WELCOME TO IWPRS TRIBUNAL UPDATE No. 494, March 23, 2007 PROBLEMS AHEAD FOR HARADINAJ PROSECUTORS Prosecutors claim witness intimidation, while defence talks of a respected and admired statesman. By Caroline Tosh in London
COURTSIDE: TENSIONS RAISED AT PRLIC TRIAL Prosecution and defence lawyers object to interventions by judges. By Lisa Clifford and Caroline Tosh in London UK REFUSES SPANOVIC EXTRADITION A Croatian Serb accused of war crimes has been allowed to stay in Britain. By Rory Gallivan in London WITNESSES SAY CONDITIONS GOOD IN KULA PRISON Former employees tell Mandic trial that detainees were well fed and treated fairly. By Merdijana Sadovic in Sarajevo BRIEFLY NOTED: KARADZIC RELATIVES INTERROGATED DEFENCE LAWYER APPEALS DISMISSAL NEW ALLEGATIONS OF KARADZIC DEAL WITH THE WEST OTHER NEWS **** NEW AT IWPR ****************************************************************** IRAQ PHOTO DIARIES, NIGHT RAIDS: Peter van Agtmael documents the late-night raids carried out by American and Iraqi troops against the homes of suspected insurgents. This series of photographs was awarded a 2nd place in the General News Stories category at the World Press Photo Awards in 2007. http://iwpr.net/?apc_state=henh&s=o&o=top_galleries_index.html 2007 KURT SCHORK AWARDS: IWPR has launched the call for this years entries for the Kurt Schork Awards in International Journalism. The awards honour fearless freelance news reporting and local journalists who cannot leave their country when the story becomes secondary to survival. Full details of the 2007 awards and how to enter may be found on the Kurt Schork Award pages on IWPRs website www.iwpr.net INTRODUCTION TO THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT Available at http://iwpr.net/?apc_state=henotri&s=o&o=tribunal_icc_00.html **** www.iwpr.net ******************************************************************** TRIBUNAL UPDATE RSS: http://www.iwpr.net/en/tri/rss.xml RECEIVE FROM IWPR: Readers are urged to subscribe to IWPR's full range of free electronic publications at: http://www.iwpr.net/index.php?apc_state=henh&s=s&m=p GIVE TO IWPR: IWPR is wholly dependent upon grants and donations. For more information about how you can support IWPR go to: http://www.iwpr.net/donate.html **** www.iwpr.net ******************************************************************** PROBLEMS AHEAD FOR HARADINAJ PROSECUTORS Prosecutors claim witness intimidation, while defence talks of a respected and admired statesman. By Caroline Tosh in London As the future status of Kosovo is thrashed out in the background, its former prime minister has gone on trial with two ex-subordinates, charged with crimes allegedly committed during the 1998-99 conflict. The March 5 opening statements at the trial of Ramush Haradinaj, a one-time senior officer of the Kosovo Liberation Army, KLA, have highlighted a number of obstacles faced by the prosecutors. Prosecutors contend that they have had difficulties finding enough witnesses to testify in the face of widespread witness intimidation in the war-torn province. They also talk of international opposition to the case. The defence argues there is no case against their client and says the trial can be seen as a victory for those in Serbia opposed to Kosovos independence. Supporters of Haradinaj claim he is on trial to show that the tribunal is even-handed towards both sides in the Kosovo conflict and is not biased against Serbs. There has only been one other KLA trial at the tribunal. It ended in the acquittal of former KLA commanders Fatmir Limaj and Isak Musliu in November 2005, because of a lack of evidence to link them to the murder and torture of Serbs at a KLA prison camp in 1998. Their cases are currently under appeal, along with that of their co-accused Haradin Bala, a former KLA footsoldier, who was sentenced to 13 years. The indictment against Haradinaj, Idriz Balaj and Lahi Brahimaj alleges that between March 1 and September 30, 1998 they were involved in the unlawful removal and mistreatment of Serb civilians and the mistreatment of other civilians perceived to be collaborating with Serbian forces, in the Dukagjin region of western Kosovo. A quick glance at the charge sheet reveals a list of crimes horrifying in their brutality, but on a different scale to those usually prosecuted at the tribunal - with no allegations of mass killing or of the widespread destruction of homes and properties. Carla Del Ponte, the chief prosecutor, underscored the importance of this trial in opening remarks to the trial chamber, which she has made at just two other trials during her seven-year tenure. She emphasised that the case was solely about crimes in Kosovo in 1998, and had nothing to do with any wider diplomatic events. She warned that it would not be an easy prosecution and was one that few supported by their cooperation at both international and local level. Indeed, the trial of this high-level politician could be embarrassing for some. Haradinaj was appointed prime minister under the constitution established by the United Nations Mission in Kosovo, UNMIK, in December 2004, and has been praised by Western diplomats for his leadership skills. Significantly, Del Ponte reminded judges of a further obstacle to the prosecution - the serious, ongoing problem of witness intimidation in Kosovo, which had left many reluctant to testify and some terrified. Witnesses, she said, had received threats both veiled and direct, and one had been threatened only that weekend. "If I have no witnesses appearing in court, I will be obliged to withdraw this indictment," she warned, after presiding judge Alphons Orie interrupted this revelation. But in spite of these problems, she emphasised that the judges should be in no doubt, as the prosecution will prove, that these men - this warlord with his lieutenant and his jailer have blood on their hands. In his opening statement, Haradinajs defence counsel painted a very different picture, of a statesman both respected and admired by the international community and committed to the protection and integration of Kosovos ethnic minorities. The objectives of the KLA in western Kosovo were to protect the local population against Serbian aggression and to fight for an independent and liberated Kosovo, said Emmerson. He dismissed the case against his client as little more than a patchwork of individual allegations against Haradinajs co-accused, tenuously stitched together with the evidence of a tiny handful of witnesses. Emmerson made no reference to Del Pontes claims of witness intimidation, but simply dismissed the prosecution witnesses as demonstrably unreliable and their evidence against Haradinaj as false. But some media reports back Del Pontes claims that witnesses due to testify in the trial are being targeted. Last month, the Serbian radio station B92 reported that a witness had been killed, and that two others had later pulled out due to fears over their personal safety. When quizzed about this at a press briefing on February 28, Olga Kavran, the spokesperson for the Office of the Prosecutor, said there was no information that the witness list had changed and that the number of witnesses filed remained at 98. The prosecution has long contended that witness intimidation is a grave problem in Kosovo which has been administered by the UN since June 1999 and where law and order have traditionally been substituted by clan rule and codes of loyalty and honour. In past addresses to the United Nations Security Council, UNSC, Del Ponte claimed intimidation was widespread and systematic. She also slammed UNMIK for what she said was its less than optimal protection of witnesses in the province. Since Haradinaj was indicted, prosecutors have wrangled with UNMIK over its powers to monitor his political activities. On March 7, judges dismissed the prosecutions call to remove these powers. Prosecutors lodged their motion after a request by Haradinaj to engage in a public appearance with an UNMIK official, arguing that such a move might deter prosecution witnesses from appearing and increase risks to their safety. In an interview with IWPR this week, Neeraj Singh, spokesman for UNMIK, confirmed that witness intimidation in Kosovo is an ongoing problem. But Singh dismissed the prosecution claim that there is a connection between intimidation and Haradinajs public appearances. On no occasion did the prosecution provide information on any specific or concrete risk of harm to witnesses, he said. But past experience at the tribunal would suggest prosecutors could have a problem in finding witnesses prepared to testify in the Haradinaj trial. An IWPR investigation from April 2005 five months into the Limaj trial found that a number of witnesses set to testify against the former KLA members said they had considered dropping out because the threats they received were so severe. It also observed that most witnesses who had testified in the trial by that time were either former comrades of the accused who were reluctant to appear for the prosecution, or alleged victims testifying under protective measures, often in fear of their lives. Of the seven witnesses who have testified in the Haradinaj trial so far, four of them have used similar measures to hide their identity adopting pseudonyms and employing voice and face distortion technology. Michael O'Reilly, Haradinaj's defence team coordinator, said that while it would be naive to suggest that there has never been a case of witness intimidation in Kosovo, there's nothing to link such behaviour to his client. "Haradinaj is an intelligent man he doesn't do that kind of thing - although no-one can categorically exclude the possibility that some hotheads in Kosovo think they're doing a service to their country by intimidating witnesses," he said. O'Reilly argues that the main problem that prosecutors face is not witness intimidation but lack of evidence. "If you look at the indictment you will see that there is very little that is alleged against Haradinaj personally," he added, and what is alleged is simply not supported by evidence. He also argued that the charges against his client are based on assumption, rather than anything more substantial. "People were killed, and there's evidence that some of them may have been in KLA custody at that time. As Haradinaj was