SIMONOVIC: ICTY DECISION TO QUASH SUBPOENA IS POLITICALLY IMPORTANT

NEW YORK, 29 Oct (Hina) - Croatia's representative in the United Nations, Ivan Simonovic, on Wednesday expressed satisfaction with a decision of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague saying that the ICTY does not have the right to subpoena sovereign states and their officials. Earlier this year, the Tribunal issued a subpoena duces tecum to Croatia and its Defence Minister Gojko Susak, asking for some documents under threat of punishment. Croatia lodged an appeal, saying one could not threaten a sovereign state in international relations with punishment. Croatia's appeal was rejected by the Trial Chamber, and Croatia lodged its appeal with the Appeals Chamber, which on Wednesday ruled in favour of Croatia and quashed the subpoena. "The Appeals Chamber verdict is a turning point in decision-making on the subpoena. In the legal sense it means that the Hague Tribunal cannot issue subpoenas, or threaten a sovereign state or its high officials when they act on behalf of the state," Simonovic said. "This verdict is very important for the modelling of the international law, but even more important for Croatia are its political implications," he said. "The prosecution supported the idea of starting a new legal practice in the case of Croatia and Minister Susak, a practice which has foundations neither in international law nor in the Tribunal's Statute. One tried in this way to deprive Croatia of the usual position which sovereign states in the international law and international relations have. As it was supposed that many countries do not support the idea of creating a new legal practice which would be applied to all states, one went as far as to qualify Croatia as a 'culprit-state' and interpret the Dayton agreement as a limitation of its sovereignty. With the favourable verdict Croatia has defended its sovereignty on a symbolic level. It is to the credit of the Appeals Chamber that they had the courage to establish the mistake made by the Prosecution and the Trial Chamber and, abiding by the letter and the spirit of the Statute and international law, to accept Croatia's arguments and reach a verdict in its favour," Simonovic said. "In this legal battle with political implications, Croatia was given little chance of success. The success of its appeal has not earned Croatia only sympathies on the international scene, but it undoubtedly earned Croatia respect and reputation. Defending its views Croatia has also defended the general principle which says that in international relations legal regulations apply to all - big and small likewise - the principle of sovereign equality of states. Croatia will make full use of this international success if it brings it into the context of further cooperation, and not dodge cooperation with the Hague Tribunal. Insisting on the application of the same rules and criteria to Croatia as to all other states is a matter of national pride. But the punishment of all war crimes remains a legal, political and moral commitment of the Republic of Croatia. With the Tribunal's decision, Croatia has managed to appear as an equal in international relations with other states. By deciding to punish crimes in its courts and to cooperate with the International Tribunal, Croatia has chosen to be equal to those states which apply high civilisation standards to the behaviour of their citizens," Simonovic concluded. (hina) jn rm 291739 MET oct 97