VZCZCXRO5997
RR RUEHBC RUEHDE RUEHDIR RUEHKUK RUEHTRO
DE RUCNDT #1062/01 3271519
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 231519Z NOV 09
FM USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7681
INFO RUCNIRA/IRAN COLLECTIVE
RUEHEG/AMEMBASSY CAIRO 1111
RUEHBY/AMEMBASSY CANBERRA 2539
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO 0836
RUEHSM/AMEMBASSY STOCKHOLM 0653

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 USUN NEW YORK 001062 
 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PREL AORC UNGA
SUBJECT: SIXTH COMMITTEE DEBATES AND ADOPTS RESOLUTION ON 
CRIMINAL ACCOUNTABILITY OF UN OFFICIALS 
 
¶1. Summary:  The Sixth Committee concluded debate on Agenda 
Item 78: Criminal Accountability of U.N. Officials and 
Experts on Mission with twenty-two Member States delivering 
interventions on the subject.  The major issue boils down to 
whether an international convention is needed to ensure no 
judicial gaps exist or whether the responsibility should 
reside with states.  Additionally, there is a question as to 
whether any gap exists to begin with.  On November 12, the 
Committee recommended by consensus to the General Assembly 
adoption of a resolution on criminal accountability that 
defers addressing the issue until the 67th UNGA.  End 
Summary. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - 
REGIONAL INTERVENTIONS 
- - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶2. Australia, representing Canada, Australia, and New Zealand 
(CANZ), called on Member States to close the jurisdictional 
gap by establishing jurisdiction over serious crimes 
committed by their nationals while serving as U.N. official 
or experts on mission.  CANZ advocated the Secretariat's 
proposal for a convention requiring States to exercise 
criminal jurisdiction over their nationals participating in 
U.N. operations abroad. 
 
¶3. Sweden, on behalf of the European Union (EU), reaffirmed 
its support for the U.N.'s zero tolerance policy regarding 
sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.  It noted the 
jurisdictional gaps that exist regarding U.N. officials 
serving overseas and also proposed an international 
convention as a long term measure to address this gap. 
 
¶4. Mexico, speaking for the RIO Group, urged the United 
Nations to enforce a zero tolerance policy and asked for more 
detailed information on the criminal acts, such as 
statistics, from the Secretariat.  It noted that the 
terminology in the Spanish version was incorrect. 
 
¶5. Egypt, on behalf of the African Group, stressed the 
importance of criminal accountability to the Group as there 
are a high number of U.N. officials serving in Africa.  Egypt 
urged Member States to fully implement resolutions 62/63 and 
63/119 and called on these States to establish jurisdiction 
over crimes of a serious nature committed by their nationals 
while serving as U.N. officials or experts on mission. 
 
¶6. Iran, representing the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), called 
for the implementation of resolutions 61/291, 62/63, and 
63/119.  The NAM commented that it was still premature to 
discuss a draft convention on the criminal accountability of 
U.N. officials and experts on mission.  The NAM said it was 
looking forward to receiving more information on the problem 
before taking further measures. 
 
- - - - - - - - 
COMMON THEMES 
- - - - - - - - 
 
¶7. All of the interventions commented that all U.N. staff 
must be held accountable for crimes committed while on 
mission with most countries (e.g. Jordan, Indonesia, Nigeria, 
and the Democratic Republic of Congo) supporting the "zero 
tolerance" policy of the United Nations.  Several Member 
States noted that jurisdictional gaps exist (notably 
Switzerland, Russia, and South Africa) but there was no 
agreement as to how this should be corrected.  Several 
delegations, mostly European, called for an international 
convention on criminal accountability to address these gaps. 
Other Member States (Malaysia, China, Russia, and the United 
States) observed that a convention would be premature at this 
point.  Some of these delegations urged States to adopt 
national legislation to establish jurisdiction to address the 
issue.  Most delegations (e.g. Jordan, Russia, South Africa, 
and the United Arab Emirates) agreed, however, that more data 
and statistics were needed on the issue in order to properly 
address it.  Several Member States noted their countries' 
efforts to train their personnel sent on U.N. missions 
 
¶8. The United States welcomed the Secretary-General's report 
on the criminal accountability of U.N. officials and experts 
on mission and highlighted the importance of the issue to the 
United States.  LegOff noted that the United States believed 
that at this point, an international convention on criminal 
accountability was not the most efficient or effective means 
to ensure accountability. 
 
¶9. On November 12, the Sixth Committee recommended by 
 
USUN NEW Y 00001062  002 OF 002 
 
 
consensus to the General Assembly the adoption of a 
resolution on criminal accountability.  For the most part, 
the resolution repeated and reaffirmed recommendations from 
past resolutions 62/63 and 63/119.  After weeks of 
negotiation, language concerning recommending an 
international convention on criminal accountability was 
dropped. 
RICE