12 peace  and  security  by  giving  the  Tribunals  jurisdictions  over  crimes  that  it  believed already existed in international customary law.      How  the  Security  Council  will  act  in  the  future,  and  how  it  will  act  in  the  further implementation of Resolution 1373 must remain to be seen.  It is clear though that the Security Council had acted as though it does have legislative authority to create criminal law, if the creation of that law would lead to restoration and maintenance of international peace and security. Implications for the reform of domestic law The Security Council has a powerful mandate and the weight and binding authority of Chapter  VII  behind  it.    So  far,  it  seems  to  have  received  overwhelming  support  from virtually all member States.  How long this cooperative spirit will last and whether the CTC can sustain it, are the big challenges.  The critical point may well be crossed as the CTC shifts focus from foundational arrangements (of domestic legislation and executive machinery  in  place  in  national  systems)  to  monitoring  what  domestic  action  States  are actually  taking  to  combat  terrorism  (whether  States  are  bringing  terrorists  to  justice  or providing safe havens).    There are other concerns: for instance, that the implementation of Resolution 1373 should not   be   used   as   an   excuse   to   infringe   on   human   rights.      Successive   UN   High Commissioners (Mary Robinson and the late Sergio Vieira de Mello¹⁸) have urged the CTC to appoint an expert on human rights to assume responsibility for monitoring State’s compliance with human rights norms in the area of counterterrorism.     Whatever the implications for law creation at the international level, what is clear about Resolution 1373 is its direct and widespread impact on law making at the domestic level.   The  influence  of  foreign  and  international  rules  and  models  on  domestic  systems  has been a growing phenomenon and certainly is not new.  However, by any measure, the use of Chapter VII powers in this instance and the import of the actions taken by and through the CTC to implement Resolution 1373 are quite unprecedented.  Domestic policy and legislative changes are being sought to conform to a pre-determine framework and taken under circumstances that may be viewed as under direct influence, if not pressure, of a powerful Security Council (and, yes, a less-than-fully-representative Security Council at that)  or  through  other  influential  Governments  or  regional  authorities,  and  often  under stipulated or narrow time frames.  In these circumstances, it may well be asked whether the law making power has not truly moved further away from the State.  From the law reform perspective, it may also be asked whether the process of law making risks losing some of the valued traditions and requirement for due time for reflection, proper study and for domestic debate.    However, Resolution 1373 needs also to be seen in the light of the horrors of September 11  and  the  enormous  challenge  of  responding  to  the  immediate  threat  of  widespread terrorism in the environment of a globalised world.  It was essential for the international community to be united in its response, and to do so as promptly and as effectively as it                                                 18 Statement to the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the Security Council, 21 October 2002.