assumed to be the most senior KLA officer, it is inferred that he must have been part of it, but there's no evidence," he said. Its an inference built upon an assumption. He argues that the KLA did not have control of the so-called Dukagjin operational zone - as the prosecution alleges - and that there is strong evidence that there were Serb actors operating in the area throughout the indictment period. To support this, he points out that Emmerson referred in his opening speech to a cluster of bodies those of six Albanians that were removed from the original indictment after witness statements suggested Serb forces were responsible for these deaths. Krenar Gashi, a journalist for the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, BIRN, in Kosovo, said that most Kosovo Albanians consider Haradinajs indictment to be politically motivated and a reaction to the indictments of the late Yugoslav president Slobodan Milosevic and former Serbian president Milan Milutinovic for alleged crimes against the Kosovo Albanian civilian population. After the trial of Milosevic and Milutinovic, the international community has to show that it will prosecute Albanians, too. Haradinaj is a victim of this, he said. But Anton Nikiforov, political advisor to Del Ponte, dismisses the notion that the prosecution would indict someone to show balance. "The concept behind this tribunal was to be even-handed there's no mystery about that," he said, "but during the Balkans wars, crimes were committed in different states by different sides and these had to be addressed". "The international tribunal was not established in order to satisfy anybody's political concepts or feelings, but first of all to satisfy the victims of mass crimes. And victims were on all sides, he explained. Nikiforov told IWPR that there was resistance from certain quarters to seeing Haradinaj brought to trial, because of the sense in Kosovo - and elsewhere too - that the KLA and the Albanian community in general were engaged in a noble war against the regime in Belgrade. "The international community supported the noble fight," he added. This was compounded by fears that prosecuting the former premier could undermine stability in Kosovo, he added. But the trial has caused little unrest in Kosovo so far, says Gashi. He said it is not receiving as much coverage in the local press as he expected, and thinks it is being eclipsed in the public eye by the current negotiations over the future status of the province. "Nothing in Kosovo is more important right now than the final status," he said. "Everything else is being ignored." Caroline Tosh is an IWPR reporter. TENSIONS RAISED AT PRLIC TRIAL Prosecution and defence lawyers object to interventions by judges. By Lisa Clifford and Caroline Tosh in London The prosecution and defence have clashed with tribunal judges hearing the case against six Bosnian Croats, saying their intrusive questioning is jeopardising the fairness of the trial. Lawyers for both sides this week made impassioned appeals to the court, arguing that the numerous questions from the bench are disruptive and have made it virtually impossible for lawyers to put their cases effectively. They also repeated a previous complaint about time constraints imposed by the judges. Jadranko Prlic, Bruno Stolic, Slobodan Praljak, Milivoj Petkovic, Valentin Coric and Berislav Pusic were senior political and military leaders of the unrecognised Croat entity known as Herceg Bosna. They face 26 charges of war crimes for the expulsion and murder of Muslims in Bosnia and Hercegovina during the Croatian-Muslim conflict in 1993. They are also accused of being part of a joint criminal enterprise to politically and militarily subjugate and ethnically cleanse Bosnian Muslims and other non-Croats from parts of Bosnia that they claimed as Herceg Bosna and to join this territory to a greater Croatia. Also allegedly involved in this joint criminal enterprise were the former president of Croatia Franjo Tudjman, former Croatian defence minister Gojko Susak and Mate Boban, the president of Herceg Bosna. All three are now deceased. This week, prosecutor Ken Scott told the judges led by Frances Jean-Claude Antonetti that their principal role when hearing the case is that of a neutral, procedural umpire. He said lawyers must be given time to conduct questioning according to their own plans, and not suffer frequent interruptions from the judges as is happening at the moment. If the prosecution has not asked a question, I would say nine times out of 10 there is a very good reason why, said Scott. Prlics lawyer Michael Karnavas agreed that the constant questioning is problematic. He told IWPR its not up to the judges to search for the truth but rather to determine whether the prosecution has proved its case. The judges are trying to take over the questioning, because theyre impatient, and its disruptive, said Karnavas. Judges are paid to be patient. Both sides are struggling to have time to put their case forward. I am asking for my client to be afforded the same procedural rights and fairness afforded to other accused who - unlike Mr Prlic - were not tried under the