Interpol

INTERPOL'S POSSIBILITIES FOR ACTION
IN CONNECTION WITH INTERNATIONAL CRIMES

REFERRED TO IN THE STATUTES OF EXISTING AD HOC TRIBUN ALS
AND IN THE DRAFT STATUTE
OF THE PLANNED INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
INTRODUCTION
The idea of an international criminal court which would be competent to hear cases
against those accused of international crimes is closely linked to the notion of an international
police crime investigation force responsible for collecting the evidence needed to enable the
investigating and/or prosecuting authorities to reach a decision about the indictment of the
suspects and then allow the judges to decide on the guilt or innocence of the accused and the
penalties to be imposed.
This idea goes back to the establishment of the International Criminal Police
Organization (or rather the International Criminal Police Commission') which was set up in
Vienna between the two World Wars on the basis of the principles of international police co-
operation laid down at the Monaco Police Congress in 1914.
An awareness of this link is vital to an understanding of why the establishment of the

International Criminal Court will fill a void in the network of international bodies responsible
for combating international crime.
The historical background given in Appendix 1 demonstrates the need for a special
relationship between an international criminal police organization and a permanent
international criminal court.
CO-OPERATION BETWEEN THE ICPO-INTERPOL

AND THE AD HOC INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS FOR THE
PROSECUTION OF PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR SERIOUS VIOLATIONS
OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW COMMITTED IN
THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA AND IN RWANDA
Since its establishment, the ICPO-Interpol has overseen international co-operation in the
fight against ordinary law crime. The Organization facilitates the sharing of information
between its 177 member countries which are at varying stages of development. In spite of
these differences, Interpol has succeeded in overcoming many obstacles to international co-
The ICPC was succeeded by the organization which the general public knows as Interpol (its telegraphic
address made official in its 1956 Constitution).
PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/695379/
operation and, through its General Secretariat, is still the only intergovernmental police
organization offering its member countries the permanent facilities required for exchanging
police information rapidly and reliably.
Although Interpol has wisely restricted its activities to its own specialist area, domain, it
has nonetheless keenly followed attempts to harmonize the penal legislations of its member
countries as well as initiatives designed to establish an international penal code which would
be enforced by an international criminal court. Interpol has always felt that its action could
not be fully effective in the absence of an international penal court on whose behalf it would
circulate arrest warrants that are international in every sense of the term.
This became a reality with the establishment of the ad hoc International Tribunals to
prosecute those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed
in the Former Yugoslavia and in Rwanda. Following the adoption of United Nations Security
Council Resolution 808 in 1993, the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly (October 1994, Rome)
approved a report2 entitled "Consequences of the establishment of the International Tribunal
for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international
humanitarian law committed in the territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991" which
confirmed that Interpol's legitimate aims include providing assistance in proceedings against
individuals accused of serious violations of international humanitarian law. The Resolution
attached to the report therefore provided for co-operation between Interpol and the
International Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of
international humanitarian law committed in the Former Yugoslavia.
Three years later, the Interpol General Assembly (New Delhi, October 1997) adopted a
Resolution concerning "Co-operation in searching for persons accused of serious violations
of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda and neighbouring countries between
1st October 1990 and 31st December 1994" which refers to the 1994 Resolution concerning
Interpol's policy on the matter.
As a result of this policy Interpol can lay claim to the establishment of certain
precedents which are relevant in the context of the planned international criminal court as they
allow Interpol to process any information relating to the fight against offences which come
within the jurisdiction of the planned Court and which are already covered in the Statutes of
the existing ad hoc tribunals. However, expanding the list of offences in the draft Statute for
the International Criminal Court would again raise the question of the scope of Interpol's
possibilities for action in this area.
DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL INFORMATION AND THE POLICY

ON INTERPRETING ARTICLE 3 OF THE ICPO-INTERPOL'S
CONSTITUTION
Strictly speaking, Interpol only deals with information linked to the prevention and
punishment of criminal offences. Article 2 of the Rules on International Police Co-operation
and on the Internal Control of Interpol's Archives states that "police information" means:
:
Cf. Appendix 2.
-3-
"any information pertaining to constituent aspects of ordinary criminal law crimes, as

expressed in Article 2(b) of the Constitution and excluded by Article 3 of the Constitution, the
investigation and prevention of such crimes, the prosecution and punishment of alleged
offenders, and any information pertaining to missing persons and unidentified dead bodies:
the term does not include information that is unrelated to specific criminal cases and that
cannot under any circumstances be used to identify' private individuals or corporate bodies it
may concern".
The offences referred to in the draft Statute for the Court are undeniably international
since they are offences under international criminal law as defined in international
conventions. On the other hand, it is not clear whether serious violations of international
humanitarian law are to be classed as political offences, in the sense used in mutual assistance
law and in Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution.
In actual fact, Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution states that "It is strictly forbidden for
the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or
racial character" and this should be interpreted as an expression of respect for human rights in
criminal proceedings and an attempt to reconcile national sovereignty with Interpol's
independence and neutrality.
Neither the General Secretariat nor the NCBs are allowed to use Interpol to trace
individuals who are wanted for essentially political offences such as high treason, the
expression of certain inflammatory statements or unlawful assembly (demonstrations) etc.
Article 3 also forbids Interpol to search for an individual (who has not committed an ordinary
criminal law offence) simply because he or she belongs to a particular political or religious
movement. Similarly, it would be contrary to Article 3 for Interpol to provide assistance in
proceedings against an individual who was being sought just because he belonged to a
particular racial or ethnic group.
In the case of ordinary criminal law offences which have been committed for political,
religious or ethnic reasons. Interpol's approach is to determine the predominant character of
the case under consideration. The following three Interpol General Assembly Resolutions
form the basis of the predominance theory:
- Resolution No. 14 (1951 ) of the 1CPC (forerunner to the ICPO-Interpol, the Statutes
of which contained a similar provision to the current Article 3) which stated that the
aforementioned provision applied to "offences of a predominantly political, racial or
religious character"
Resolution AGN/53/RES/7 of the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly (Luxembourg,

1984) which maintained the principle for applying Article 3 of the present Constitution, while
giving Interpol extra scope to be involved in prosecuting terrorist offences3
5
The 1984 Resolution features other indications designed to facilitate the application of Article 3. As far as
politicians are concerned, a distinction is made between acts committed "in connection with their political
activities" and subject to Article 3, and offences committed by a politician acting as a private individual. In
respect of offences committed by persons with "political motivations", the Resolution takes the view that the
ordinary criminal law aspect dominates if there is no direct connection between the act and the political cause,
the victims and the objective sought. In these circumstances, the predominance of the ordinary criminal law
aspect becomes even clearer when the offence concerned has been committed "outside the conflict area" and
"when the offences constitute a serious threat to personal freedom, life or property".
-4-
- Resolution AGN/63/RES/9 (Rome. 1994) on serious violations of international

humanitarian law and co-operation with the International Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia4.
On this legal basis, Interpol's practice - with reference mainly to acts of terrorism but
also to some cases of genocide - has evolved considerably in the context of the 1994
Resolution on co-operation with the International Tribunal of The Hague, although the
principle of predominance, which was introduced in 1951, has never been called into
question.
What was new in the 1994 Resolution (in comparison with the 1984 one) was the
exclusion of political exception in the prosecution of politicians responsible for serious
violations of humanitarian law: the exercise of political power as the cause of an offence can
be recogni/ed as illegal (in international law) and it can be considered that the offence can
only have been committed outside of such power.
The Resolution disregards the official position of the offender and makes the status of
victims and their non-involvement in the armed conflict an important factor in determining
whether ordinary criminal law aspects predominate. From an objective standpoint, it attempts
to show that these offences have nothing in common with acts of war or political crimes.
The crimes dealt with in the draft Statute for the International Criminal Court are
international offences and as such, go beyond the territorial boundaries set by domestic law.
They are a matter for international law enforcement and it would be inappropriate and
contrary to the spirit of developments in international criminal law, for the proposed
International Court to declare cases inadmissible for the same political reasons as those which
are invoked in the application of national extradition laws.
The concept of "crimes against humanity" implies recognizing (above the rights of
States) certain fundamental rights which, as such, must be protected by imposing international
criminal penalties to punish any violations.
The provisions of the 1994 Resolution are therefore applicable to any serious violations
of humanitarian law and there is no reason for the Interpol General Assembly to adopt a new
policy on the offences mentioned in the Statute of the planned International Criminal Court.
The Interpol General Secretariat will simply submit to its General Assembly a draft
Resolution which will confirm the Organization's support for the activities of the planned
International Criminal Court and the need for co-operation between the two institutions and
will, if appropriate, adopt a position on the crime of aggression (i.e. in the event of the Court's
jurisdiction including this offence in the same way as genocide and crimes against humanity).
The 1984 Resolution was amended in 1994 to allow for politicians responsible for serious violations of
humanitarian law to be prosecuted. In the context of crimes against humanity in the Former Yugoslavia, the
1994 Rome Resolution states that "Offences committed by politicians must therefore be assessed to
determine whether the political or the ordinary criminal law aspect is predominant, in the same way as
offences committed by other people".
-5-
Having said this, the fact that the draft Statute for the Court excludes political grounds
for refusing requests would appear to argue in favour of not applying Article 3 of Interpol's
Constitution. If the Rome Diplomatic Conference makes it impossible for a State to refuse to
co-operate with the Court on political grounds, this would mean that all Interpol's Member
States would be linked by the same legal texts and the same interpretations thereof.
Interpol's General Assembly Resolution could therefore refer solely to the Statute for
the planned Court. Indeed, Interpol has already taken the opportunity to establish its position
on the non-application of Article 3 of its Constitution to terrorist offences and genocide by
referring to conventions ratified by its member countries and, for the purposes of extradition,
removing these crimes from the category of political offences.
Appendix l
THE LESSONS OF HISTORY
When Interpol was set up, there were differences of opinion between countries about the
simultaneous creation of an international criminal court and a truly international police force.
In 1920, just after the First World War. the League of Nations (Jeneral Assembly
decided that the time was not yet right to implement Baron Descamps' plan for the creation of
an international criminal court5.
This did not prevent Vienna's chief of police from organi/.ing an International Criminal
Police Congress (which led to the creation of the International Criminal Police Commission,
the ICPC) in Vienna in 1923".
Three years later, at the first International Congress on Penal Law in Brussels (26th to
29th July 1926), discussion resumed on the creation of an international criminal tribunal,
independent of the permanent Court of Justice. There was a consensus among eminent legal
experts about the aim, but opinions differed about how to create such a body7.
The same issue was also on the agenda at the Second International Congress on Penal
Law held in Bucharest from 6th to 12th October 1929. Professor Pella presented a report
which found that police co-operation, as it had been developed after World War I, did not
allow for investigations to be carried out beyond national borders. He also recommended the
use of a system of "investigative Commissions", as had been suggested at the first Hague
Conference in 1899*.
According to Professor Pella, these Commissions would only intervene in connection

with offences which were international and which came within the jurisdiction of an
international court, their task being to gather evidence and establish the bare facts, without
judging responsibility, and to carry out detailed investigations. States would be duty-bound to
assist in the carrying out of such missions9.
Baron Descamps was the President of The Hague Committee of legal experts and was responsible fur this
project (cf. Minutes of the First International Congress on Penal Law. 1926 [original French p. 382 et seq.)).
A. Goldenberg's thesis entitled "La Commission Internationale de Police Criminelle" (Paris. 1953, p. 103
etc.).
All of the legal experts (such as Pella, Saldana. Donnedieu de Vahres and Politis) had the following question
to answer: Are (here good grounds for establishing an international criminal court and if so. how should il be
organ i/ed°
Minutes of the Second Congress on International Penal Law, 1929 [original French p. 265).
Ibid.
Appendix l
Page 2
The recently created International Criminal Police Commission (ICPC) felt concerned
by this debate. According to its Statutes approved at the Congress in Vienna, the Commission
did not have supranational authority to carry out enquiries or investigations on the territories
of its member countries.
The ICPC therefore welcomed the idea of ad hoc investigative commissions as a

practical solution for co-operation between an international criminal court and an international
criminal police body10.
However the progress of this period was swept aside by the breakout of the Second
World War during which time (in 1940 to be precise) the ICPC headquarters were arbitrarily
transferred from Vienna to Berlin by the German police. All international police activities
were therefore suspended for several years while ICPC independence, freedom and resources
were taken over by the Nazi regime.
When the Belgian government organized an international conference in Brussels in June

1946 to revive the ICPC, it was clear to everyone that it was to be re-established on the basis
of the principles of international police co-operation, as laid down at the Conference of
Monaco and adopted by the Congress in Vienna in 1923. The 1946 Brussels Conference
(considered as the 15th ICPC General Assembly session) then amended the Statutes of the
first Commission and decided to set up its headquarters in Paris."
During this same period, the International Military Tribunals of Nuremberg and Tokyo
were established, but with no reference to the pre-war universalist idea of creating a
permanent international criminal justice system. This precedent was nevertheless of
considerable importance inasmuch as the first United Nations initiatives to establish an
International Criminal Court were based on the Statute of the Nuremberg Tribunal, approved
by Resolution 94 C (I) of 11th December 1946':.
In addition, the lessons learnt from the Second World War led to the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights 13 being cited in Article 2 of Interpol's Constitution so that its
content would become part of the Organization's internal legal principles, and it also resulted
in the ratification of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide.
Surely we should end this century by building on the universalist ideas launched at
its beginning, and again at the end of the Second World War, to ensure that the
protection of human rights through an international criminal justice system is more
than just an ad hoc issue.
The ICPC supported the recommendation of the Second International Congress on Penal Law on the creation
of an international criminal court and worked in conjunction with the League of Nations on the first
international penal law penal law conventions.
A. Goldenberg's thesis entitled "International Criminal Police Commission" (Paris, 1953, p. 103 etc.).
G. Grenbing "La création d'une Cour pénale internationale: bilan et perspectives"; CH. Bassiouni "An
appraisal of the growth and developing trends of international criminal law" Revue International de Droit
pénal, 1975 pp. 405 and 435 etc.
This Declaration was adopted and proclaimed by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 217 A ( I I I )
of 10th December 1948.
Appendix 2
Resolutions adopted by the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly
Resolution No. 14 (Lisbon, 1951)
Resolution No. AGN/53/RES/7 (Luxembourg, 1984)
Resolution No. AGN/63/RES/9 (Rome, 1994)
Report No. 13 (Rome, 1994) on the "Consequences of the establishment of the

