Coalition for the International Criminal Court
Follow Us: Facebook Twitter
Browse by Region
map Americas Africa Asia and Pacific Europe Middle East and North Africa
Review Conference: Informal Daily Summary - 8 June 2010
08 June 2010
Dear All,

The Review Conference of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
(ICC) opened on May 31st in Kampala, Uganda.

From 31 May to 11 June, States Parties to the ICC Rome Statute - ICC's founding
treaty - as well as observer states, international organizations and NGOs are
meeting to discuss amendments to the Statute as well as its impact to date.

This message includes a short summary on the discussions around the crime of
aggression; stocktaking and other matters (I); as well as ICC press statements,
related documents and news articles, (II).

For more information on the Review Conference, please visit the CICC website at:

To see the CICC Review Conference Background Paper visit:\

Please note that official Review Conference documents can be found on the ICC
website at:

Please do not hesitate to contact us should you need further information.


CICC Secretariat




On 8 June, States Parties and observer States met to discuss potential
amendments to the Rome Statute regarding the Crime of Aggression in an Informal
Session. On the whole, the comments centered on the three proposals circulated
to date: a non paper circulated by Argentina, Brazil and Switzerland (ABS) on 7
June, as well as a proposal by Canada and a non-paper by Slovenia both
circulated today.

The statements made by delegations were quite varied. Some states reiterated
their support for the ABS proposal and others expressed their discomfort. Some
States expressed notable concerns regarding the applicability of the principles
of consent and reciprocity animating the Canadian proposal to the international
criminal law context; others saw respect for these principles as central to a
proper amendment. Various States expressed interests in the Slovenia proposal,
while others questioned if the proposal added much beyond the existing Canadian
proposal. On the whole, States expressed the need to move forward on the basis
of those options already before the Conference- rather than introducing wholly
new proposals- and to seek compromise in order to move closer together on those
elements of commonality between the varied positions. Discussions also touched
on the revised Conference Room Paper presented by the Chair which sought to
incorporate the most consensual elements of ABS proposal, as indicated by States
in yesterday's discussions.

Amnesty International also made a statement in the plenary and expressed
concerns over proposals that would threaten the Court's independence. Amnesty's
latest media release on the matter is available at:

Professor of International Law and former Nuremberg Prosecutor Benjamin B.
Ferencz also made few comments at the end of the session.

In addition, States Parties and observer States met for a brief session of the
Working Group on the Crime of Aggression to approve the outstanding portions of
the Chair's Report of the Working Group on the Crime of Aggression. Few concerns
were articulated regarding the revised text, and the Report was approved.

For more information and background, see: and


On the morning of 8 June, the 9th plenary session of the Review Conference was
convened in order to consider the outcome documents and summaries for the four
stocktaking topics that were held in the first week of the Review Conference.

The plenary adopted by consensus the following documents:

- Resolution on Complementarity:

- Moderator's summary of Peace and Justice Panel:

-Resolution on the Impact of the Rome Statutes on Victims and Affected

- Declaration on Cooperation:

- Summary of round table discussion on Cooperation:

Following the adoption, William R. Pace, Convenor of the Coalition for the ICC
took the floor to express his appreciation for the work carried out by states,
and the focal points in particular, to ensure a successful stocktaking exercise
and the intention of the CICC to continue working on these issues with all
actors in the future.


In addition to the stocktaking issues, the plenary session considered and
adopted the "draft resolution on strengthening the enforcement of sentences" as
proposed by Norway.

The resolution calls upon States to indicate their willingness to imprison
persons sentenced by the Court and necessarily by seeking assistance in which to
do so by UN bodies and other actors involved in assistance programs.

Read the resolution:



i. "Clarification regarding the situation in Sri Lanka", ICC Press Office, 7
June 2010,

ii. "The Registrar of the ICC and delegates from States Parties to the Rome
Statute face to face with the challenges of the Court in the ground", ICC Press
Office, 7 June 2010, and media/press releases/pr540

i. "Program of events", Women's Initiative for Gender Justice, May 2010,

iii. "Advancing Gender Justice - A Call to Action", Women's Initiative for
Gender Justice May 2010,\

iv. "Press Statement at the Review Conference, 31 May Press Conference", Women's
Initiative for Gender Justice, May 2010,\

