SWEDEN TO AUDIT DETENTION UNIT AT UN COURT FOR EX-YUGOSLAVIA
New York, Mar 31 2006 6:00PM
The United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) today announced that the Swedish Government has accepted its request to conduct an independent audit of the Hague-based court’s Detention Unit.

The probe will cover all areas related to the Detention Unit’s management and administration, according to existing agreements and other regulations.

“A team will conduct the audit as soon as possible, and will submit their report to the Tribunal once it is complete,” < http://www.un.org/icty/ ">ICTY said in a <" http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/2006/p1060-e.htm ">news release, voicing gratitude for Sweden’s support.

The audit was announced earlier this month by Tribunal President Fausto Pocar after the court’s most notorious suspect, former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, died in detention. His death was ruled a heart attack and early toxicology reports showed no evidence of poisoning.

In New York today, Judge Fausto Pocar reported by teleconference to the Security Council on Mr. Milosevic’s death, reconfirming that it had resulted from natural causes, according to the Council President, Ambassador Cesar Mayoral of Argentina. He told reporters following the closed-door meeting that the Council would revisit the issue in June when President Pocar briefs it in person.
2006-03-31 00:00:00.000
________________

For more details go to UN News Centre at http://www.un.org/news

=====================================================

Details:

The International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, more commonly referred to as the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), is a body of the United Nations (UN) established to prosecute war crimes in the former Yugoslavia.

The tribunal functions as an ad-hoc court and is located in The Hague.

It was established by Resolution 827 of the UN Security Council, which was passed on May 25, 1993.
It has jurisdiction over certain types of crime committed on the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991: grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, violations of the laws or customs of war, genocide, and crime against humanity.

It can try only individuals, not organizations or governments. The maximum sentence it can impose is life imprisonment. Various countries have signed agreements with the UN to carry out custodial sentences. The last indictment was issued March 15, 2004. It aims to complete all trials by the end of 2008 and all appeals by 2010.

Criticisms of the Court

Some of the criticisms levelled against the court include:

It was established by the UN Security Council instead of the UN General Assembly The UN Charter specifically gives the exclusive right to establish such organs to the General Assembly.
This has been the formal basis of Milo?evi?'s claim that the court has no legal authority. It was established on the basis of the Chapter VII of the UN Charter; relevant portion of the charter reads "the Security Council can take measures to maintain or restore international peace and security"; it is disputed whether a tribunal could be considered a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security.
An apparently disproportionately large number of indictees are Serbs (to the extent that a sizeable portion of the Bosnian Serb and Serbian political and military leaderships have been indicted), whereas there have been very few indictments resulting from crimes committed against Serbs (many Croat indictees were charged with crimes committed against Bosnian Muslims); furthermore, Serbian indictees are of higher rank than those of other nations and face with broader accusations.
Defenders of the Tribunal respond that Serb control of the established command structure (and most of the weaponry) of the Yugoslav People's Army (JNA) from the start of the various wars facilitated the commission of crimes on a wider and more organised scale; furthermore, the Serb command structure facilitated the identification of those with command responsibility for war crimes.
However, this fails to explain why a number of specific crimes committed against Serbs are not prosecuted.

Many of the indictees are still not apprehended, which reflects badly on its image. Defenders point out that the Tribunal has no powers of arrest, and is reliant on other agencies (notably national governments, EUFOR and KFOR) to apprehend and extradite indictees.
The Tribunal's power to issue secret indictments creates uncertainty among people who regard themselves as possible indictees, which places an unreasonable strain on their ability to proceed with their everyday lives, both in the short and long term.
The Tribunal in effect makes no distinction between the Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian languages, issuing documents in what it terms "B/C/S" ("Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian") with no regard to differences between the three; see Serbo-Croatian language.

Supporters of this approach respond that since all three forms are mutually intelligible to a high degree (and indeed were officially considered to be single language before the breakup of the former Yugoslavia) separate translations are not needed.
However, despite the fact that most of the indictees are Serbs, the tribunal exclusively uses translators who speak Bosnian and Croatian languages. Some of the indictees have filed complaints about not being able to fully understand the translations.

