A number of researchers found in the sentence Radovan Karadzic language that actually justify Slobodan Milosevic on the part given to him once the charges for genocide in Srebrenica. But can it change anything in the system shameful councils, known as the Hague Tribunal, and the perception of the shape of the Milosevic?
Statement of the British journalist, politician and writer Neil Clark and the American researcher of the Balkans Andy Wilcoxson that the international criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) actually justified the former head of Yugoslavia, Slobodan Milosevic on several key charges (primarily accused of genocide of Muslims in Srebrenica), caused a predictable stir. In theory, the justification for Milosevic, even partial, can destroy the whole system of the Hague Tribunal, is based more on emotional than on the legal prosecution of Serbs of all sins, especially in the outbreak of wars in the Balkans in the 90-ies of the last century. However, the ICTY is not eager to get yourself killed and buried along with the entire NATO policy in the Balkans last 30 years. In General, the situation is more complicated than it seems at first glance, and yet more dangerous.
“Milosevic is the most demonized character of European history since the Second world war. Even the slightest deviation from trend to the personification of evil in his face is impossible”
The so-called justification of Milosevic concluded in section 1460 on page 1303 of more than 2,500-page verdict in the case of the then Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic. The Tribunal acknowledges that in the course of the investigation there was found no evidence that Milosevic “agreed” with the so-called General plan (“intent”) to carry out the genocide of Bosnian Muslims by ethnic cleansing to create a mono-ethnic territory. From the point of view of common sense this means that Milosevic is justified – and the total charges of genocide, and specifically in the case of Srebrenica”, in which Karadzic was convicted, and Milosevic just buckled in for the company (actually, the ICTY, while Milosevic was still alive in Bosnian episodes, and especially on hard).
In this case I had to remove several charges from the Karadzic, and including the notorious Srebrenica. In the first place, has not been proven “creating a criminal group” together with the leadership of Serbia with the purpose of committing genocide. Their essence is the absolutely chusovomu the principle of “joint criminal” (SPD, joint criminal enterprise), and even “joint criminal intent”, which can be brought to the Hague any Serb (and not even a Serb), were in the public or the service contract in Serbia, Montenegro or Republika Srpska in the 90-ies. This creatively redesigned the ICTY vicious principle of “command responsibility”, which is missing in the global legal system, moreover, is not fixed in the Statute of the ICTY: it is clearly spelled out five types of responsibility, but no LDS.
To put it simply, is a form of conspiracy theory, which provides a horizontal responsibility for all members of the “criminal group”, for all actions committed by all its members. Even for those acts which are condemned simply do not know. But the Tribunal earnestly believed that Milosevic, Karadzic, Mladic, Krajisnik, Djordjevic, Krstic, Gvero and in each one they show the finger, once or repeatedly going somewhere and discussed how they would have to do to cleanse Eastern Bosnia from the Muslims through genocide. And then gave the orders to implement it. A sort of “conspiracy “Wannsee”.
Inventing such an amazing pseudouridine wording, the Tribunal had not even tried for her to pick up naukopodobny justification. In 2004 the Trial chamber so straight and said: “Prosecution is not required to prove that the accused possessed the necessary intent to commit genocide on the basis of responsibility (meant that the responsibility for the SAP or “third category”). Although any first-year student of the police Academy knows that the prosecution must demonstrate that the defendant was, first, the opportunity second, the intention to commit the incriminated act, and it is in the wording in which it is fixed in the criminal code.
Moreover, the principle of command responsibility at the ICTY is based on a unique justice of the postulate that the commander “had reason to know” or “should have known” that his subordinates are committing a crime, or even intend to commit a crime. From the point of view of law, where the wording is crucial, this is nonsense. As the accused could claim that he “had to know” someone’s intentions? Negligence offense, but to war crimes it is not applicable. Moreover, the Tribunal deliberately confuses the concept of “war crimes” and “crimes committed in time of war,” but this is a trifle in comparison with the basic legal inventions of the ICTY.
Now go to the genocide. In the UN Convention on genocide there is a phrase “with intent to destroy”, which involves planning of the act. But this planning is necessary to prove – the same Wannsee conspiracy has been proven on the basis preserved in the German foreign Ministry Protocol and the testimony of Eichmann on trial in Israel. To do the same ICTY understandably failed and the Tribunal has taken very narrowly (and in fact – as he wanted) to interpret the concept of “planning” as the most important qualification the accusations of genocide. And in 1999 decided: “No need to these plans were drafted or formulated.” That is, somewhere deep down, the accused wanted to make a genocide in Eastern Bosnia, and then very angry people guessing these secret desires, realized something that the Tribunal and qualifies as genocide. Since then, the tangle of “command responsibility” begins to spin in the opposite direction, forming a “criminal group”, and with it the SAP.
Every one of allegations against senior officials and senior officers of the Serbs based on this shameful logic. The first sentence in Srebrenica, in which appeared the word “genocide” was submitted to Radoslava General Krstic, the commander of Drinkin the corps of the Army of the Serbian Bosna, despite the fact that he was not physically there (it is usually called “alibi” and is a basic rehabilitative concept). The Krstic inventively attributed to “complicity” in genocide according to the SAP and “command responsibility” and was sentenced to 35 years he is serving in the UK. While the international court of justice refused to recognize the genocide of all the Bosniacs, and the ICTY specifically ordered in the judgment the Krstic that there has been a genocide in a particular place, but with the intent to destroy Bosniacs of Srebrenica” and, more broadly, “Muslims of Eastern Bosnia”. But not all of Bosnia – and, apparently, still not all.
The ICTY chooses the rules, laws and “legal” norms, he cancels them, he’s breaking himself interprets. However, he very ingeniously defends, by translating these verbal constructions that take your breath away. And now legally Milosevic, he is not justified. The wording in the verdict against Karadzic are related only to Karadzic and to any other. Even his own fate “uncoupling” from collective the prosecution essentially had no effect: 40 years of prison is essentially a death sentence.
“English and American authors criticizing the Hague, the duty to accused of Pro-Serbian and is now especially fashionable Pro-Russian sympathies”
A case Milosevic does not exist. It is closed in connection with death of the accused. Therefore, the fault of Milosevic has not been proven, he’s not convicted, it’s nothing to rehabilitate or recognize innocent. But his name can now be “tied” to any business or, conversely, to disengage from it. In the same sentence Karadzic spelled out that Milosevic “contributed” to the Bosnian Serbs during the conflict. That is, there is the same “aiding and abetting” under the scheme, had once played in the case of General krstić.
But the point is not whether justified by one single point person who needs no excuse, and the crazy principles of the functioning of the ICTY. For example, only in the case of “the Srebrenica genocide” the Tribunal has indicted four Serbian generals. About Krstici above. The following is Lieutenant-General Milan Gvero, the Deputy Commander of the Republika Srpska Army on morality, law and religion, de facto press Secretary Ratko Mladic. He voluntarily surrendered to the Hague in 2006 and was on duty accused of genocide of Muslims. In 2010, he was sentenced to five years for “inhumane acts” and “persecution”, but the ICTY was forced to withdraw charges of genocide, mass killings and deportation. A month later, he was released early, and in 2013 suffered from a severe form of diabetes the General died in Belgrade from complications after a leg amputation. Third – major-General Radivoje Miletic, chief of operations and training of the General staff of ARS. After a long trial was sentenced to 19 years for crimes against humanity, and 10 years in prison in Scheveningen, where, because of the same diabetes lost vision. Genocide from the wording of the ICTY was also removed. Finally, General Zdravko Tolimir, head of the Department of intelligence and counterintelligence of the General staff of ARS. He was extradited to the Hague in 2007 and in 2012 sentenced to life in prison for genocide, persecution and forcible transfer of the Bosnian Muslims of Srebrenica, in 2016 died in prison.
General Tolimir was the only one who was directly involved in the occupation by Serbian forces of the enclaves of Srebrenica and Zepa. He was the protagonist in the liberation of the French pilots shot down by air defense of Serbia. Participated in the Dayton conference and was responsible for the implementation of the military part of the Paris peace agreements on the part of Republika Srpska. But the accused was “the principle of command responsibility,” as I participated in a “joint criminal act” with the aim of destroying the Muslim population of Eastern Bosnia. Despite the fact that Tolimir really directly planned (the word is appropriate here) operation on the occupation of the enclaves and negotiated with the Muslim commanders, providing them with a corridor and with the command of the Dutch garrison of Srebrenica, the ICTY has not been able to find concrete evidence of his involvement in “crimes against humanity”, sentencing to life in General on the principle of the same SPD.
These sentences of the ICTY itself creates additional “legal precedents”. The declared principle of “command responsibility” outlaws of all former employees and employees of generals Miletic, Krstic, Tolimir and Gvero. Two thirds of staff and all advisers, including civilians, foreigners, volunteers and contractors. It is not a court, not a Tribunal and even the courts, and the Inquisition.
In response to all this criticism the apologists of the Tribunal throw on opponents, the flow of emotions and aggressive libel, argumentum ad hominem. And to any hominem, as you know, you can optionally pick this argumentum, that will not find. For example, British and American authors criticizing the Hague, the duty to accused of Pro-Serbian and is now especially fashionable Pro-Russian sympathies.
But the main arguments of supporters of the ICTY is emotions. Milosevic – the most demonized character of European history since the Second world war. Even the slightest deviation from trend to the personification of evil in his person is impossible. And even the forced amendments in various judgments and decisions, partially exonerating the then head of Yugoslavia (for example, the charges of involvement in the shelling of Sarajevo was indeed revoked) will be disregarded or interpreted in favor of the ICTY. The vicious principle of the Hague Tribunal first gave rise to null and void the language and proof system”, and then formed in the public mind the false narratives that are not only dominant in Western society, but rooted in the Serbian part.
Debunking the ICTY will not happen soon. Too much in the mythology of the 90-ies will have to be revised.Related posts: