Informazione
L'uranio fa notizia solo se ad ammalarsi sono militari italiani
1. Lettera a Liberazione e Il Manifesto:
Commissione d’inchiesta su Uranio Impoverito: Vittime militari, e le
popolazioni civili? (Adriano Ascoli)
2. Da fonti giornalistiche:
URANIO: UNAC; NUOVO CASO LINFOMA HODGKIN, MALATO CARABINIERE / E' un
carabiniere l'ultima vittima / A Palazzo Chigi nessuno riceve il
maresciallo gravemente malato
3. Un film sull'uranio impoverito alla Mostra di Venezia
--- LINKS ---
Sulla questione "uranio impoverito" (U238), anche nel caso iracheno,
vedi: /
ON DEPLETED URANIUM IN YUGOSLAVIA AND IRAQ SEE ALSO:
Sick Guard members blame depleted uranium
(by Jane McHugh)
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2810214.php
Depleted Uranium (by Michael Berglin)
http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=14277
Weapon of (long-term) mass destruction (by Felicity Arbuthnot)
http://www.stopusa.be/scripts/print.php?id=20154
WHO 'suppressed' scientific study into depleted uranium cancer fears in
Iraq (by Rob Edwards)
http://www.stopusa.be/scripts/print.php?id=22484
Uranium casualties in Iraq
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=5833&s2=24
DU, weapons of war
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=5777&s2=23
Toxic pollution and killing in Iraq
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=5851&s2=25
MoD accused of dragging feet over uranium test for Gulf war veterans
(by Lee Glendinning)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5023476-103690,00.html
Times (UK): Sick Gulf veterans will be tested for depleted uranium (by
Michael Evans)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/decani/message/83912
Uranium Casualties (by Ron Chepesiuk)
http://www.towardfreedom.com/sep04/uranium_casualties.htm
The Invisible Threat (by Michelle Mairesse)
http://www.hermes-press.com/depluran.htm
=== 1 ===
(lettera inviata il 16 settembre u.s. a Liberazione e Il Manifesto)
Commissione d’inchiesta su Uranio Impoverito: Vittime militari, e le
popolazioni civili?
Già nel "99, in seguito a notizie radiofoniche sfuggite al controllo e
repentinamente censurate, circa l'utilizzo dalle basi italiane in
missioni offensive (ed illegali, in barba alla nostra Costituzione)
contro la Confederazione Jugoslava di aerei A10 (che sapevo dotati di
proiettili con Uranio Impoverito), decisi di avviare una improvvisata
campagna di controinformazione sull'uso di queste armi criminali, per
le conseguenze che avrebbero avuto sulle popolazioni serbe, albanesi e
rom che abitavano, legittimamente, il Kossovo e la Jugoslavia e per i
militari che ne sarebbero rimasti vittime. Si iniziò con una campagna
di sensibilizzazione in seno al movimento fiorentino, e ripetuti fax ed
e-mail alle varie sedi romane. Fu la prima denuncia in questo senso, e
ci volle un pò prima che la cosa trovasse ascolto nei giornali e nelle
forze che almeno a parole si opponevano alla guerra contro la
Jugoslavia. Poi, dopo i primi articoli su Liberazione e Il
Manifesto, il comando NATO ammise, dicendo che l'uranio era in verità
innocuo... ora invece si iniziano a riscontrare danni percentualmente
rilevanti addirittura sui soldati impiegati in quelle zone, che hanno
avuto un contatto indiretto con quelle sostanze, e non sono stati
esposti al momento dell'esplosione di detti proiettili sugli obiettivi
colpiti, quali saranno gli effetti subiti dalle popolazioni colpite in
modo ravvicinato dalle esplosioni? Per ora nessuno possiede cifre
indicative, e non pare che la cosa interessi a molti.
Bisogna anche considerare che con la strategia militare (letteralmente
terroristica) inaugurata dagli USA in Iraq nel 91/92, e proseguita in
Bosnia, Kossovo-Jugoslavia, Afghanistan e Iraq, i principali bersagli
per "convincere" i nemici alla resa sono proprio gli obiettivi civili.
In Jugoslavia l'Esercito Federale perse solo poche decine di carri
armati, ed il suo potenziale rimase (e rimane) pressochè intatto,
mentre venne sistematicamente colpita l'industria chimica,
metalmeccanica (ricordate gli operai bombardati?), gli acquedotti,
ospedali, scuole, mezzi di trasporto pubblico, informazione
giornalistica, infine dopo aver bombardato vicino al perimetro di un
reattore nucleare proprio nei pressi di Belgrado, minacciando una
Chernobyl a due passi da casa nostra, la Jugoslavia firmò la "pace"...
Ora, a distanza di nemmeno 5 anni, nessuno parla più di quella guerra
criminale, degli esiti nefasti della destabilizzazione di quelle terre,
anche con l'appoggio a bande terroriste e mafiose che oggi "governano"
un Kossovo monoetnico e prima compivano orribili delitti contro civili
inermi e religiosi ortodossi con l'appoggio diretto dei "nostri"
servizi militari e mediatici, dove sono rimasti solo albanesi e pochi
serbi "carcerati" nelle loro case (e i rom sono fuggiti, cacciati in
massa dai loro sobborghi), dove la disoccupazione è alle stelle e il
disastro umano, culturale ed ambientale è terribile.
Una commissione seria dovrebbe perlomeno indagare sulle condizioni di
vita, salute, nascita e morte in quella terra (da noi) martoriata e
sull'incidenza di particolari malattie sulle popolazioni fuggite o
espulse dopo la "liberazione" alleata (molti alloggiano ora nei campi
nomadi delle nostre città), se ne scoprirebbero tante... non è un caso
forse che come avviene oggi in Iraq, anche in Serbia ed in Kossovo i
primi provvedimenti delle autorità imposte dai vincitori sono stati la
defenestrazione dell'intero corpo scientifico: coloro cioè che potevano
dare corpo a un'analisi e comparazione dei dati, e a una memoria
scientifica dei danni della guerra. Sarebbe opportuno far circolare
informazioni al riguardo ed impedire un nuovo oblio sulle
responsabilità della nostra classe politica, e parte dei vertici
militari, in simili nefandezze.
Adriano Ascoli (Pisa)
=== 2 ===
URANIO: UNAC; NUOVO CASO LINFOMA HODGKIN, MALATO CARABINIERE
(ANSA) - ROMA, 20 SET - Si chiama Ciro Nastri, 28 anni, carabiniere
scelto del battaglione mobile carabinieri di Laives (Bolzano), con tre
anni di servizio tra Kosovo e Bosnia. E' affetto da linfoma di Hodgkin,
un tumore causato, secondo gli esperti, dalle contaminazioni da metalli
pesanti tra cui l'uranio impoverito. Lo fa sapere l'Unione nazionale
arma carabinieri (Unac).
''In convalescenza da oltre un anno - spiega l'Unac - Ciro Nastri e'
costretto a sottoporsi a proprie spese, a cicli bisettimanali di
chemioterapia presso il policlinico di Napoli. Costretto altresi' al
silenzio dai suoi superiori che hanno tentato di dissuaderlo anche dal
presentare domanda di riconoscimento da causa di servizio''.
