ZAGREB, July 28 (Hina) - In the legal sense, and thereupon in the political sense, the biggest omission of the indictments issued by the UN war crimes tribunal (ICTY) against Generals Rahim Ademi and Ante Gotovina was their failure to
mention that the military operation in the pocket of Medak and the action codenamed 'Storm' were a part of a wider international conflict, said Ivo Josipovic, a professor at the law school of Zagreb University. According to him, the criticism, stirred up since the disclosing of the two indictments, has been focused on two things of minor importance, which are significant for the Croatian public but have no greater objective weight for the process, and this refers, for instance, whether the self-styled Republic of Serb Krajina is cited in quotation marks or not. For Josipovic, it is the misplaced interpretation that the UN Tribunal is thus
ZAGREB, July 28 (Hina) - In the legal sense, and thereupon in the
political sense, the biggest omission of the indictments issued by
the UN war crimes tribunal (ICTY) against Generals Rahim Ademi and
Ante Gotovina was their failure to mention that the military
operation in the pocket of Medak and the action codenamed 'Storm'
were a part of a wider international conflict, said Ivo Josipovic, a
professor at the law school of Zagreb University.
According to him, the criticism, stirred up since the disclosing of
the two indictments, has been focused on two things of minor
importance, which are significant for the Croatian public but have
no greater objective weight for the process, and this refers, for
instance, whether the self-styled Republic of Serb Krajina is cited
in quotation marks or not. For Josipovic, it is the misplaced
interpretation that the UN Tribunal is thus trying to give some
permanent state character to Krajina by citing it with no quotation
marks.
He added that the indictment explicitly said that Krajina was a
self-proclaimed entity. In addition it is absolutely clear that the
tribunal treats Krajina (the area occupied by Croatian Serb rebels
in early 1990s) as a part of Croatia's territory, and the court in no
way brings into question Croatia's territorial integrity, the
professor explained.
In his mind, it can be concluded from the indictments that
'disputable areas' are for the Hague-based Tribunal disputable
owing to the conflict and not because of their being a part of
Croatia's territory.
According to Josipovic, the biggest omission in legal terms is the
Tribunal's failure to see that 'Storm' and all what happened in that
period was within a greater war which ravaged this region and that
the conflict had the international character, but the Tribunal
failed to emphasise it.
Both Krajina and all what preceded 'Storm' were results of the
greater Serbian aggression against Croatia, he reminded.
The tribunal's failure is in particular visible in the explanation
of the indictment and in the segment called 'Additional Facts'
where the developments between 1990-1995 were described in a
simplified manner.
The parts recall the establishment of the independent Republic of
Croatia, the self-proclamation of Krajina, but there was no mention
of the international aspects and circumstances in which all of that
happened, and there was no mention of the fact that the self-
proclamation was backed by logistic, military, political
assistance and help of every other kind given by the Federal
Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), Josipovic said.
The professor added that other indictments issued so far by this
tribunal had omissions, but, in his opinion, those mistakes were a
result of preparations which were insufficiently thorough rather
than of political premeditation.
"An indictment is only an initial act for the conduct of a process,
and it is more important what will finally be put in the verdict and
what will happen during the court process," Josipovic said.
He maintains that Croatia must advocate the establishment of facts,
no matter whether somebody likes or dislikes it.
Commenting on the fact that the late president Franjo Tudjman was
mentioned in the Gotovina indictment, Josipovic said that with such
parenthetical remarks about President Tudjman the Tribunal's
prosecutors tried to "compensate the fact" that it was no longer
possible to carry out a legal process against Tudjman.
"His role in the history can only be assessed by historians,
political science experts and citizens, but no court, including the
Hague Tribunal, can tackle Tudjman as an evident or 'inner'
indictee," Josipovic said.
He added that the commanding responsibility cited in the
indictments was a matter which should be proved before the
tribunal, and it remained to be seen whether the generals violated
the principles of the commanding by failing to prevent crimes.
He said it would be insufficient for the verdict to state the fact
that somebody was at the helm of military units when the crime was
perpetrated. It is necessary to prove the connection between the
commander's conduct and a specific crime," Josipovic explained.
He said he could understand that people who had been involved in the
events were sensitive to some imprecise formulations in the ICTY's
indictments. These imprecise formulations can be used by those who
do not want to see that the cooperation (between Zagreb and the
Tribunal) is being carried out in compliance with the Tribunal's
Statute and Croatia's legal order, or by those who advocate the
severance of the relations with the Tribunal, he added.
One of problems of the Tribunal is that it pays scant attention to
unnecessary mistakes which are of no significance for criminal
proceedings.
It is pity that by such conduct the Tribunal renders the position of
all who support its work and international justice more difficult,
the professor said.
He noted that political reactions almost completely neglected
innocent victims. The respect towards innocent victims and
punishment of all who have committed crimes must be Croatia's
policy in relation to the past war events, he concluded.
(hina) ms