|
Justice for
Milosevic
Jun 29th 2001 From The Economist Global Agenda The arrival of Slobodan Milosevic in The Hague to face a war-crimes tribunal is a big step forward for Yugoslavia's efforts at political rehabilitation. But it was economic need as much as the demands of international justice that led to his handing over MONEY may not buy you love; but it will pay for some justice. After 13 years in power, four murderous wars, the whipping-up of vicious ethnic rivalries and the achievement of international isolation, it was a financial deadline that eventually did for Slobodan Milosevic. His delivery on June 28th to a Dutch prison to face a war-crimes tribunal in The Hague came on the eve of a meeting in Brussels of representatives of around 40 donor countries, at which Yugoslavia has received commitments of around $1.3 billion towards the rebuilding of its shattered economy. That Mr Milosevic will now face trial for some of the atrocities perpetrated by his regime nevertheless marks a triumph for international law over the culture of impunity that has disfigured the Balkans. In Yugoslavia itself, however, the handing-over of Mr Milosevic has exposed a rift between the federal authorities and the Serbian government. Mr Milosevic’s arrest in April was on charges of corruption and the abuse of power. (It also coincided with a deadline set by America for Yugoslavia to start co-operating with the tribunal, or forfeit $50m of American aid, plus any hope of help in the future from the IMF and the World Bank.) Vojislav Kostunica, the Yugoslav president, whose defeat of Mr Milosevic in elections last September led to his downfall, had insisted the former dictator should stand trial at home before facing justice abroad. Carla Del Ponte, the war-crimes tribunal’s chief prosecutor, was adamant that Mr Milosevic must stand trial in The Hague, a demand echoed by many western governments. On June 23rd, the Yugoslav government issued a decree providing for the extradition of war-crimes suspects. Mr Milosevic’s lawyers mounted a legal challenge, asking the Constitutional Court to rule that the decree violated a ban on extradition. On June 28th, the court froze the extradition, but the Serbian authorities, led by Zoran Djindjic, the prime minister, ignored the ruling. Mr Kostunica has denounced the extradition as illegal and unconstitutional, and his party has abandoned the parliamentary groups of the ruling coalition in both the Serbian and the federal Yugoslav assemblies. Zoran Zizic, the Yugoslav prime minister and a member of the Montenegrin partner in the coalition, similarly resigned in protest on June 29th, a move likely to trigger the collapse of the government. After the arrest of Mr Milosevic, there were fears that any Yugoslav concessions to the tribunal might stir latent nationalist indignation and prompt serious unrest. Mr Milosevic’s Socialist Party did, after all, win 14% of the vote in Serbia’s parliamentary elections in December. Many Yugoslavs consider their country unfairly persecuted by the West. In the event, thousands have demonstrated in Belgrade to protest against the government’s surrender of Mr Milosevic. But many Serbs seemed pleased that he was gone at last. Certainly, many will be relieved as aid now starts to flow. America had made its participation in the Brussels meeting conditional on progress in co-operation with the tribunal. But this week American officials said they expected to commit “significant” sums towards the rebuilding of Yugoslavia. This week’s events should also help improve the mood at a meeting next month of “London Club” commercial creditors, when Serbia’s crippling external debt will be on the agenda When he first faces the tribunal on Tuesday Mr Milosevic will be charged with war crimes in 1998-99 against ethnic-Albanian civilians living in Kosovo. The indictment alleges that Yugoslav and Serbian armies “looted, pillaged...engaged in a systematic campaign of destruction of property...harassed, humiliated and degraded civilians” and perpetrated massacres. It asserts that Mr Milosevic is responsible for the actions of his subordinates. Prosecutors are also hoping to press charges arising from the earlier—and far bloodier—wars in Croatia and Bosnia from 1992-95. In those conflicts, millions were made homeless, and as many as 250,000 were killed. Mr Milosevic has already made a critical confession: that his government secretly financed Serb militias during the wars in Bosnia and Croatia. He admitted as much not because the authorities were investigating possible war-crimes charges, but to defend himself against accusations that he had embezzled the money. For the tribunal’s prosecutors the trial of Mr Milosevic is a chance to dispel doubts about their effectiveness. When it was established in 1992, the tribunal was widely seen as a fig-leaf to hide the pusillanimity of the western powers, who did not want to intervene in conflagration devouring the Balkans. It took years for the tribunal to establish itself. Its first few trials were of low-level torturers and murderers, and there were complaints that even these took too long. Prosecutors said this was part of a deliberate strategy of starting with the small fry and working up the chain of command. In recent years, that approach has at last started to pay off, with trials of a spate of senior figures. In January, Biljana Plavsic, a former president of the Bosnian Serb Republic, and a key figure in the war, surrendered to the tribunal to face charges of genocide and war crimes. In February, the tribunal sentenced Dario Kordic, a senior Croat leader during the war, to 25 years in prison for crimes against humanity. Four men, all senior officials at the time, were indicted along with Mr Milosevic in May 1999. One of them, Milan Milutinovic, the president of Serbia, has immunity under the constitution, and his office has dismissed reports, following Mr Milosevic's departure, that he may surrender himself to the tribunal, perhaps in order to testify against Mr Milosevic. Critics of the tribunal—among them, the Russian government—argue that it no longer has a role, and may even fan the flames of separatism in Kosovo and Macedonia. The best way for the Yugoslav people to come to terms with the crimes perpetrated in their name, claim critics, is by dealing with Mr Milosevic and his minions themselves. This would also do more, they argue, to establish the rule of law in Yugoslavia than a distant trial before international judges in The Hague. This is Mr Kostunica’s position. The tribunal has, indeed, set aside its pursuit of some people already indicted in favour of local trials. The permanent international criminal court likely to be established in the next few years to try war crimes and crimes against humanity will be empowered to act only when national courts are unwilling or unable to do so. But the current tribunal has been given the power by the UN of taking precedence over any national legal authorities in the strife-torn region. In trying Mr Milosevic, it is providing the most resounding of demonstrations that it is ready to use that power. |