Rivoltosi poi all'Unac, e' stato inserito nel lungo elenco di
carabinieri e militari assistiti dall'associazione ''che si e'
mobilitata subito affinche' anche l'ultima vittima non rimanga come gli
altri, abbandonato dallo Stato e dall'Arma dei Carabinieri, trovandosi
tra breve riformato dal servizio senza diritto a pensione, ovvero senza
alcun mezzo di sostentamento almeno secondo le vigenti leggi italiane''.
L'Unione sta approntando una causa civile per il risarcimento dei danni
a tutti i militari, nella quale saranno citati in giudizio il ministero
della Difesa, il Comando Generale dell'Arma dei Carabinieri ed il
comando della divisione mobile che comprende ''tutti i reparti che
hanno mandato e mandano uomini allo sbaraglio senza informarli dei
reali rischi presenti sugli scenari di guerra''. L'Unac, tra l'altro,
ha richiesto da tempo ''una legislazione d'emergenza, che tarda ad
arrivare, al fine di aiutare gli sfortunati colleghi''. (ANSA).
BBB-NE
20/09/2004 16:40
---
http://www.ilmanifesto.it/
il manifesto - 21 Settembre 2004
URANIO - E' un carabiniere l'ultima vittima
L'Unac (unione nazionale arma dei carabinieri) ha denunciato un altro
caso di linfoma di Hodgkin riscontrato in militari che sono stati in
missione in Bosnia e in Kosovo: a esserne affetto è un carabiniere di
28 anni, Ciro Nastri. Verdi e Comunisti italiani hanno chiesto che a
lui e a tutti i suoi colleghi ammalati della stessa sindrome venga
riconosciuta la «causa di servizio». In base alle attuali normative,
infatti, al carabiniere verrà dimezzato lo stipendio al termine della
licenza di 90 giorni per malattia. Dopo un anno scatterà la riforma del
servizio, senza diritto alla pensione, non essendoci il requisito dei
14 anni di lavoro. Domani l'associazione nazionale assistenza vittime
arruolate nella forze armate (Anavafa) ha indetto una manifestazione
davanti a Palazzo Chigi, «affinché vengano ricordati e rispettati i
diritti di tutti i militari di leva e di carriera, che si sono ammalati
o sono morti, senza che ci fosse stato nei loro confronti alcun
riconoscimento».
---
da Liberazione, 23 Settembre 2004
A Palazzo Chigi nessuno riceve il maresciallo gravemente malato
Uranio, Diana resta fuori
Pieno di dolori, senza più fegato né intestino, Marco Diana, 35 anni,
ieri mattina alle undici si è seduto davanti Palazzo Chigi ed ha
aspettato, invano, che qualcuno al governo lo ricevesse. Nonostante un
telegramma di richiesta d'incontro inviato con largo anticipo al
Presidente del Consiglio, Silvio Berlusconi. Così nell'attesa il
maresciallo Diana ieri ha rilasciato interviste, per tutta la giornata,
dosando il fiato e la voce sulla spinta dei dolori che gli mordono il
corpo da quando il suo lavoro gli ha portato in dote un cancro allo
stomaco di ritorno dalla missione in Somalia (sette anni fa). Prova
vivente degli effetti collaterali dell'uranio impoverito, come lui
stesso si definisce.
Diana ieri era a Roma per il sit-in indetto dall'Anavafaf,
l'associazione che tutela i familiari delle vittime arruolate nelle
forze armate, per il rivendicare il diritto al riconoscimento della
causa di servizio per tutti i militari di leva e di carriera deceduti o
gravemente malati: 10.647 i morti tra il 1976 e il 2001 e a questi si
devono aggiungere appunto, le vittime dell'uranio impoverito. A Marco
ancora una volta, hanno sconsigliato di parlare, di portare in piazza i
suoi diritti: il giorno prima di partire per Roma dalla sua casa di
Villamassargia, in Sardegna, ha ricevuto telefonate da soliti vertici
militari: «Volevano la lista degli integratori che mi permettono di
nutrirmi e per i quali spendo in vecchie lire circa tre milioni al
mese. Gli ho risposto di rivolgersi al mio avvocato. Conoscono bene le
mie spese, la lista l'hanno avuta d tempo. Non voglio elemosina ma il
riconoscimento dei danni subiti per mio lavoro». Marco è un fiume in
piena. Alle sue spalle le fotografie di altri ragazzi in divisa che
sono morti. Accanto a lui i genitori, ma anche i genitori degli altri
ragazzi che non ce l'hanno fatta. C'è anche chi si fa coraggio
guardando Marco, come il giovane artificiere reduce da missioni di pace
nei Balcani, 25 anni, un cancro al testicolo asportato quest'anno. Da
quando lo scandalo uranio impoverito è scoppiato, nell'inverno
2000-2001, sono ormai una trentina le morti riconducibili
all'esposizione delle polveri di quello che gli americani chiamano dal
'91 "metallo del disonore". E quasi 300 i militari con malattie legate
ai micidiali proiettili. Sindromi tumorali che si assomigliano tutte,
ma che non portano al riconoscimento della causa di servizio a un
risarcimento per l'impegno nelle missioni di pace che in questo
decennio - dalla Somalia in poi - hanno coinvolto decine di migliaia di
militari italiani. La scorsa settimana è stata finalmente istituita una
commissione di inchiesta del Senato sui danni da uranio impoverito. Ma
è solo l'inizio. «C'è bisono di andare con urgenza al voto in aula per
approvare la commissione. Il rischio di interferire da parte delle
gerarchie militari, che possono ostacolare l'iter parlamentare, è molto
forte. La pratica delle pressioni è peraltro assai consolidata, come
dimostrano gli interventi ricattatori nei confronti di si ammala»
spiega Gigi Malabarba, capogruppo Prc al Senato durante il presidio. Il
timore di insabbiamenti è forte. D'altra parte come sostiene Falco
Accame, presidente dell'Anavafaf, la questione non è tanto medica,
quanto politico-militare. Sarà per questo che Berlusconi o chi per lui
non ha voluto incontrare il maresciallo Diana.
Sabrina Deligia
=== 3 ===
http://www.repubblica.it/2004/i/sezioni/spettacoli_e_cultura/cinema/
venezia/marra/marra/marra.html
"Vento di terra" di Vincenzo Marra con attori non professionisti
Film sulle scelte difficili e la battaglia per la vita di un ragazzo
napoletano
Storia di Enzo, contro la povertà
e la morte da uranio impoverito
La decisione di andare militare in Kosovo per battere la fame
Il ritorno e la scoperta della malattia. Un'opera molto applaudita
dal nostro inviato RITA CELI
La locandina di "Vento di terra"
VENEZIA - Il pubblico della Mostra, sempre severo e spietato con i film
italiani, ha salutato con un lungo applauso la proiezione di "Vento di
terra" di Vincenzo Marra, presentato nella sezione Orizzonti. Il
regista napoletano, per la terza volta a Venezia, ha confermato il
successo conquistato al suo debutto, nel 2001, con "Tornando a casa",
premiato come miglior opera prima alla Settimana della critica. Dopo il
dramma di un gruppo di pescatori siciliani, Marra ha scelto questa
volta di raccontare la storia di Enzo, un ragazzo di 18 anni che vive
con la sua famiglia nel quartiere di Secondigliano a Napoli,
interpretato con grande intensità da Vincenzo Pacilli, attore non
professionista come gran parte del cast composto da Vincenza Modica,
Giovanni Ribera, Edoardo Melone e Francesco Giuffrida (volto noto al
pubblico televisivo per aver curiosamente interpretato lo stesso ruolo
nella fiction di Canale 5 "Carabinieri").
