It is a great pleasure for me to open the sixty-seventh Conference of the International Law Association. Some thirty years have passed since we last had such an august gathering of international law experts here in Helsinki.

Your last Conference here in our capital led to the adoption of the "Helsinki Rules on the Uses of Waters of International Rivers". These rules govern inter-state relations in a practical area and have retained their validity. Since then, Helsinki has been identified with successful efforts to promote cooperation between East and West as well as to establish universally applicable commitments in the field of human rights. From the regulation of navigation to freedom of movement Helsinki has been an inspiration for ideas that have stood the test of time and transcended national boundaries.

In signing the historic CSCE Final Act in Helsinki twenty-one years ago the leaders responsible for European security declared their readiness to settle their differences by peaceful means. The goal was to establish principles for a new collective security order and to end the era of wars in our continent's history. Today we know that the CSCE process paved the way for profound change in Europe.

Europe is in the midst of a historic transformation. By grasping the opportunity that this offers, we can prevent the re-emergence of political and military dividing lines. The international community must act creatively. It has to strengthen international law and multilateral institutions.

This Conference will focus on the always crucial issue of how the rules of international law operate in inter-state relations. One of the areas where new measures for international cooperation and preventive actions are needed is terrorism, and state-sponsored terrorism in particular. There is a growing commitment within the international community to condemning terrorism and implementing means, consistent with fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, to effectively fight it. Finland endorses these commitments.

In December 1994 the United Nations General Assembly adopted the Declaration on Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism. A number of international meetings dealing with this issue have been held since then. The G7/P8 Ministerial Conference on Terrorism held recently in Lyon voiced a determination to give absolute priority to the fight against terrorism and adopted international measures to prevent it. International counter-terrorism cooperation - which includes deterrence, prosecution and punishment of terrorism, questions relating to the movement of persons, international treaties and arrangements - is urgently needed and I urge those participating in this Conference to help, as experts in international law, in bringing it about.

The end of the Cold War has provided the United Nations with new opportunities. The UN is no longer the scene of ideological confrontation. Now it should help the world to focus also on threats to our common security.

The founding fathers of the United Nations had vision of a global system of collective security. Mindful of the lessons of the 1930s, they wanted to ensure prompt action by the United Nations to safeguard peace and security, seek co-operative solutions, and deal effectively with aggression.

The problem we are facing now is that the goals and priorities for action have not been agreed upon. International conferences tackle particular issues from a variety of perspectives. However, we still lack clear and precise agreement on the direction we should take in dealing with them.

The role of international law in setting our priorities is crucial. Since the 1960's we have been seeing the creation of principles and norms which in the current international climate can finally be brought to fruition. We have progressively developed a number of these principles and norms to adjust them to contemporary realities. We have succeeded in laying down the ground rules for conduct between civilized nations. The task that we have to undertake is that of determining how we can promote consensus-building between nations - some of which have been in existence for centuries whilst others are only a few years old, twenty or so having become independent in the present decade.

I would like to propose that you look into two priority areas. First, to advance understanding and implementation of the rule of law in these new countries through a variety of necessary advisory services, whether bilaterally or within a multilateral context, the best expression of which is the United Nations. The second area is the progressive development of international law.

First, the issue of nation-building. I had the privilege to contribute to the birth of a new nation, Namibia. There are always great difficulties to overcome in such processes. The decisive factor is the determination of the people to live in peace and harmony within themselves and with their neighbours.

Apart from nation-building, I see some other important areas where lawyers could be helpful. The United Nations is currently suffering from a kind of battle fatigue as a result of the great variety of activities in which it has been engaged since the end of the Cold War. Your association could contribute to compiling the results of that work - from the legal aspect - and propose ways of resolving related difficulties. The United Nations has in recent years become more receptive to advice and ideas from bodies like yours. This is an opportunity that you - as members of the International Law Association - should not miss.

The international community has seen a momentous rise of nationalism and the creation of new states, but is still in the midst of confusion. Many new states have not yet been able to solve internal differences and conflicts. It is not enough merely to talk about rules for peaceful settlement of disputes when atrocities - such as those in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda - are taking human lives, causing untold suffering and tearing communities apart. New modalities for effectively dealing with these situations are badly needed. They should be developed not only from a practical but also from a legal point of view.

What we are presently experiencing is convincing evidence that international enforcement mechanisms have to be enhanced. We must strengthen the Security Council's capability for decisive action.

We must also pay adequate attention to the role of the International Court of Justice. Over the years the Court has earned the international community's trust as an expert and impartial body. Therefore, it could and should be given a wider role in the settlement of international disputes and in advising on the application of international law.

Finland has supported the work of the two international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The cooperation of the parties concerned as well as of other actors is needed to bring perpetrators before the tribunals. Collective responsibility must be replaced by individual responsibility.

Finland has firmly supported the establishment of a permanent international criminal court - the Preparatory Committee of which is right now meeting in New York. The ad hoc arrangements in the case of the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda are commendable advances in the field of enforcement - but hardly sufficient. More vigorous efforts by the international community are needed in order to bring perpetrators of the heinous deed of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity to justice. Unfortunately atrocities are not a thing of the past - they are still raging around us. Effective enforcement of international law could also bring immediate relief for the masses of refugees and other displaced persons.

We need also to look at the achievement of social justice and to work for better integration at the national level of ethnic and social minorities. I have personally experienced the determination of the victims of apartheid to build a new nation based on justice and the rule of law. Efforts by the international law community to mitigate exclusion - through the establishment of human rights norms - have been monumental.

The reform of the United Nations is an ongoing process that needs continued attention in the years to come. The UN Charter has so far proved a flexible tool for progressively developing international law. We should have an open mind and be ready to take up in a constructive spirit any amendments of the Charter that may be necessary to achieve a better functioning of the UN system.

A momentum for the development of international law still continues. In order for it to be sustained, your constant efforts are needed to ensure, in the spirit of the United Nations Charter and through all appropriate legal measures, the maintenance of international peace and security and the rehabilitation of national societies torn apart by conflict and strife.

I warmly welcome you all to Finland. I trust that you will keep the spirit of Helsinki alive during your deliberations and make the conference a platform for further reflection and development of international law so as to better safeguard our destiny in peace and harmony. Let us work and act together to create a better, safer and more prosperous world community for individuals and nations alike.