CYIL vol. 15 (2024)
CYIL 15 ȍ2024Ȏ ACTIVITIES OF THE SIXTH COMMITTEE OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY … with the topic of responsibility of States and only then with responsibility of international organizations. The resolution on responsibility of international organizations was facilitated by Brazil. Following the circulation of the zero-draft resolution, Russia submitted a language proposal that would lead to convening of a resumed session of the Sixth Committee on this topic in 2025. The proposal was supported by Iran and Cuba. The Czech Republic, the United Kingdom, the United States, the Netherlands and some other States opposed this proposal, stating their position that the ILC products needed to be considered on a case-by-case basis and that a one-size-fits-all approach could not be adopted (thus countering criticism of alleged unequal treatment of the ILC products compared to the Draft Articles on Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity). In his revised draft resolution responding to the Russian proposal, the facilitator tried to propose convening of a working group on DARIO as a compromise solution. The working group would be convened during the regular autumn session of the Committee. He also suggested increasing the frequency of consideration of the topic. Some Latin American States supported this draft (El Salvador, Colombia, Chile, Argentina, Mexico, Costa Rica). However, other States – including the Czech Republic – stated that a so-called technical roll-over of the last resolution 9 adopted in 2020 was the only acceptable outcome (the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Slovakia, Sweden, Malta, Finland, the Netherlands, Canada, Greece, and others). It was also noted that the limited interest in intervening in the Committee’s debate on the topic showed the lack of interest of the majority of Member States in negotiating a convention. As a result, the consultations continued in the so-called small group format (i.e. not including all Member States, but only those that had been most active in the negotiations so far and had demonstrated a strong interest – this included the Czech Republic). The small group negotiations resulted in the third and fourth versions of a draft resolution presented by the facilitator. The opponents of negotiating a convention showed flexibility and were willing to accept the inclusion of a new text to the draft resolution, by which the General Assembly would “invite interested States to engage in dialogue on this topic on an informal basis during the intersessional periods” . The facilitator’s fourth draft was placed under silence procedure, which was subsequently broken by Russia, still insisting on convening the resumed session. After breaking the silence, Russia came up with new demands (such as annual consideration of the topic), which were not appreciated by others at this stage of the negotiations. This approach was explicitly described by some States as inconsistent with negotiating in good faith. Russia’s breaking of the silence put the opponents in a comfortable position, as only two scenarios were then possible: (a) a technical roll-over of the last resolution adopted on the topic, or (b) no resolution on the topic, thus ending consideration of the topic as it would not on the agenda of the 81 st session of the General Assembly. In the end, the facilitator took a risk and submitted the draft resolution on which Russia had broken silence to the Committee for action. This draft was, after all, adopted
9 Resolution of the General Assembly A/RES/75/143, adopted on 15 December 2020. Available here: https://docu ments.un.org/doc/undoc/gen/n20/368/98/pdf/n2036898.pdf?token=exMo5Dvm6hHj7GYXUm&fe=true.
329
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs