Letter dated 13 June 1995 from the Ambassador of Finland, together with Written Statement of the Government of Finland

Lettdart13June1995.m the.Ambassaof-F&4 togethawith
Wn#en bkmnî oftheGovernmeotfFinland EMBASSY OF FIN LAN D

Groot ~e~oqinnelaan 16
2517 SG TIiE XAGm The iiaçue, 13 June 14?5

No. I iL5

Dezr Sir,

Referring to your lorter of 8 February 1995 please fine
enclosed the ansïer of the Ministry for Foreign Affairs

of Finlanc.

occepi, Sir, the assurances of my highest

consiaeration.

Z.Z. Mz. M. 3e5jaoui

Presidenc of the Inrernazicnal
CDUri of ~'usZ~C~

The Ezcjue MINISTRY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRÇ
OF F INLAND

In response to the letter of 8 February 1995 £rom the Registrar
of the International Court of Justice to the Minister for

Foreign Affairs of Finland regarding the request for an advisory
opinion made by the United Nations General Açsembly, the
Goverment of Finland has the honour to refer to its response
submitted to the Court on 10 June 1994 concerning a similar
request made by the World Bealth Assembly, and to state the
f ollowing :

The request made by the General Assembly seeks to attain an
abstracto determination of the legality, or othewise, of the

use of nuclear arms in war or other armed conflict. It ignores
the complexity ofthe technical, rtrategic and moral aspects of
the problem posed by the existence of nuclear weapons. It fails
to recognize the fact that effective security arrangements can
only be attained through agreements wiiich take into account al1
relevant circumstances including the specific security interests
of each State. During the years, Finland has actively promoted
the conclusion of such agreements and will do so in the future.

It would thus be improper for the Court to give the opinion
requested by the General Assembly. In view of the Court's long-
standing practice in the matter of advisory opinions, such

impropriety would seem to be constituted by two factors:

1. Answering the request the Court could not remain faithful to
its character as a judicial organ

This factor has to do with the hypothetical, future-oriented
character of the request. In the absence of a concrete factual
situation, the Court would itself be required to analyze
different types of nuclear weapons and to entertain various
nyootheses about situations in which they might conceivably be

used and the factual consequences of their use. This would
require analyzing extremely complex and controversial pieces of
technical, strategic and scientific information. The counter-
factual character of such speculation would make any hypothesis
uncertain. Entering such speculation, the Court would not be
able to remain faithful to the requirements of its character as
a judicial organ.

2. No reply to the substance of the request would constitute a
useful service to the United Nations of which the Court is the
principal judicial organ

A statement in abstracto on the legal status of the use of
nuclear weapons would seriously intervene in the diplomatic

negotiations being conducted on 'various bilateral and
multilateral fora to limit and reduce the threat posed by
nuclear weapons. It would create blanket support for one or
another disputed position and fail to respect the comprehensive
give-and-take character of such negotiations - even make themseem altogether superfluous. During recent years, a number of
important agreements on the limitation, prohibition or control
of specific types of armaments have been attained, among them
the 1993 Convention on Chemical Weapons, and the 1995 decision
on the indefinite extension of the Treaty on the Non-
Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. To undermine such negotiations
by a judicial fiat would not constitute a useful service by the
Court to the efforts of the United Nations in this field.