|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1992 - Address by Juge Robert Ago |
|
| President of the Curatorium of the Academy of International Law | |
|
Your
Majesty, I feel deeply honoured to have been chosen to receive, on behalf of The Hague Academy of International Law, the Félix Houphouët-Boigny Peace Prize, and, furthermore, to do so at the prestigious Headquarters of UNESCO, under the auspices of its Director-General, Professor Federico Mayor. I owe this honour to the fact that I am the current President of the Academy's Curatorium, the organ which directs its scientific and teaching activity. I share this responsibility with Minister Max van der Stoel, President of the Administrative Council, the body in charge of the Academy's administrative and financial affairs. I am receiving the second Houphouët-Boigny Peace Prize. The first, as you all know, was awarded to two figures who have devoted their lives' work to the search for the solution to one of the most complex and challenging problems of human coexistence of our time. The second Prize is different from the first in that it is being awarded not to individuals but to an institution, to an Academy which, since its creation in 1923, has devoted its efforts and resources to spreading knowledge of and to developing and strengthening international law. To have awarded such a renowned international prize, with the aims that go with it, to an institution which was established to perform the task which I have just described, and to have done so during a period which the United Nations has designated as "Decade of international law" is the mark of a deep conviction. It stems from the recognition of the importance and of the priority role of law in promoting, maintaining and guaranteeing peace and, therefore, in the harmonious development of human society. As the great internationalist whose memory does such honour to your beautiful country, Your Majesty, stated in his Prolegomena, nulla est communitas quae sine jure conservari possit. While this statement holds true for all the independent political systems into which mankind is divided, it is all the more so for the largest of human communities – the international community, which has now become universal. Recognizing the importance of international law is tantamount to affirming that law is the mainstay of the community of States, and that the development and achievements of this community can only go hand in hand with the progress of the law which it expresses. This recognition is especially important at a time when the law of nations, after centuries of slow and sometimes barely perceptible development, appears certain to reach an intense and tumultuous pace of development. This law has been extended to a great number of new areas, plunging to the depths of the sea and soaring to outer space; it is being precipitated, by incessant scientific and technical progress, towards increasingly vast horizons and towards previously unimaginable responsibilities. May the members of the Jury who took the decision to honour our Academy, and to whom we are so deeply grateful, rest assured that the precious resources which they have made available to the Academy will be used for the training of young people who wish to devote themselves to activities in the area of international relations. This training will obviously cover international law in its current state. However, I would like to particularly point out that we shall devote very special attention to people who feel this calling in the least privileged regions and in countries which have only recently joined the community of independent States. This, in fact, is precisely what we have been doing for many years now, in our summer sessions at The Hague, in our external sessions, in our research centres, in our study groups and in our other initiatives. In the same way, the Academy has already decided to create a Houphouët-Boigny scholarship to go to a young Côte d'Ivoire researcher.
Furthermore, I would like to make it clear that all those who in one way or another contribute to this training activity should constantly bear in mind the fact that law, and especially international law, is not a merely technical subject, arid and static. Rather, the subject which we teach is a living one, drawn from the life and blood of history. This does not only mean that it constantly evolves with history but it also means that it has a soul. In saying this, I naturally have in mind the words with which Félix Houphouët-Boigny has, in a way, summarized his credo: "I feel hatred for hatred". International law, its expectations for peaceful coexistence and the harmonious development of relations between States, its criteria for the increasingly necessary pursuit of common goals, its institutions for the peaceful settlement of conflicts, its prescriptions for the definitive elimination of the curse of war and armed struggle in all its forms, can never triumph if the feelings of intolerance and hatred which still lie buried in the hearts of men – whether their origin is religious or ethnic, national or cultural – continue to well up. For the tender shoot of international law to thrive, the soil in which it is rooted must be cleared once and for all of noxious ideas and replaced by those of mutual understanding, reciprocal respect, cooperation and unity in a shared destiny. We are living in incredibly difficult times, in which the forces of dislocation and fierce opposition sometimes seem about to gain the upper hand. My old friend Boutros Boutros-Ghali, a member of the Curatorium of our Academy, is deeply committed to the struggle against these forces – indeed, this very struggle is what has prevented him from being here with us today, as he so keenly wished. Nevertheless, his work stands as a message of confidence for all of us. We should never be discouraged: let us cast out of our minds forever the fear of the annihilation of the ideals and hopes which have brought us here together today, thanks to the generosity and farsightedness of this eminent African head of State. The poisons of the human soul which he hates, and which we hate with him, will not be strong enough to prevail : non prevalebunt! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
