Qatar and Hesse reviewed economic and foreign policy

Ambassador Abdullah bin Mohammed bin Saud Al Thani and Minister Lucia Puttrich – Picture by MOFA Qatar, Embassy of Qatar in Germany.

Friday, 21 May 2021, Wiesbaden, Hesse, Germany: Representing the Premier of Hesse, Volker Bouffier, Minister of State Lucia Puttrich, Minister for Federal and European Affairs, received the Ambassador of the State of Qatar in Germany and the Czech Republic, Sheikh Abdulla bin Mohammed bin Saud Al Thani at the Hessian State Chancellery in Wiesbaden. It was the first official visit by Ambassador Al Thani to Hesse to review bilateral relations. 

Trade relations between Hesse and Qatar Economic relations between the countries were subject of the talks: “Germany and Qatar maintain distinct trade relations. German exports to Qatar amounted to around EUR 1.5 billion in 2019. Motor vehicles, aircraft, plant and machinery top the list of German exports. German companies in Qatar are primarily active in plant construction, energy generation and construction, the service sector and transport infrastructure. 

Qatar is also one of the largest foreign investors in Germany and has substantial stakes in Volkswagen, Deutsche Bank, Siemens and Hapag-Lloyd, amongst others. 
Qatar is about the size of Hesse and has about 2.6 million inhabitants. Only a small proportion of them are Qataris. The country attracts a large number of guest workers, especially from Southeast Asia. 

Qatar has recently introduced minimum wages for guest workers, and improved their legal standing and rights vis-à-vis employers. 

For further information  

Qatar’s Foreign Ministry: 

https://www.mofa.gov.qa/ŰŹÙ…ÙŠŰč-ۣ۟ۚۧ۱-Ű§Ù„ÙˆŰČۧ۱۩/Ű§Ù„ŰȘÙŰ§Ű”ÙŠÙ„/1442/10/11/وŰČÙŠŰ±Ű©-Ű§Ù„ŰŻÙˆÙ„Ű©-Ù„ŰŽŰ€ÙˆÙ†-Ű§Ù„Ű§ŰȘۭۧۯ-Ű§Ù„ŰŁÙ„Ù…Ű§Ù†ÙŠ-ÙˆŰ§Ù„ŰŁÙˆŰ±ÙˆŰšÙŠ-ŰȘŰŹŰȘمŰč-مŰč-ŰłÙÙŠŰ±-Ù‚Ű·Ű±Â 

Government of Hesse: 

https://staatskanzlei.hessen.de/presse/pressemitteilung/europaministerin-trifft-botschafter-des-staates-katar 

Ernesto de Zulueta leads digital innovation in Spain

Tuesday, 18 May 2021, Madrid, Kingdom of Spain: The Spanish Council of Ministers assented to the appointment of Ernesto de Zulueta y Habsburgo-Lorena to the newly created post of ‘Ambassador-at-Large for Digital Transformation’ at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, European Union and Cooperation (MAEUEC). 

Zulueta was born on 7 July 1961 in New York, USA. He holds a degree in Sociology, and entered the diplomatic service in 1987. He has been posted to the Spanish diplomatic representations in the Russian Federation, the United Nations, Uruguay and Singapore. He was also Technical Advisor to the Cabinet of the Minister of Foreign Affairs and Deputy Director General for Andean Community Countries.

In 2007 he was appointed Consul General of Spain in Dakar (Senegal), and in 2010 he was dispatched in the capacity of Deputy Head of Mission at the Spanish Embassy in Warsaw, Poland. In January 2012 he was appointed Director General for North America, Asia and the Pacific and between June 2015 and June 2020 he was Ambassador of Spain to the Republic of Peru. Until recently he was serving as advisory member of the Technical Cabinet of the Undersecretariat.

Ernesto de Zulueta is a son of the late Spanish ambassador Eduardo de Zulueta y Dato, and Archduchess Renata of Austria-Teschen, Princess of Altenburg. His grandfather Ernesto de Zulueta e Isasi also served as Spanish top diplomat, and the latter’s grandfather was Spanish Prime Minister Eduardo de Zulueta e Iradier. His mother’s paternal grandfather was Archduke Karol Stefan of Austria-Teschen, a brother of Spanish Queen Maria Christina, consort to King Alfonso XII and mother to King Alfonso XIII of Spain. 

For further information :


Spanish Foreign Ministry: http://www.exteriores.gob.es/Portal/en/Paginas/inicio.aspx

Ambassador at large Ernesto de Zulueta: https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernesto_de_Zulueta

ReykjavĂ­k Declaration by Arctic Council

Thursday, 20 May 2021, ReykjavĂ­k, Republic of Iceland: At the 12th Arctic Council Ministerial meeting in Reykjavik, Iceland and online, Ministers of the eight Arctic States and leaders from the six Indigenous Permanent Participant organisations convened and marked the passing of the two-year Chairmanship from Iceland to the Russian Federation for the next two years (2021-2023).

The eight Foreign Ministers signed the Reykjavik Declaration, reaffirming the Council’s commitment to maintain peace, stability and constructive cooperation in the Arctic region, emphasizing Arctic States’ unique position to promote responsible governance in the region, and asserting the importance of immediately addressing climate change in the Arctic. In recognition of the Council’s 25th anniversary, the Ministers adopted Council’s first ever Strategic Plan that reflects the shared values, goals and joint aspirations of the Arctic States and Indigenous Permanent Participants. It will guide the Council’s work for the next decade.

During its Chairmanship, Iceland emphasized work on the Arctic marine environment, climate and green energy solutions, people and communities in the Arctic, and strengthening the Arctic Council. The accomplishments of the Council during the Icelandic Chairmanship include deliverables that strengthen the knowledgebase on Arctic shipping and enhance emergency response in Arctic waters, assess climate impacts on Arctic ecosystems, reduce pollution, promote the wellbeing of Arctic inhabitants, and much more.

The incoming Chairmanship of the Russian Federation will continue to support many ongoing activities of the Council’s Working Groups and other subsidiary bodies, while introducing a number of new projects and initiatives. Sustainable development will be the main overarching priority of the Russian Chairmanship, with the human dimension, the environment and sustainable economic growth as key areas.

The Foreign Ministers of all eight Arctic States were in attendance in Reykjavik, and were joined by leaders of the six Permanent Participant organizations both in person and online. Representatives of the Council’s six Working Groups and Observers were invited to attend the meeting virtually. The meeting was the first to be held in-person under the auspices of the Arctic Council since the Covid-19 pandemic put a halt to such gatherings in early 2020.

The first executive meeting of Senior Arctic Officials during the Russian Chairmanship will take place in June in Moscow as well as online.

This year also marks the 25th anniversary of the founding of the Arctic Council in Ottawa, capital of the Dominion of Canada. In preparations to the Ministerial, Canadian Ambassador in the Kingdom of Denmark, Denis Robert, held intensive talks to Danish officials including State Secretary for Foreign Policy Jesper MĂžller SĂžrensen, or a bilateral tĂȘte-Ă -tĂȘte with Greenland’s Minister of Trade, Industry, Foreign Affairs and ClimatePele Broberg who was in Copenhagen previous to the trip to Iceland. 

For further information:

Arctic Council: https://arctic-council.org/en/news/arctic-council-foreign-ministers-sign-the-reykjavik-declaration-adopt-councils-first-strategic-plan/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/utanrikisraduneyti/albums/72157719213279551

Global Affairs Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/global-affairs/news/2021/05/minister-of-foreign-affairs-concludes-successful-participation-in-arctic-council-ministerial-meeting-in-iceland.html

ReykjavĂ­k Declaration: https://www.international.gc.ca/world-monde/international_relations-relations_internationales/arctic-arctique/reykjavik-declaration-2021.aspx?lang=eng

———–

On the picture from left to right: Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada, Marc Garneau (who also represented Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada (CIRNAC) on behalf of Daniel Vandal, Minister of Northern Affairs; Swedish Foreign Minister Ann Linde; Faroese Premier BĂĄrður ĂĄ Steig Nielsen; Danish Foreign Minister Jeppe Kofod; Greenland’s Minister of Trade, Industry, Foreign Affairs and Climate, Pele Broberg; Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, Sergey Lavrov; Finnish Foreign Minister, Pekka Haavisto; Icelandic Foreign Minister, Guðlaugur Þór Þórðarson; Norwegian Foreign Minister, Ine Eriksen SĂžreide; U.S. Secretary of State, Antony Blinken

Council of Europe’s 131st Committee of Ministers

Friday, 21 May 2021, Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, Germany: Hamburg’s First Mayor Dr. Peter Tschentscher and German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas welcomed high-ranking representatives of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to Hamburg City Hall and opened the 131st session of the Committee of Ministers. Germany had taken over the chairmanship of the Committee of Ministers from the Hellenic Republic on 18 November 2020 in Strasbourg and will pass it on to Hungary at the meeting in Hamburg.

Germany’s priorities as Chair of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe were the implementation of rulings by the European Court of Human Rights, consistently anchoring human rights in the digital space as well, taking action against hate and incitement online, and improving the protection of minorities, especially the Roma. The European Foreign Ministers discussed these and other topics today at their virtual meeting in Hamburg.

In the words of First Mayor Dr. Peter Tschentscher: “The Council of Europe is an important voice for human rights and the rule of law in Europe. As an independent international organisation, it monitors the observance of citizens’ fundamental rights and works for peace and security – from Iceland to Russia, from Scandinavia to the border with the Middle East. The Council of Europe stands for understanding and exchange between the states of Europe and thus fits in well with the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg, which, according to its constitution, acts as a ‘mediator between all continents and peoples of the world’.”

Council of Europe’s 131st Committee of Ministers

This year’s meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe took place predominantly digitally. In addition to Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, Hungary’s Foreign Minister PĂ©ter SzijjĂĄrtó (future Chair) and the heads of the various Council of Europe institutions partook in person in the Hamburg City Hall,  including the council’s Secretary-General Marija Pejčinović Burić. All other participants will be connected virtually, including the Secretary-General’s successor as chief of Croatian diplomacy, Gordan Grlić-Radman. 

The Council of Europe is an independent international organisation based in Strasbourg. It was founded in 1949 and works to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The Council of Europe has 47 member states. The Committee of Ministers is the decision-making body of the Council of Europe and is formed by the foreign ministers of the member states. At its annual session, decisions are adopted and put into force. The most important conventions of the Council of Europe include the European Convention on Human Rights, the Convention against Torture and the European Social Charter.

The European Court of Human Rights, which was founded in 1959 by the member states of the Council of Europe, watches over the observance of human rights. The court’s judgements are binding upon all member states.

For further information:


Government of Hamburg: https://www.hamburg.de/pressearchiv-fhh/15078614/2021-05-21ministerkomitee-des-europarats/
Council of Europe: https://www.coe.int/en/web/sogi/newsroom
Government of Hungary: https://abouthungary.hu

“International Law and Economic Diplomacy”

Opening Lecture of HCLA – ADA University Executive Program

The Hague Center for Law and Arbitration in collaboration with ADA University of Azerbaijan has launched a series of executive courses for diplomats and government officials of Azerbaijan on 21 May.

His Excellency Dr. Christophe Bernasconi, Secretary-General of the Hague Conference on Private International Law (HCCH), delivered the opening lecture “Judicial Cooperation in General Diplomacy and Consular Relations.”

The courses have been scheduled by HCLA and ADA University in Baku exclusively for diplomats, judges, government officials, and international lawyers. The program will feature several world-class lecturers, arbitrators and prominent international lawyers  from the University of Vienna, Brussels University, Doshisha University in Japan.

The program will continue on May 24 and 26, 2021. Participants and lecturers will interact and exchange ideas on the latest developments in international law, economic diplomacy and governance.

New Agreements

In the picture H.E. Dr. Ines Martinez Valinotti, Ambassador of Paraguay and Dr. Mayelinne De Lara, Diplomat Magazine’s publisher. Photography by Ülle Baum.


Looking back to some public diplomacy duties before the Covid-19 lockdown, featured here the signature of a collaboration agreement between the Embassy of Paraguay in Canada and Diplomat Magazine Europe 

Her Excellency InĂ©s MartĂ­nez Valinotti, Ambassador of Paraguay to Canada, recipient of the “Ambassador of the Year and Public Diplomacy Award 2020” by the Faculty of Law of the University of Ottawa, signed the agreement together with Dr Mayelinne De Lara, Diplomat Magazine’s publisher on 14 January 2021. 

Both associates agreed for an indeterminate period of time to support investigative academic journalism producing media research, organising press trips to provide editorial quality content for Diplomat Magazine in a framework of understanding, freedom of speech, political neutrality and journalistic ethics, common interest. It was likewise noted that no exclusivity, no costs involved or compensation of any kind, no legal responsibility, and respecting Intellectual rights while remaining independents, was paramount to the announced cooperation.  

In the framework of this agreement His Excellency, Dr Euclides Acevedo, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Paraguay, shared his views with Diplomat Magazine EU on a series of public affairs issues such as in Covid vaccines regional distribution, reactivation of the economy, 30 years of MERCOSUR, and the role of Paraguayan ambassadors in promoting international trade. Minister Acevedo concluded his intervention addressing prospect European investors in his country. 

ICC Prosecutor to the United Nations Security Council on the Situation in Libya

It is a pleasure to once again engage with the Council, albeit virtually, due to the prevailing COVID-19 pandemic. This briefing is my last before this Council on the Libya situation before the end of my mandate on the 15th of June. I would have preferred to be with you in person but the pandemic has forced us all to adapt and to find new ways of continuing our work. In response to these challenging times, my Office has also had to adopt new strategies and to demonstrate resilience, allowing nothing to detract us from our full commitment to our mandate under the Rome Statute.

Mr President, let me congratulate the People’s Republic of China on assuming the Presidency of the Security Council for the month of May. I wish you, Mr President, every success in steering the crucial work of this Council in the pursuit of international peace and security and the protection of human rights and accountability for atrocity crimes in that context.

I also seize the occasion to congratulate the new members of the Council who have assumed their important function as of January of this year.

On 23 October 2020, we witnessed the signing of the historic ceasefire agreement by Libyan parties in Geneva under the auspices of the United Nations. On the occasion of my last briefing to this Council, I welcomed this development and urged all parties to continue their efforts to bring peace and stability for the benefit of people of Libya who have endured so much. The recent inauguration of a new interim Government of National Unity is another commendable milestone which I welcome.

Lasting peace and stability remain crucial pillars of development and protection of human rights in Libya. Much hope rests on the Government of National Unity to work in an efficient and inclusive manner to address the violence and political turmoil that has engulfed the country and to secure peace and stability in Libya. There can be no lasting peace without accountability and justice and in this regard, I reiterate my Office’s firm commitment to work in collaboration with the Government of National Unity to ensure accountability for serious crimes alleged to have been committed in Libya falling under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (“ICC” or the “Court”).

Even in the midst of serious financial constraints, the Libya situation remains one of my Office’s active investigations and the situation will continue to be a priority and receive the attention it requires to advance it further. My Office will continue to exert all possible efforts to make substantial progress on this situation. Here, I wish to emphasise the importance of ensuring that my Office receives adequate resources to continue to advance this crucial work. We will be making submissions in this regard as part of the Office’s 2022 proposed budget.

During the reporting period, members of my Office have travelled to Libya, interviewed witnesses and received essential documents and materials from various sources, including individuals, NGOs, and representatives of victims organisations within and outside Libya. In particular, my Libya team has continued to constructively engage with relevant Libyan national authorities following the discovery of multiple mass graves in the city of Tarhuna.

This engagement has resulted in fruitful exchanges, in particular, with the Prosecutor General’s Office, the Office of the Military Prosecutor, the Criminal Investigation Department, the Ministry of Defence and several forensic agencies, regarding the status of national investigations, complementarity and cooperation.

The team also visited crime scenes in Tarhuna, including a site where over 100 bodies had been recovered from graves that were discovered in June of this year. The team met with prosecutorial, investigative, and forensic agencies involved in the investigation of these crimes, as well as with external partners who are undertaking related technical and judicial activities.

Additionally, the team met survivors and family members of the young men who were injured or killed during the airstrike on the Al-Hadba Military College in Tripoli on 4 January 2020, as well as with displaced persons from Benghazi and numerous victims of the crimes committed in Tarhuna.

All these positive engagements have enhanced my Office’s ongoing efforts to strengthen cooperation with relevant national authorities and partners on the ground, thus opening much needed opportunities for the preservation and the collection of evidence for future prosecutions. 

My Office has been impressed with the commendable hard work of all actors in their efforts to preserve relevant evidence of the alleged crimes, working together with the Government of National Accord. As the Office continues and intensifies its investigative activities in Libya, it looks forward to build on the existing rapport and relations towards strengthening a fruitful and collaborative spirit of engagement with the Government of National Unity.

In this regard, I would be remiss if I do not express my gratitude for the excellent cooperation and support that my Office has and continues to receive from the United Nations Support Mission in Libya (“UNSMIL”). My Office welcomes the appointment of Mr Ján Kubiơ as Special Envoy of the UN Secretary-General and Head of the UNSMIL and looks forward to the continued cooperative relationship we have enjoyed under the able stewardship of Ms Stephanie Williams, to whom we express our sincere gratitude. Effective justice cannot be achieved without joint efforts and good cooperation with the national authorities and key partners such as UNSMIL.

My Office remains active in its close monitoring of the situation in Libya. We continue to receive concerning information about ongoing crimes, ranging from disappearances and arbitrary detention to murder, torture and sexual and gender-based violence.