International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for
Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of
the Former Yugoslavia since 1991"
Resolution No. AGN/66/RES/10 (New Delhi, 1997)
Report No. 12 (New Delhi, 1997) on "Co-operation in searching for persons accused
of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in Rwanda and
neighbouring countries between 1st October 1990 and 31st December 1994"
XXTH GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL POLICE COMMISSION
LISBON, JUNE II TH TOI 5TH 1951
REQUEST FOR INTERNATIONAL ENQUIRIES
(Resolution n° 14)
"The International Criminal Police Commission, meeting at its General Assembly in LISBON, from
June l l t h to 15th 1951,
Having taken cognizance of the communication submitted by its President, Mr. F.E. LOUWAGE, as
also the report submitted by the specialised sub-committee presided over by Professor LUTHI,
1) RECOMMENDS to its members and to the Heads of the National Central Bureaux to see that no request for
information, notice of person wanted and above all no request for provisional arrest for crimes of a
predominant political, racial or religious character, is ever sent to the International Bureau or to the National
Bureaux, even if, in the requesting Country, the facts amount to an offence against the ordinary law;
2) DECIDES, in view of respecting as much as possible the prescriptions of article I of the Statutes, that, in
case of doubt with regard to the political, racial or religious character of a request, the Chief of the
International Bureau, in agreement with the Secretary General of the I.C.P.C., be authorised to suspend the
circulation of any request for information or wanted notice emanating from a National Central Bureau or any
other requesting police authority in order to ask for such precisions as are necessary to enlighten him with
regard to the exact nature of the acts and the true situation of the delinquents;
3) RECOMMENDS, moreover, to the Members and Chiefs of the National Central Bureaux also to take care, as
far as possible, that the requests which reach them from foreign police authorities do not appear to violate the
principles set forth in 1 ) and 2) of the present resolution and to notify immediately, if necessary, the
International Bureau in PARIS, who will inform the Secretary General. The President will be informed by
the Secretary General of the acts referred to in paragraphs 2) and 3) of the present Resolution;
4) DECIDES, moreover, that the police authorities who address either to the Chief of the International Bureau,
for circulation to the National Central Bureaux, or to a foreign National Bureau, requests for information or
enquiries, have the entire responsibility, which would result from the political, racial or religious character of
the affair to which the request refers".
Unanimously adopted.
RESOLUTION No. AGN/53/RES/7 TO BE CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
1 copy in the CHRONOLOGICAL SERIES:

Year 1984
1 copy in the SUBJECT SERIES:

SUBJECT:
Heading: Basic texts and internal
administration of the ICPO-Interpol
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 3
OF THE CONSTITUTION Sub-heading: Constitution, Application
of Article 3
TEXT OF THE RESOLUTION
TAKING INTO ACCOUNT Article 3 of the Organization's Constitution,

The ICPO-Interpol General Assembly, meeting in Luxembourg from 4th to
11th September 1984 at its 53rd session:
RECOMMENDS THAT, in order to facilitate the interpretation of Article 3,
the principles listed below should be circulated to all departments responsible
for crime prevention and law enfor · t, and that they should be applied by
both the NCBs and the General Secretariat.
I. RULES OF PROCEDURE
1. Under Article 3 of the Constitution, the Organization is strictly forbidden

"to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military,
religious or racial character".
2. A resolution adopted by the General Assembly in 1951 makes it clear that the
scope of the Article covers "offences of a predominantly political, racial
or religious character .... even if - in the requesting country - the facts
amount to an offence against the ordinary law".
3. It is impossible to give a more precise definition of a political, military,

religious or racial case. Each case has to be examined separately, with
due consideration for the specific context.
4. When the Secretary General is aware of a case in which it might be necessary

to apply Article 3, he discusses it with the requesting NCB to determine
whether Article 3 is in fact applicable.
5. If the NCB maintains its request for action, it assumes full responsibility
for the specific nature of the case and the Secretariat gives the fullest
possible details in any notice published about it.
- 2-
6. When, in the light of the provisions of Article 3, the Secretary General

is in complete disagreement with an NCB over the interpretation to be given
to certain facts, the Secretariat refuses to collaborate on the case.
7. When an NCB, acting on its own initiative, obviously infringes the provisions
of Article 3, the Secretary General informs the other NCBs of his point of view.
8. If, during a bilateral exchange between NCBs, a difference of opinion arises

regarding the application of Article 3, the General Secretariat must be
informed.
9. The refusal of one or more countries to act on a request circulated by an

NCB or by the General Secretariat (an extradition request, for example),
does not mean that the request itself is invalid and that it automatically
comes under Article 3 of the Constitution. However, if certain countries
refuse extradition, this is reported to the other NCBs in an addendum to
the original notice indicating that the offender has been released. When
a person is arrested with a view to extradition the wanted notice remains
valid, unless the requesting country decides otherwise, until the person
concerned has been extradited.
II. ANALYSIS OF POSITIONS ADOPTED IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES
1. Some of the acts included as offences in various national penal codes are by
their very nature political, military, religious or racial (e.g. membership
of a prohibited organization, the expression of certain prohibited opinions,
offences involving the press, insulting the authorities, offences against the
internal or external security of the State, desertion from the armed forces,
treason, espionage, practising a prohibited religion, recruitment or
propaganda for particular religions, membership of a racial association).
Such acts come within the scope of Article 3.
2. Article 3 also covers any acts committed by politicians in connection with

their political activities, even if those concerned are prosecuted after
their fall from power and, in some cases, after they have fled abroad. The
situation is different in the case of an offence committed by a politician
acting as a private individual.
3. When offences are committed by persons with definite political motives but
when the offences committed have no direct connection with the political
life of the offenders' country or the cause for which they are fighting, the
crime may no longer be deemed to come within the scope of Article 3. This
is particularly true when offences are committed in countries which are not
directly involved (i.e. outside the "conflict area") and when the offences
constitute a serious threat to personal freedom, life or property.
Examples are cases in which:
- police officers are killed or hostages are taken outside the conflict area,
with a view to obtaining the release of an accomplice;
- 3 -
- there is an attack on members of the general public outside the conflict

area (for instance by leaving a bomb in a bank or throwing a grenade
into a café).
4. Offences committed outside the conflict area in order to draw attention to

a particular cause (aircraft hijackings, the taking of hostages, kidnappings)
do not come within the scope of Article 3.
5. Generally speaking, a valid criterion is whether or not there is anything to

connect the victims directly or indirectly with the aims or objectives
pursued by the offenders, and with the countries in the conflict area or
with the relevant political situation.
6. When assessing a particular case in the light of the provisions of Article 3

of the Constitution, the type of co-operation requested by the NCB concerned
also has to be considered. When prevention is involved there is nothing to
hinder the circulation of technical information, even if this has been
obtained in connection with politically motivated cases. Similarly it must
be possible to circulate information about potential aircraft hijackers or
offenders likely to take hostages, provided that such circulars are not
based solely on the fact that the person in question belongs to a particular
political movement.
oooOooo
RESOLUTION No. AGN/63/RES/9 TO BE CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
1 copy in the CHRONOLOGICAL

SERIES year 1994
SUBJECT: 1 copy in the SUBJECT SERIES

Application of Article 3 of the Heading: Basic texts and internal
Constitution in the context of administration of the ICPO-Interpol
serious violations of international
humanitarian law Sub-heading: Constitution,
Application of Article 3
ΤΕΓΓ OF RESOLÖTTOH
NOTING THE CONTENTS OF Report No. 13, entitled 'Consequences of the

establishment of an International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons
Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed
in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991",
HAVING DISCUSSED the applicability of Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution
in the context of serious violations of international humanitarian law,
MINDFUL of the importance of the establishment of the said Tribunal in the
development of international law,
ALSO MINDFUL of the responsibility of States to co-operate with the
Tribunal and of the importance of Interpol's position in that context,
CONVINCED of the need to facilitate the interpretation and application of
Article 3 of the Organization's Constitution in the area of serious violations
of international humanitarian law,
The ICPO-Interpol General Assembly, meeting in Rome from 28th September to
4th October 1994 at its 63rd session:
ENDORSES the analyses and considerations contained in the above-mentioned
Report ;
INVITES the Secretary General to follow those guidelines and recommends
that the NCBs do likewise, in conformity with their national legislations,
should their co-operation be requested in connection with investigations
relating to serious violations of international humanitarian law.
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL POLICE ORGANIZATION
INTERPOL
63rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY SESSION
ROME, 28th September - 4th October 1994
No 13
ENGLISH
CONSEQUENCES OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE

PROSECUTION OF PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR SERIOUS VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL
HUMANITARIAN LAW COMMITTED IN THE TERRITORY OF THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA SINCE 1991
Report submitted by (Original: French)

the Executive Committee
CONFIDENTIAL INTENDED ONLY FOR POLICE AND JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
1. INTRODUCTION
The establishment of an "International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Per-

sons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Lav
Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991" raises two
problems: that of relations between the Tribunal and Interpol and that of
Interpol's involvement in the handling of criminal cases dealt vith by the
Tribunal.
The question of the Tribunal using Interpol's communications channels has
been raised in the context of the Council of Europe (CDPC session of 8th
June 1993).
The President of the Tribunal wrote to Interpol's Secretary General on 13th
December 1993 requesting information about the Organization because he con-
sidered that Interpol's Constitution, in particular Article 3, was of great
relevance to the Tribunal's work on its rules of procedure.
The International Tribunal then adopted its "Rules of Procedure and Eviden-
ce" (Document No. IT/32 of 24th March 1994). Article 39 of the Rules states
that "in the conduct of an investigation, the Prosecutor may seek ... the
assistance ... of any relevant international body including the Internation-
al Criminal Police Organization (Interpol)".
The Tribunal has therefore adopted the principle of co-operation through
Interpol, without expressing an opinion on how far Interpol would be com-
petent in the matter.
Consequently, Interpol must define its position with regard both to co-oper-
ation with the Tribunal and to the application of Article 3 of Constitution
to the cases the Tribunal has to deal with.
That is the aim of the present report, which was approved by the Executive
Committee during its 108th session.
2. THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL
The International Tribunal was established on 25th May 1993 by Resolution

827 (1993) of the United Nations Security Council, acting under Chapter VII
of the United Nations Charter to contribute to the restoration and mainte-
nance of international peace and security. The same Resolution adopted the
Statute of the International Tribunal as appended to Report S/25704 by the
Secretary General of the United Nations. It follows that the Tribunal is a
judicial institution of the United Nations and is part of that Organization.
The Tribunal sits in The Hague (Netherlands) and, in conformity with its
Statute, consists of: two Trial Chambers, each composed of three judges;
an Appeals Chamber composed of five judges; a Prosecutor; a Registry. The
judges are all nationals of different States, are independent, must possess
certain qualifications and are elected by the United Nations General Assem-
bly from a list submitted by the Security Council after nominations have
been invited from the Member States. The Prosecutor acts independently; he
is appointed by the Security Council, upon nomination by the United Nations
Secretary General.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 2
The International Tribunal has the pover to prosecute persons responsible

for serious violations of international humanitarian lav committed in the
territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1st January 1991 (cf. Articles 1 to
5 of the Tribunal's Statute in Appendix 1).
Those violations include:
- serious offences against the 1949 Geneva Conventions,
- violations of the lavs or customs of var,
- genocide,
- crimes against humanity.
Article 7(1) of the Tribunal's Statute states that a person vho planned,
instigated, ordered, committed or othervise aided and abetted in the plan-
ning, preparation or execution of a crime referred to in Articles 2 to 5 of
the Statute shall be individually responsible for the crime.
It is up to the Prosecutor to initiate an investigation, to receive or ob-
tain information and to decide whether or not it is advisable to institute
proceedings. He has the pover to question suspects, victims and vitnesses,
to collect evidence and to conduct on-site investigations. He may also seek
the assistance of the State authorities concerned.
An indictment prepared by the Prosecutor must be confirmed by a judge from
one of the Trial Chambers. At the request of the Prosecutor, this judge may
issue such orders and varrants for the arrest, detention, surrender or
transfer of persons, and any other orders as may be required for the conduct
of the trial.
Any person against whom an indictment has been confirmed is taken into cus-
tody.
In application of Article 29 of the Statute of the Tribunal (cf. Appendix

2), States are obliged to co-operate vith the Tribunal.
This obligation concerns, inter alia, the identification, location and ar-
rest of the persons concerned, the taking of testimony and the production of
evidence.
3. INTERPOL AND THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL
Based on the general consideration that the development of mutual assistance

betveen criminal police authorities set as a goal in Article 2 (a) of the
Constitution is likely to be promoted by receiving police information from
intergovernmental organizations, Article 6(l)(b)(bb) of the Rules on Inter-
national Police Co-operation and on the Internal Control of Interpol's
Archives, adopted by the General Assembly in 1982 as an appendix to the
General Regulations, expressly permits the General Secretariat to process
police information sent to it by an intergovernmental organization per-
forming its official duties.
The International Tribunal is a United Nations institution and Article
6(l)(b)(bb) of the Rules therefore applies to information sent by it.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 3
The information processed by the General Secretariat by virtue of the said

provision may be communicated to the NCBs in conformity with Article 8(1)
and (2) of the same Rules.
Article 8(5) of the Rules applies to the communication of information to the
International Tribunal. Authorization by the NCB which originally sent the
information is therefore required.
Furthermore, there is no doubt that in the spirit of this provision, a re-

quest by the relevant NCB for transmission to the Tribunal amounts to autho-
rization.
The above shows that, if the International Tribunal so wishes and if the
States concerned, in conformity with their own laws, wish to co-operate
through Interpol in the cases being dealt with by the Tribunal, the co-op-
eration facilities set up within the context of Interpol may be used.
However, Interpol cannot become involved in the type of case referred to in

Article 3 of its Constitution. Interpretation of that Article with regard
to the offences.defined in Articles 1 to 5 of the International Tribunal's
Statute (cf. Appendix 1) is therefore essential in determining the limits of
the Organization's competence.
4. INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF INTERPOL'S CONSTITUTION
4.1 Legal basis
Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution (1956) states that: "It is stric-

tly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or ac-
tivities of a political, military, religious or racial character".
Although this provision undoubtedly forbids Interpol to intervene

against offences which by their nature are political (such as high
treason or spying), military (such as desertion), religious (such as
belonging to a banned religious group) or racial, it has nevertheless
caused problems of interpretation when the alleged offence can be
considered to constitute a violation of ordinary criminal law (e.g. an
assassination) although the underlying motive was political, military,
religious or racial.
National laws and legal systems can vary in the legal definitions they
give to such acts. The consequences as regards the application of any
national provisions referring to the motives mentioned above may also
therefore differ in different countries. However Interpol, as an in-
ternational organization has had to develop its own rules on the
practical application of Article 3 of its Constitution.
The General Assembly of the ICPC (which preceded the ICPO), whose Stat-
ute already contained a provision similar to that of the current Arti-
cle 3, had adopted a resolution (No. 14, 1951) which stated that the
said provision applied to "offences of a predominantly political, ra-
cial or religious character". Resolution AGN/53/RES/7 adopted by the
Interpol General Assembly in 1984 maintained that principle for the ap-
plication of Article 3 of the current Constitution.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 4
The existence of a political, military, religious or racial motive is

not therefore in itself sufficient to require application of Article 3
because those motives could turn out to be less important compared vith
other relevant facts, which tip the balance in favour of the
predominance of ordinary criminal lav aspects. Nor is the existence of
an ordinary criminal law aspect sufficient in itself to prevent the ap-
plication of Article 3. The question of predominance has to be settled
by examining the facts, even if, as the 1951 Resolution says, "in the
requesting country the facts amount to an offence against the ordinary
law".
The 1984 Resolution contains other considerations intended to facili-
tate the application of Article 3.
As far as "politicians" are concerned, it distinguishes between acts
committed "in connection with their political activities", subject to
Article 3, and offences committed while acting as a private individual.
In respect of offences committed by persons with "political motiva-

tions", the Resolution takes the view that the ordinary criminal law
aspect predominates if there is no direct connection between the act
and the political cause, the victims and the objective sought.
In these circumstances, the predominance of the ordinary criminal law
aspect becomes even clearer when the offence concerned has been com-
mitted "outside the conflict area" and "when the offences constitute a
serious threat to personal freedom, life or property".
4.2 The Organization's practice

