ISLAMABAD, Sept 28: Pakistan is unlikely to sign the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in its present form because among other reservations it is against giving the UN Security Council dominance over the ICC, official sources told Dawn .

The Rome Statute was enforced in July 2002. The ICC has jurisdiction in accordance with the legislation over persons with respect to the crimes of genocide, human rights violation, war crimes and aggression.

Pakistan had voted in favour of the statute at the UN Conference of Plenipotentiaries in 1998, but has not signed the agreement because of certain concerns. India, Israel and China have also not signed the treaty as yet.

The United States had signed the treaty in December 2000, but did not ratify it because of concerns regarding the ICC’s jurisdiction over its nationals which it considered as an infringement upon its sovereignty.

The sources said Pakistan did not favour the role of the Security Council in relation to the ICC because of the skepticism about the increasing influence the UNSC would have on the ICC.

Pakistan believed that the UNSC was a political organ of the UN and all its decisions were taken on political considerations rather than on legal principles. This would not be conducive to the development of a non-discriminatory and non-selective uniform legal system.

Pakistan has concerns also on the provisions dealing with armed conflicts not of an international characters. Such conflicts fall entirely within the domestic jurisdiction of a state, and therefore such provisions violate the sovereignty of a state as well as the principle of complementarity on which the entire statute is based.

Pakistan also recommends that reservations should be permitted for widespread adherence to the statute of the ICC.

This will enable states that may have difficulty with some of the provisions to become a party to the statute by reserving their positions on these provisions provided the object of the treaty is not defeated.

Pakistan also has to study the extent of amendments to be carried out in its constitution and domestic laws including those provisions that deal with the immunity of the heads of government and state.

The provisions of the statute that tend to challenge the legal process of a state, were also not considered by Pakistan to be compatible with the principle of complementarity which constituted the basis for the establishment of the ICC.

Pakistan says it will be negation of the principle of sovereignty and integrity of states if their legal system is challenged on the grounds that a trial conducted by them is a sham trial and is meant to protect or shield criminals.

Pakistan also has concerns over the trigger mechanism of the ICC provisions. Although the principle of complementarity has been reaffirmed in the statute, there are a number of provisions which dilute that principle.

Pakistan favours that only a state party is competent to activate the trigger mechanism, as it alone is competent to decide whether or not it can effectively deal with cases involving crimes of genocide, aggression and war crimes.