Joint Nordic Statement: Report of the International Law Commission
Joint Nordic Statement delivered by Ms. Sesselja Sigurdardottir, Director General, Directorate for Legal and Executive Affairs
at the Ministry for Foreign Affairs in Iceland,
General Assembly, Eighty-first Session
Sixth Committee: Agenda item 78:
Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-sixth and seventy-seventh session: ILC Cluster I
26 October 2026
As set out in the Charter of the United Nations and the Commission’s statute, the Commission is entrusted with promoting the progressive development of international law and its codification. Its functions are at the very heart of the United Nations mandate. The Nordic countries fully support the Commission in its call on the Assembly to ensure that the Commission can have the necessary resources to continue to discharge its mandate effectively. We note that insufficient resources prevented part of the seventy-seventh session from being held in New York. We support continued efforts to facilitate direct contact and an effective dialogue between the Commission and delegates of the Sixth Committee.
With regard to the Commission’s programme of work, the Nordic countries welcome its decision to include the topic “Identification and legal consequences of obligations erga omnes in international law” in its programme of work. We congratulate Mr. Masahiko Asada on his appointment as Special Rapporteur for the topic. The Nordic countries also welcome the Commission’s decision to include the topic “The right to regulate in international investment law” in its long-term programme of work.
Furthermore, the Nordic countries commend the Commission’s recognition of the need to ensure gender parity in national and international institutions, including in terms of its own composition, where further progress should be made to comply with this objective.
As a final general remark, the Nordic Countries express strong support for the candidacy of Ambassador Rolf Einar Fife for re-election to the ILC. His extensive experience, deep expertise in international law and multilingualism have made him a valued member of the Commission and we welcome his continued contribution.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
I will now turn to the first cluster and start with the topic of “Sea-level rise in relation to international law”. This topic remains on the agenda of the Sixth Committee this year, notwithstanding the completion of the International Law Commission’s work on the topic last year. This alone underscores its continued importance.
It was particularly fitting that the 81st session of the General Assembly began with the adoption by consensus of the UN Declaration on Sea Level Rise. The Nordic countries celebrate this milestone achievement which represents the culmination of hard work undertaken across United Nations fora, including under the auspices of the Sixth Committee.
We commend and admire the leadership of friends across the Pacific Islands Forum, the Alliance of Small Island States as well as other partners who have worked hard to bring the existential challenge of sea-level rise to the forefront of discussions. Their efforts have advanced the consideration of this topic by the International Law Commission, by the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and now, by the entire United Nations membership.
The Nordic Countries are pleased to continue our support for this work, and we join the call for the sea-level rise dimension to be comprehensively integrated into every relevant international process.
The Declaration is an important marker of political backing for the work we have ahead of us, including in relation to the legal dimensions of sea-level rise.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
We know that the adverse effects of climate change are not evenly distributed. The inhabitants of small island and low-lying coastal communities standing face-to-face with the rising tide bear witness to this fact. They face threats to territory, livelihoods, cultural heritage and identity because of human-made changes to the Earth’s climate systems.
Those most affected cannot be expected to carry this burden alone. For some affected States, the challenge is no longer only how to adapt, but how to preserve the habitability of their territory, the continuity of their Statehood and the rights and identity of their peoples.
Legal responses must therefore go hand in hand with action on the underlying cause. We agree with the Secretary-General that mitigation must be treated as a core risk-prevention measure alongside adaptation. Rapid and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions are essential, including by transitioning away from fossil fuels. This transition is a global effort for the bettering of the common interests of humankind and must therefore include all and leave no one behind. Decarbonisation requires a scale-up of technologies and solutions – as well as the creation of new and innovative technologies and solutions.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
Reflecting on the three primary strands for addressing sea-level rise in relation to international law, the Nordic countries continue to approach the topic with empathy and resolve, and stress what we communicated in the 80th session.
