STATEMENT : PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR THE UNITED NATIONS DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE OF PLENIPOTENTIARIES ON PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES AGAINST HUM

STATEMENT BY

MS. ZURSHIDA MURNI ABDUL HAMID

REPRESENTATIVE OF MALAYSIA TO THE FIRST SESSION OF THE MEETING OF THE PREPARATORY COMMITTEE FOR THE UNITED NATIONS DIPLOMATIC CONFERENCE OF PLENIPOTENTIARIES ON PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY

ON CONSIDERATION OF CLUSTER 2 OF DRAFT ARTICLES CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY:

DEFINITION AND GENERAL OBLIGATIONS (ARTICLES 2, 3, AND 4)

Mr. Chair,

1. Since this is the first time Malaysia is taking the floor, allow us to congratulate you on your appointment as Chair for this preparatory committee meeting.

2. We also wish to express our appreciation to Professor Murphy for the insightful summary of the cluster.

Mr. Chair,

3. We have reviewed the draft articles and the commentaries by the ILC and we wish to seek clarification from Professor Murphy on Art 2.

4. The first is with regard to Article 2(2)(d), it is noted that the elements to constitute “deportation” under the draft Articles includes –

1. forced displacement by expulsion or other coercive acts ;
2. the persons are expulsed from the area in which they are lawfully present; and
3. such expulsion is without grounds permitted under international law.

5. It seems that the scope of this provision could include aliens/non-nationals such as immigrants and refugees.

6. In that context, would the determination on the lawful presence of non-nationals depends on the domestic laws of States having sovereign rights to include or exclude non-nationals from their territory, or would it be based on international law governing these categories of aliens.

7. If the draft article, when it was drafted by ILC is intended to refer to the later, that is the lawful presence depend on international law, how would this provision be applied to States that are not parties to international conventions relating to these categories of aliens.

8. Secondly, with regard to Article 2(1)(h), Malaysia notes the Commission’s view that excluding the definition of “gender” accommodates evolving understandings and supports universality. Could Professor Murphy share your insight how this approach ensures legal certainty, State consent, and foreseeability in the application of crimes against humanity?

9. Malaysia raises these questions in a constructive spirit, with a view to ensuring that the convention achieves both universality and the highest standards of legal precision and legitimacy.

Mr Chair,

10. I would like to take this opportunity to assure the meeting that Malaysia remains committed to engaging constructively in this process, with a view to ensuring that the outcome of this process will reflect a balanced and inclusive views and based on broad support among Member States

I thank you Mr. Chair