shadow of the completion strategy. All trials at the tribunal must be concluded by 2008, with the court due to close its doors in 2010. To speed up the proceedings which have been going on for nearly one year and were described by Karnavas this week as by far the most complicated at the tribunal Judge Antonetti in April 2006 ordered the prosecution to cut its case to 400 hours from the 450 it had requested. In November, amid vehement protests from both sides, he slashed the prosecutions allotted time by another 107 hours in order to ensure the case finishes by this summers July recess. Defence lawyers, meanwhile, were given one-sixth of the time used by the prosecution for their cross-examination of each witness. These time constraints, coupled with the controversy over judges questions, contributed to a tense atmosphere in court both this week and last. The mood deteriorated further after remarks from Judge Antonetti that appeared to suggest that the frequent interventions from the bench actually helped the defence. In 90 per cent of the cases - 95 per cent of the cases - most of the questions are in favour of your clients, he said, addressing Karnavas and the other defence lawyers. When you say that it is not a fair trial, I would like you to tell me of another chamber that is to such an extent in favour of the defence. Judge Antonettis comments made at the March 15 session left prosecutors incredulous and Scott sitting with his head down. He told the court on March 19 that he wanted to disappear from the room. I was so embarrassed for this institution. I was embarrassed for myself Frankly, I was even embarrassed for the judges, he said. Judges Arpad Prandler and Stephan Trechsel hurried to distance themselves from their colleague, saying on March 19 that his remarks do not reflect our attitude. They also pointed out they do not keep track of whether answers to their questions are favourable to one side or the other. Then it was Antonettis turn to explain, which he did by blaming French-to-English translation problems, The translation doesnt always come across as it should and doesnt reflect what I said. He then described his remarks as a slip of the tongue and explained what hed meant to say was that in most cases, the answers to questions from the bench were in favour of the defence. He admitted, however, that he had not worked out the percentage. Scott, however, seemed sceptical, saying, The prosecution is very concerned whether the victims, the prosecution and the international community will receive a fair trial in this case. The week ended on a more conciliatory note with a special hearing on March 22 described by Judge Antonetti as positive and constructive to discuss time constraints and other matters. No matter what we do, this trial cannot move any faster than its moving, and its moving way too fast in my opinion, said Karnavas. The case continues next week. Lisa Clifford and Caroline Tosh are IWPR reporters. UK REFUSES SPANOVIC EXTRADITION A Croatian Serb accused of war crimes has been allowed to stay in Britain. By Rory Gallivan in London A British court ruled this week that Milan Spanovic, a Croatian Serb convicted in absentia for 1991 war crimes in the Glina region, should not be extradited to Croatia to face a retrial. The judge hearing Spanovics extradition case said extradition would be unfair since the alleged offences happened so many years ago, and because the Zagreb government has known of his whereabouts in Croatia and subsequently in the UK since May 1997. I am satisfied that the passage of time since the offence is alleged to have been committed would now make it unjust and oppressive to extradite the defendant, and he is therefore discharged, said Judge Timothy Workman. Ben Lloyd, representing the Croatian government, said he would appeal. Croatia sought Spanovics extradition from the UK last year after he was arrested in London on a shoplifting charge. A court in Croatia convicted Spanovic in absentia on November 17, 1993 of war crimes against civilians in the Glina region of Croatia, and sentenced him to 20 years. The conviction relates to events in the villages of Maja and Svracica on August 18, 1991 as Serb paramilitary forces attacked predominately Croat villages between the towns of Glina and Sisak. Spanovic was charged with attacking and torturing civilians and plundering and setting fire to civilian and religious buildings during this attack. His final extradition hearing was held at the City of Westminster Magistrates Court in London on March 20. Explaining why he accepted the passage of time argument against extraditing Spanovic, Judge Workman pointed out that since arriving in the UK in 1998, Spanovic had been in contact with both the Croatian embassy and the UK immigration authorities. Mr Spanovic had, therefore, a reasonable expectation that he could live freely in this country and, as far as I am aware, he has done so in employment, supporting his family and without committing offences, he said. Judge Workman also addressed the question of whether there would be impediments to a fair re-trial. I have in mind that the alleged offences were said to have occurred during a period of civil war in which inevitably evidence will be hard to find or reconstruct, he said. Witnesses memories after such a lengthy period during which radical change took place will have faded or be inaccurate. Inevitably, some witnesses may be unavailable or impossible to trace. However, Judge Workman dismissed the idea - suggested by Spanovics lawyer Julian Atlee in previous hearings - that the Croatian government may have been seeking another Milan Spanovic and not the one before the court. I am satisfied that the defendant is the person being sought by the Croatian authorities, because the particulars given in the request are identical to those given by the defendant in respect of his name, he said. At a previous hearing, held on March 5, Atlee had pointed to an OSCE, human rights report which claimed that Serbs in Croatia accused of war crimes had their offences upgraded so that they would not be covered by a government amnesty. Judge Workman said it appeared that the crimes with which Spanovic was charged were excluded from the amnesty, but that - had he not discharged Spanovic on the basis of passage of time - he would have had to ask for further information and to hear further submissions on the matter. The judge said that since the Croatian government intended to appeal against the decision, Spanovic would still have bail conditions imposed on him. However, Atlee requested that these be relaxed as Spanovic had cooperated fully with the court, observing his bail conditions stringently. Judge Workman agreed that Spanovic would no longer have to wear an electronic tag and reduced the hours at which he was required to be at home. Asked outside the court how he felt about the decision, Spanovic said he was happy. His lawyer issued a statement saying, My client came to the United Kingdom in 1998 because he had faith in the English system of justice. He has always cooperated fully with that system, and he believes that in its judgement today, the facts of the case have been recognised. Rory Gallivan is an IWPR contributor in London. WITNESSES SAY CONDITIONS GOOD IN KULA PRISON Former employees tell Mandic trial that detainees were well fed and treated fairly. By Merdijana Sadovic in Sarajevo The trial of former Bosnian Serb official Momcilo Mandic continued this week at Bosnias war crimes court in Sarajevo with defence witnesses who talked about conditions in the Kula prison. They said there was plenty of food and that conditions in the Serb-run prison east of Sarajevo were very good. It was also claimed that Muslim and Croat detainees received fair treatment, including regular medical assistance. Their testimony contradicted evidence from numerous prosecution witnesses, who said earlier in the trial that the conditions in Kula were appalling and that inmates were beaten, maltreated and often killed. Before the war, Kula was a prison for petty criminals, but when fighting broke out in April 1992, Bosnian Serb forces took over and it became a detention facility for thousands of non-Serb civilians. According to a document presented by the prosecution at the Hague trial of Bosnian Serb leader Mimcilo Krajisnk in November 2004 at which Mandic himself testified for the prosecution some 10,000 Muslim and Croat civilians passed through the prison during the first two years of the Bosnian war. The document was issued in October 1994 by the Republika Srpska, RS, commission in charge of monitoring the exchange of civilian prisoners during the war. Between May and December 1992, Mandic served as justice minister in the Bosnian Serb government and was a close ally of the Hague tribunals top war crimes fugitive, Radovan Karadzic. Mandic is the most senior wartime Bosnian Serb government official to be tried so far in the Bosnian court. According to the indictment, he was solely responsible for the administration of penal facilities in Republika Srpska at the beginning of Bosnias 1992-95 war, and was the direct superior of all the management and staff in those institutions. He is accused of crimes in Kula as well as a prison in Foca, eastern Bosnia, where hundreds of Muslims and Croats were unlawfully detained, tortured and killed. The indictment further alleges that Mandic planned and ordered the persecution of non-Serb civilians on political, national, ethnic and religious grounds and that he failed to take action to prevent these crimes and punish those committing them. In separate hearings held last summer in Sarajevo, Mandic who four years ago was publicly accused by the United States of helping Karadzic escape justice and was described as his major funding source was tried for various financial crimes. He was sentenced to nine years in prison by the Bosnian court for organised crime and corruption at the end of October last year. A month later, his trial on war crimes charges began at the War Crimes Chamber of the same court. The defence started presenting its evidence on February 23 of this year. During the prosecution phase of that trial, many former inmates of the Kula prison testified about appalling conditions in the facility, which was too small to accommodate all the detainees who were brought there between May and December 1992, the time relevant to the indictment. They said sanitary conditions were poor and food was scarce. Many claimed to have lost 20-30 kilograms in just a few months. The court also heard evidence about the beatings, torture and mistreatment the inmates were allegedly subjected to on a daily basis. This week, however, three defence witnesses painted a completely different picture of the prison. The former cook at Kula, Voja Janjetovic, said there was plenty of food and the staff prepared three very versatile meals a day for all detainees. There was no reason for complaints, she claimed. We always prepared enough food for everyone, and those who wanted more would get extra portions, so that no one would be hungry, she said. Janjetovic also told the court that guards and the prison staff ate the same food as the detainees and said sanitary conditions were satisfactory. Medical technician Boro Trapara corroborated Janjetovics testimony. He worked at the Kula infirmary during the war and said he was personally in charge of regular and rigorous controls of the quality of food prepared at Kula. The meals were always freshly prepared and the inmates were getting milk and eggs regularly, he said. He explained there was a farm adjacent to the prison, with some 20,000 chickens and 100 pigs, so we had more than enough food. Trapara also told the court he provided medical assistance to everyone who came to the infirmary and claimed inmates were allowed to visit him any time they needed help. When Judge Almiro Rodrigues asked Trapara whether he ever asked the inmates how and why they were brought to the prison, the witness replied: No, that was not my business. He also said the injuries most inmates had were minor scratches, blisters and bruises and they did not require special treatment. Prosecutor Behaija Krnic then mentioned the name of detainee Bahrudin Becirevic who according to the documents presented in court this week died soon after he received treatment from Trapara. The witness said he remembered Becirevic was wounded, but claimed that happened before he was brought to Kula. I treated his wound, but it was nothing serious, he said. He was adamant that the prisoners were not maltreated, because he would have noticed that. He also dismissed the claims by prosecution witnesses that the sanitary conditions were terrible, saying that was pure nonsense, because there were enough toilets, and they were clean. Mandic who is a trained lawyer also questioned the witness. If the food was that good and everyone received sufficient number of meals, how come so many witnesses at this trial said they lost a lot of weight? That doesnt make sense to me, he said. Trapara replied: Its not uncommon for people to lose weight when they are under a lot of stress, even when they have enough food. I myself lost 14 kilogrammes in 1992 because of the war, and I was eating regularly, he added. When Judge Rodrigues asked Trapara to clarify what kind of stress the detainees were exposed to that could cause such dramatic weight loss, Trapara said he didnt know. It must be because they were imprisoned no one is too happy when they are detained, he said. While the prosecution claims Mandic who had an office at Kula in 1992 was aware thousands of civilians were detained there unlawfully and kept in overcrowded prison cells for months, the defence is trying to prove that the Bosnian Serb army was in charge of those prisoners and that their client had no influence over the army. A third witness who testified this week former prison guard Ranko Tesanovic said that soon after the war broke out in April 1992, the Bosnian Serb army was given one part of the Kula prison to which regular guards, including himself, had no access. He said he believed the army was using its section of the jail to hold captured Muslims and Croats, who were then exchanged for detained Serbs. I dont know what was going on there, he said. That part of the prison was run and guarded by the army. The trial will continue on April 17. Merdijana Sadovic is IWPRs Hague programme manager. BRIEFLY NOTED: KARADZIC RELATIVES INTERROGATED By Caroline Tosh in London The hunt for fugitive suspect Radovan Karadzic continued this week as police in the Montenegrin capital detained and interrogated family members of the former Bosnian Serb leader, say media reports. News agencies reported that police took close family members of Karadzics brother Luka from their homes in Niksic in western Montenegro to a police station in Podgorica. Karadzics sister Radmila Tomovic, her husband and daughter were also taken in for questioning in Niksic, local media reports said. Karadzic was indicted by Hague tribunal prosecutors nearly 12 years ago on charges of committing war crimes during the Bosnian war. He has eluded capture despite a five million US dollar bounty. He and fellow fugitive Bosnian Serb army general Ratko Mladic are thought to be responsible for orchestrating the massacre at Srebrenica in 1995, when some 8,000 Muslim men and boys were executed by Bosnian Serb forces. Reports on Karadzics whereabouts have