On this legal basis, Interpol's practice - with reference mainly to
acts of terrorism but also to some cases of genocide - has evolved
considerably although the principle of predominance, which was intro-
duced in 1951, has never been called into question.
Thus, some 20 years ago, most terrorist offences were considered to be

covered by Article 3 of the Constitution, whereas during the past de-
cade it has been acknowledged that most of these acts are predominantly
ordinary law crimes.
In the same way, genocide is now accepted as coming within Interpol's
field of activities, from which it was originally considered to be
excluded.
Developments in international law have gradually led to changes in the
Organization's practice.
The 1977 European Convention on the Suppression of Terrorism stated
that, in the context of extradition proceedings, certain offences
(illegally taking control of an aircraft, illegal acts against civil
aviation, offences involving the use of bombs, grenades, rockets,
automatic firearms when such use endangers lives, etc.) were not to be
regarded as political.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 5
Furthermore, in conformity with the 1948 Convention on the Prevention

and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, genocide is not considered to
be a political crime as far as extradition is concerned.
For many years, the general trend of Interpol's practice, as veil as of

developments in international lav, has been to progressively restrict
the application of provisions which could ensure that those vho commit
certain crimes are treated more favourably because of the political
context of the act.
5. ARTICLE 3 OF INTERPOL'S CONSTITUTION AND OFFENCES COMING WITHIN THE COMPE-

TENCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL
Nev problems relating to the interpretation of Article 3 of Interpol's Con-

stitution are raised by the prospect of the Organization's involvement in
cases vhich might lead to prosecution before the International Tribunal of
persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian lav
as laid dovn in international conventions and international customary lav.
Vhen analysing these problems, it is necessary to refine certain concepts of
interpretation and to develop the rules on interpreting Article 3, but vith-
out abandoning the main principles vhich have guided Interpol's actions
since 1951. To do this, it would seem appropriate to begin by considering
the offences vhich the International Tribunal will have to deal with, and
then to consider hov far Interpol is competent in respect of those offences,
in the light of the interpretation of Article 3 in the present context.
5.1 Offences punishable by the International Tribunal (cf. Appendix 1)

The International Tribunal is only competent to try "serious violations
of international humanitarian lav" (Article 1 of the Statute of the In-
ternational Tribunal).
This means the following offences:
5.1.1 Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949 (Article 2 of

the Statute)
These Conventions lay dovn the basic rules of the applicable
customary lav and regulate the conduct of var from the humani-
tarian perspective by protecting certain categories of persons:
prisoners of var; civilians in time of war; wounded and sick
members of the armed forces in the field; sick and shipvrecked
members of the armed forces at sea. Also, public and private
property are protected from appropriation and destruction not
justified by military necessity.
Each Convention contains a provision listing the particularly
serious violations that qualify as "grave breaches"; Article 2
of the Tribunal's Statute states that it is competent in such
cases.
An analysis of these violations shows that most of them comprise
elements of offences against ordinary criminal lav: murder;
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 6
various assaults on physical integrity or health, including acts

of torture; taking civilians hostage; destruction or appropri-
ation of property.
It is also clear that, when they are victims of the offences un-
der consideration, the persons protected are either not involved
in the armed conflict (because they are civilians) or are no
longer involved.
Destruction and appropriation of property only become punishable
when committed on a large scale, illegally and arbitrarily, and
when not justified by military necessity.
5.1.2 Violations of the lavs or customs of var (Article 3 of the Sta-
tute)
The lavs and customs of var are the subject of the 1907 Hague
Convention and its appended Regulations. There is no doubt that
these provisions are nov part of the body of international cus-
tomary lav and are derived from the acknowledgement that var
does not justify the use of any means whatsoever.
The list of violations contained in Article 3 of the Tribunal's

Statute is not intended to be exhaustive.
The violations listed comprise elements of offences against or-

dinary criminal lav (assaults on life, physical integrity,
health, property) and most of them have in common the fact that
the acts are unnecessary from the military point of viev.
In this respect, it is sufficient to refer to the following
terms: "unnecessary suffering"; "vanton destruction"; "de-
vastation not justified by military necessity"; attacks on or
bombardment of "undefended" places.
5.1.3 Genocide (Article 4 of the Statute)
Genocide is the subject of the 1948 Convention on the Prevention

and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The punishable acts
listed in Article 4 of the Tribunal's Statute are also listed in
Articles II and III of the 1948 Convention. These provisions,
vhether the genocide is committed in time of var or in time of
peace, are nov considered part of international customary lav.
Genocide implies an intention to destroy a national, ethnical,

racial or religious group in vhole or in part.
For the most part, acts of genocide expressly or implicitly

comprise elements of offences against ordinary criminal lav
(murder; serious attacks on physical or mental integrity;
other actions against a group vhich can only be undertaken by
violating ordinary criminal lav).
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 7
5.1.4 Crimes against humanity (Article 5 of the Statute)

These crimes were recognized in the Charter (1945) and Judgment
of the Nürnberg Tribunal.
As far as Article 5 of the Tribunal's Statute is concerned, they
are acts perpetrated during armed conflict and "directed against
any civilian population", in other words committed as part of a
widespread or systematic attack.
The list of such crimes includes offences against ordinary cri-
minal law: murder and extermination; torture; rape; illegal
detention and imprisonment.
It will be noted, however, that in two cases ("persecutions" and
"other inhumane acts"), the relatively imprecise wording re-
quires some knowledge of the facts in order to be able to detect
the presence of violations of ordinary criminal law.
5.2 Application of Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution to criaes punish-
able by the International Tribunal
The resolutions adopted by Interpol institutions (cf. Point 4 above)
are based on a distinction between offences which are essentially
political, military, religious or racial - and are therefore covered by
Article 3 - and offences committed for political, military, religious
or racial motives. The theory of predominance means that, for the
latter, a decision has to be taken on whether or not Article 3 applies.
Consequently, it is important to determine whether, among the offences
punishable by the International Tribunal, there are any which, by their
very nature, are political, military, religious or racial. If that is
not the case, the offences should then be considered in the light of
Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution with the aim of finding rules al-
lowing the theory of predominance to be applied, taking into account
Resolution AGN/53/RES/7 of 1984.
5.2.1 The political element
Clearly, none of the offences punishable by the International
Tribunal are political in essence. Practically all the offences
can, however, be committed for political reasons (e.g. in order
to conquer territory).
In the 1984 Resolution (Point II, 3 to 5), the ordinary criminal
law aspect predominates if there is a lack of "direct connection
with the political life of the offenders' country or the cause
for which they are fighting" - this is "particularly true when
offences are committed in countries which are not directly in-
volved (i.e. outside the "conflict area") and when the offences
constitute a serious threat to personal freedom, life or pro-
perty". The Resolution considers a "valid criterion" the fact
that there is nothing "to connect the victims directly or in-
directly with the aims or objectives pursued by the offenders,
and with the countries in the conflict area or with the relevant
political situation".
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 8
This Resolution, the wording of which can also give rise to pro-
blems of interpretation, was adopted in the context of the fight
against terrorism. As the examples show, Point II (3 to 5) re-
fers to bombings, aircraft hijackings and hos tage-taking by ter-
rorists claiming political motives.
The Resolution seems to consider that the "distance" separating
the political motive claimed from the reality of the act com-
mitted is of vital importance.
Certain elements can suggest that this reality is far enough
from the political motive to exclude application of Article 3 of
Interpol's Constitution, but none of these elements is absolute-
ly valid in itself. For instance, the geographical distance of
the scene of the act from the area of conflict, the fact that
the victims have nothing to do with the political cause in ques-
tion, and the seriousness of the act are all elements which
should be taken into consideration.
How do these ideas, which appeared in the context of terrorism,
relate to offences punishable by the International Tribunal? In
the first place, it is clear that the offences concerned are, by
definition, committed in an area of conflict. But geographical
location is not the only criterion, and other facts can be in-
fluential when the predominant element is being determined. The
connection between the victims of the said offences and a possi-
ble political motive should therefore be examined, and the seri-
ousness of the crimes must be considered.
The analysis (cf. Point 5.1 above) shows that the victims of
these crimes are generally people who are not or are no longer
participating in the conflict. In fact, it is hard to see the
difference between the victims of a terrorist attack blindly
committed outside an area of conflict and the victims of ex-
actions committed inside a conflict area when those victims have
nothing to do with the political cause at the root of the con-
flict or with the political aim sought.
In fact, the desire to destroy a group of people or cause it to
flee in no way implies that that group is involved in the cause;
similarly, it cannot be presumed that because a group of people
has certain convictions, it is involved in a cause. The group
of people concerned is merely the stake in the political game
because of its presence on that particular territory. Further-
more, even if, in the past, a victim has been involved in a po-
litical cause which is at the root of the conflict, this fact
could not be a "direct connection" as referred to in the said
Resolution since there is no longer any involvement at the time
of the offence.
Generally speaking, it must be remembered that whatever the
respective grievances of the parties to the conflict, the vic-
tims of offences punishable by the International Tribunal can-
not, in legal terms, be considered to be taking part in the
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 9
conflict because they are either civilians or people who are no

longer participating in the armed conflict. They are not there-
fore taking part in the conflict in any way and are only suffer-
ing from its effects. And the fact that the victims are not
participating in the conflict will be all the more important in
determining the predominating aspect if victimization is found
to be systematic or organized.
To turn to the criterion of the "seriousness of the offences",
it should suffice to recall that the International Tribunal vill
only judge people presumed to be responsible for serious viola-
tions of international humanitarian lav and that, because of
their particular seriousness, these acts are established as
crimes by international conventions. Furthermore, these crimes
generally comprise elements vhich constitute violations of or-
dinary criminal lav.
It is certain that every case where Interpol's assistance is

requested vill have to be examined individually to determine
whether the ordinary criminal lav aspect predominates over a
possible political motive.
It is, however, also certain that in the large majority of
cases, the non-involvement of the victims in the conflict, taken
in conjunction vith the seriousness of the offences - provided
the offences comprise elements constituting violations of or-
dinary criminal lav - vill outveigh any political motive claimed
by the offender.
Article 7(1) of the Tribunal's Statute institutes penal respon-
sibility for persons who plan, instigate, order, commit or
othervise aid and abet in the planning, preparation or execution
of a crime referred to in Articles 2 to 5. These crimes are
more likely to be committed by politicians. Does this mean that
they vould be covered by Article 3 of the Constitution? The
1984 Resolution (Point II, 2) vould suggest an affirmative
ansver since it refers to "politicians" vho have committed acts
"in connection vith their political activities"; on the other
hand, there is a nuance if "an offence [is] committed ... as a
private individual".
This part of the Resolution seems to be based on a faulty con-
cept. The fact is that political pover can only be exercised
vithin the limits of the lav, and that includes international
lav. It has to be admitted that there are many areas in vhich
the exercise of political pover cannot be developed in legal
form. It is, hovever, clear that in this respect, international
penal lav sets absolute limits. Consequently, the offences
referred to in the Tribunal's Statute cannot have been committed
in the exercise of political pover; they can only have been
committed outside of such pover and the offender bears personal
responsibility for them as the Statute states.
Offences committed by politicians must therefore be assessed to

determine vhether the political or the ordinary criminal lav
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 10
aspect is predominant, in the same way as offences committed by

other people.
5.2.2 The military aspect
The question here is, firstly, whether serious offences against
the 1949 Geneva Conventions (Article 2 of the Statute) and vio-
lations of the lavs and customs of war (Article 3 of the Sta-
tute) are, because of their very nature, military offences.
It could be tempting to reply in the affirmative to that ques-
tion, since the offences are committed during armed conflicts
and will often have been committed by those participating in the
field.
It must be remembered, however, that the Geneva Conventions pro-
tect civilians and people (prisoners, the sick, etc.) who are no
longer participating in the armed conflict; they also forbid
destruction and appropriation of property when such acts are not
justified by military necessity. In addition, most of the of-
fences constituted by violations of the laws or customs of war
comprise as one of their elements the fact that the acts are not
necessary for military purposes.
Consideration must also be given to the fact that even if the
person who committed an offence is a member of the armed forces,
that does not automatically make the offence a military one, any
more than an offence committed by a politician automatically be-
comes a political offence.
An analysis, on the basis of these premises gives the following
results. Compelling a prisoner of war or a civilian to serve in
the forces of a hostile power (Article 2(e) of the Statute), an
operation linked with the constitution of armed forces and
therefore inextricably linked with military matters could be
considered an essentially military offence; it therefore seems
that Article 3 of the Constitution must be applied. On the
other hand, offences which comprise violations of ordinary cri-
minal law and appear unnecessary for military purposes are not
military offences; they are outside the military domain since,
by definition, they do not correspond to a military necessity
and cannot have any military usefulness. All other offences
must be examined to determine whether the ordinary criminal law
aspect or the military aspect predominates. The rules developed
in Point 5.2.1 above must then be applied. In other words, the
non-involvement of the victims and the seriousness of the act
must be considered in relation to a possible military motive.
5.2.3 Religious or racial aspects
It is clear that no offence punishable by the International Tri-
bunal is religious in essence. Should the question of religious
motive be raised, the predominance will have to be examined,
taking into account all the considerations mentioned above.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Page 11
The presence of a racial element can be excluded in the present

