Inclusion

65. There were different views concerning the inclusion of aggression.

66. Some delegations were of the view that aggression should be included to avoid a significant gap in the jurisdiction of the Court, as aggression was one of the most serious crimes of concern to the entire international community, and that it should be regarded as a core crime under general international law; to create a deterrent and to avoid the impunity of the responsible individuals by providing a forum for their prosecution; to enhance the role and stature of the Court; to avoid any negative inference concerning individual criminal responsibility under customary law contrary to the Nürnberg Tribunal precedent affirmed by the General Assembly; and to avoid adopting a retrogressive statute 50 years after the Nürnberg and Tokyo tribunals and the adoption of the Charter of the United Nations.

67. Some delegations supported the inclusion of this crime if general agreement could be reached on its definition and on the appropriate balance of the respective roles and functions of the Court and the Security Council, without delaying the establishment of the Court.