We have collected credible information and evidence on serious crimes allegedly committed in official and unofficial detention facilities in Libya. In particular, the Office received information on the Mitiga Prison controlled by the Special Deterrence Force and the Gernada and Al-Kuweifiya detention facilities controlled by the militia known as the Libyan Arab Armed Forces, previously called the Libya National Army or LNA, and its associated forces. These crimes, which include large-scale torture, sexual violence, inhumane treatment, and arbitrary detention have been reported for years but regrettably to date, the perpetrators have not been held accountable.

Further credible reports detail the summary conviction and sentencing of civilians to long prison sentences including handing of death penalty by Military Courts in eastern Libya following secret trials devoid of fair trial guarantees. The Office has received documents and other materials supporting these reports.

The scale of these alleged crimes is large. UNSMIL reports that more than 8,850 individuals are arbitrarily detained at 28 official prisons in Libya in Judicial Police custody with an estimated 60 to 70 percent in pre-trial detention. An additional 10,000 individuals are detained in other detention facilities run by militia and armed groups including about 480 women and 63 juveniles and children.

I urge all parties to the conflict in Libya to immediately put an end to the use of detention facilities to mistreat and commit crimes against civilians and persons hors de combat. International law and the Rome Statute prohibit the use of detention facilities in this manner. I reiterate the critical importance for international observers and investigators to be given full access to all detention facilities in Libya and to receive full cooperation in this regard.

I urge the Government of National Unity to take urgent steps to put an end to the crimes committed in detention centres and to fully investigate allegations of arbitrary detention, torture, confiscation of property, rape and other forms of sexual violence, including in prisons and detention facilities.

My Office has also been following reports of the targeting of civilians who dare to voice opposition to the actions of militias in the east and west of Libya. The violent silencing of public critics as a method to terrorise the civilian population reached another low point with the despicable murder of human rights lawyer, Ms Hanaan Al-Barassi in Benghazi in November of last year.

The Office condemns these crimes in the strongest possible terms and calls upon the civil and military authorities in Libya to duly investigate and prosecute the persons responsible for these crimes. The Office reiterates its call to the Libyan authorities to fully investigate the disappearance of Ms Siham Sergewa, an elected member of the House of Representatives, who has been missing since her abduction in Benghazi on 17 July 2019.

In addition, the Office has received concerning information about the activities of mercenaries and foreign fighters in Libya. This information is consistent with the findings of UNSMIL Panel of Experts reports. The Office fully supports the call for these armed groups and individuals to leave Libya without delay. I must emphasise that crimes committed by mercenaries and foreign fighters on Libyan territory may fall under the jurisdiction of the Court, no matter the nationality of the persons involved.

I encourage this Council and all Member States of the United Nations to once again convey a clear and firm message to leaders and commanders, be they military or civilian, and all parties and armed groups involved in the Libya conflict that the rules of international humanitarian law must be respected and that those who defy such rules will be held individually responsible.

Regarding the ongoing victimisation of migrants in Libya, the Office has concretely enhanced cooperation, coordination and the exchange of information and expertise with national authorities and EUROPOL under the Office’s Strategic Goal 6 in order to advance our respective work and investigations. I call on partners to intensify their efforts in this regard with the aim of strengthening our collective efforts in addressing impunity for serious crimes against migrants in Libya.

The recent reports about another shipwreck in the last week of April 2021 leading to the death of over 100 migrants as well as reports about the ongoing abuse and exploitation of migrants, underline the urgent need for national authorities, partners and agencies to intensify their efforts to prevent further tragedies and crimes.

Let me reiterate and emphasise that the failure to execute the ICC warrants remains a major stumbling block preventing my Office from seeking effective justice for the victims of atrocity crimes committed in Libya. Recently, according to credible reports, two ICC suspects subject to arrest warrants for crimes committed in Libya have died and will never face justice at the Court.

Justice for victims and affected communities in Libya cannot be effectively achieved without our collective efforts towards the timely arrest and surrender of those against whom warrants of arrest have been issued by the Court. There has been no tangible progress in securing the execution of any of these warrants. This is an obligation that falls mainly on States.

Over the years of my reporting to this Council, I have lamented the fact that individuals against whom warrants of arrest have been issued remain at large. One of these individuals was Mr Mahmoud Mustafa Busayf Al-Werfalli, who as a commander of the Al-Saiqa Brigade was alleged to have executed 43 civilians as specified in two arrest warrants. Credible reports indicate that he was killed in Benghazi on the 24th of March earlier this year.

In addition, Mr Al-Tuhamy Mohamed Khaled allegedly responsible for the perpetration of serious crimes including torture, has also reportedly died in Cairo, the Arab Republic of Egypt.

I regret that victims, and their families, of the crimes allegedly committed by Mr Al-Werfalli and Mr Al-Tuhamy have been denied justice and closure through the Court’s fair, independent and impartial judicial proceedings. Much work and resources have gone into the preparation of these cases and now, uncertainty remains. All this could have been prevented had the suspects been duly arrested and transferred to the custody of the Court.

The unwillingness of those in power in eastern Libya to transfer Mr Al-Werfalli to the Court, or to genuinely investigate and prosecute him, has contributed to a climate of impunity. The same lack of cooperation is evident with regard to the surrender of Mr Al-Tuhamy by the Egyptian authorities.

I call on the Libyan and Egyptian authorities to promptly investigate these reported deaths and to provide the relevant information to the Court.

While the deaths of these suspects, if confirmed, will not stop the ongoing investigation of the situation in Libya, they constitute a tragic example of suspected perpetrators escaping accountability for the most serious crimes of concern to the international community.

I must recall that the warrant of arrest against Mr Saif Al-Islam Gaddafi remains unexecuted. I reiterate that Mr Gaddafi remains a wilful fugitive from justice. I stress that Libya remains under the legal obligation to arrest and surrender him to the Court. The Office therefore calls upon the Government of National Unity to take all possible action to secure his arrest and surrender. I also repeat the calls addressed by my Office directly to Mr Gaddafi to immediately surrender himself to the competent Libyan authorities for his transfer to the Court to face trial. Defendants benefit from all due process guarantees at the ICC.

Your Excellencies, justice delayed is justice denied. ICC warrants of arrest must be executed in a timely fashion.

The Office equally notes the decrease in the number of reported crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction since the ceasefire and inauguration of the new Government. It is nevertheless a matter of concern that many serious crimes, in particular those targeting civilians have gone unpunished.

My Office has continued to secure cooperation from several States and international and regional organisations as well as to extend and enhance its existing network of cooperation to achieve meaningful progress in its ongoing investigations.

In particular, relations with EUROPOL on matters of mutual interest have been enhanced. Fruitful engagements with the Panel of Experts on Libya as well as the Independent Fact-Finding Mission on Libya have also greatly facilitated sharing of knowledge and expertise.

Let me conclude, Mr President, Your Excellencies, with a final reflection. During my mandate I have seen commendable support for the work of my Office, and great cooperation from many States and other stakeholders. I would like to take this opportunity to express my sincere appreciation for that support.

At the same time, the Office has, unfortunately, faced challenges when the machination of politics has attempted to interfere with the course of justice. Ultimately, wisdom and common values have merged to counter and reverse some of these trends, and for that my Office is equally grateful.

The Court’s important work must be allowed to be done unimpeded. We must continue, all of us, to defend this institution that was built for the sake of present and future generations, and work together towards greater accountability for atrocity crimes and the advancement of the international rule of law and the peaceful settlement of disputes so central to the founding principles of the United Nations.

My Office will continue to deliver its mandate independently and impartially in Libya, as it does in all situations where we have jurisdiction. We look to the support of this august body as we undertake this necessary work.

Virginia’s Governor Northam in Munich

In the picture Dr. Florian Herrmann and Governor Ralph S. Northam – Picture by Bayerische Staatskanzlei.

Monday, 17 May 2021, Munich, Free State of Bavaria: The 73rd Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, USA, Ralph Northam, and a gubernatorial delegation were welcomed by the Head of Bavarian Chancellery, Dr. Florian Herrmann, Minister of Federal and Media Affairs, for a bilateral meeting at Prince Carl Palace in central Munich. 

Consul General Meghan Gregonis and Dr. Florian Herrmann – Picture by Bayerische Staatskanzlei.

US American Consul General Meghan Gregonis also partook during the reception given to the visiting Virginian delegation. 
Governor Ralph Northam is the commonwealth’s governor since January 2018. He is a pediatric neurologist by profession, and served as an officer in the U.S. Army Medical Corps, which gave the bilateral conversation a focus on the defence ties between the two parties. 

The Prinz-Carl-Palais (Prince Carl Palace) is the official seat of the Bavarian Premier (MinisterprÀsident) yet is normally used for representation purposes. It is named after Prince Carl Theodor of Bavaria, a brother to King Ludwig I. 

For further information:

 
Bavarian Government: https://www.bayern.de/staatskanzlei/staatsminister-dr-florian-herrmann/

Governor of Virginia: https://www.governor.virginia.gov

US Consulate General in Munich (Consul General Meghan Gregonis): https://de.usembassy.gov/embassy-consulates/munich/consul-general/

John Kerry elaborates climate strategy with German partners

Picture by Land NRW, Phil Dera

Monday, 17 May 2021, Berlin, Federal Republic of Germany: US President Joe Biden‘s Special Envoy for Climate, and erstwhile 68th Secretary of State John Kerry was received at the Representation ofthe State of North Rhine-Westphalia in Berlin by the latter state’s Premier Armin Laschet.

Both spoke about combating climate change as a global challenge. Special Envoy Kerry was accompanied by the ChargĂ©e d’affaires at the USA Embassy in Germany, Robin S. Quinville.  Special Envoy John Kerry advises the US President on climate change issues. This is the first time an envoy for climate change is appointed.  

Premier Armin Laschet underlined North Rhine-Westphalia’s experience in reducing greenhouse gases: “North Rhine-Westphalia is a pioneer in climate protection. By phasing out lignite, we are making a major contribution to reducing CO2. At the same time, we continue to set ourselves ambitious goals for the future: We will double the amount of renewable energies in North Rhine-Westphalia by 2030.”

Germany works with the United States in the field of climate protection at all levels. Areas of cooperation include the Transatlantic Climate Bridge, which was established in 2008 as a joint initiative of the Federal Foreign Office and the Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety with Canada and the United States. In the past four years, collaboration has taken place chiefly at municipal level and between enterprises and civil society organisations. With the new US Administration, this cooperation will be rejuvenated. In future, another important field of collaboration will be renewable energies. The global energy transition is essential in the fight against global warming. Climate-neutral hydrogen and its derivatives in particular will play a crucial role in decarbonisation.

The US Special Envoy on Climate Change, John Kerry, made stops in London and Rome over the past few days. In Rome, Kerry spoke with Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi as well as high-ranking business representatives. In the Vatican, he was received by the Bishop of Rome, Franciscus. In London, Kerry met with COP 26 President Alok Sharma. The UN climate conference is scheduled to take place in Glasgow, Scotland, in autumn 2021, after it had to be postponed in 2020 in the wake of the Corona pandemic.

In Berlin Special Envoy Kerry was also treated by Federal President Dr. Steinmeier to a private dinner, and was received by German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas beforehand at the Foreign Office located in Berlin-Mitte. 

For further information 

Government of NRW: https://www.land.nrw/de/pressemitteilung/ministerpraesident-armin-laschet-empfaengt-us-klimasondergesandten-john-kerry

German Foreign Office: https://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/en/aussenpolitik/themen/klima/maas-kerry/2459880

Le Tribunal irano-américain des réclamations a 40 ans

Par Cristina Hoss

Depuis bientĂŽt quarante ans, une institution arbitrale bien discrĂšte Ɠuvre dans le but de rĂ©gler les diffĂ©rends entre les États-Unis d’AmĂ©rique et la RĂ©publique islamique d’Iran nĂ©s de la rĂ©volution islamique. Une belle occasion pour braquer les projecteurs sur cette institution peu connue du public haguenois et pourtant membre apprĂ©ciĂ© de la famille des institutions qui font de la ville de La Haye la ville de la justice internationale. En effet, le Tribunal quadragĂ©naire contribue encore non seulement au rĂšglement des diffĂ©rends entre les deux États qui lui ont donnĂ© mandat de ce faire, mais il aura Ă©galement contribuĂ© de maniĂšre incidente -peut-ĂȘtre mĂȘme involontaire- mais significative au dĂ©veloppement du droit de l’arbitrage international. 

On ne peut parler du Tribunal irano-amĂ©ricain sans rappeler les circonstances qui ont entourĂ© sa crĂ©ation. La crise qui en est immĂ©diatement Ă  l’origine a Ă©tĂ© dĂ©clenchĂ©e par la rĂ©volution islamique ainsi que par l’évĂ©nement traumatisant de la prise en otage membres du personnel diplomatique et consulaire de l’Ambassade amĂ©ricaine Ă  TĂ©hĂ©ran.  Mais l’histoire est complexe et les causes plus lointaines de la crise sont liĂ©es au rĂ©gime instaurĂ© par le gouvernement du Shah d’Iran, rĂ©gime Ă  la rĂ©putation redoutable, notamment du fait des agissements de sa police, la SAVAK, et par son association Ă©troite avec les États-Unis dont il Ă©tait un alliĂ© fidĂšle avec lequel il entretint d’excellentes relations Ă©conomiques, militaires et politiques pendant de longues annĂ©es.

C’est dans ce cadre qu’il avait conclu avec les États-Unis des contrats de fournitures et assistance militaires et lancĂ© de grands projets d’infrastructure Ă  la rĂ©alisation desquelles avaient Ă©tĂ© associĂ©e de nombreuses sociĂ©tĂ©s commerciales amĂ©ricaines. Pendant les annĂ©es 1960 et 1970, de trĂšs nombreux ressortissants amĂ©ricains, hommes d’affaires, investisseurs, ingĂ©nieurs etc., s’étaient installĂ©s en Iran, Le rĂŽle jouĂ© par les États-Unis n’était pourtant pas toujours bienvenu et fut source de tensions considĂ©rables ; dĂšs les annĂ©es 1960, l’opposition contre le Shah commença Ă  s’organiser au sein de la sociĂ©tĂ© iranienne, une opposition pas seulement islamique mais de toute couleur politique. Le soulĂšvement populaire devait culminer dans la chute du gouvernement du Shah, le retour en dĂ©but de l’annĂ©e 1979 de l’Ayatollah Khomenei jusque-lĂ  exilĂ©, l’accueil du Shah aux États-Unis pour traitement mĂ©dical, et enfin la prise en otage de 52 membres du personnel de l’Ambassade amĂ©ricaine Ă  TĂ©hĂ©ran par des manifestants militants, le 4 novembre 1979, date qui restera ancrĂ©e dans la mĂ©moire de ceux qui l’ont vĂ©cu – sans doute aussi parmi les lecteurs du Diplomat Magazine.

Cette prise d’otage et le soutien qu’elle reçut du nouveau gouvernement iranien dĂ©clencha une crise internationale majeure. En rĂ©action Ă  cette violation flagrante du droit international, les États-Unis tentĂšrent alors de jouer toutes les cartes : le Conseil de sĂ©curitĂ© adopta deux rĂ©solutions condamnant les actes, le SecrĂ©taire gĂ©nĂ©ral de l’ONU fut sollicitĂ© pour faciliter des missions humanitaires et mettre sur pied une commission d’enquĂȘte, une sĂ©rie de mesures unilatĂ©rales adoptĂ©es par le prĂ©sident Jimmy Carter fut alors mise en place, avec notamment le gel des avoirs iraniens aux États-Unis, l’interdiction d’importation et d’exportation ainsi que l’interdiction de toute transaction financiĂšre. Le 29 novembre 1979, les États-Unis saisirent la Cour internationale de Justice, lui demandant de rĂ©gler le diffĂ©rend et d’obtenir la libĂ©ration des otages par une ordonnance en indication de mesures conservatoires. L’ordonnance rendue par la Cour resta sans suite, tout comme son cĂ©lĂšbre arrĂȘt de 1980 constatant la responsabilitĂ© du gouvernement islamique du fait de sa dĂ©cision de pĂ©renniser une situation créée par des personnes privĂ©es.  Ces mesures n’eurent pas l’effet escomptĂ©. Dans une tentative dĂ©sespĂ©rĂ©e de libĂ©rer les otages, les États-Unis envoyĂšrent huit hĂ©licoptĂšres pour libĂ©rer les otages, cette opĂ©ration dite « Eagle Claw Â», tourna Ă  la dĂ©bĂącle totale.

Toutes ces dĂ©marches des États-Unis ayant Ă©chouĂ©, c’est par l’intermĂ©diaire de la RĂ©publique fĂ©dĂ©rale d’Allemagne d’abord, puis de la RĂ©publique populaire et dĂ©mocratique d’AlgĂ©rie, qui accepta d’assumer ce rĂŽle, que les deux Parties entamĂšrent des nĂ©gociations, sans jamais se rencontrer. Ces nĂ©gociations dĂ©bouchĂšrent sur ce qu’il est convenu d’appeler les « Accords d’Alger Â» du 19 janvier 1981. Il s’agit de dĂ©clarations de la RĂ©publique d’AlgĂ©rie que les deux Parties au diffĂ©rend s’engagent, sĂ©parĂ©ment, de respecter. Les Accords d’Alger consistent en deux dĂ©clarations principales et deux plus techniques, mais leur ensemble constitue bien un traitĂ© au sens de la Convention de Vienne du droit des traitĂ©s avec tout ce que cela implique, y compris en matiĂšre d’interprĂ©tation. Ils visent Ă  mettre fin Ă  un diffĂ©rend politique majeure par le rĂšglement arbitral. L’acceptation des Accords d’Alger permit la libĂ©ration des otages aprĂšs 444 jours, le 20 janvier 1981, qui se trouva ĂȘtre la date de l’investiture de Ronald Reagan, vainqueur de Jimmy Carter aux Ă©lections. C’est ce dernier qui accueillit lui-mĂȘme les otages sur une base militaire amĂ©ricaine en Allemagne.