In the context of the law of the sea, the Nordic countries reaffirm the universal and unified character of UNCLOS, which sets out the legal framework within which all activities in the oceans and seas must be carried out. Our responses to sea-level rise caused by climate change must be constructed in the context of, and in conformity with, our Constitution of the Ocean.
While the baselines from which maritime zones are determined correspond to a geographical reality of the natural environment, the Convention does not set out a positive obligation for States to update their duly established baselines in the context of physical changes resulting from climate change. We firmly stand behind the Declaration’s affirmation that States, which have established their maritime zones in accordance with UNCLOS, can maintain those zones in the face of climate change related sea-level rise.
We underscore the strong presumption in favour of continued Statehood despite the disappearance of a State’s constituent elements, as well as preservation of sovereignty and maintenance of membership of the United Nations and other international organizations. This presumption is a safeguard to protect the right of all peoples to self-determination and to avoid situations of loss of nationality and of statelessness.
Finally, in relation to the protection of persons, we recall the message in the ILC Study Group’s final report, that persons affected by sea-level rise “remain rights holders and States have a duty to respect, protect and fulfil their human rights obligations, including with regard to civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights.” We recognise the importance of identifying relevant legal norms in addressing their specific situation, and note the value of existing instruments, both of a legally binding and non-binding nature. We stand ready to consider incorporating the sea-level rise dimension into processes relevant to the protection of persons, as well as to carry out dedicated work to act on the ILC Study Group’s recommendations.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
The International Law Commission has, in recent years, made a significant contribution to enhancing legal clarity on this topic. International courts and tribunals have provided further guidance. The UN Declaration now provides an important basis for practical follow-up.
Our task is to translate the legal clarity provided to us into effective legal protection.
For the Nordic countries, upholding the law of the sea and standing with States and peoples most affected by sea-level rise are mutually reinforcing responsibilities. International law will be a source of stability even as coastlines change.
The Nordic countries will continue to support ambitious climate action, the integrity of UNCLOS and strong international cooperation towards equitable and lasting solutions for States and peoples affected by sea-level rise.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
I will now turn to Chapter IV of the ILC report, concerning Immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction.
The Nordic countries wish to express their deep appreciation for the work of the Commission on this important topic, which is both legally complex and politically sensitive. We commend the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Claudio Grossman Guiloff for his hard and dedicated work, and we also wish to pay tribute to the significant contributions made by the previous Special Rapporteurs, Mr. Roman A. Kolodkin and Ms. Concepción Escobar Hernándes.
In contrast to the situation of diplomatic agents and States as such, there is no legal instrument that sets out a general immunity regime relative to State officials. The Commissions work on this topic represents a significant step towards a common understanding of the international legal norms applicable to this matter, as also stated in the written comments to the draft articles submitted to the Secretary-General by the Nordic countries in December 2023.
The Nordic countries welcome the successful completion of the second reading of the draft articles and congratulate the Commission on bringing its work on this long-standing and important topic to a conclusion. We further note the Commission's recommendation that the draft articles be considered, at the appropriate time, by the General Assembly as a possible basis for the future elaboration of a convention.
Being cognizant that most of the proposed draft articles reflect customary international law and are as such already binding on states without treaty codification, the Nordic countries agree that the final draft articles could indeed constitute the basis for negotiating a treaty on the immunity of State officials from foreign criminal jurisdiction.
The Nordic countries continue to hold the view that the ILC has succeeded in drafting what is a broadly acceptable text reflecting the applicable customary rules, and that the draft is both satisfactorily structured and adequately detailed.
