24 September 2003
U.S. Official Says Rule of Law Key in Post-Conflict Societies
U.N. Security Council debates justice, rule of law
"[T]he importance of the rule of law to a system of peace cannot be overstated," according to Ambassador James Cunningham, U.S. deputy permanent representative to the United Nations.
Cunningham spoke for the United States at the U.N. Security Council's September 24 debate on "Justice and the Rule of Law: the United Nations' Role." He noted that the U.N. Charter depends upon the rule of law "to fulfill the ideas ... we are all pledged to support."
Nevertheless, since the founding of the United Nations "there have been more than 200 armed conflicts involving more than 100 different countries, resulting in some 30 million deaths. These statistics tell us we have not yet succeeded in fulfilling the call of the [U.N.] Charter to rid the world of the scourge of war and to heal its wounds," Cunningham told the council.
The U.S. envoy said that the process of establishing the rule of law in a post-conflict society is complex. First there must be order, he said, which requires well-trained police. The police must be part of an "effective, fair and credible legal system" including qualified judges, prosecutors and lawyers. Physical infrastructure --- from courthouses to prisons -- may need to be built or rebuilt, and law school curricula and legal codes themselves may need to be revised, Cunningham said.
The burden of such an undertaking is great, but the rewards of the rule of law in a society are great as well, Cunningham said, adding that the rule of law enables formerly warring adversaries to be integrated into the society's economic prosperity. "Every experience with demobilization provides abundant evidence in support of this point," he said.
The support of an informed public is also necessary for the rule of law to be established, and "profound social and cultural change" is often needed for it to take hold, Cunningham said. He noted the increasing activity of the international community in helping countries in this work over the past 10 years, and said there are "cadres of experts in the many areas related to the re-establishment of the rule of law" who can aid in the effort.
Cunningham stressed the need to prosecute those responsible for committing wartime atrocities, and noted, "No nation devotes more resources to training and compliance with the law of armed conflict than the United States."
Following is the transcript of Cunningham's remarks:
(begin transcript)
UNITED STATES MISSION TO THE UNITED NATIONS
PRESS RELEASE
September 24, 2003
Statement by Ambassador James B. Cunningham
United States Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations
Justice and the Rule of Law in International Affairs
United Nations Security Council
September 24, 2003
Mr. President,
Thank you for providing the opportunity to discuss the centrality of justice and the rule of law in international affairs.
The United States of America is a nation founded, not upon ethnicity or cultural custom or territory, but upon law enshrined in our Constitution. As a consequence, establishing and maintaining the rule of law has been an enduring theme of American foreign policy for over two centuries. Notably, the U.S. Constitution specifically provides that treaties shall be the supreme law of the land. We therefore do not enter into treaties lightly, because we believe the importance of the rule of law to a successful system of peace cannot be overstated. Democracy, justice, economic prosperity, human rights, combating terrorism, and lasting peace all depend on the rule of law. The rule of law is essential to fulfill the ideas behind the U.N. Charter we are all pledged to support.
Since the creation of the United Nations, however, there have been more than 200 armed conflicts, involving more than 100 different countries, resulting in some 30 million deaths. These statistics tell us we have not yet succeeded in fulfilling the call of the Charter to rid the world of the scourge of war and to heal its wounds.
To be sure, our collective experience has shown there is no one-size-fits-all approach to conflict resolution and post-conflict development. Nonetheless, we have learned a few lessons that must be firmly applied if we are to improve our performance. We know that U.N. mandates must be clear and realistic from the outset, backed by adequate resources. We know that helping societies emerge from conflict requires order within which reform can take place. And we know that order is not an end in its own right. Rather, it must be part of a larger plan for establishing or re-establishing the rule of law so that social and economic development can take place and justice can be served.
Inevitably, the process of securing the rule of law is multi-faceted. Order requires well-trained police forces. These police forces must then be integrated into an effective, fair, and credible legal system and a functioning judiciary staffed by qualified judges, prosecutors, lawyers, and other officials. In some cases, courtrooms may need to be rebuilt, law school curricula may need to be revamped, legal codes may need to be revised, and prison systems may need to be restructured. The burden of the rule of law is great, but so are the rewards: a reliable legal infrastructure is crucially important to the economic prosperity necessary to reintegrate formerly warring factions into society. Every experience with demobilization provides abundant evidence in support of this point.
None of these measures, however, will succeed without informed public support. Often, profound social and cultural change is needed for the rule of law to take root. In the last 10 years, the international community has become increasingly active in helping countries in this difficult work. To be most effective, there is the need for cadres of experts in the many areas related to the re-establishment of the rule of law: administrators, civilian police, lawyers, judges, prosecutors, teachers, media experts and others. And to the extent these people are not already on the U.N. payroll, we must be able to recruit them on short notice to help rebuild a society emerging from conflict. Obviously, these experts should know the language and culture of the country they may be asked to help in order to be most effective, but even with the help of uniquely qualified specialists, the international community cannot wave a magic wand to bring a society out of conflict to a better future. That task can only be completed if there is the necessary long-term commitment from the local government and population.
And this commitment will be severely tested. All our impulses and cravings for justice urge us to prosecute where horrific crimes have occurred, but launching prosecutions in the midst of negotiations may not be the best route to post-conflict development. Flexibility in approach is needed.
That said, good judicial models can greatly help countries build strong judiciaries. As the Nuremberg legacy teaches us, no one should be above the law. Indeed, the United States has been at the forefront of international efforts to ensure that those responsible for wartime atrocities are prosecuted from the establishment of the Nuremberg and Tokyo Tribunals to leading the effort to set up the International Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda to the most recent case of the Sierra Leone Special Court. And the United States has been the single largest donor to these international institutions. At home and abroad, we have vigorously pursued the highest standards in accountability for war crimes and crimes against humanity. No nation devotes more resources to training and compliance with the law of armed conflict than the United States.
In fact, a Department of Defense Directive formally provides that "all reportable incidents [involving violations of the law of war] committed by or against U.S. or enemy persons are reported promptly, thoroughly investigated, and when appropriate, remedied by corrective action." The Department of Defense has formal procedures and responsibilities in place to ensure that all such violations of the law of war are prosecuted in appropriate cases. Commanding officers, who receive an initial report of a possible war crime, are required to request that a formal investigation be conducted. In addition, senior Department of Defense officials are required to provide for disposition of war crimes cases under the Uniform Code of Military Justice in appropriate cases. We hope that other countries will follow our example in this area by training all their men and women in uniform in their legal obligations and holding their soldiers accountable for violations of the laws of war.
Let me conclude where I began: the rule of law is indispensable to justice, freedom, and economic development. Moreover, the rule of law is indispensable to international peace and security abroad. As a nation founded by law, the United States is the unflagging champion of the rule of law. By working together in support of the rule of law, we believe the international community can strengthen the peace and help conflict-ridden societies build a better future. For 200 years, this has been our firm conviction and practice, and it will remain our first article of faith.
Thank you, Mr. President.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Bureau of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
