Mr. Chairman,

It is indeed an honour and privilege for me to attend the fourth International Forum. I appreciate that we meet in Stockholm, in a city, which is well known for its tolerant, multicultural atmosphere. I find the theme of our meeting very timely. Especially in light of the fact that the twentieth century has been called by many experts “The Century of Genocide”, since genocide and other mass murders took away horrendous number of human lives.

Therefore, Hungary is of the view that the international community should remain committed to the principle, whereby respect for human rights cannot be considered an exclusively internal affair of any given state.Violations of human rights and fundamental freedoms are indeed a matter of legitimate international concern. Consequently, governments are accountable for violations of international human rights standards. Beyond taking the necessary legislative and institutional steps, governmental efforts should also include bringing those individuals within their jurisdiction who committed serious human rights violations to justice.

That is one of the major reasons why my Government has been a steady supporter from the very beginning of the establishment of the International Criminal Court.

International experience has amply demonstrated that prevention is the most effective form of protection for people in danger. It is, however, well known that building a culture of prevention is not an easy task, since the costs of prevention have to be paid in the present, while its benefits, may lie in the more or less distant future.

The success of prevention depends on an effective early-warning system, relying on the systematic collection and analysis of observations from potential conflict areas. In this context, it should be noted that currently even the United Nations has no systematic and accurate means to gather, analyse, and interpret the warning signals of a potential violent conflict or genocide. Furthermore, no established procedures exist for transferring this information to governments, especially those in the Security Council of the United Nations. Had it been such procedures, mass murders in Rwanda or ethnic cleansing in Bosnia could have been prevented.

Mr. Chairman,

Most major crises of the past decade, resulting in genocide or ethnic cleansing have been triggered by internal conflicts in which ethnic identity was a prominent source of divide. The idea of the state as the sole protector of the rights of its citizens, in combination with extreme ethnic nationalism, leads to the denial of the idea itself of state protection for the rights of ethnic minorities. Protection and promotion of the identity of national and ethnic minorities ensuring their institutional participation in public affairs are not only requirements evolving from human rights. They also form the basic premises of the non-discriminatory functioning of a democratic state.

Examples of democratic societies show that the legally and institutionally underpinned generosity towards minorities and other vulnerable groups is a sign of the state’s strength and self-confidence and not that of its weakness as it is seen by many.

In our age of globalisation, we could hardly find a country where everyone speaks the same language, shares the same culture, beliefs or traditions. The international community should realise that the presence of different national, ethnic, linguistic or religious groups within the frontiers of a country is not only an asset, but also a source of social and cultural enrichment.

Mr. Chairman,

Hungary is convinced that if we want to preserve the diversity of beliefs and the general acceptance of democratic principles and values we must educate the young generations the lessons of the past, as the knowledge is the best tool to combat discrimination, intolerance and hostility. That was the main reason why Government of Hungary has decided to introduce a day of Holocaust Remembrance into our school curriculum.

Mr. Chairman,

In response to the shock the world has experienced when discovering the barbaric murder of millions of Jews perpetrated by Nazi Germany, the United Nations has adopted the Genocide Convention in 1948. Events in Rwanda and Bosnia have rehabilitated the Convention, whose application and interpretation have become matters for urgent attention. Perhaps the gaps in the Convention are only the oversights of optimistic negotiators, mistaken in the belief that they were erecting a monument to the past, rather than a tool to address future challenges and to shape the future of global justice. Their naiveté may be forgiven. A failure to learn the lessons of the 55 years, since its adoption, cannot.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman