veličina fonta

verzija za štampu

copyright

pošalji komentar

Tension Mounts Over Karadzic Trial Location

Radovan Karadzic i Ratko Mladic

11 September 2008  While many victims want the former Bosnian Serb chief tried for his crimes at home, others argue that The Hague remains the only suitable place for such a historic event.


By Merima Husejnovic and Erna Mackic

Representatives of victims in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina want the former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic tried by the State Court in Sarajevo. But while legal experts admit this could bring a sense of “closure” to victims, they fear it could pose an unacceptable security risk for the country.


Many victims of the 1992-5 conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina recalled feelings of bitter disappointment with the trial of the former Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic, which was lengthy and failed to deliver a verdict, as he died four years into the trial.


“We would like it if he came to Sarajevo because he committed his crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina,” Ema Cekic, of the Vogosca branch of the Association of Families of Missing Persons, said. “However, we know our court can’t handle it and I pray to God that the Tribunal can. We have already seen how he behaves and how the court treats him.”


But analysts and legal experts warn that trying Karadzic before the State Court War Crimes Department in Sarajevo could cause problems. “Considering the fragility of the peace and political processes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, it would make more sense to have the trial in The Hague,” Andre de Hoogh, a Dutch professor of international law, told Justice Report.


Bosnian judicial officials have declined to assess their capacities concerning a possible Karadzic trial in Bosnia and Herzegovina. “The position of the BiH Prosecutor’s Office is that senior officials should be tried in The Hague,” spokesperson Boris Grubisic said.


“We do not want to discuss in detail an assessment of our capacities to try indictees such as Radovan Karadzic.”


On the other hand, last year, the then head of the State Prosecutor's Office, Marinko Jurcevic, said his office would be willing, “if necessary”, to take over the indictments against Karadzic and the former Bosnian Serb army chief, Ratko Mladic. State Court President Meddzida Kreso said the same, though she now does not wish to comment publicly on the possibility of a trial in Bosnia and Herzegovina.


Tribunal’s ‘Historic’ Mission:


When the State Court’s War Crimes Department was founded in 2003, Theodor Meron, the then president of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, ICTY, said Karadzic and Mladic had to be tried in The Hague “if the Tribunal wants to carry out its historic mission in full”.


Five years on, now Karadzic has been arrested, the question of where he should be tried has become urgent. One factor fuelling speculation over the location is the slow pace of The Hague Tribunal. Six weeks since Karadzic’s arrest, there is still no final version of the indictment. The prosecution has announced it will not be ready until late September.


Another issue is the fact that the ICTY’s mandate will soon end. The UN Security Council’s so-called exit strategy is for the Tribunal to finish by the close of 2010. This suggests all trials must wind up in little more than two years.


Along with Karadzic, two suspects awaiting trial in The Hague are Stojan Zupljanin and Zdravko Tolimir. There are no indications as to whether or when Mladic and former Croatian Serb leader Goran Hadzic will come to Scheveningen. Even if the latter two were handed over now and their trials began this year, past practice suggests their trials might take years.


The Serbian Radical Party leader, Vojislav Seselj, surrendered in 2003, but his trial began last year; the prosecution is still presenting evidence. Another example is Zdravko Tolimir, arrested and transferred to The Hague in June 2007. His trial has yet to start. There have been five status conferences so far, but the starting date and plan of the trial have not been determined.


On the other hand, the longest trial before the State Court lasted little more than two years. This concerned a total of 11 people, accused of genocide in Srebrenica. The trial of Radovan Stankovic, the first indictee whom the Tribunal handed over to the local judiciary, lasted 11 months. In March 2007, Stankovic was sentenced to 20 years’ jail for crimes against humanity committed in Foca, eastern Bosnia, in 1992. However, two months later on 25 May, he escaped from prison and his whereabouts remain unknown.


Although he is the only such escapee, his flight from justice raises the issue of security in Bosnia’s prisons, which are overcrowded. Research has suggested that prison facilities operate on average at 120 per cent capacity.


Should Karadzic be tried in Sarajevo, the process ought not to last longer than three years, as time limits are stipulated in the country’s Criminal Procedure Code. According to this, the court must start the trial within 90 days of the accused entering a plea.


The ICTY Rulebook stipulates, however, that a status conference must only be scheduled within 120 days of the defendant’s first appearance before the court, and subsequently in intervals of no more than 120 days after the most recent status conference, “in order to organise consultations among parties and ensure expeditious preparation of the trial”.


Former Hague Tribunal Judge Frank Hepfl recently predicted that the Karadzic trial might last two years because there was a long list of witnesses seeking protection.


On August 29, when Karadzic appeared before the court for the second time, Judge Iain Bonomy said that the start of trial would be scheduled “in due course”.


Hague Tribunal spokesperson Nerma Jelacic said it was not possible to speculate on the duration of the Karadzic trial. The Tribunal would “do its best to have another trial that is expeditious and in line with highest international standards”, she told Justice Report.


But Jelacic also said that the Tribunal has asked the UN not to allow for it to be shut down until all cases are completed. “In his most recent address to the UN, on June 4, President Fausto Pocar sent a message that the Tribunal would not close its doors before the remaining fugitives were put on trial,” Jelacic noted.


“He urged the Security Council to make it clear that the international community would bring these indictees to court and that this did not depend on the proposed deadlines in the strategy to end the Tribunal's mandate.”


Security concerns versus ‘closure’ for victims:


Former Hague Tribunal Prosecutor Geoffrey Nice strongly supports trying Karadzic in Sarajevo, mainly because it would make things easier for witnesses and victims. “They could listen to the evidence in their own language and see Karadzic face to face. Besides, it would be easier for the witnesses in the region to testify in Sarajevo than go to The Hague,” Nice said. A Sarajevo trial would also not be “burdened” with deadlines.


Former US Ambassador to UN John Bolton agrees, pointing out that this was the only way that “people are going to assume political and legal responsibility for the crimes committed in their name”.


But many international legal experts disagree. Although in principle they believe that trials should be held as close to the victims and crime scenes as possible, they say Karadzic should be tried in The Hague.


“Karadzic’s trial would probably pose big problems for the court, the most important being security. For the sake of security during trials, especially for the witnesses, it is more practical to have the trials in The Hague. This could also help ensure a fair trial,” Param-Preet Singh of Human Rights Watch told Justice Report.


Singh said security-related matters could affect the fairness of a trial if, for example, the court could not provide protection for witnesses.


Andre de Hoogh also thought a trial in Sarajevo would cause tensions to rise among the communities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that it would be “more sensible” to try Karadzic in The Hague.


“Although a trial in Bosnia might provide a better sense of justice to the victims… I think a trial in Bosnia would open old wounds”, De Hoogh said.


On the other hand, both Singh and De Hoogh admitted there were arguments in favour of a trial in Sarajevo when talking about the victims and their need “to see justice”. “A trial in Bosnia would help the victims tackle their various doubts about what actually happened here, especially about what happened to their families and friends,” De Hoogh said.


Hatidza Mehmedovic, chair of the Srebrenica Mothers Association, cited reasons both for and against a trial in Sarajevo. “If they [The Hague] failed to try Milosevic, I hope they would manage to finish the Karadzic trial,” she said. “But it would be good if he were tried here. For me, this court is very important and has its strength, and its verdicts are stronger than those of the Hague Tribunal.”


The State Court recently found seven former Special Police members guilty of genocide in Srebrenica and sentenced them to between 38 and 42 years in prison. These are the highest sentences pronounced for crimes committed in this war, with the exception of the life sentence that the Hague Tribunal pronounced on Stanislav Galic for the siege of Sarajevo.


Svetlana Broz, director of the Sarajevo-based Gariwo NGO, fears victims will not get much satisfaction from a trial held either in The Hague or Sarajevo, though she ultimately supports a trial before the Tribunal.

“Society in Bosnia and Herzegovina is not mature enough for such a trial; it might be subjected to political manipulation and I also fear it would show how unprepared our judiciary is for such a venture,” she said. “But I am not sure even the ICTY will be able to finish this trial within a reasonable time frame and in an adequate fashion.”


Countries in the region are already trying suspects whom The Hague prosecution has charged before transferring the proceedings to the local judiciary. Since September 2005, Bosnia’s State Court has received six such cases, involving 10 defendants, pursuant to this rule. All but one has been completed or is in the final stage.


However, Jelacic dismissed speculation that the Karadzic trial will be the next to be repatriated in this fashion. “At this point there is no case to suspect that the judges are considering sending back a trial to Bosnia and Herzegovina or Serbia, because the referral bench currently has received no such requests,” she said.


Andre de Hoogh agreed. “Considering that Karadzic was indicted and sent to The Hague, the trial will be held before the ICTY; any wish or request to transfer him back to Bosnia will be ignored,” he concluded.


Merima Husejnovic and Erna Mackic are Justice Report journalists in Sarajevo. Merima@birn.eu.com and erna@birn.eu.com. Justice Report is BIRN`s online publications .