placed him in areas between Serbia, the Bosnian Serb entity Republika Srpska, and Montenegro. Mladic is thought to be hiding in Belgrade, aided by supporters in the military. This week, Karadzics brother Luka who was in Serbia when his relatives were taken away for questioning said they could provide no information on Radovans whereabouts, and also accused the police of unnecessary harassment, said the Associated Press report. This comes just one month after NATO troops raided the Pale homes of Karadzics children, Sonja and Sasa Karadzic. *** DEFENCE LAWYER APPEALS DISMISSAL By Caroline Tosh in London Former Croatian justice minister Miroslav Separovic has appealed against his dismissal as lawyer for Croatian general Mladen Markac. Separovics appeal, filed on March 20, is also against the trial chamber finding of misconduct in his representation of Markac, who is set to go on trial with former Croatian army generals Ante Gotovina and Ivan Cermak, on May 7. The three Croatians are charged with the murder, persecution and deportation of ethnic Serbs during a Croatian military operation to retake the Serb-held Krajina region in the summer of 1995. Judges dismissed Separovic from the case on March 6, stating that he had a personal interest in the case and was likely to be called to testify. Separovic, a Zagreb attorney, was Croatias justice minister during the period relevant to the indictment. The trial chamber also ordered Markac to find a new lawyer, and told Separovic to assist his replacement until he or she is ready to fully take over the case. The code of ethics for the defence at the tribunal prevents lawyers representing a client where there is a conflict of interest, or where counsel is likely to be a necessary witness in a trial. In his appeal this week, Separovic argued that in their decision to dismiss him, judges did not appropriately take into account the legal arguments and jurisprudence on conflict of interest at the tribunal. He also argued that the judges finding jeopardises and endangers Markacs right to a fair trial due to substantial hardship he would suffer if he were not allowed to choose his own counsel. Attached to the appeal was a statement signed by Markac on March 7, 2006, in which the former general said he was entirely informed of the conflict of interest of his counsel and had full faith in Separovic. Markac also said he thought the judges decision unjust and unlawful as it deprived him of his right to choose his own counsel. *** NEW ALLEGATIONS OF KARADZIC DEAL WITH THE WEST By Merdijana Sadovic in Sarajevo The Banja Luka daily Fokus this week published a document which allegedly shows that former US Balkans envoy Richard Holbrooke signed a deal with Radovan Karadzic promising him 600,000 US dollars and freedom in exchange for his complete withdrawal from politics. The copy of the document, whose authenticity is almost impossible to prove, is dated May 5, 1996 and appears to bear Holbrookes and the former Bosnian Serb presidents signatures. The newspaper claims that in addition to the money intended to cover Karadzics living costs for six years - the deal required him to live at a secret location either in Republika Srpska or in Serbia. The newspaper also alleges that Karadzic honoured his side of the deal and disappeared from public life in June 1996. Several newspapers in Serbia and Montenegro have picked up the same report. Karadzics brother Luka told Fokus this week that he himself was a witness to the agreement and that several international diplomats, including the then Russian foreign minister Yevgeny Primakov were also aware of the deal. He called on Holbrooke to admit the existence of this gentlemens agreement and to reveal its details in public. Holbrooke has vehemently denied the allegations. This is a crude and obvious forgery," Ashley Bommer, Holbrookes chief of staff, told the AFP news agency on March 22. Also this week, the Bosnian Serb authorities again denied that Karadzic was hiding in Republika Srpska, but did not comment on the newspaper report. OTHER NEWS: Judges hearing the case of Dragomir Milosevic, the Bosnian Serb general charged with crimes committed during the 1992-95 siege of Sarajevo, this week conducted a three-day visit to several locations in the city. The judges were accompanied by representatives of both the prosecution and defence. Milosevic succeeded general Stanislav Galic as the commander of the Sarajevo Romanija Corps, SRK, of the Bosnian Serb army in August 1994 until November 1995. He is charged with murder, terror and attacks on civilians in relation to a campaign of sniping and shelling attacks on the city of Sarajevo. It is alleged that as a result of this campaign thousands of civilians of all ages were killed and wounded. Galic has been sentenced on appeal to life imprisonment for his role in the siege. Milosevics trial began on January 11 and is currently in the prosecution phase. *** The Hague tribunal this week dismissed a joint appeal by three Croatian army generals accused of crimes allegedly committed in the 1995 Operation Storm, in which their lawyers challenged the tribunals jurisdiction to try this