CYIL vol. 15 (2024)

MAREK ZUKAL The resumed session was held from April 1 st to April 5 th , 2024. The level of engagement by delegations was high, with the majority stressing the need to fill the gap in treaty law by concluding a convention on the basis of DACAH. Opponents, however, raised objections to this approach (Russia, China, Iran, Eritrea, Cameroon, Algeria, Cuba, Syria, Saudi Arabia). These delegations do not accept that there is a normative gap in treaty law and point to the fact that some international tribunals (ICTY, Nuremberg tribunal) have successfully prosecuted crimes against humanity without a treaty basis. Some delegations continued to criticize the fact that the definition of crimes against humanity in DACAH was identical to the definition contained in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. They emphasize the non-universality of the Rome Statute and see this as an obstacle to efforts towards a convention. Other States (in particular States Parties to the Rome Statute), on the other hand, consider that the definition contained in the Rome Statute reflects customary international law and that the creation of a different definition would lead to an undesirable fragmentation of international law. Some delegations suggested amending the definition of crimes against humanity taken from the Rome Statute to include slavery and slave trade, crime of gender apartheid, forced marriage, environmental crimes and exploitation of natural resources. Delegations opposed to the idea of negotiating a convention also suggested adding the crime of imposing “unilateral coercive measures” (a term they consistently use to describe autonomous sanctions, i.e. sanctions not imposed by the UN Security Council). The discussion during the resumed session also heard negative views on the jus cogens character of the prohibition of crimes against humanity expressed in the preambular paragraphs of DACAH (expressed by China, Syria, Russia, but also France) – the categorization was premature and the consequences unclear, according to them. The resumed session culminated in taking note of the Chair’s summary of the discussions 22 . In the autumn of 2024, the Sixth Committee is expected to decide on the way forward regarding DACAH. It is expected that the majority of States will continue to propose the commencement of negotiations of a convention – either through the General Assembly, or through an international conference of plenipotentiaries, which Austria has already expressed interest in hosting. Protection of persons in the event of disasters 23 The Sixth Committee considered the Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters 24 (DAPPED) in the framework of a working group, as mandated by the resolution adopted in 2021. In 2016, the ILC recommended the General Assembly to elaborate a convention on the basis of the DAPPED. 22 Issuanceofthefinalversionofthesummarypending.ForthedraftseedocumentA/C.6/78/L.22(availablehere:https:// documents.un.org/doc/undoc/ltd/n24/091/51/pdf/n2409151.pdf?token=IJi3waocOJ25icLika&fe=true). 23 For information about consideration of this topic during previous sessions see ZUKAL, Marek and Jan MAIS, op. cit. 24 Draft Articles on the Protection of Persons in the Event of Disasters, adopted by the International Law Commission at its sixty-eighth session, in 2016. Available here: https://legal.un.org/ilc/texts/instruments/ english/draft_articles/6_3_2016.pdf.

332