The Tribunal has not prosecuted the citizens of any NATO countries as a result of NATO's involvement in the Kosovo conflict. NATO spokesman Jamie Shea said the following about the court:

NATO countries are those that have provided the finance to set up the Tribunal, we are amongst the majority financiers, and of course to build a second chamber so that prosecutions can be speeded up so let me assure that we and the Tribunal are all one on this, we want to see war criminals brought to justice and I am certain that when Justice Arbour goes to Kosovo and looks at the facts she will be indicting people of Yugoslav nationality and I don't anticipate any others at this stage.

The Tribunal is funded by approved appropriations made by the Fifth Committee of the General Assembly.
NATO countries contribute to the budget as they are members of the UN and hence they get assesed for it as approved.

However, a significant portion of the budget is voluntary funding. Voluntary funding comes from the EU, Most industrialised states, Japan, Russia and others. The UN General Assembly publishes the Tribunal's annual budget and Audited Financial Statements.

In December 2003, Wesley Clark testified behind closed doors during Slobodan Milo?evi?'s trial. In the 1990s, Clark had spoken with Milo?evi? for more than 100 hours in his role as the head of the U.S. military team during the Dayton Agreement negotiations and as NATO's Supreme Allied Commander in Europe.

Critics of the court took Clark's testimony as a prime example of the court's flaws.
During Clark's cross-examination by Milo?evi? the following exchange is found:

MILO?EVI?: [Interpretation] General Clark, is it true that in an interview that you gave for The New Yorker on the 17th of November, you said that the war that you waged was technically illegal?

[Judge Richard May, presiding, cuts Milo?evi? off and some back and forth follows between the two, in which Judge May reminds Milo?evi? that since Milo?evi? is cross-examining General Clark, he can only address matters regarding which the witness was asked to testify during the examination in chief by the prosecutions counsel. Since the legality of the NATO military action was not discussed during examination in chief, the rules of procedure do not permit Milo?evi? to raise that issue during cross-examination. At the end of the exchange, Milo?evi? asks:]

MILO?EVI?: [Interpretation] So I cannot ask him anything at all about the war waged by NATO against Yugoslavia. Is that what you're saying?

JUDGE MAY: Yes.

MILO?EVI?: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. May, that really is an example showing that this is truly nothing more than a farce.

Milo?evi? was required to call Clark as his own witness to open these lines of questioning.
Critics have questioned whether the Tribunal exacerbates tensions rather than promotes reconciliation, as is claimed by Tribunal supporters. Polls show a generally negative reaction to the Tribunal among the Serb and Croat public.
The majority of Croats and Serbs doubt the tribunal's integrity and question the tenability of its legal procedures (although the Serbs's and Croats's opinions on the court are almost always exactly the opposite with regard to the cases that involve both parties).

On the other hand, Kosovo Albanians and Bosnian Muslims have frequently expressed their high regard for the court and the trust in its impartiality.
Critics, even within the United Nations, have complained of the Tribunal's high cost. The two-year budget for the Tribunal for 2004 and 2005 was $271,854,600 (USD). The cost is borne by all U.N. members.
Critics have also complained of the length of trials, with some extending for several years. Supporters of the Tribunal respond that many of the defendants are charged with multiple crimes against many victims, all of which must be proven beyond reasonable doubt, thus requiring long trials. Simultaneous translation also slows trials.

Ms. G. Goldwater
Switzerland, Geneva
iii44@aol.com
Internet Correspondent and Commentator
http://goldwater.mideastreality.com/
Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC]
[www.euFunding.org ]
FPC REPORT EXPOSES MASSIVE CONTRADICTIONS IN EUROPEAN AID TO PALESTINIANS http://eufunding.org/FPC2004Report.pdf
Europe Underwrites Palestinian Terror [by "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] ]
http://goldwater.mideastreality.com/2006/feb/22_12.html

The world is a dangerous place, not because of those who do evil, but because of those who look on and do nothing.
--Albert Einstein
To paraphrase one of the greatest moral insights of the Talmud, those who show mercy to the cruel will be cruel to the merciful.

You may pass articles, and/or any sections of our websites to your lists, under the condition that all Signatures and Links plus credits are incorporated in full. No excerpts can be used without permission.