case. Ante Gotovina, Ivan Cermak and Mladen Markac are due to go on trial on May 7 this year for their alleged role in murders and persecution of Serbs in the Krajina region in southern Croatia in the summer of 1995. The defence teams of the three indicted generals challenged the jurisdiction of the tribunal arguing that there was no armed conflict in Krajina once Operation Storm was completed. They claimed any crimes which might have occurred after Operation Storm officially ended should be prosecuted by the Croatian judiciary, because the tribunal has jurisdiction to try only individuals suspected of committing crimes during an armed conflict. However, in their 26-page ruling this week, the judges rejected all the defence arguments, saying previous cases tried at the tribunal had established the court does have jurisdiction to hear this case. *** NATO troops deployed in Bosnia searched the Sarajevo apartment of Slobodan Zupljanin, who is suspected of helping his relative - the war crimes fugitive Stojan Zupljanin - escape justice. This raid was conducted just a few weeks after Bosnian special police searched several buildings in Banja Luka also belonging to Slobodan Zupljanin. Details of the operation in Sarajevo were not made public. Stojan Zupljanin is one of the four most wanted Bosnian Serb war crimes fugitives indicted for genocide, along with Radovan Karadzic, and Bosnian Serb Army generals Ratko Mladic and Zdravko Tolimir. His indictment remained sealed until 2001, and he has been on the run ever since. *** Judges in the case of six former Serbian officials charged with responsibility for the forcible expulsion of Kosovo Albanians during the 1998 to 1999 conflict have granted a prosecution request for additional time to call three more witnesses. Prosecutors in the trial of former Serbian president Milan Milutinovic, former deputy Yugoslav prime minister Nikola Sainovic, former Yugoslav army chief of staff Dragoljub Ojdanic and police and army officers Vladimir Lazarevic, Sreten Lukic and Nebojsa Pavkovic were due to conclude their case on March 23. But on March 21, they made a request to add three witnesses to their list, which judges agreed to the following day. The witnesses are Former NATO commander Wesley Clark, Zoran Lilic, a former Yugoslav president, and Shaun Burns, former United Nations mission chief in Kosovo. The trial chamber has so far heard from 111 prosecution witnesses in the trial, which began on July 10, 2006. Prosecutors now have until mid-May to present the additional testimonies. The decision on whether or not to allow Clark to testify is pending, and will be rendered by the appeals chamber in April. A defence request to extend the deadline of June 15 for the submission of their witness and exhibit lists was refused by judges. Their case is scheduled to begin at the end of June. **** www.iwpr.net ******************************************************************** TRIBUNAL UPDATE, the publication arm of IWPR's International Justice Project, produced since 1996, details the events and issues at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, ICTY, at The Hague. These weekly reports, produced by IWPR's human rights and media training project, seek to contribute to regional and international understanding of the war crimes prosecution process. The opinions expressed in Tribunal Update are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the publication or of IWPR. Tribunal Update is supported by the European Commission, the Dutch Ministry for Development and Cooperation, the Swedish International Development and Cooperation Agency, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and other funders. IWPR also acknowledges general support from the Ford Foundation. TRIBUNAL UPDATE: Editor-in-Chief: Anthony Borden; Managing Editor: Yigal Chazan; Senior Editor: John MacLeod; International Justice Senior Editor: Merdijana Sadovic; International Justice Project Manager: Katy Glassborow; Reporter: Caroline Tosh; Translation: Predrag Brebanovic, and others. IWPR Project Development and Support: Executive Director: Anthony Borden; Strategy & Assessment Director: Alan Davis; Managing Director: Tim Williams. **** www.iwpr.net ******************************************************************** IWPR builds democracy at the frontlines of conflict and change through the power of professional journalism. IWPR programs provide intensive hands-on training, extensive reporting and publishing, and ambitious initiatives to build the capacity of local media. Supporting peace-building, development and the rule of law, IWPR gives responsible local media a voice. Institute for War & Peace Reporting 48 Grays Inn Road, London WC1X 8LT, UK Tel: +44 (0)20 7831 1030 Fax: +44 (0)20 7831 1050 For further details on this project and other information services and media programmes, go to: www.iwpr.net ISSN 1477-7940 Copyright © 2007 The Institute for War & Peace Reporting **** www.iwpr.net ******************************************************************** If you wish to change your subscription details or unsubscribe please go to: http://www.iwpr.net/index.php?apc_state=henh&s=s&m=p