Par la DĂ©claration gĂ©nĂ©rale, l’Iran s’engageait Ă  libĂ©rer les 52 otages retenus depuis le 4 novembre 1979. Les États-Unis acceptaient les conditions de l’Etat iranien, Ă  savoir : la non-intervention dans les affaires intĂ©rieures de l’Iran, l’annulation du gel des avoirs iraniens, la levĂ©e des sanctions contre l’Iran et l’annulation des rĂ©clamations contre l’Iran devant les juridictions des États-Unis ainsi que la restitution Ă  l’Iran des biens du Shah. Enfin, les États-Unis devaient se dĂ©sister de l’instance devant la Cour internationale de Justice, laquelle avait rendu son arrĂȘt sur le fond mais demeurait saisie de la question des rĂ©parations.

La deuxiĂšme dĂ©claration, la DĂ©claration sur le rĂšglement du contentieux (Claims Settlement Declaration), est celle qui crĂ©a le Tribunal irano-amĂ©ricain, donnant mandat Ă  celui-ci de se prononcer sur les rĂ©clamations de ressortissants de l’un des États contre l’autre (rĂ©clamations privĂ©es), ainsi que sur les diffĂ©rends juridiques entre les deux États concernant l’interprĂ©tation et l’application des Accords d’Alger (rĂ©clamations dites « A Claims Â») et les diffĂ©rends entre les deux Etats concernant l’acquisition contractuelle de biens et de services, les official claims (rĂ©clamations dites « B Claims Â»).

La premiĂšre sĂ©ance du Tribunal s’est tenue le 1er juillet 1981 au Palais de la Paix, dans la petite salle de justice, frĂ©quemment utilisĂ©e par le Cour permanente d’arbitrage, qui avait offert ses services Ă  cette nouvelle institution arbitrale en attendant qu’elle puisse se doter d’un secrĂ©tariat et de locaux propres. Compte tenu du volume de rĂ©clamations attenues, il avait Ă©tĂ© convenu que l’Etat hĂŽte mettrait Ă  la disposition du Tribunal des locaux plus ou moins permanents, bien que l’on estimĂąt Ă  l’époque que les rĂ©clamations seraient traitĂ©es dans une pĂ©riode de cinq Ă  dix ans
 

Les promeneurs du quartier de Stolkpark connaissent sans doute le bĂątiment emblĂ©matique qui sert de siĂšge au Tribunal, situĂ© entre les bois de Scheveningen et le Westbroek Park, un bĂątiment qui a arbitrĂ© le Parkhotel puis, selon une rumeur non-confirmĂ©e, la Gestapo pendant l’occupation allemande.

On peut imaginer sans grande peine l’ambiance tendue qui rĂ©gnait au Tribunal pendant les premiĂšres annĂ©es. Cette expĂ©rience assez unique aurait facilement pu tourner Ă  l’échec, mais elle est en rĂ©alitĂ© une belle leçon de l’effet pacificateur du rĂšglement des diffĂ©rends par la voie arbitrale. En grande partie, cela est dĂ», qu’on me pardonne cette analyse de juriste, Ă  l’existence d’un rĂšglement de procĂ©dure permettant au Tribunal de continuer son travail malgrĂ© certaines difficultĂ©s rencontrĂ©es. C’est par une coĂŻncidence fortuite que la crĂ©ation du Tribunal est Ă  peu prĂšs contemporaine de l’adoption d’un rĂšglement procĂ©dural de l’arbitrage sous l’égide de la Commission des Nations Unies pour le Droit Commercial International, la CNUDCI.  Le Tribunal n’aurait pas pu mieux tomber. Le RĂšglement d’arbitrage adoptĂ© par la CNUDCI en 1976 prĂ©sentait un ensemble complet et dĂ©taillĂ© de rĂšgles de procĂ©dure pouvant ĂȘtre utilisĂ© dans la conduite d’arbitrages commerciaux mais aussi, comme le Tribunal le prouve, internationaux. Les commentateurs en conviennent, l’existence de ce rĂšglement a largement contribuĂ© au succĂšs du Tribunal qui en a adaptĂ© quelques articles mais qui, s’est essentiellement servi de ce rĂšglement pour rĂ©soudre des questions de procĂ©dure. Il fut ainsi l’un des premiers Ă  devoir appliquer et interprĂ©ter les dispositions, faisant du Tribunal une rĂ©fĂ©rence en matiĂšre de procĂ©dure arbitrale.

Les Membres du Tribunal, leurs assistants et le secrĂ©tariat ont ainsi su surmonter les obstacles et ont rĂ©ussi un remarquable tour de force : progressivement, le Tribunal s’est organisĂ© pour traiter les quelques 3800 rĂ©clamations dĂ©posĂ©es par des personnes privĂ©es, naturelles et juridiques. Selon nos derniĂšres informations, le Tribunal est venu au bout d’un nombre impressionnant d’affaires -prĂšs de 4000- dont toutes les rĂ©clamations privĂ©es, 72 affaires de la catĂ©gorie B et 21 affaires de la catĂ©gorie A. 16 affaires inter-Ă©tatiques demeurent pendantes. Le Tribunal a pris la dĂ©cision, fort heureuse, de publier les sentences dans des Recueils et de les rendre ainsi accessible, non seulement au public intĂ©ressĂ© mais aussi au monde de l’arbitrage at large. C’est d’ailleurs l’une des raisons pour lesquelles la jurisprudence du Tribunal a pu asseoir son autoritĂ© et influer sur le dĂ©veloppement du droit de l’arbitrage :

La contribution du Tribunal au monde de l’arbitrage ne se limite pas aux questions de procĂ©dure. Des dĂ©cisions du Tribunal irano-amĂ©ricain frĂ©quemment citĂ©es dans les sentences arbitrales de tribunaux du CIRDI, ou encore de tribunaux ad hoc, notamment quand il s’agit d’analyser la notion d’expropriation, la nationalitĂ© effective, la force majeure, le droit de la responsabilitĂ© internationale, ou encore en matiĂšre de mĂ©thodes de calcul de la compensation (quantum).

Compte tenu de l’étendue du mandat du Tribunal,  la nature des affaires traitĂ©es par celui-ci n’est pas homogĂšne ; il s’agit parfois d’affaires simples, Ă  caractĂšre commercial, parfois d’affaires d’un degrĂ© de complexitĂ© juridique et factuelle des plus sophistiquĂ©s. Le lecteur du Diplomat Magazine est invitĂ© pour s’en assurer Ă  consulter la derniĂšre dĂ©cision rendue dans l’affaire A :15, une affaire inter-Ă©tatique qui comportait des rĂ©clamations multiples, rassemblĂ©es en clusters thĂ©matiques. Sans mĂȘme lire les prĂšs de sept-cents pages de la sentence partielle (opinions sĂ©parĂ©es non-comprises !), le lecteur pourra parfaitement mesurer la fascinante combinaison de questions factuelles et juridiques traitĂ©es par le Tribunal dans cette affaire, et ce n’est qu’une seule affaire !

La composition du Tribunal est des plus classiques en matiĂšre d’arbitrage international, et n’est pas sans rappeler celle des Commissions mixtes créées Ă  l’issue de la premiĂšre Guerre mondiale. Le Tribunal est composĂ© de neuf membres, trois nommĂ©s par les États-Unis, trois nommĂ©s par l’Iran et trois nommĂ©s conjointement par les six arbitres dĂ©jĂ  nommĂ©s, les membres ressortissants de pays-tiers, les « TCMs Â», third-country Members. Il se trouve que, depuis la crĂ©ation du Tribunal, les membres de pays-tiers ont Ă©tĂ©, Ă  l’exception de l’Argentin JosĂ© Maria Ruda, des ressortissants de pays europĂ©ens de tradition de droit civil. Parmi les juristes internationaux appelĂ©s Ă  siĂ©ger en tant que « membre de pays tiers Â» on retrouve des noms familiers : Michel Virally, JosĂ©-Maria Ruda, Willem Riphagen, Karl-Heinz Böckstiegel, Gaetano Arangio-Ruiz, Krzysztof Skubiszewski, Hans van Houtte ou encore les membres actuels, les professeurs Nicolas Michel, Herbert Kronke et Bruno Simma.

Eu Ă©gard Ă  la nature hĂ©tĂ©roclite des affaires portĂ©es devant le Tribunal, ses Membres doivent ĂȘtre de fins juristes, spĂ©cialistes non seulement du droit international public et du droit de l’arbitrage, mais aussi du droit comparatif, du droit international privĂ© et du droit des contrats, avec un intĂ©rĂȘt particulier pour les transactions commerciales, et disposer aussi une certaine expertise en matiĂšre pĂ©troliĂšre, militaire et aĂ©ronautique. Enfin, il leur faut Ă©galement avoir « la bosse des maths Â», lorsqu’ils ont Ă  dĂ©terminer le montant des compensations Ă  accorder selon des mĂ©thodes de calcul parfois trĂšs Ă©laborĂ©s. Pour ce qui est des connaissances linguistiques, de nos jours, les Membres du Tribunal s’expriment en anglais seulement, les dĂ©cisions Ă©tant en revanche rendues dans les deux langues officielles du Tribunal.

Quarante ans aprĂšs la premiĂšre sĂ©ance du Tribunal, il est temps de cĂ©lĂ©brer cette belle rĂ©ussite de l’arbitrage international. Il est vrai que, lors de sa crĂ©ation, personne n’aurait imaginĂ© que le rĂšglement de ce contentieux durerait autant d’annĂ©es, mais ce qui compte, ce sont les milliers de sentences rendues, dans des circonstances parfois difficiles. Les relations entre les deux États parties ont connu des hauts et des bas (des bas surtout) les forces politiques ont pu changer, des gouvernements sont tombĂ©s, des administrations avec, d’autres les ont remplacĂ©s, car les donnĂ©es gĂ©opolitiques subissent d’incessants changements, mais au cours de toutes ces annĂ©es, quelle qu’ait Ă©tĂ© la situation politique du jour, le Tribunal a continuĂ© Ă  travailler sans relĂąche, Ă  rendre des sentences d’un haut degrĂ© de complexitĂ© juridique et factuelle, et qui plus est, les deux États concernĂ©s, les États-Unis et l’Iran, ont tenus Ă  coopĂ©rer avec le Tribunal, ont contribuĂ© Ă  son budget, participĂ© aux procĂ©dures et audiences, et exĂ©cutĂ© ses sentences arbitrales. AprĂšs des dĂ©buts quelque peu difficiles, c’est dans le cadre de dĂ©bats sereins que les Parties et les Membres du Tribunal s’acquittent de leur mission commune : trouver une solution aux diffĂ©rends divers qui fondent la compĂ©tence du Tribunal.  Le Tribunal peut en tĂ©moigner : le rĂšglement des diffĂ©rends par la voie arbitrale ou judiciaire est une voie fort prometteuse – quelle que soient les circonstances extĂ©rieures.  

Il ne nous reste qu’à adresser nos vives fĂ©licitations au Tribunal irano-amĂ©ricain des rĂ©clamations,  ainsi qu’aux deux États parties, pour avoir contribuĂ© au rĂšglement pacifique de ce diffĂ©rend majeur de notre Ă©poque – contre vents et marĂ©es.

Site internet : www.iusct.nl

Informations sur l’auteur:

Cristina Hoss

Cristina Hoss est juriste au Greffe de la Cour internationale de Justice et, entre 2015 et 2017, a été conseillÚre juridique de S.Exc. M. Bruno Simma, Membre du Tribunal.

Elle garde de son passage au Tribunal un souvenir ému et saisit cette occasion pour saluer ses anciens collÚgues et amis. Les vues exprimées sont strictement personnelles et ne reflÚtent pas nécessairement celles des Nations Unies ou de la Cour internationale de Justice.