01 Nov 2012
Mr. President,
Excellencies,
1. My delegation would like to express its thanks to the International Court of Justice (“the Court”) for the comprehensive and informative report of its work from 1 August 2011 to 31 July 2012 (A/67/4). It is evident that the Court has had an extremely busy year dealing with a myriad of legal issues. It is therefore a testament to the leadership of President Peter Tomka and former President Hisashi Owada that the Court has been able to discharge its duties with the highest levels of competence, efficiency and professionalism.
2. Mr. President, it is Singapore’s firmly-held view that international relations must be governed by the rule of law in order to preserve international peace and stability. Fundamental to the rule of law is the notion that disputes must be resolved through peaceful means. Where disputes have failed to be resolved through informal processes such as negotiations or mediation, serious consideration should be given for such disputes to be adjudicated by a neutral third party.
3. Needless to say, the Court plays a vital role in this regard. Under international law, there is no formal hierarchy amongst the various judicial mechanisms and international tribunals. But it is incontrovertible that the Court commands immense prestige and authority. First, it is the only international court of a universal character with general jurisdiction. Second, it is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations and draws on a heritage dating back to the Permanent Court of International Justice. Its judgments have been, and continue to be, extremely influential, and have a deep impact on the development of international law. The Court therefore plays a fundamental role in ensuring that the rule of law in international relations is maintained and strengthened.
4. During the period covered in the report, there have been a number of jurisprudential developments of particular interest to my delegation. We note that the Court has taken the opportunity to clarify the jurisprudence relating to the jurisdiction of the Court in response to requests to adjudicate and render advisory opinions. These clarifications are useful in this developing area of international law, and given the increase in the number of cases where such arguments are being made, we anticipate that there will be other occasions in the future for further elaboration and development. We also note the increasing number of disputes involving issues of environmental law which are being brought before the Court. We look forward to receiving the views of the Court on these issues, given the dynamic growth of this area of law and their pertinence to the global community.
5. We also keenly followed the deliberations of the Court in the case relating to the Obligation to Prosecute or Extradite (Belgium v. Senegal). Interpretation of this obligation is something which concerns the international community at large, given the prevalence of such clauses in a whole segment of international treaties, including those on counter-terrorism. It is no coincidence that the International Law Commission is also in the process of examining this issue and has in fact specifically noted that an in-depth analysis of the case will be conducted to fully assess its implications for the topic.
6. With regard to the administration of the Court, my delegation applauds the Court for successfully clearing its backlog of cases. We share the Court’s confidence that States considering coming to the principal judicial organ of the United Nations can now be assured that, as soon as the written phase of the proceedings has come to a close, the Court will be able to move to the oral proceedings in a timely manner. We are also encouraged to read that work is proceeding on the modernization of the Great Hall of Justice, including the introduction of information technology resources on the judges’ bench, and we look forward to its speedy completion.
7. Singapore notes the request made by the Court for the creation of an associate legal officer post (P-2) within the Department of Legal Matters in its budget submission for the biennium 2012-2013, which was not granted. My delegation’s view is that this request was not made lightly, given the efforts of the Court to increase its efficiency, including the deliberation of several cases concurrently. Given the central role that the Court plays, and the range of issues which it has to deal with, including those of a highly complex and controversial nature, it is only right that we support this request.
8. In conclusion, Singapore reiterates its belief that the Court plays a vital role in ensuring the existence and maintenance of the rule of law in international relations. We continue to hold the Court in our deepest regard and pledge our continued support for its work. We wish the Court every measure of success in meeting its future challenges and in the discharge of its duties for the year ahead.
9. Thank you, Mr. President.