Dopo l'improvvisa morte del padre, per aiutare la mamma e la sorella,
sotto la minaccia dallo sfratto, Enzo deve fare scelte decisive. Non è
un ragazzo spensierato come i suoi coetanei, il lavoro manca e per
evitare di prendere una brutta piega, sceglie la carriera militare. "Il
sottotesto della storia che racconto in questo film potrebbe essere: o
la divisa o la malavita" spiega Marra. "Sono le uniche due alternative
alla fame di molti ragazzi della periferia napoletana, come delle
periferie di tante metropoli di tutto il mondo".
"Questa storia nasce dalla riflessione sulle tante persone che di
fronte a un evento drammatico, come lo è la morte del padre per Enzo,
si ritrovano senza paracadute, senza coperture economiche e sociali,
senza mezzi per sopravvivere. Per molti di loro, a Napoli come nei
ghetti neri delle metropoli americane, l'unica vera alternativa è
partire da soldato in qualche missione ben pagata", afferma il regista.
Le circostanze costringono infatti il ragazzo a una scelta estrema, e
parte per il Kosovo. Al suo ritorno, quando finalmente tutto sembra
andare per il verso giusto, scopre di essere ammalato.
"Io prima scrivo la storia, poi vado a verificare, perché non voglio
raccontare stupidaggini. E in questo caso era tutto vero. Non sono
affatto pessimista" prosegue l'autore. "La realtà che viviamo oggi è
mille volte peggio di quella che si trova ad affrontare Enzo. Nel mio
film è tutto molto realistico. Non mi sono inventato niente, e non
poteva concludersi nel classico lieto fine, non è questa la realtà".
La realtà è che una corrispondenza tra le missioni all'estero e la
malattia "è ancora negata dalle autorità militari", sottolinea Marra,
che ha voluto inserire nel film un avvocato che sta raccogliendo prove
per conto di altri soldati che, come Enzo, si sospetta si siano
ammalati per l'uranio impoverito. Un personaggio che costringe ancora
una volta il protagonista a reagire. "Il finale lascia molte speranze”
conclude l'autore, "non soltanto perché la sua famiglia ha trovato una
casa, ma anche perché quell'avvocato rappresenta una società civile che
non si arrende".
(7 settembre 2004)
1. Lettera a Liberazione e Il Manifesto:
Commissione d’inchiesta su Uranio Impoverito: Vittime militari, e le
popolazioni civili? (Adriano Ascoli)
2. Da fonti giornalistiche:
URANIO: UNAC; NUOVO CASO LINFOMA HODGKIN, MALATO CARABINIERE / E' un
carabiniere l'ultima vittima / A Palazzo Chigi nessuno riceve il
maresciallo gravemente malato
3. Un film sull'uranio impoverito alla Mostra di Venezia
--- LINKS ---
Sulla questione "uranio impoverito" (U238), anche nel caso iracheno,
vedi: /
ON DEPLETED URANIUM IN YUGOSLAVIA AND IRAQ SEE ALSO:
Sick Guard members blame depleted uranium
(by Jane McHugh)
http://www.armytimes.com/story.php?f=1-292925-2810214.php
Depleted Uranium (by Michael Berglin)
http://english.pravda.ru/printed.html?news_id=14277
Weapon of (long-term) mass destruction (by Felicity Arbuthnot)
http://www.stopusa.be/scripts/print.php?id=20154
WHO 'suppressed' scientific study into depleted uranium cancer fears in
Iraq (by Rob Edwards)
http://www.stopusa.be/scripts/print.php?id=22484
Uranium casualties in Iraq
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=5833&s2=24
DU, weapons of war
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=5777&s2=23
Toxic pollution and killing in Iraq
http://www.uruknet.info/?s1=1&p=5851&s2=25
MoD accused of dragging feet over uranium test for Gulf war veterans
(by Lee Glendinning)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,5023476-103690,00.html
Times (UK): Sick Gulf veterans will be tested for depleted uranium (by
Michael Evans)
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/decani/message/83912
Uranium Casualties (by Ron Chepesiuk)
http://www.towardfreedom.com/sep04/uranium_casualties.htm
The Invisible Threat (by Michelle Mairesse)
http://www.hermes-press.com/depluran.htm
=== 1 ===
(lettera inviata il 16 settembre u.s. a Liberazione e Il Manifesto)
Commissione d’inchiesta su Uranio Impoverito: Vittime militari, e le
popolazioni civili?
Già nel "99, in seguito a notizie radiofoniche sfuggite al controllo e
repentinamente censurate, circa l'utilizzo dalle basi italiane in
missioni offensive (ed illegali, in barba alla nostra Costituzione)
contro la Confederazione Jugoslava di aerei A10 (che sapevo dotati di
proiettili con Uranio Impoverito), decisi di avviare una improvvisata
campagna di controinformazione sull'uso di queste armi criminali, per
le conseguenze che avrebbero avuto sulle popolazioni serbe, albanesi e
rom che abitavano, legittimamente, il Kossovo e la Jugoslavia e per i
militari che ne sarebbero rimasti vittime. Si iniziò con una campagna
di sensibilizzazione in seno al movimento fiorentino, e ripetuti fax ed
e-mail alle varie sedi romane. Fu la prima denuncia in questo senso, e
ci volle un pò prima che la cosa trovasse ascolto nei giornali e nelle
forze che almeno a parole si opponevano alla guerra contro la
Jugoslavia. Poi, dopo i primi articoli su Liberazione e Il
Manifesto, il comando NATO ammise, dicendo che l'uranio era in verità
innocuo... ora invece si iniziano a riscontrare danni percentualmente
rilevanti addirittura sui soldati impiegati in quelle zone, che hanno
avuto un contatto indiretto con quelle sostanze, e non sono stati
esposti al momento dell'esplosione di detti proiettili sugli obiettivi
colpiti, quali saranno gli effetti subiti dalle popolazioni colpite in
modo ravvicinato dalle esplosioni? Per ora nessuno possiede cifre
indicative, e non pare che la cosa interessi a molti.
Bisogna anche considerare che con la strategia militare (letteralmente
terroristica) inaugurata dagli USA in Iraq nel 91/92, e proseguita in
Bosnia, Kossovo-Jugoslavia, Afghanistan e Iraq, i principali bersagli
per "convincere" i nemici alla resa sono proprio gli obiettivi civili.
In Jugoslavia l'Esercito Federale perse solo poche decine di carri
armati, ed il suo potenziale rimase (e rimane) pressochè intatto,
mentre venne sistematicamente colpita l'industria chimica,
metalmeccanica (ricordate gli operai bombardati?), gli acquedotti,
ospedali, scuole, mezzi di trasporto pubblico, informazione
giornalistica, infine dopo aver bombardato vicino al perimetro di un
reattore nucleare proprio nei pressi di Belgrado, minacciando una
Chernobyl a due passi da casa nostra, la Jugoslavia firmò la "pace"...
