At the meeting of the Institute of International Law

(Kraków, 20 August 2005)

Thank you for the invitation and for giving me the opportunity of addressing you at this inauguration of the 72^nd session of the Institute of International Law.

Your session coincides with the celebration of the 25^th anniversary of the foundation of Solidarity movement and many other anniversaries. It happens that the year 2005 offered us an opportunity to observe the anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp constructed by the Nazi Germany on the Polish territory. Many leaders of the democratic world visited on this occasion both Auschwitz and Kraków. We celebrated in many capitals the 60^th anniversary of the victory over the Third Reich as well as the 30^th anniversary of the Helsinki Process. The main event is still before us. I have in mind the September Summit of the United Nations. The historic, political and moral significance of all events I have mentioned can not be overestimated.

Let me refer in this respect to the words of Professor Krzysztof Skubiszewski, Honorary Member of the Institute and former Minister for Foreign Affairs of my country addressed to the 45^th session of the General Assembly in 1990:

“During the past decade the concept and ethics of solidarity have had an unusual impact on public life in Poland, and this in spite of the obvious counterweight created by the realities of everyday life. I think that by introducing solidarity as the basic notion of public activity, Poles have showed that in our world of unlimited egoism, violence and the incredible richness of some and the inhuman depravation and humiliating poverty of others, there is a better road ahead. The Polish idea and practice of solidarity has had its international impact by contributing to the creation of circumstances propitious to the great event of our times: the fall of totalitarianism in Europe and the resulting unification of Germany...”

And he continued:

“ We have started building a post-cold-war order. Its architecture is in the process of being devised. We must take a long view, but one thing is certain: the United Nations is now facing a tremendous task and an epoch-making challenge”.

His words have not lost an iota of their validity, today.

This new world order has to be built on the rule of law. The threats and challenges facing the international community today are well known. It really stands at a crossroads. And the dilemma of our times has perhaps been best summarized by the philosopher Immanuel Kant, over 200 years ago. He concluded that the world was destined for perpetual peace. It would come about either by human foresight or by a series of catastrophes with no other alternative.

I profoundly believe that ultimately human foresight will prevail.

Speaking to the members of the Institute, one of the most prestigious institutions of the international law in the world, let me focus on the overarching question of the rule of law in international relations. The topic is important and, I venture to say, quite timely.

You may wonder: why such a broad topic when there are so many specific, concrete, urgent issues facing the international community?

My answer is, because all these other issues are but symptoms of absence of, or weak development of the rule of law. Moreover, these other issues are of more temporarily nature, while the question of the rule of law has been linked forever to humankind.

But what does it mean? What happens if the rule of law is not present? At national level, it is easy to see negative effect of this. We talk then about failing or failed States. We have also seen that the varnish of civilization is thin. When the laws cannot be implemented, the anarchy prevails. After the end of the cold war the threat and challenge for the international peace and stability is too much greater extend due to the nature of relations within the states than between them.

The international law is a common baseline for all international relations and central to our efforts to build a safer, stable and more prosperous world.

Justice and the rule of law at the international level are seen in our foreign policy as the basic principles. They are the essential foundations for security, protection of human rights, prosperity and sustainable development.

It is against this background that we should see the attempts by the United Nations to slowly but surely codify and develop international law. Over the years, a significant body of international law has been codified. A great number of treaties that established rules of conduct for States and increasingly made an impact on the lives of individuals and the business activities of corporations – where in the area of trade, human rights, the environment, organized crime and terrorism, have been concluded.

New global threats to the international community pose new challenges for international law. International humanitarian law and human rights have significantly evolved since these days when what States did to their citizens was entirely their own concern. Sovereignty also implies a responsibility of States toward their population and toward each other. It is also imperative, for political, legal and moral reasons that human rights and international humanitarian law are respected in the fight against terrorism. Dynamic processes of globalization in action as well as the growing interdependence between security, development and human rights call for a new approach to a concept of international solidarity. And more: nowadays the infamous concept of “interference into internal affairs” cannot be used as an instrument to prevent the international concern about the violation of human rights and rights of minorities.

The impressive body of international law represents an enormous collective effort by Member States of the United Nations as well as by learned institutions like yours.

Conversely, the fact alone that we have a great number of treaties and a large body of customary international law and ongoing activity to create additional law does not necessarily mean that the rule of law is observed and respected.

The codification of the enormous body of substantive law, however, has not been accompanied by the establishment of adequate mechanisms aimed to ensure compliance by States with their international obligations. While the elaboration of new norms of international law continues and will continue, the focus is now shifting towards building of mechanisms aimed at enhancing the effectiveness of existing international law. The United Nations must remain the core center of this new effort.

Another important element is that there is a possibility for every State to have an effective recourse against violation of its rights, including the use of international institutions. This applies to both terms of prevention or reparation if preventive measures fail. Such international mechanisms include judicial and other instances. One of the most important among them is – or rather should be - the Security Council.

This brings me to the question of the ability of the international community, in particular the United Nations, to deal effectively with violations of international law, in particular violations endangering the vital interests of the international community as a whole.

In parallel of the “legal” task there is urgent need for concerted political will toward full use of the existing and newly created mechanisms. Likewise, universal adherence to these mechanisms will be critical for the success of the endeavor at hand. A corresponding strengthening of international judicial structures might also be mentioned

But then, there is responsibility of each and every one of us to protect this law and secure its development. To achieve this, we must all work together: States and their representatives, governmental and non-governmental organizations, the business community and the civil society, all of us.

We deal with a process that requires our continuous concern and intensive work. As a matter of fact, in early 1999 the Secretary-General of the United Nations identified the consolidation and the advancement of the international rule of law as the second most important goal of the Organization, next to peace and security only (a special Action Plan for an Era of Application of International Law has been developed at the UN).

What then is to be done? We have to strengthen and convey our commitment to the need to promote respect for international law in order to insure stability in international relations and assure legitimacy for action by States and international organizations. We have to question, once policy suggestions or decisions are made, whether they are consistent with the strengthening of the rule of international law. We have to promote forcefully the study and respect for international law, especially among decision- and public opinion-makers, particularly those in mass media.

What then, do we do about those who deny the very existence of the law in question or who violate it when it suits their interests? The only methods that will work in a long-run is to spread the knowledge of the law - which does not necessarily mean its articles and paragraphs, but rather its basic principles and the spirit – to the millions of potential victims of violations of international law.

To be able to do all this we have to see to it that the knowledge of international law be wider and more comprehensive. That is why, teaching international law and its contents are of major importance.

Let me also note in this context the attempts made in the past to establish standardized curricula of teaching international law as well as the relevant contributions of your Institute to this work. One curriculum that may serve a model or stimulus can be found in the Institute’s resolution on the teaching of public and private international law (Session of Strasbourg –1997).

Ultimately, the goal we are striving for is international law as a universal language for the rule of law in international relations.

The draft outcome document of the High-level Plenary Meeting of the General Assembly, 2005 submitted by the President of the General Assembly called for universal adherence to and implementation of the rule of law at both the national and international level. Let us unite our efforts to achieve this noble objective, so crucial for the existence of a sound international community.

Those who believe in the rule of law in international relations are sometimes scoffed at as naive or seen as idealists who do not understand that we live in “the real world”. To me, however, being an idealist does not mean that one cannot be a realist as well. In fact in Poland we know better than in many other countries that the idealists were the most effective realists at the end of the day.