v. "Statement delivered to the Review Conference General Debate", Women's
Initiative for Gender Justice, 1 June 2010,\

vi. "Programme from the Women's Court", Women's Initiative for Gender Justice, 1
June 2010,

vii. "Women's Court: Summary and quotes from speakers", Women's Initiative for
Gender Justice, 1 June 2010\

viii. "Proposals threaten International Criminal Court's independence", Amnesty
International, 8 June 2010,\

ix. "IHRC Amendment Proposals to the Rome Statute," Iranian Islamic Human Rights
Commission, 7 June 2010

x. "IHRC Proposals on Expansion of ICC Jurisdiction," Iranian Islamic Human
Rights Commission, 7 June 2010

xi. "IHRC Review of Activities," Iranian Islamic Human Rights Commission. 7
June 2010\


i. "Trouble for the International Criminal Court", Brett D. Schaefer, National
Review Online, 8 June 2010,\

"How is the International Criminal Court getting along? To answer that question,
the Review Conference for the ICC was convened in Kampala, Uganda, on May 31 and
is scheduled to last through June 11. It was launched with an ambitious agenda
to engage in a stocktaking exercise, assess the Court's record since 2002, and
consider three amendments to the Rome Statute, which established the ICC. The
organizers and supportive non-governmental organizations (NGOs) had high hopes
that the conference would result in a ringing endorsement of the Court and the
adoption of amendments that would greatly enhance its power. Midway through the
conference, however, that agenda is taking on water. Most surprising - and
gratifying - is that concerns and objections raised by the Obama administration
have been central to interrupting the momentum of the conference and, hopefully,
stopping the adoption of the proposed amendments.

.. The general debate closed with many NGOs and delegates voicing frustrated and
disappointed comments to each other. Although they should not have been
surprised - the Obama administration had been making similar statements for
months prior to the conference - many delegates and NGOs had held out hope that
the Americans would become more conciliatory once they were at the conference
itself. They were disabused of that hope by Rapp's statement, which, aside from
a few sentences here and there, could have been made by the Bush

ii. "ICC states likely to strike deal on aggression: official," AFP, 7 June 2010\

"International Criminal Court member states will strike a deal on the crime of
aggression at the court's ongoing review conference, a court official said
Monday. However the UN Security Council will likely retain the exclusive right
to launch an investigation for several years, Christian Wenaweser, who heads the
court's Assembly of State Parties, said.

'The option to do nothing is pretty much off the table,' Wenaweser said.

'The language of the definition specifically says what can be prosecuted is an
act of such character and gravity and scale that it would constitute a manifest
violation of the UN charter,' Stephen J. Rapp, US ambassador-at-large for war
crimes issues, told journalists.

Rapp said Washington was seeking a more precise definition of some terms.

... Switzerland, Brazil and Argentina on Monday tabled a proposal that,
according to Wenaweser, broadly defines a likely eventual agreement.

Under the proposal, the Security Council would be given immediate power to refer
an aggression case to the ICC, but any decision that gives an individual state
or the ICC prosecutor the capacity to initiate such a case will be deferred for
several years.

Even permanent members of the UN Security Council, which have consistently
expressed some unease regarding the crime of aggression, have acknowledged that
it is likely to be added to the court's list of prosecutable offenses, according
to Wenaweser.

But, he added, the notion that that the ICC prosecutor will immediately be given
unfettered authority to investigate aggression among the court's member states
is not realistic.."

Also read: "ICC nears deal to prosecute state aggression", Reuters, 7 June 2010,

CICC's policy on the referral and prosecution of situations before the ICC:

The Coalition for the ICC is not an organ of the court. The CICC is an
independent NGO movement dedicated to the establishment of the International
Criminal Court as a fair, effective, and independent international organization.
The Coalition will continue to provide the most up-to-date information about the
ICC and to help coordinate global action to effectively implement the Rome
Statute of the ICC. The Coalition will also endeavor to respond to basic queries
and to raise awareness about the ICC's trigger mechanisms and procedures, as
they develop. The Coalition as a whole, and its secretariat, do not endorse or
promote specific investigations or prosecutions or take a position on situations
before the ICC. However, individual CICC members may endorse referrals, provide
legal and other support on investigations, or develop partnerships with local
and other organizations in the course of their efforts.
Communications to the ICC can be sent to:
P.O. box 19519
2500 CM the Hague
The Netherlands