Ora, a distanza di nemmeno 5 anni, nessuno parla più di quella guerra
criminale, degli esiti nefasti della destabilizzazione di quelle terre,
anche con l'appoggio a bande terroriste e mafiose che oggi "governano"
un Kossovo monoetnico e prima compivano orribili delitti contro civili
inermi e religiosi ortodossi con l'appoggio diretto dei "nostri"
servizi militari e mediatici, dove sono rimasti solo albanesi e pochi
serbi "carcerati" nelle loro case (e i rom sono fuggiti, cacciati in
massa dai loro sobborghi), dove la disoccupazione è alle stelle e il
disastro umano, culturale ed ambientale è terribile.
Una commissione seria dovrebbe perlomeno indagare sulle condizioni di
vita, salute, nascita e morte in quella terra (da noi) martoriata e
sull'incidenza di particolari malattie sulle popolazioni fuggite o
espulse dopo la "liberazione" alleata (molti alloggiano ora nei campi
nomadi delle nostre città), se ne scoprirebbero tante... non è un caso
forse che come avviene oggi in Iraq, anche in Serbia ed in Kossovo i
primi provvedimenti delle autorità imposte dai vincitori sono stati la
defenestrazione dell'intero corpo scientifico: coloro cioè che potevano
dare corpo a un'analisi e comparazione dei dati, e a una memoria
scientifica dei danni della guerra. Sarebbe opportuno far circolare
informazioni al riguardo ed impedire un nuovo oblio sulle
responsabilità della nostra classe politica, e parte dei vertici
militari, in simili nefandezze.
Adriano Ascoli (Pisa)
=== 2 ===
URANIO: UNAC; NUOVO CASO LINFOMA HODGKIN, MALATO CARABINIERE
(ANSA) - ROMA, 20 SET - Si chiama Ciro Nastri, 28 anni, carabiniere
scelto del battaglione mobile carabinieri di Laives (Bolzano), con tre
anni di servizio tra Kosovo e Bosnia. E' affetto da linfoma di Hodgkin,
un tumore causato, secondo gli esperti, dalle contaminazioni da metalli
pesanti tra cui l'uranio impoverito. Lo fa sapere l'Unione nazionale
arma carabinieri (Unac).
''In convalescenza da oltre un anno - spiega l'Unac - Ciro Nastri e'
costretto a sottoporsi a proprie spese, a cicli bisettimanali di
chemioterapia presso il policlinico di Napoli. Costretto altresi' al
silenzio dai suoi superiori che hanno tentato di dissuaderlo anche dal
presentare domanda di riconoscimento da causa di servizio''.
Rivoltosi poi all'Unac, e' stato inserito nel lungo elenco di
carabinieri e militari assistiti dall'associazione ''che si e'
mobilitata subito affinche' anche l'ultima vittima non rimanga come gli
altri, abbandonato dallo Stato e dall'Arma dei Carabinieri, trovandosi
tra breve riformato dal servizio senza diritto a pensione, ovvero senza
alcun mezzo di sostentamento almeno secondo le vigenti leggi italiane''.
L'Unione sta approntando una causa civile per il risarcimento dei danni
a tutti i militari, nella quale saranno citati in giudizio il ministero
della Difesa, il Comando Generale dell'Arma dei Carabinieri ed il
comando della divisione mobile che comprende ''tutti i reparti che
hanno mandato e mandano uomini allo sbaraglio senza informarli dei
reali rischi presenti sugli scenari di guerra''. L'Unac, tra l'altro,
ha richiesto da tempo ''una legislazione d'emergenza, che tarda ad
arrivare, al fine di aiutare gli sfortunati colleghi''. (ANSA).
BBB-NE
20/09/2004 16:40
---
http://www.ilmanifesto.it/
il manifesto - 21 Settembre 2004
URANIO - E' un carabiniere l'ultima vittima
L'Unac (unione nazionale arma dei carabinieri) ha denunciato un altro
caso di linfoma di Hodgkin riscontrato in militari che sono stati in
missione in Bosnia e in Kosovo: a esserne affetto è un carabiniere di
28 anni, Ciro Nastri. Verdi e Comunisti italiani hanno chiesto che a
lui e a tutti i suoi colleghi ammalati della stessa sindrome venga
riconosciuta la «causa di servizio». In base alle attuali normative,
infatti, al carabiniere verrà dimezzato lo stipendio al termine della
licenza di 90 giorni per malattia. Dopo un anno scatterà la riforma del
servizio, senza diritto alla pensione, non essendoci il requisito dei
14 anni di lavoro. Domani l'associazione nazionale assistenza vittime
arruolate nella forze armate (Anavafa) ha indetto una manifestazione
davanti a Palazzo Chigi, «affinché vengano ricordati e rispettati i
diritti di tutti i militari di leva e di carriera, che si sono ammalati
o sono morti, senza che ci fosse stato nei loro confronti alcun
riconoscimento».
---
da Liberazione, 23 Settembre 2004
A Palazzo Chigi nessuno riceve il maresciallo gravemente malato
Uranio, Diana resta fuori
Pieno di dolori, senza più fegato né intestino, Marco Diana, 35 anni,
ieri mattina alle undici si è seduto davanti Palazzo Chigi ed ha
aspettato, invano, che qualcuno al governo lo ricevesse. Nonostante un
telegramma di richiesta d'incontro inviato con largo anticipo al
Presidente del Consiglio, Silvio Berlusconi. Così nell'attesa il
maresciallo Diana ieri ha rilasciato interviste, per tutta la giornata,
dosando il fiato e la voce sulla spinta dei dolori che gli mordono il
corpo da quando il suo lavoro gli ha portato in dote un cancro allo
stomaco di ritorno dalla missione in Somalia (sette anni fa). Prova
vivente degli effetti collaterali dell'uranio impoverito, come lui
stesso si definisce.
Diana ieri era a Roma per il sit-in indetto dall'Anavafaf,
l'associazione che tutela i familiari delle vittime arruolate nelle
forze armate, per il rivendicare il diritto al riconoscimento della
causa di servizio per tutti i militari di leva e di carriera deceduti o
gravemente malati: 10.647 i morti tra il 1976 e il 2001 e a questi si
devono aggiungere appunto, le vittime dell'uranio impoverito. A Marco
ancora una volta, hanno sconsigliato di parlare, di portare in piazza i
suoi diritti: il giorno prima di partire per Roma dalla sua casa di
Villamassargia, in Sardegna, ha ricevuto telefonate da soliti vertici
militari: «Volevano la lista degli integratori che mi permettono di
nutrirmi e per i quali spendo in vecchie lire circa tre milioni al
mese. Gli ho risposto di rivolgersi al mio avvocato. Conoscono bene le
mie spese, la lista l'hanno avuta d tempo. Non voglio elemosina ma il
riconoscimento dei danni subiti per mio lavoro». Marco è un fiume in
piena. Alle sue spalle le fotografie di altri ragazzi in divisa che
sono morti. Accanto a lui i genitori, ma anche i genitori degli altri
ragazzi che non ce l'hanno fatta. C'è anche chi si fa coraggio
guardando Marco, come il giovane artificiere reduce da missioni di pace
nei Balcani, 25 anni, un cancro al testicolo asportato quest'anno. Da
quando lo scandalo uranio impoverito è scoppiato, nell'inverno
2000-2001, sono ormai una trentina le morti riconducibili
all'esposizione delle polveri di quello che gli americani chiamano dal
'91 "metallo del disonore". E quasi 300 i militari con malattie legate
ai micidiali proiettili. Sindromi tumorali che si assomigliano tutte,
ma che non portano al riconoscimento della causa di servizio a un
risarcimento per l'impegno nelle missioni di pace che in questo
decennio - dalla Somalia in poi - hanno coinvolto decine di migliaia di
militari italiani. La scorsa settimana è stata finalmente istituita una
commissione di inchiesta del Senato sui danni da uranio impoverito. Ma
è solo l'inizio. «C'è bisono di andare con urgenza al voto in aula per
approvare la commissione. Il rischio di interferire da parte delle
gerarchie militari, che possono ostacolare l'iter parlamentare, è molto
forte. La pratica delle pressioni è peraltro assai consolidata, come
dimostrano gli interventi ricattatori nei confronti di si ammala»
spiega Gigi Malabarba, capogruppo Prc al Senato durante il presidio. Il
timore di insabbiamenti è forte. D'altra parte come sostiene Falco
Accame, presidente dell'Anavafaf, la questione non è tanto medica,
quanto politico-militare. Sarà per questo che Berlusconi o chi per lui
non ha voluto incontrare il maresciallo Diana.
Sabrina Deligia
=== 3 ===
http://www.repubblica.it/2004/i/sezioni/spettacoli_e_cultura/cinema/
venezia/marra/marra/marra.html
"Vento di terra" di Vincenzo Marra con attori non professionisti
Film sulle scelte difficili e la battaglia per la vita di un ragazzo
napoletano
Storia di Enzo, contro la povertà
e la morte da uranio impoverito
La decisione di andare militare in Kosovo per battere la fame
Il ritorno e la scoperta della malattia. Un'opera molto applaudita
dal nostro inviato RITA CELI
La locandina di "Vento di terra"
VENEZIA - Il pubblico della Mostra, sempre severo e spietato con i film
italiani, ha salutato con un lungo applauso la proiezione di "Vento di
terra" di Vincenzo Marra, presentato nella sezione Orizzonti. Il
regista napoletano, per la terza volta a Venezia, ha confermato il
successo conquistato al suo debutto, nel 2001, con "Tornando a casa",
premiato come miglior opera prima alla Settimana della critica. Dopo il
dramma di un gruppo di pescatori siciliani, Marra ha scelto questa
volta di raccontare la storia di Enzo, un ragazzo di 18 anni che vive
con la sua famiglia nel quartiere di Secondigliano a Napoli,
interpretato con grande intensità da Vincenzo Pacilli, attore non
professionista come gran parte del cast composto da Vincenza Modica,
Giovanni Ribera, Edoardo Melone e Francesco Giuffrida (volto noto al
pubblico televisivo per aver curiosamente interpretato lo stesso ruolo
nella fiction di Canale 5 "Carabinieri").
Dopo l'improvvisa morte del padre, per aiutare la mamma e la sorella,
sotto la minaccia dallo sfratto, Enzo deve fare scelte decisive. Non è
un ragazzo spensierato come i suoi coetanei, il lavoro manca e per
evitare di prendere una brutta piega, sceglie la carriera militare. "Il
sottotesto della storia che racconto in questo film potrebbe essere: o
la divisa o la malavita" spiega Marra. "Sono le uniche due alternative
alla fame di molti ragazzi della periferia napoletana, come delle
periferie di tante metropoli di tutto il mondo".
"Questa storia nasce dalla riflessione sulle tante persone che di
fronte a un evento drammatico, come lo è la morte del padre per Enzo,
si ritrovano senza paracadute, senza coperture economiche e sociali,
senza mezzi per sopravvivere. Per molti di loro, a Napoli come nei
ghetti neri delle metropoli americane, l'unica vera alternativa è
partire da soldato in qualche missione ben pagata", afferma il regista.
Le circostanze costringono infatti il ragazzo a una scelta estrema, e
parte per il Kosovo. Al suo ritorno, quando finalmente tutto sembra
andare per il verso giusto, scopre di essere ammalato.
"Io prima scrivo la storia, poi vado a verificare, perché non voglio
raccontare stupidaggini. E in questo caso era tutto vero. Non sono
affatto pessimista" prosegue l'autore. "La realtà che viviamo oggi è
mille volte peggio di quella che si trova ad affrontare Enzo. Nel mio
film è tutto molto realistico. Non mi sono inventato niente, e non
poteva concludersi nel classico lieto fine, non è questa la realtà".
La realtà è che una corrispondenza tra le missioni all'estero e la
malattia "è ancora negata dalle autorità militari", sottolinea Marra,
che ha voluto inserire nel film un avvocato che sta raccogliendo prove
per conto di altri soldati che, come Enzo, si sospetta si siano
ammalati per l'uranio impoverito. Un personaggio che costringe ancora
una volta il protagonista a reagire. "Il finale lascia molte speranze”
conclude l'autore, "non soltanto perché la sua famiglia ha trovato una
casa, ma anche perché quell'avvocato rappresenta una società civile che
non si arrende".
(7 settembre 2004)
Da: ICDSM Italia
Data: Mar 28 Set 2004 15:29:14 Europe/Rome
A: icdsm-italia@ yahoogroups. com
Oggetto: [icdsm-italia] Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense
Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense
1. International Tribunal or Star Chamber? On the ICTY's decision to
impose counsel on Slobodan Milosevic
(BRITISH HELSINKI HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP)
2. Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense: U.S.-Created Court
Gags Yugoslav President
(Sara Flounders / INTERNATIONAL ACTION CENTER)
3. US Policy Analyst James Jatras: 'Groundwork For Terrorist Network'
Laid In Bosnia In 1990s, US Planned War On Yugoslavia In August 1998
4. Milosevic Trial Suspended As Lawyers Grapple With
Unwilling Witnesses
=== 1 ===
International Tribunal or Star Chamber?
BRITISH HELSINKI HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP
http://www.bhhrg.org/LatestNews.asp?ArticleID=47
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/izbor/jugoslavija/2004-09-18.html
Date: 13 September 2004
On 10th September 2004, the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia imposed defence counsel on its most famous defendant,
Slobodan Milosevic. This decision overturned previous rulings: the
Prosecution had tried, at the beginning of the trial, to force a lawyer
on Milosevic, and the judges had addressed the issue several times
during the hearings.
On 3rd July 2001, the very first day of the trial, the presiding judge,
the late Sir Richard May, said, "Mr. Milosevic, I see that you're not
represented by counsel today. We understand that this is of your own
choice. You do have the right, of course, to defend yourself."[1]
On 30th August, Judge May again said, "The accused is entitled to
represent himself."[2] The judge announced that amici curiae would be
appointed in order to ensure that the trial was fair. May emphasised
that the role of the amici would not be to represent the accused.
