11. Mr. ONKELINX (Belgium) {…}

12. In article 10, he was in favour of option 1 for paragraph 1, provided that agreement was reached on the definition of aggression. {…}

22. Mr. HAFNER (Austria) {…}

25. On the fourth question, he could accept option 1 in both paragraphs of article 10. {…}

30. Mr. BELLO (Nigeria) {…}

31. On article 10, he was comfortable with option 1 for paragraph 1. {…}

32. Ms. SHAHEN (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya) {…}

35. {…} Both article 10 and article 6 (b) should be deleted. {…}

49. Mr. MANYANG D'AWOL (Sudan) {…}

50. The Security Council had a special role in matters relating to the question of aggression, but as far as other issues were concerned the General Assembly could perhaps be allowed to refer matters.

51. Mr. NGUYEN BA SON (Viet Nam) {…}

53. His delegation strongly supported the inclusion of the crime of aggression among the core crimes under the jurisdiction of the Court and recognized the rights of the Security Council under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. He agreed that the United Nations General Assembly could also have a role. {…}

58. Mr. KROKHMAL (Ukraine) supported automatic jurisdiction with respect to the most serious crimes, including the crime of aggression. {…}