Mission & Justice

Geoffrey Robertson; 6/8/08

The appearance of Radovan Karadzic in The Hague dock has provided some satisfaction for victims of his Bosnian Serb regime - not only families who grieve for those it massacred but for all of us forced impotently to read of the atrocities at Sarajevo and Srebrenica, a form of wickedness never experienced in Europe since the Nazis. The big question is whether justice will be seen to be done better than in the convoluted and inconclusive trial of Slobodan Milosevic. Can the Karadzic trial be fair, expeditious and effective - and cost-effective as well? The trial will surely benefit from lessons learnt in the course of the Milosevic proceedings, when prosecutors “threw the book” at the defendant and the judges insisted that all charges against him over the three wars he waged - in Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo - should be heard together.

(more…)

30/7/08: See: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24100079-12335,00.html

Bosnia’s war crimes court today sentenced seven Serbs to heavy jail terms after finding them guilty of genocide for the murder of more than 1000 Muslims during the 1995 Srebrenica massacre. Of the seven, six were convicted of direct participation in the murder of more than 1,000 Muslims in a single day in Kravice, near the ill-fated eastern Bosnian town, said Court of Bosnia-Hercegovina judge Hilmo Vucinic.

Aryeh Neier; 24/7/08: The writer, president of the Open Society Institute and a founder of Human Rights Watch, is the author most recently of Taking Liberties: Four Decades in the Struggle for Rights. (c) Project Syndicate, 2008. www.project-syndicate.org

It is only a little more than 15 years ago that the first of the contemporary international courts was created to prosecute those who commit war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. That court, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), may soon mete out justice to a new defendant, following the arrest in Belgrade of Radovan Karadzic, wartime leader of Bosnia’s Serbs. Yet, there is already a persistent theme in criticism of such tribunals: in their effort to do justice, they are obstructing achievement of a more important goal, peace. Such complaints have been expressed most vociferously when sitting heads of state are accused of crimes. The charges filed by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court against Sudanese President Omar Bashir for crimes against humanity and genocide in Darfur are the latest example. Indeed, the denunciations of the justice process this time are more intense and more vehement than in the past. The complaints were also loud in 1995, when the ICTY’s prosecutor indicted Karadzic and his military chief, General Ratko Mladic, and even louder when they were indicted again later in the same year for the massacre at Srebrenica.

(more…)

Steven Freeland; 16/7/08

This week marks the 10th anniversary of the statute of the International Criminal Court. On July 17, 1998, delegates from more than 120 countries attending a conference in Rome voted to establish a permanent international criminal body to act quickly and effectively when the most serious forms of international crime were committed. The Rome Statute confirmed the international community’s aim of “putting an end to impunity”. As a permanent court, the ICC is unlike previous international criminal tribunals established as ad hoc bodies, such as the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals following World War II and the International Criminal Tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. The ICC began its activities in July 2002, following ratification by the requisite 60 countries (there are now 106 state parties). Australia ratified the Rome Statute in July 2002 and remains a strong supporter of universal justice and the work of the court.

(more…)

14/7/08

The Arab League is being called to rescue one of its leaders, President of Sudan, Omar Al Bashir. Reports say he is being considered by the International Criminal Court (ICC) as a suspect in the ongoing conflict and massacres in Darfur. Al Bashir, being the president, holds a moral responsibility for the bloody conflict in the unfortunate region. He, nevertheless, tried to resolve the crisis long before the West got hold of the issue and made it an election banner in more than one country. But the real question is, why is he being singled out? There are many presidents and international figures, amongst us, who could also be tried for crimes against humanity. Yes, we are thinking of Ariel Sharon (AKA: the Butcher of Lebanon) who should have been prosecuted years before Slobodan Milosevic was arrested, and George W. Bush, whose catastrophic foreign policies have resulted directly in the killings of thousands of innocent people in both Afghanistan and Iraq.

(more…)