not all of the nominated candidates belies such concerns.

Indeed the nomination of the ten women candidates is a clear example of how such concerns are unfounded. While the ratio of female and male candidates in the nominations leaves a lot to be desired, we are pleased to note, after extensive research on the background and histories, that all the ten women nominees are highly qualified individuals with appropriate experience for the position in addition to coming from diverse regions of the world. No state party could claim that they were compelled to vote for a woman candidate only to fulfill the minimum voting requirement.

States parties this week have been in the process of getting voting instructions from their capitals, and some of them proudly stated that they have identified their six women candidates - indicating thereby that the minimum requirement is being treated as a maximum. It is a matter of serious concern that the voting requirements stated in the rules is understood by some states as quota. States parties are reminded that the requirements are a minimum and not a maximum or a quota.

Many questions about how the elections will actually proceed given the number of nominations, the need to meet all the requirements etc. have been addressed at the briefing sessions and the mock ballot organized by the Bureau of the Assembly of States Parties. Some concerns however remain. There is no understanding or estimate as to how many successful candidates one round of ballot would produce or put in other words how many rounds of ballots it would take to elect eighteen judges. The Bureau clarified that if need be, the practice of ‘stopping the clock’ would be followed to ensure that eighteen judges are elected in this session. The concern however is that after four rounds of ballot, the rules require that the minimum voting requirement be discontinued. This could potentially lead to results that would skew the composition of the court with regard to regional and gender representation. States parties must remain mindful of these requirements even beyond the fourth ballot.

Finally, I would call upon states parties present and voting at the elections to bear in mind that these elections are not yet another ‘business as usual’ election for an international position. Victims, survivors, women and people affected by most heinous crimes around the world have high expectations that the International criminal Court will be an institution they could depend on for justice. It is the moral responsibility and obligation of all state parties to seat in the high position of judges of the ICC only the most qualified, experienced, credible, committed, untainted and those with a highest personal integrity.

-30-

For more information, contact: Reena Geevarghese, 212-675-7648