"The atmosphere, generally speaking, is businesslike. The delegations are not engaging in unnecessary polemics. But many important issues are still outstanding. This third week is probably a crucial one if we want to see a statute adopted and signed at the end of the Conference," Yáñez-Barnuevo said.

The "like-minded" countries and many others are actively working to reach an agreement on a statute creating an International Criminal Court (ICC), the ambassador told Radio Radicale Due , but "of course not at any price." He defined the minimum accomplishment of the Conference thus: the creation of an "independent, fair, effective Court."

You had earlier mentioned a unanimous appeal by Spain's Parliament. What is that about?

- Yes, we are very lucky in the sense that in Spain this is not a contentious issue. All political parties, NGOs, the media, are in favor of the idea of an ICC and a Criminal Court which would be fair and effective.

All the political parties have drafted and adopted by unanimity a parliamentary motion which goes into a rather detailed number of points backing the fact that the Court must cover the core crimes of international concern."

Spain has proposed that the ICC Statute consider as crimes attacks against United Nations and humanitarian aid personnel. It has also supported Canada's and Singapore's initiatives to provide the UN Security Council with a less active role in determining the Court's actions.

"In the original draft … there was a provision saying that the Court could not act before having first a sort of green light from the Security Council. We are against that, we are utterly opposed to that because that would be equivalent to give a veto to each permanent member as regards the action by the Court in a particular situation," he pointed out.

"Our proposal builds on a compromise proposal first suggested by Singapore and Canada, which is to invert the situation," he added. Under this formula, the Council will not be asked for permission by the Court to act, but the Council would have the power to stop the Court when it sees that international peace and security are in danger.

In remarks that took issue with of states opposed to any significant role by the Council, the Spanish ambassador stressed: "We think that we have to find a correct balance and our proposal is only to try to surround this possibility which we do not like, but it is important to have the Security Council supporting the Court.

What about the 24-month suspension clause?

What we say is that the Security Council could ask for suspension for periods, first of all not exceeding 12 months , so it could be 3 months, or 4 or 6 months, it depends on the situation and than could ask for an extension. But, it would be the Court who will take the decision to suspend.

This alternative is criticised by many countries and activists, because it would give time for states under investigation to destroy evidence of crimes. Yáñez-Barnuevo takes a pragmatic approach. "We think that it is a possible compromise, we are open to other possibilities and we are working with other 'like-minded' in order to find the correct language."  Alejandro Kirk/IPS