VIEWPOINT FROM LONDON

COULD THE HAGUE TRIBUNAL COLLAPSE?

by Brian Gallagher

The Croatian Herald, Australia No. 1032 - 24.09.04

 

If the Milosevic trial collapses, could the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia survive? Most probably not. The possible - probable? - collapse of the Milosevic trial would be a devastating blow to the Tribunal's credibility - such as it is. Furthermore, events like the Blaskic miscarriage of justice demonstrate that there are few saving graces for the Tribunal to realistically argue it could continue.

Currently, the Milosevic trial is in adjournment. The impositions of counsel, Stephen Kay, upon Milosevic has back-fired. Witnesses refuse to turn up, Milosevic refuses to co-operate and as a result Mr Kay was effectively unable to present any kind of case. However, Kay himself pointed out the enormity of - in effect - putting together a defence for Milosevic. "The scale: it doesn't get bigger than this," he said. He was given a month by the judges to try and sort things out. It is doubtful much will have changed in one month. The trial could then collapse; even Milosevic is entitled to a proper defence.

Furthermore, Stephen Kay has appealed his own appointment. If this is successful, the trial could also then collapse if it is ruled that Milosevic is too ill to carry out his own defence.

If that happens, the Serbs will claim that Serbia was innocent throughout the wars, that they were the victims. There will be contempt and disgust throughout Kosovo, Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

Could the Hague survive? Quite possibly not. With Milosevic free, its hard to see Croats being put on trial. Few would consider it seemly. And of course, the various Serbs indicted would want to know why they should be put on trial - or remain imprisoned - while their boss walks? And who would want to put Karadzic and Mladic on trial, given the farce of the Milosevic trial?

Its not just the Milosevic trial where the credibility of the court is in question.

The indictments against Gotovina, Cermak and Markac for the American controlled Operation Storm which defeated Milosovic and his allies are well known to be "flawed" - to put it mildly. Generals Cermak and Markac gave themselves up. They were told they would have to submit to interview with the prosecutors in order for them to gain release on bail. A quite outrageous abuse of power.

The latest twist in this dismal saga is that, despite having given themselves up, the Tribunal judges have just ruled they should not be released. The decision may change, but the message sent is that the Tribunal's word cannot be trusted.

A wider issue with the Operation Storm indictments is that they effectively criminalise Operation Storm and thus the liberation of Croatia and indeed Bosnia-Herzegovina. Given that there are still calls in Serbia for a Greater Serbia - such as those made by Serb politician Tomislav Nikolic - guilty verdicts could have serious consequences for the stability of the region. The Serbs would once again claim parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina and Croatia - and this time quote the Tribunal on the matter. No indictment threatens the territorial integrity of Serbia. Dozens of guilty verdict against Serbs will hardly matter; they will say their claims have been legitimised.

The Tribunal cannot be trusted to throw out the Operation Storm indictments - the theory of which the prosecutors contradict in the Milosevic case. The fact that Croat General Tihomir Blaskic was sentenced to 45 years for crimes he did not commit, the sentence reduced to 9 years, demonstrates that. Indeed, this particular miscarriage of justice could not have impressed anyone, and must have been quietly noted by many as pointer to the competence of prosecutors and judges.

There are many other matters that damage the Tribunal's standing. For example, how is it that current Serbian foreign minister Vuk Draskovic, whose involvement with the 'Serbian Guard' which committed atrocities in Croatia is left alone by Carla Del Ponte? Indeed, how is it he supports the Tribunal? What is going on there, one wonders.

Human rights groups have much to answer for here; too many have turned a blind eye to the faults at the Tribunal and supported it without question. No doubt this is due to concerns that criticising the Tribunal may undermine their case for the International Criminal Court, which the US has refused to join. However, had they taken a more critical position, the Tribunal may not have found itself in the position it is in now. The cause of international justice has not been advanced.

The reputation of the Tribunal is something the judges in the Milosevic trial have expressed as a reason to impose counsel onto Milosevic. The fact that he is able to manipulate this tribunal is in itself a damning indictment of it. Little wonder that the whole credibility of the Tribunal is now in question.

 

© Brian Gallagher

My 'Viewpoint from London' column appears in the Australian 'Croatian Herald' and thereafter at www.croatiafocus.com