The topic of our conference, "Empower the International Court of Justice to safeguard the future of world's two billion children and generations yet to be born", correctly indicates how non-substitutable and important role the judiciary and confidence in its operation have in democratic countries respecting the rule of law. However, the confidence in such system of courts expressed by the topic of our conference, if it is to be fulfilled by legitimate expectations of those who foster it, must necessarily be supported by institutional guarantees in the form of competent judicial authorities.

The legal basis of the International Court of Justice is the Charter of the United Nations, the Statute of the International Court of Justice and the Rules of the International Court of Justice.

At the present time, the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice includes all disputes and issues submitted by member countries and also matters defined by the Charter of the United Nations or by international treaties and conventions. Member countries may undertake in advance to comply with the decision of the International Court of Justice either by signing a treaty or convention which explicitly establishes such obligation or by making a separate statement. In accordance with the Statute, the International Court of Justice deals with disputes particularly by implementing international conventions laying down rules expressly acknowledged by the countries involved in the dispute, international practice and generally recognized procedures, which are accepted as law, general legal principles acknowledged by member countries and also judicial decisions and opinions of the most qualified legal experts from individual countries.

The task of all countries is to enforce and abide by the international law in three areas. The first area is fundamental human rights, as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The second area is humanitarian law, which empowers the UN to provide necessary humanitarian aid and assistance in the territory of affected countries. The third area is peaceful settlement of disputes between countries and within countries, including flexible national mechanisms for mediation, decision and settlement of disputes and achievement of social reconciliation.

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was signed by more than 100 countries of the world, forbids all forms of discrimination, slavery, serfdom, torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment. Everyone has the right to life, liberty, nationality, freedom of movement, freedom of religion, right to seek asylum, right to marry, freedom of peaceful assembly and a number of other rights. The Declaration, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights constitute the International Bill of Rights, which is the basis for the UN's "world movement" for human rights.

Some regional initiatives began to regard the issue of human rights as one of the fundamental factors of political and social stability. In the Old Continent, particularly the European Court of Human Rights, established in early 1950s, which is a Council of Europe institution, has proved during the past decades to be one of the most successful instruments of the international law.

Humanitarian law came into existence as a response to unspeakable suffering, undignified, degrading and inhumane treatment of victims of war and civilians. One of elementary legal instruments for settlement of disputes within countries is the third article of each of the four Geneva Conventions. It establishes humane treatment of persons taking no part in hostilities and persons who did not use their arms. It forbids using any violence against such persons, including humiliating and degrading treatment or any other persecution. Moreover, it demands protection for members of the medical personnel and medical transports.

As I mentioned before, the third area is peaceful settlement of disputes between countries and within countries, including flexible national mechanisms for mediation, decision and settlement of disputes and achievement of social reconciliation. At the present time, there are a number of procedures for mediation and peaceful settlement of disputes. However, this method of settlement of disputes is effective only if both parties are willing to respect the international law. The presence of appointed representatives and the role of a mediating third party diminish the possibility of direct communication between adverse parties. The Court of Conciliation and Arbitration, established in 1994 by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, offered a possibility to settle mutual disputes between some European countries and countries of the former Soviet Union. The activity of this court is based on the Convention on Conciliation and Arbitration and its conciliation procedures form an attractive alternative for settlement of mutual disputes between countries.

However, mediation is more successful in settling disputes at the international level. It does not require making any obligations in advance and allows direct communication between adverse parties. Its object is only to settle the conflict to the satisfaction of all parties to the dispute. Mediation is often used as an instrument of settlement of different internal and international disputes. Examples are the civil war in El Salvador, the civil war in Mozambique or the settlement of disputes between Greece and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.

Regrettably, the International Court of Justice has now only a limited significance in prevention of violent conflicts. During the period of its existence, it has resolved about 100 cases which concerned serious endangering of the safety and war crimes. Disputes leading to violent conflicts usually do not concern breach of laws, contracts or mutual obligations. They are generally political disputes concerning various national interests. Adverse countries or groups do not have interest in settling their disputes in lengthy court proceedings. Most countries which respect the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice reserved the right not to bring before this court disputes concerning national security or similar issues. Therefore, the powers of the International Court of Justice in relation to settlement of domestic disputes are strongly limited by the fact that only countries may appear before this court as litigants.

The judicial proceedings of the International Court of Justice usually aggravate confrontational and adverse aspects of disputes, at least during the course of the trial. In 1990s, there were some suggestions how to strengthen the powers of the International Court of Justice, which concerned the function and appointment of judges and the use of the International Court of Justice as a deliberative body of national courts. In spite of the outlined problems in operation of the International Court of Justice, we believe that it will, in the future, serve also as an efficient protector of our common future not only of our born children but also of those yet to be born.

I thank you for your attention and wish the organizers and participants successful discussions at this conference.