context. At most, the question of a conflict with an ethnic
background could arise. A distinction should be made between
"race" and "ethnic group" as these concepts are not synonymous.
This is confirmed by the wording of the Convention on the Pre-
vention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide which expressly
distinguishes between ethnic groups and racial groups.
6. CONCLUSION
The analyses and considerations developed in the present report are intended
to facilitate the interpretation and application of Article 3 of the Consti-
tution in the area of serious violations of international humanitarian law.
This area is a complex one and is likely to lead to hesitation over the di-
rection to take from the point of view of Article 3. It is all the more
necessary to have a common approach to these problems within Interpol and,
consequently, to develop certain guidelines. Although these could in no way
exhaust the subject or do away with the need for each case to be examined
individually, they could, by supplementing and - to some degree - revising
or interpreting the ideas expressed in Resolution AGN/53/RES/7 of 1984,
remove the major uncertainties of interpretation which might have arisen in
the present context.
Appendix 3 is a preliminary draft resolution by which the General Assembly
would ratify the analyses and considerations contained in the present re-
port.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Appendix 1
OFFENCES PUNISHABLE BT THE TRIBUNAL
Extract fron the Statute of the International Tribunal
Article 1
Competence of the International Tribunal
The International Tribunal shall have the pover to prosecute persons re-
sponsible for serious violations of international humanitarian lav committed in
the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991 in accordance vith the pro-
visions of the present Statute.
Article 2
Grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949
The International Tribunal shall have the pover to prosecute persons com-
mitting or ordering to be committed grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of
12 August 1949, namely the folloving acts against persons or property protected
under the provisions of the relevant Geneva Convention:
(a) vilful killing;
(b) torture or inhuman treatment, including biological experiments;
(c) vilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health;
(d) extensive destruction and appropriation of property, not justified by
military necessity and carried out unlavfully and vantonly;
(e) compelling a prisoner of var or a civilian to serve in the forces of a
hostile pover;
(f) vilfully depriving a prisoner of var or a civilian of the rights of
fair and regular trial;
(g) unlavful deportation or transfer or unlavful confinement of a civili-
an;
(h) taking civilians as hostages.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Appendix 1
Page 2
Article 3
Violations of the lavs or customs of var
The International Tribunal shall have the pover to prosecute persons

violating the lavs or customs of var. Such violations shall include, but not be
limited to:
(a) employment of poisonous veapons or other veapons calculated to cause
unnecessary suffering;
(b) vanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not
justified by military necessity;
(c) attack, or bombardment, by vhatever means, of undefended towns,
villages, dwellings, or buildings;
(d) seizure of, destruction or vilful damage done to institutions de-
dicated to religion, charity and education, the arts and sciences,
historic monuments and works of art and science;
(e) plunder of public or private property.
Article 4
Genocide
1. The International Tribunal shall have the power to prosecute persons com-
mitting genocide as defined in paragraph 2 of this article or of committing
any of the other acts enumerated in paragraph 3 of this article.
2. Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy,
in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as
such:
(a) killing members of the group;
(b) causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to
bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Appendix 1
Page 3
3. The following acts shall be punishable;

(a) genocide;
(b) conspiracy to commit genocide;
(c) direct and public incitement to commit genocide;
(d) attempt to commit genocide;
(e) complicity in genocide.
Article 5
Crimes against humanity
The International Tribunal shall have the pover to prosecute persons re-
sponsible for the following crimes when committed in armed conflict, whether in-
ternational or internal in character, and directed against any civilian popula-
tion:
(a) murder;
(b) extermination;
(c) enslavement;
(d) deportation;
(e) imprisonment;
(f) torture;
(g) rape;
(h) persecutions on political, racial and religious grounds;
(i) other inhumane acts.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Appendix 2
STATES' CO-OPERATION WITH THE TRIBUNAL
Extract from the Statute of the International Tribunal
Article 29
Co-operation and judicial assistance
1. States shall co-operate with the International Tribunal in the investigation

and prosecution of persons accused of committing serious violations of in-
ternational humanitarian lav.
2. States shall comply without undue delay with any request for assistance or
an order issued by a Trial Chamber, including, but not limited to:
(a) the identification and location of persons;
(b) the taking of testimony and the production of evidence;
(c) the service of documents;
(d) the arrest or detention of persons;
(e) the surrender or the transfer of the accused to the International
Tribunal.
AGN/63/RAP. No. 13
Appendix 3
AGN/63/A.P.RBS/5
Preliminary draft resolution
Subject; Application of Article 3 of the Constitution in the context of serious

violations of international humanitarian lav
NOTING THE CONTENTS OF Report No. 13, entitled "Consequences of the estab-
lishment of an International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible
for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Lav Committed in the Terri-
tory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991",
HAVING DISCUSSED the applicability of Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution
in the context of serious violations of international humanitarian lav,
MINDFUL of the importance of the establishment of the said Tribunal in the
development of international lav,
ALSO MINDFUL of the responsibility of States to co-operate vith the Tri-
bunal and of the importance of Interpol's position in that context,
CONVINCED of the need to facilitate the interpretation and application of
Article 3 of the Organization's Constitution in the area of serious violations
of international humanitarian lav,
The ICPO-Interpol General Assembly, meeting in Rome from 28th September to
4th October 1994 at its 63rd session:
ENDORSES the analyses and considerations contained in the above-mentioned
Report;
INVITES the Secretary General to follov those guidelines and recommends
that the NCBs do likewise should their co-operation be requested in connection
vith investigations relating to serious violations of international humanitarian
lav.
RESOLUTION AGN/66/RES/10 TO BE CLASSIFIED AS FOLLOWS:
SUBJECT: 1 copy in the CHRONOLOGICAL SERIES.

Year 1997
Co-operation in searching for persons accused
of serious violations of international humani- 1 copy in the SUBJECT SERIES:
tarian law committed in Rwanda and Heading: Co-operation with international
neighbouring countries between 1st October organizations
1990 and 31st December 1994
Sub-heading: Co-operation with the United
Nations
1 copy in the SUBJECT SERIES:

Heading: Basic texts and internal
administration of the ICPO-Interpol
Sub-heading: Constitution, application of

Article 3
TEXT OF RESOLUTION
RECALLING the analyses and considerations contained in the report entitled

"Consequences of the establishment of an International Tribunal for the prosecution of
persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the
territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991" (AGN/63/RAP. No.13) which were endorsed
by the General Assembly at its 63rd session (Rome, 1994).
ALSO RECALLING Resolution AGN/63/RES/9 entitled "Application of Article 3 of

the Constitution in the context of serious violations of international humanitarian law",
appended to that report and adopted by the General Assembly at the same session, which
recommended that the NCBs follow the guidelines contained in the report, "in conformity
with their national legislations, should their co-operation be requested in connection with
investigations relating to serious violations of international humanitarian law",
BEARING IN MIND the United Nations Security Council's Resolution 955 of 8th
November 1994 setting up an International Tribunal to try persons responsible for acts of
genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law. committed in Rwanda
or in neighbouring countries;
RECOGNIZING that genocide is a crime which is condemned by the whole

international community,
CONVINCED that success in the fight against the odious crime of genocide and in
bringing the perpetrators of genocide to justice will not be achieved without international co-
operation.
-2-
RESOLUT1ON AGN/66/RES/10
AWARE of Article 41 of Interpol's Constitution and of the close co-operation that exists
between the ICPO-Interpol and all the United Nations institutions including the International
Criminal Tribunal in The Hague,
BEARING IN MIND the concurrent jurisdiction of territorially competent courts and

the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
The ICPO-Interpol General Assembly, meeting in New Delhi from 15th to 21st October
1997 at its 66th session:
RECOMMENDS that the NCBs co-operate with the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda, as well as with the Rwandan police and judicial authorities, with a view to
identifying, locating and, if in conformity with their national laws, detaining while awaiting
extradition, persons accused of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed
in Rwanda and neighbouring countries between 1 st October 1990 and 31 st December 1994;
ASKS the General Secretariat to assist in searching for such persons;
ASKS the Secretary General to bring the present resolution to the attention of the
appropriate United Nations authorities.
I N T E R N A T I O N A L C R I M I N A L POLICE O R G A N I Z A T I O N
INTERPOL
66th GENERAL ASSEMBLY SESSION
NEW DELHI, 15th - 21 st October 1997
No 12
ENGLISH
CO-OPERATION IN SEARCHING FOR PERSONS ACCUSED OF

SERIOUS VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL HUMANITARIAN LAW
COMMITTED IN RWANDA AND NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES
BETWEEN 1ST OCTOBER 1990 AND 31ST DECEMBER 1994
Report submitted by
the Rwandan NCB (Original: English/French)
C. Ο Ν ί ! O L Ν T l Λ ί
AGN/66/RAP.No. 12
At its 63rd session (Rome, 1994), the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly decided to
refine and modify its interpretation of Article 3 of the Organization's Constitution. Having
discussed the analysis given in a long report (AGN/63/RAP.No. 13), it decided that Interpol
was not precluded from dealing with serious violations of international humanitarian law by
that article.
The report was, in fact, submitted and discussed in the light of the recent establishment
of an "International Tribunal for the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations
of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since
1991", and the resolution appended to the report (AGN/63/RES/9) was adopted almost
unanimously.
During the discussions on this subject, which took place at the 5th plenary session, the
General Secretariat's legal experts expressed the view that the principles approved could
certainly apply to crimes of the same type committed in different circumstances or in different
countries. The Organization's Secretary General expressed the same view.
Since 1994, the General Secretariat and the International Tribunal for former
Yugoslavia have been working together: more than sixty red notices have been issued about
presumed perpetrators. On the other hand, the United Nations Security Council's Resolution
955 of 8th November 1994 on genocide in Rwanda seems to be applied less rigorously. That
resolution established concurrent jurisdiction of territorially competent courts and the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.
It is important for Interpol to display absolute fairness in combating crimes, in whatever

part of the world they may be committed. The NCB of Rwanda is therefore submitting a
resolution which is in absolute conformity with the spirit of Report AGN/63/RAP.No. 13
which the General Assembly adopted at its 63rd session and which emphasizes the need for
international police and judicial co-operation with a view to arresting and bringing to justice
people accused of having committed crimes against humanity in Rwanda and neighbouring
countries between 1st October 1990 and 31st December 1994. A copy of the draft resolution
is appended.
The resolution recommends that the NCBs should co-operate with the International
Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and with Rwanda in this task, and also asks the General
Secretariat to provide Rwanda and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda with all
possible assistance for the same purpose.
AGN/66/RAP.No. 12
Appendix
DRAFT RESOLUTION
Subject: Co-operation in searching for persons accused of serious violations of international

humanitarian law committed in Rwanda and neighbouring countries between 1st
October 1990 and 31st December 1994
RECALLING the analyses and considerations contained in the report entitled

"Consequences of the establishment of an International Tribunal for the prosecution of
persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the
territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991" (AGN/63/RAP.No.l3) which were endorsed
by the General Assembly at its 63rd session (Rome, 1994),
ALSO RECALLING Resolution AGN/63/RES/9 entitled "Application of Article 3 of

the Constitution in the context of serious violations of international humanitarian law",
appended to that report and adopted by the General Assembly at the same session, which
recommended that the NCBs follow the guidelines contained in the report, "in conformity
with their national legislations, should their co-operation be requested in connection with
investigations relating to serious violations of international humanitarian law",
BEARING IN MIND the United Nations Security Council's Resolution 955 of 8th
November 1994 setting up an International Tribunal to try persons responsible for acts of
genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law, committed in Rwanda
or in neighbouring countries;
RECOGNIZING that genocide is a crime which is condemned by the whole

international community,
CONVINCED that success in the fight against the odious crime of genocide and in
bringing the perpetrators of genocide to justice will not be achieved without international co-
operation,
AWARE of Article 41 of Interpol's Constitution and of the close co-operation that exists
between the ICPO-Interpol and all the United Nations institutions including the International
Criminal Tribunal in The Hague,
BEARING IN MIND the concurrent jurisdiction of territorially competent courts and

the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda,
AGN/66/RAP.No. 12
Appendix
Page 2
The ICPO-Interpol General Assembly, meeting in New Delhi from 15th to 21 st October
1997 at its 66th session:
RECOMMENDS that the NCBs co-operate with the International Criminal Tribunal for
Rwanda, as well as with the Rwandan police and judicial authorities, with a view to
identifying, locating and, if in conformity with their national laws, detaining while awaiting
extradition, persons accused of serious violations of international humanitarian law committed
in Rwanda and neighbouring countries between 1st October 1990 and 31st December 1994;
ASKS the General Secretariat to assist in searching for such persons.

Interpol

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Interpol

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Interpol

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTERPOL'S POSSIBILITIES FOR ACTION

IN CONNECTION WITH INTERNATIONAL CRIMES

An awareness of this link is vital to an understanding of why the establishment of the

CO-OPERATION BETWEEN THE ICPO-INTERPOL

DEFINITION OF CRIMINAL INFORMATION AND THE POLICY

"any information pertaining to constituent aspects of ordinary criminal law crimes, as

Resolution AGN/53/RES/7 of the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly (Luxembourg,

- Resolution AGN/63/RES/9 (Rome. 1994) on serious violations of international

THE LESSONS OF HISTORY

According to Professor Pella, these Commissions would only intervene in connection

The ICPC therefore welcomed the idea of ad hoc investigative commissions as a

When the Belgian government organized an international conference in Brussels in June

Resolutions adopted by the ICPO-Interpol General Assembly

Resolution No. 14 (Lisbon, 1951)

Resolution No. AGN/53/RES/7 (Luxembourg, 1984)

Resolution No. AGN/63/RES/9 (Rome, 1994)

Report No. 13 (Rome, 1994) on the "Consequences of the establishment of the

Resolution No. AGN/66/RES/10 (New Delhi, 1997)

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL POLICE COMMISSION

LISBON, JUNE II TH TOI 5TH 1951

REQUEST FOR INTERNATIONAL ENQUIRIES

1 copy in the CHRONOLOGICAL SERIES:

1 copy in the SUBJECT SERIES:

TEXT OF THE RESOLUTION

TAKING INTO ACCOUNT Article 3 of the Organization's Constitution,

1. Under Article 3 of the Constitution, the Organization is strictly forbidden

3. It is impossible to give a more precise definition of a political, military,

4. When the Secretary General is aware of a case in which it might be necessary

6. When, in the light of the provisions of Article 3, the Secretary General

8. If, during a bilateral exchange between NCBs, a difference of opinion arises

9. The refusal of one or more countries to act on a request circulated by an

II. ANALYSIS OF POSITIONS ADOPTED IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES

2. Article 3 also covers any acts committed by politicians in connection with

- there is an attack on members of the general public outside the conflict

4. Offences committed outside the conflict area in order to draw attention to

5. Generally speaking, a valid criterion is whether or not there is anything to

6. When assessing a particular case in the light of the provisions of Article 3

1 copy in the CHRONOLOGICAL

SUBJECT: 1 copy in the SUBJECT SERIES

NOTING THE CONTENTS OF Report No. 13, entitled 'Consequences of the

63rd GENERAL ASSEMBLY SESSION

ROME, 28th September - 4th October 1994

CONSEQUENCES OF THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE

Report submitted by (Original: French)

The establishment of an "International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Per-

2. THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL

The International Tribunal was established on 25th May 1993 by Resolution

The International Tribunal has the pover to prosecute persons responsible

In application of Article 29 of the Statute of the Tribunal (cf. Appendix

3. INTERPOL AND THE INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL

Based on the general consideration that the development of mutual assistance

The information processed by the General Secretariat by virtue of the said

Furthermore, there is no doubt that in the spirit of this provision, a re-

However, Interpol cannot become involved in the type of case referred to in

4. INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF INTERPOL'S CONSTITUTION

4.1 Legal basis

Article 3 of Interpol's Constitution (1956) states that: "It is stric-

Although this provision undoubtedly forbids Interpol to intervene