COUR INTERNATIONALE DE JUSTICE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
Translation
Federal Foreign Office
Legal Adviser and
Head of the Legal Directorate-General
Bonn, 5 October 1998
Mr Eduardo Valencia-Ospina
Registrar of the International Court of Justice
Peace Palace
2517 KJ The Hague
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your letter of 10 August 198 to the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairs, which
was forwarded to me.
In it you suggest that the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany communicates its
position on the case in which the United Nations Economic and Social Council in its decision
no. 1998/297 of 5 August 1998 at the International Court requests a report on the question of
the applicability of Article VI section 22 of the Convention of 13 February 1946 on the
Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations in the case of Mr Dato' Param
Cumaraswamy as Special Rapporteur to the Commission on Human Rights.
It is the view of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany that:
- it is the prerogative of the Secretary-General of the United Nations to make a binding
decision in the concrete case concerning whether an expert has or does not have immunity
pursuant to Art. VI, section 22 of the Convention after examining the question as to whether
such immunity would impede the course of justice or whether immunity can be waived
without prejudice to the interests of the United Nations, whereby such a decision may be
subjected to examination by the International Court of Justice on the application of a member
state (Art. VIII, section 30 of the Convention),
- the immunity of an expert pursuant to Article VI of the Convention is to be respected by all
government institutions in the States parties to the Convention, including his native country,
- in the concrete case, pursuant to what has been stated above, the Malaysian Government is
under the obligation to refrain from all means of coercion and enforcement measures in
connection with the legal proceedings against Mr Cumaraswamy, at least as long as the
International Court of Justice has not made any statement to the effect that
Mr Cumaraswamy's immunity should be lifted. In the view of the Government of the Federal
Republic of Germany it would be desirable if the International Court of Justice could, in its
report, also state its position on the question of whether Mr Cumaraswamy's immunity wouldimpede the course of justice and whether his immunity can be waived without prejudice to the
interests of the United Nations.
Yours sincerely,
(sgd.) Dr Born
p.p.
Written Statement of the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany