ICTY:"Meronization" of our future
20.03.2013
The International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES) in Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly analyses events in the Middle East and the Balkans. In view of the announced discussion on the activities of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia which will take place at the UN General Assembly on 10 April 2013, IFIMES has analysed the activities of ICTY. The most relevant and interesting sections from the analysis entitled: ICTY: “Meronization” of our future are published below.
ICTY:
“Meronization“ of our future
Supported by some of ICTY judges, Theodor Meron has become the gravedigger of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. With the acquittal of Momčilo Perišić he has established the mechanisms for protecting political and war leaders from eventual criminal prosecution for grave violations of international humanitarian law.
In the analysis entitled “War crimes and genocide: Can Theodor Meron preserve ICTY's reputation?” which was published on 6 July 2012 (link:
http://www.ifimes.org/en/researches/war ... 013-01-24/), IFIMES pointed to practically all the possible consequences and implications of partial acquittal of Radovan Karadžić by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) at the halfway stage of his trial according to which he was found not responsible for genocide in seven municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Although ICTY was initially established to deal with war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the latest partial judgement in the Radovan Karadžić case has opened Pandora's Box and brought Bosnia and Herzegovina back to where it was as the beginning. The results achieved by ICTY have collapsed like a house of cards. This huge mechanism, which had once fought a brave fight together with its founder and the countries from the region in order to realise its mandate, has today sunk into despair of judicial bureaucratism, self-complacency and mere academic discussion.The greatest responsibility for the future of ICTY lies with the current President of ICTY and President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals Theodor Meron, an experienced American (Israeli) lawyer and judge, who should have examined all the possible implications of the partial acquittal in the Karadžić case as well as a series of other issues that have appeared in the final stage of ICTY's work.
THE ANTICIVILISATIONAL JUDGEMENT
The acquittal of Momčilo Perišić, former Chief of the Yugoslav Army General Staff, after he was sentenced to a 27-year imprisonment for supporting and assisting in war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia, has definitely marked ICTY as a political court and Theodor Meron as its gravedigger and the executioner of anticipated international justice. Theodor Meron, ICTY President, presided the Appeals Chamber which acquitted Momčilo Perišić, as well as the Appeals Chamber in case of Croatian generals Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markač who were also acquitted. After Gotovina and Markač acquittals, US State Department issued a press release through its spokesperson Victoria Nuland in which it stressed that „the United States played no role in Gotovina and Markač cases“ and that they did not submit any briefs on behalf of either the prosecution or the defence. Bearing in mind that Croatian military operation “Storm” was carried out in cooperation with the American army, this kind of public release comes as no surprise although it is obvious that US State Department also wanted to distance itself indirectly from Theodor Meron's actions. This position of US administration was quite reasonable after WikiLeaks dispatches from the US Embassy to the Netherlands showed connection between Theodor Meron and the representatives of American Embassy from the moment he came to ICTY. WikiLeaks dispatches covering the period 2002-2004 (see enclosed WikiLeaks dispatches) show that Theodor Meron abused his function as ICTY President and that he revealed all information on ICTY directly to the US Embassy to the Netherlands. Analysts have concluded that due to his narrow interests Meron “involved” US State Department in ICTY's activities and that US State Department has never publicly distanced itself from the in(appropriate) communication with Meron as ICTY President.
Knowing that WikiLeaks dispatches partly cover also a period of 2012, it will be very interesting to see what role Theodor Meron's played in projecting the activities of ICTY.
THE “WAR” BETWEEN THE CHIEF PROSECUTOR AND ICTY PRESIDENT
The acquittal of Momčilo Perišić has set new legal standards for commanding responsibility and Theodor Meron has – together with some of ICTY judges – granted amnesty to political leaders and war commanders for their future war crimes. Although ICTY's appellate judgements are final and can not be contested, ICTY's Office of the Prosecutor took advantage of the appeal discussion in the case of Serbian war and political leaders (Nikola Šainović and others IT -05-87), which took place immediately after the judgement in Perišić case was delivered, and asked the Appeals Chamber to regard the judgement in the Perišić case as an “incident” that diverges from ICTY's usual rules whereby its findings are contrary to the interest of justice. In the appeal discussion Chief Prosecutor Serge Brammertz claimed that Perišić's appellate judgement represents an introduction of new criteria of “concrete orientation” which is not known in common international law, as well as “undefined concepts” which lead to problems in the implementation of the law, whereby ICTY's Appeals Chambers case law has been misinterpreted and the findings in the Perišić judgement further undermine the proper implementation of international humanitarian law.
Brammertz's statement in which he required that ICTY's second Appeals Chamber actually revokes the findings in the Perišić judgement not only opened the “war” between the Prosecutor and some of the judges led by judge Meron but also represents a civilisational clash between those who support the historical position of unpunished crimes (committed by political and war leaders) and those who advocate civilisational norms and international humanitarian law in their true sense.
Prosecutor Brammertz's statement has created a dramatic situation, as in fact it confirmed that after Perišić’s acquittal the UN Security Council as the founder of ICTY has to take urgent action. Namely, the primary goal of establishing ICTY was not to implement “new legal system” through the creation of case law based on the misuse of the international humanitarian law, but to respect the established international legal norms through the consistent application of the international and criminal law. The basic purpose of ICTY was and is to prosecute persons who are most responsible for severe violations of international humanitarian law in the region of former Yugoslavia. However, that goal is undermined with the adoption of judgements that are contrary to the interest of justice.
ICTY – A TOOL IN THEODOR MERON'S HANDS
ICTY has adopted a series of acquittals with which it has set the precedents for future trials against persons who are most responsible for committed war crimes, thus gaining the “right” to resolve all issues in the field of international law on which no legal or political consensus or agreement has been reached for the past 150 years. This inability to reach agreement or consensus was actually caused by the most powerful countries which protected their interests and safeguarded their political and military leaders. Has ICTY, especially its judges, resolved those issues in the interest of our civilisation and future generations? Will the court decisions have a deterrent effect on future threats to human civilisation? UN Security Council has established ICTY in line with Chapter VII of the UN Charter to deal with threats to civilisational peace and security. However, after Perišić's acquittal, ICTY has turned into its own contradiction, jeopardising international peace and security with its actions. Meron and his group of judges have turned all those historical stumbling blocks into grave reality. He has taken sides with those who never wanted international norms and equality before the law to be equally applied to everyone .
The conflict between Brammertz and Meron is not merely a conflict between two high court officials, but a conflict between two concepts and two civilisational approaches to resolving international relations: the conservative and anticivilisational concept represented by ICTY President Theodor Meron and the positive and realistic concept represented by ICTY Chief ProsecutorSerge Bramemertz.
MERON'S WITHDRAWAL AND RESIGNATION – THE ONLY WAY TO RESCUE ICTY'S REPUTATION
What can be expected from future rulings before ICTY if it is presided by Theodor Meron? Nothing but new acquittals and conflicts within ICTY and beyond it. ICTY's judges have forgotten about the reality and the victims; instead they became the puppets in the hands of powerful politics and politicians of their respective countries. Of course there are some judges who are opposing Meron, which is evident from their dissenting opinions in delivered judgements, but the question is if they are strong enough to do anything in this situation.
Unfortunately, in this civilisational legal conflict not only the victims of crimes have been forgotten but the whole region of former Yugoslavia has become “collateral damage” of establishing the new international humanitarian law and legal system in which the most powerful actors can no longer be held responsible for severe violations of international humanitarian law.
Withdrawal of Theodor Meron's mandate by UN Security Council and the US administration and/or his resignation from all functions at ICTY represent the only realistic solution after the scandal provoked by acquittals of Perišić and other defendants. This is not only the question for the UN Security Council, but a general civilisational issue on how to prevent the “Meronization“ of our future.
The IFIMES International Institute is of the opinion that the announced discussion on the activities of ICTY which will take place at the UN General Assembly on 10 April 2013 should focus on strengthening international law and protecting the victims of past and future crimes rather than serving individuals and countries whose aim is to (mis)use the international legal system for their own interests.
Mislim, ne Srba. naravno.
Dakle, dogovorili su se da podjele Bosnu dok je preko 1/3 RH bilo okupirano. Svasta. Ti bas imas bujnu mastu.