We find that the draft articles successfully strike a balance between the interests of the forum State and the State of the official. In this regard, the procedural provisions suggested in Part Four of the draft articles are particularly important, ensuring adequate safeguards for the State of the official, while also observing the interests of the forum State. The Nordic countries emphasize that Part Four of the draft articles not only aims to ensure fair trial safeguards for foreign State officials in the context of the exercise of criminal jurisdiction, but also contributes to optimal communication between States, respecting their sovereign equality. Such safeguards serve to prevent the abuse or politicization of criminal jurisdiction and maintain peaceful relationships among States.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
In addition, the Nordic countries would like to reiterate their consistent support for what is now draft article 6. We support the additions to draft article 6 of the crime of aggression, slavery, and the slave trade. All these crimes have an established status as crimes under international law.
Article 6 must be read in conjunction with the procedural safeguards that will entail increased predictability for States. Part Four will also be crucial to avoid politicization of draft article 6. Moreover, the Nordic countries have consistently underlined the importance of harmonizing the draft articles with legal developments that have occurred over the last decades. These remind us that the commission of the most serious international crimes cannot be considered today to constitute acts performed in an official capacity giving rise to immunity and thereby providing a shield against accountability. Furthermore, the Nordic countries have taken due note of the explanations of the Special Rapporteur as to the purpose of the draft articles. It is to serve as the basis for a treaty. It is in that context that States should have ample opportunity to express their views on the content of the possible future treaty. States will be well served in having before them a text as here suggested.
We also recall our strong commitment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the other treaties enumerated in the annex to the draft articles, underlining the importance of harmonizing the draft articles with legal developments reflected in said treaties.
The point of departure of the Nordic countries is that progressive development and codification of international legal rules should respect immunities considered under this topic, without this becoming a shield for impunity for the most serious international crimes. We are also of the view that respect for the sovereign equality of States should not hinder non coercive collection of important information and evidence. Moreover, certain conduct clearly does not qualify as an official act triggering immunity ratione materiae.
Immunity of State officials may give rise to challenging questions for prosecutorial and other domestic authorities, including judiciaries, that will be the final arbiters of difficult cases. This is why we firmly believe that the outcome will be of real practical assistance to States.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
Throughout the Commission's work on this topic, the Nordic countries have underlined both the importance of grounding conclusions firmly in customary international law, which is not static, as well as the value of having a common understanding. We consider that the draft articles constitutes a valuable contribution to a common understanding of the international legal norms applicable to this matter and provides a useful basis for future consideration by States.
The Nordic countries look forward to continued discussions in the Sixth Committee concerning the future of the draft articles. We thank the Commission for its extensive and valuable work on this important topic.
Mr/Mme. Chair,
I will now turn to the topic of “General principles of law”. On behalf of the Nordic countries, I would like to congratulate the International Law Commission for having adopted the entire set of draft conclusions, comprising 12 draft conclusions, together with commentaries thereto.
We are pleased that the Commission has been able to finalize its work on this important topic and take note of the Commission’s recommendation to the General Assembly.
We would also wish to express our gratitude to the Special Rapporteur, Mr. Marcelo Vázques-Bermúdez, for his diligent work on the topic that complements the Commission’s earlier work on the primary sources of international law.
The Nordic countries have supported the general approach of the Special Rapporteur. We would like to recall our previous statements on this topic, where we have stated among other things that a cautious approach is warranted given the significance of the topic and the many sensitivities at play. We are pleased to note that the Commission's final draft conclusions reflect such an approach and provide a balanced framework for the identification of general principles of law.
We would also like to recall our written comments submitted on 1 December 2024 at the request of the Commission. As we noted therein, the criteria for identifying general principles of law should be applied with due regard to their relationship with the other primary sources of international law. While we recognize that there is no formal hierarchy among those sources, we observe that general principles of law often fulfil a subsidiary function within the international legal system.
In this context, the Nordic countries wish to reiterate that conclusions drawn should also be adequately related to the practice and opinions of States. As we have previously stated, we believe it is important to avoid an overreliance on subsidiary means for the determination of law, in the form of judicial decisions and the opinions of individual writers. In conclusion, the Nordic countries would once again wish to express our sincere appreciation for the significant work of the Commission on this topic.
Thank you.