Topic: 2025 – Criminal Accountability of UN Officials
Country: Republic of Korea
Delegate Name: Esther Kim
As the world’s largest international organization, the United Nations plays an indispensable role in preserving international peace. Even so, historically, significant humanitarian damage has been caused by individual UN officials who have committed internationally wrongful acts. A notable and unfortunate case is the UN peacekeeping mission in Haiti, where officials’ neglect led to a cholera outbreak, killing thousands. Other reports of misconduct, including sexual exploitation and abuse, have been documented, most prominently in Haiti, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and the Central African Republic.
At the center of the debate is the principle of functional immunity, which protects UN officials from legal processes that would otherwise find them guilty. Perhaps more importantly, it also leaves victims without adequate compensation for the damage caused. In light of this, South Korea emphasizes its support for the principles of justice and international law and maintains that the UN should only respect officials’ functional immunity to the extent that an official mission requires.
South Korea recognizes that one of the major obstacles to accountability is the lack of transparency surrounding reports of alleged misconduct. Thus, transparency should be improved by providing relevant information about alleged offenders, especially to states directly involved in the case. This will support informed legal processes to determine the necessary administrative actions. From a preventive standpoint, states should also ensure that deployed officials are fully aware of their international responsibilities, legal obligations, and local customs.
Systemic weaknesses in existing prosecution processes also warrant serious attention. While internal mechanisms such as the Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS) conduct investigations that seek to hold UN staff accountable, many states have cited concern over understaffing and potential conflicts of interest. This has often led to ineffective investigations that experienced unnecessary delays. For this reason, South Korea advocates for the diversification of the prosecution process by involving different entities. Specifically, when an internationally wrongful act does not constitute a jus cogens violation, the authority to prosecute should lie with the host country, and the official’s home country should assist when the host country lacks proper jurisdiction or power to enforce final decisions. On the other hand, when an internationally wrongful act involves the violation of jus cogens norms, South Korea believes that the ICC should get involved. In fact, South Korea strongly encourages all states to ratify the Rome Statute to enable smooth cooperation with the ICC in prosecuting internationally wrongful acts.
South Korea also emphasizes the need for a more robust dispute mechanism that would allow for a multilateral agreement for victim compensation and reparation. Consistent with international legal standards, victims should have access to timely and appropriate compensation, regardless of whether the harm was intentional or accidental. Thus, South Korea proposes the establishment of ad hoc dispute mechanisms consisting of representatives from the host state, official’s home state, and UN OIOS officials. Under this system, administrative decisions would be carried out by national authorities, ensuring that compensation and reparations can be decided and enforced in a more holistic and credible manner.
In conclusion, South Korea believes that with the increase of transparency, establishment of diversified prosecution processes and robust dispute mechanisms, the functional immunity of UN officials can be respected while upholding international law.