Despite these clear statements, the Prosecution again argued that
counsel should be imposed. Although Judge May had already ruled on
this, Judge Patrick Robinson intervened and made the following
statement:
"Mr. Ryneveld, I have heard your submission. However, I do not consider
it appropriate for the Chamber to impose counsel upon the accused. We
have to act in accordance with the Statute and our Rules which, in any
event, reflect the position under customary international law, which is
that the accused has a right to counsel, but he also has a right not to
have counsel. He has a right to defend himself, and it is quite clear
that he has chosen to defend himself. He has made that abundantly
clear. The strategy that the Chamber has employed of appointing an
amicus curiae will take care of the problems that you have outlined,
but I stress that it would be wrong for the Chamber to impose counsel
on the accused, because that would be in breach of the position under
customary international law."[3]
(Judge Robinson has since become the presiding judge, following the
death of Judge May.) After Robinson had made his intervention, May
returned to the subject a third time, saying "Let me add this, Mr
Ryneveld: Yes, that is the view of the Trial Chamber, that it would not
be practical to impose counsel on an accused who wishes to defend
himself."[4]
As if this were all not enough, Judge May returned to the subject again
on 11th December. "Mr. Milosevic," he said, "there's one matter we want
to raise with you. It's this: You haven't appointed counsel to defend
you. As you know, it's your right to defend yourself if you wish,
although you may wish to reconsider that in the light of the complexity
and seriousness of these charges. But that's a matter for you."[5]
The reason why the judges kept to this position is indeed that the
right of a accused person to defend himself is indeed enshrined in the
statute of the International Criminal Tribunal. Article 21.4.d states,
"The accused shall be entitled . to defend himself in person." No
qualification or exceptions are laid out here. Although the same
article also says that the accused is entitled "to have legal
assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of justice
so require, and without payment by him in any such case if he does not
have sufficient means to pay for it," it is quite clear that this
article does not mean the court has right to impose counsel, but
instead that the accused has the right to a lawyer if he needs one.
This interpretation is itself used by the ICTY's own "Directive on the
Assignment of Defence Counsel," dated 28th July 2004, which reaffirms
the right of an accused to defend himself (Article 5). This Directive
makes it clear that the assignment of counsel is a right enjoyed by the
accused, not a right of the court to assign one if the accused wishes
to defend himself.
The right to defend oneself is enshrined in other documents too. Using
the very words which have since been integrated into the ICTY's own
statute, Article 6.3.c of the European Convention on Human Rights
states: "Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following
minimum rights: . to defend himself in person." As with the ICTY
statute, no exceptions or derogations from this are provided for.
Perhaps the ICTY, being a UN body, does not think it is bound by the
European Convention even though it has direct legal force in many
European states. But even the United Nations' own documents also
provide for this right. Article 14.3.d. of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights also uses the same language: "In the
determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be
entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: . to
defend himself in person". No exceptions or derogations are provided:
indeed the right to defend oneself in person is a "minimum guarantee".
It is a core right.
In spite of this, on 8th November 2002, the Prosecution again applied
for defence counsel to be imposed. It argued that the defendant should
have counsel imposed for health reasons. Again, the Trial Chamber
rejected this, in an oral ruling on 18th December 2002. On 4th April
2003, the Trial Chamber issued a long document laying out its reasons
for refusing to impose counsel.[6] It reviewed the ICTY's own statute
and concluded rapidly that "A plain reading of this provision [Article
21.4.d] indicates that there is a right to defend oneself in person and
the Trial Chamber is unable to accept the Prosecution's proposition
that it would allow for the assignment of defence counsel for the
Accused against his wishes in the present circumstances."
The Trial Chamber then launched into a long discussion of the relevant
law, drawing on cases from around the world. It argued that the
imposition of counsel was a feature only of inquisitorial systems, not
of the adversarial systems used by the ICTY. In support of its view
that the imposition of counsel was inadmissible, the Trial Chamber
quoted the US Supreme Court case Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806
(1975), which states, "We confront here a nearly universal conviction,
on the part of our people as well as our courts, that forcing a lawyer
upon an unwilling defendant is contrary to his basic right to defend
himself if he truly wants to do so." The Supreme Court held that
imposition of counsel would violate the spirit of the 6th amendment.
The ICTY Trial Chamber commented:
"It [i.e. the Supreme Court] pointed out that only the sixteenth
century Star Chamber in the long history of English legal history
adopted a practice of forcing counsel upon an unwilling defendant in
criminal proceedings, and recounted Stephen's comment on this
procedure: 'There is something specially repugnant to justice in using
rules of practice in such a manner as to debar a prisoner from
defending himself, especially when the professed object of the rules so
used is to provide for his defence.' "
The ICTY Trial Chamber went on, "There is a further practical reason
for the right to self-representation in common law. While it may be the
case that in civil law systems it is appropriate to appoint defence
counsel for an accused who wishes to represent himself, in such systems
the court is fulfilling a more investigative role in an attempt to
establish the truth.
In the adversarial systems, it is the responsibility of the parties to
put forward the case and not for the court, whose function it is to
judge. Therefore, in an adversarial system, the imposition of defence
counsel on an unwilling accused would effectively deprive that accused
of the possibility of putting forward a defence." [emphasis added]. It
also concluded that, "The obligation of 'putting a case,' i.e. putting
forward the defence version of events if it differs from that put
forward by a witness, is reflected in Rule 90 (H) of the Rules. As the
Amici Curiae note, such an obligation cannot be fulfilled by counsel
who is not instructed by an accused as to the defence to put forward."
The Trial Chamber then reviewed some of the other international
documents which uphold the right of a defendant to defend himself,
including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
mentioned above, the
American Convention on Human Rights (Article 8.2.d), the European
Convention on Human Rights (mentioned aboive), and the Statute of the
new International Criminal Court. (Article 67.1.d) In this statute, the
right to defend oneself is limited only when the defendant behaves in a
disruptive manner in the court room. (The Rwanda tribunal, indeed, has
imposed counsel on a defendant for this very reason.) The Trial Chamber
discussed the imposition of counsel in a case in Germany, a case which
went to the European Court of Human Rights,[7] but rightly found this
case to be irrelevant to the
Milosevic case because the defendant was not defending himself.
Discussing other cases too, the Trial Chamber concluded that the only
relevant case did not allow for exceptions to the general right to
defend oneself (paragraph
36). "The international and regional conventions (in similar language)
plainly articulate a right to defend oneself in person . In the Trial
Chamber's view, it is appropriate to be guided by the ICCPR and the
Human Rights Committee's interpretation of it, which confirms the right
to self-defence and rejects the imposition of defence counsel on an
unwilling accused." (paragraph 37)
The Trial Chamber then turned to practicalities and concluded that
imposition of counsel could simply not work because the defendant would
refuse to instruct counsel (paragraph 38). Winding up its discussion,
it says that the imposition of counsel can occur only when the
defendant behaves in such a disruptive manner that he has to be removed
from the courtroom (paragraph 40) and concludes (paragraph 41) that
although the Trial Chamber has the duty to ensure an expeditious trial,
it may do this only by respecting the rights of the accused as laid out
in Article 21 of its own statute, i.e. by respecting the right of a
defendant to defend himself.
All the main points of this reasoning were summarily thrown out of the
window when Milosevic's defence started. On 10th September 2004, the
Trial Chamber ruled that counsel would be imposed.[8] The reasons given
for this astonishing volte-face are simply disingenuous. Referring to
the 4th April 2003 ruling, Judge Robinson said, "the Trial Chamber,
while holding that the accused had a right to defend himself also held
in paragraph 40 that the right to defend oneself in person is not
absolute." This is disingenuous because the Trial Chamber explicitly
laid down the circumstances in which the right might be limited
(disruptive behaviour leading to expulsion from the court room). Even
though Milosevic's health had been an issue ever since the trial
started in early 2002, the Trial Chamber made no mention of this as a
possible reason for imposing counsel on 4th April 2003.
In September 2004, the Trial Chamber suddenly adopted the Prosecution's
argument that Milosevic had not been taking his medicine as prescribed,
but it seemed not to care that it is obviously a basic human right to
take medication as one sees fit - unless the defendant is mentally
incompetent either to stand trial or regulate his medicinal intake.
Crucially, the Trial Chamber offered no legal argument, i.e. by quoting
precedent or law, for using the health of the accused as a reason for
imposing counsel. It simply rescinded all its earlier decisions, which
had been grounded in law and precedent; it stated that international
and domestic law provided precedents for imposing counsel, without
quoting a single one; and it said that it was "in the interests of
justice" to impose counsel. No definition was given of these interests.
The Trial Chamber concluded, "The fundamental duty of the Trial Chamber
is to ensure that the trial is fair and expeditious," but in fact based
its decision to impose counsel was grounded solely on expediency, at
the expense of fairness. It should also be remembered that the bench in
the Milosevic trial permitted the prosecution to ramble on for months
with irrelevant "expert" testimony consuming sessions far beyond its
original allotted time while the prosecutors tried to induce someone -
anyone - from Serbia, to plead direct incrimination of Milosevic - all
without success.
Even by the appalling standards of the ICTY, the one-sidedness of this
decision to impose defence counsel (after reducing the time available
to the defendant's case to about half that granted to the prosecution)
is shocking.
By going against all its own previous rulings on the matter, the
Tribunal's decision is a pure example of arbitrary rule. As such, the
ICTY has demonstrated itself to be in contempt of the rule of law. It
suggests that achieving a verdict is the overriding concern of the
Tribunal and given that it was the Prosecution which demanded the
imposition of counsel on Mr. Milosevic, it is difficult to avoid the
conclusion that conviction at all costs has become the guiding
principle of the Tribunal.
[1] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010703IA.htm, page 1
[2] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010830SC.htm, page 7
[3] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010830SC.htm, page 17
[4] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010830SC.htm, page 18
[5] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/011211MH.htm, page 149
[6] http://www.un.org/icty/milosevic/trialc/decision-e/040403.htm
paragraph 18
[7] Croissant v. Germany, European Court of Human Rights ("ECHR"), Case
No. 62/1001/314/385, Judgement, 25 September 1992 ("Croissant v.
Germany").
[8] http://www.un.org/icty/milosevic/trialc/order-e/040910.htm
=== 2 ===
INTERNATIONAL ACTION CENTER (IAC)
Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense
U.S.-Created Court Gags Yugoslav President
By Sara Flounders
In the most drastic maneuver yet to silence the truth of the U.S./NATO
war on Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) on Sept. 2 denied former President Slobodan Milosevic
of Yugoslavia the internationally recognized right to defend himself in
court. This comes after the prosecution took two years presenting its
side of the case. The
ruling came on the very day Milosevic was finally to begin calling
witnesses in his own defense.
President Milosevic vigorously presented his opening statement of his
own defense in person for two days on Aug. 31 and Sept. 1, immediately
before the Trial Chamber decided he "is not fit enough to represent
himself." He was apparently "fit enough" to perform that task.
The former president's introductory remarks set the tone for a strong
indictment of the U.S., Germany and other NATO powers for their 10-year
war of aggression against Yugoslavia. His defense case was expected to
continue in the same manner, exposing the crimes of the imperialist
powers in the Balkans.
Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general and co-chair of the
International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic (ICDSM), stated in
a letter to the court: "Under International Law, every person accused
of a crime has the right to represent himself in person in the court.
"The appearance of President Milosevic representing himself alone
during the prosecution case for over two years, nearly 300 trial days,
cross examining nearly 300 prosecution witnesses, coping with 500,000
documents, and 30,000 pages of trial transcript, then at the very
beginning of his presentation of his own defense being silenced and
lawyers he rejects placed in charge of his destiny, speaks of
injustice."
Canadian attorney and international law expert Tiphaine Dickson, who is
assisting Milosevic's supporters, said: "The prosecutor is attempting,
yet again, to force President Milosevic to accept legal counsel to
represent him, using his poor health as an excuse. President Milosevic
has insisted that he represent himself from the onset. Within the U.S.,
the Supreme Court has recognized this as a right under the Sixth
Amendment to the Constitution. To refuse to allow him this right would
turn the already illegal ICTY hearings into a star-chamber proceeding."
Historically, even in past stage-managed trials where the prosecution
held total control and a guilty verdict was assured beforehand, many
defendants have had the right to represent themselves. Nelson Mandela
facing a racist apartheid court in South Africa, Fidel Castro brought
before the court of the Bastita dictatorship, or Georgi Dimirov before
the Nazi court in the 1930s could speak in their defense.
Over 100 legal experts, lawyers and jurists from 17 countries signed a
letter entitled, "Imposition of Counsel on Slobodan Milosevic Threatens
the Future of International Law and the Life of the Defendant." This
letter urges the United Nations to allow Milosevic to continue
defending himself against war crimes charges.
The internationally circulated letter warns that imposing a defense
lawyer against Milosevic's wishes would violate international law. It
is illegal even under the statute of the Yugoslav tribunal and also
under the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights.
IMPOSING COURT-APPOINTED LAWYERS
Tiphaine Dickson, who drafted the petition, said the UN tribunal
prosecuting Milosevic is trying to impose a defense counsel to strip
him of a defense "that may be embarrassing" to the court.
Ramsey Clark's letter also points out that "The very lawyers appointed
by the Trial Chamber have a direct conflict of interest. They have
served by appointment of the court as 'friends of the Court.' You
cannot serve two masters. Having served as friend of the Court, that
same counsel selected by the Court to represent President Milosevic
cannot ethically serve as his counsel."
The two lawyers who have been appointed as defense council against
Milosevic's express wishes are Stephen Kay and his daughter Gilian Kay
Higgins. The two were appointed Amicus Curiae (friends of the court)
against Milosevic's wishes in the prosecution part of the trial. In
that appointed position, Stephen Kay was made very much aware of
Milosevic's insistence on his legal right to conduct his own defense.
Stephan Kay has long played a highly dubious role as appointed council
in earlier trials of both the Yugoslav and the Rwanda Tribunals. Where
he was appointed there were convictions in the trials. His appointment
also allowed the courts to establish dangerous legal precedents for
other trials.
Many outrageous judicial abuses have been legitimized by the ICTY over
the past 10 years. The court accepts the use of hearsay evidence,
offers reduced sentences in exchange for testimony, and allows the use
of anonymous witnesses and closed sessions.
ICTY transcripts show pages and pages blanked out because sensitive
issues have been discussed in court. "Sensitive" issues means those
relating to the U.S. role.
In December 2003, when the former supreme commander of NATO, Wesley
Clark, testified in the Milosevic trial, the court agreed to let the
Pentagon censor its proceedings. The transcripts were not released
until Washington had given its approval.
A COURT TO JUSTIFY OCCUPATION
U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright was behind this court's
creation in 1993. Since then, it has been financed and organized by
funds from the U.S. and Britain. Its 1,300 personnel are also
overwhelmingly from Britain and the U.S.
From the very beginning the court has functioned to justify the U.S.,
British and NATO role in the break-up of the Yugoslav Federation.
The decision to charge President Milosevic with war crimes was made
toward the end of the 78-day U.S./NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. By
charging the elected Yugoslav president, the U.S./NATO forces placed
increased pressure on him to capitulate rather than participate in the
cease-fire negotiations or oppose the long-term U.S./NATO occupation of
Kosovo.
The entire 1999 U.S. war against defenseless Yugoslavia, the bombing of
every major city, the destruction of 480 schools and 33 hospitals,
along with bridges, roads and the entire industrial infrastructure, was
all presented by the imperialist propaganda machine as necessary to
stop an alleged genocide in the Serbian province of Kosovo.
NATO officials constantly referred to "mountains of corpses" and
"killing fields." In April 1999, the U.S. State Department claimed that
500,000 Kosovo Albanians had been rounded up and killed by Serbs. Other
reports used the number of 100,000 feared dead.
NO MASS GRAVES
Just as the weapons of mass destruction have never been found in Iraq,
the charge of massacres, mass graves, ethnic cleansing and genocide
proved to be an utter fabrication in Kosovo.
Immediately after the war, 20 forensic teams were sent to Kosovo by the
International Criminal Court at The Hague from 15 NATO countries,
including the U.S.. They dug all summer of 1999 at the very sites where
supposed witnesses had reported mass graves.
By October 1999 they reported back to Chief Prosecutor for the Tribunal
Carla Del Ponte that they had been unable to find any mass graves in
Kosovo at all. They had found a total of 2,108 corpses in individual
graves. How many of that number may have been killed by the NATO
bombing they did not speculate.
All of this material, including the reports of NATO destruction of
Yugoslav cities and the Tribunal's own forensic teams' inability to
find mass graves, was to be part of Milosevic's rebuttal. The attempt
to remove Milosevic as his own attorney is an admission that President
Milosevic is not guilty of the war-crimes charges. It adds to the U.S.
and NATO guilt in planning,
executing and carrying out a 10-year war that broke up a strong and
successful Yugoslav Federation into a half- dozen weak colonies and
neo-colonies subservient to U.S. and Western European imperialism.
The breakup of the Yugoslav Federation meant that the many industries
of Yugoslavia, including steel, auto, pharmaceuticals, chemical plants,
railroads, mines, refining and processing, that had previously been
owned by the whole population or by the workers in those plants have
been forcibly
privatized. U.S., British and German corporations now own them. Social
programs, pension funds, free education and free health care have been
decimated. It is this history of the crime of occupation that NATO's
court is trying to silence by depriving Yugoslav President Milosevic of
his right to present his own defense.
---
Flounders is co-director of the International Action Center. She was
scheduled to testify in the opening phase of former Yugoslav President
Slobodan Milosevic's defense at the International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague, Netherlands. Flounders had met with
President Milosevic in Scheveningen Prison at The Hague for six hours
on June 28 to help prepare testimony for the defense. Milosevic has
been held for three years at the prison. Material from a book published
by the International Action Center in 2002, Hidden Agenda: U.S./NATO
Takeover of Yugoslavia, edited by Flounders and John Catalinotto, was
to be the basis of her testimony at the trial.
posted: September 10, 2004
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@action-mail. org
En Espanol: iac-cai@action-mail. org
web: http://www.iacenter.org
=== 3 ===
http://www.seeurope.net/en/Story.php?StoryID=53101&LangID=1
Seeurope.net
September 9, 2004
Bosnia Helped Give Birth to Terrorist Network, Expert
Says
A former U.S. policy analyst, testifying for the
defense at Slobodan Milosevic's war-crimes trial
yesterday, said part of the groundwork for what became
the al Qaeda terrorist network was laid during the
Bosnian war in the 1990s breakup of Yugoslavia.
The testimony of analyst James Jatras appeared to be
aimed at showing that the U.S. government probably
knew that Islamic fundamentalists were fighting in
Bosnia during the 1992-95 war and in the Serbian
province of Kosovo in the 1990s.
Milosevic has claimed that the Serbs in Kosovo and the
former Yugoslav republics were fighting wars of
self-defense against what he described as persecution
by Croats and Muslims. In his opening statement last
week, he accused the United States of being part of an
anti-Serb conspiracy that also included Germany, NATO,
Islamic countries and the Vatican.
....
Jatras, testifying at Milosevic's resumed trial, had
compiled several reports on Yugoslavia when he worked
for the Senate Republican Policy Committee from 1985-
2000.
Reinforcing his earlier conclusions, Jatras said the
U.S. commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001,
attacks on the United States had found that the
"groundwork for a true terrorist network was being
laid" in 1990s Bosnia.
He called it "a small footprint movement" that later
became recognized as al Qaeda.
Jatras was questioned by Steven Kay, a lawyer assigned
last week as Milosevic's defense counsel over the
defendant's angry objections. The former Serb leader
conducted his own defense for two years until doctors
ruled that he was in danger of a heart attack if he
continued.
---
http://www.b92.net/english/news/
index.php?&nav_category=2&nav_id=29798&order=priority&style=headlines
B92 (Serbia and Montenegro)
September 9, 2004
Racak “excuse” for NATO bombing
THE HAGUE – A defence witness for Slobodan Milosevic
has told the Hague Tribunal that former US president
Bill Clinton had decided to bomb Serbia in August
1998.
James Jatras, who was a senior foreign policy analyst
in the Republican party at the time, said that the
claim of a massacre of Albanian civilians in the
village of Racak in January 1990 provided a pretext
for the attacks to begin.
Jatras told the court that this meant that the
decision to attack Yugoslavia had been taken two
months before the date on which the Hague indictment
claims that Milosevic had begun to conduct his “joint
criminal enterprise” against Kosovo Albanians.
=== 4 ===
http://www.turkishpress.com/turkishpress/news.asp?ID=27294
Agence France-Presse
September 15, 2004
Milosevic Trial Suspended As Lawyers Grapple With
Unwilling Witnesses
THE HAGUE - The UN court here has suspended the trial
of Slobodan Milosevic until October 12 to allow the
defence lawyers assigned to the former Yugoslav
president more time to prepare their case, the judges
said.
Presiding judge Patrick Robinson said he was giving
British lawyer Steven Kay and his co-counsel more time
to get "an overview of the witness situation."
Kay had earlier said he would need more time and
resources to deal with the witness list as Milosevic
was not cooperating with his defence counsel.
He said the delay would enable him to get to grips
with Milosevic's original witness list of 1,631 names
and see who should be called first.
Kay earlier complained that many witnesses scheduled
to appear in the defence case had refused to come
because Milosevic is no longer conducting his own
defense.
"Of the 23 witnesses we have been able to contact, 20
have refused to testify ... We have got senior people
from foreign governments refusing to cooperate,
ambassadors," Kay said.
Milosevic insisted that he had nothing to do with the
witnesses refusal to show up.
"It is up to the witnesses. I do not want to influence
the witnesses in any way," he said.
To show why people were unwilling to take the stand he
quoted from a letter of the former Canadian ambassador
to Yugoslavia from 1990 to 1992, James Bissett, who
called the proceedings in The Hague "a Stalinist show
trial".
"I do not want to be part of this travesty of
justice," Milosevic quoted Bissett as saying.
Russian parliamentarian Nikolai Ryzhkov publically
announced he had refused to testify last week. A group
of five French witness also announced they would not
come if they were questioned by the imposed lawyers.
A group of thirty defence witnesses from
Serbia-Montenegro also said they would not testify at
the trial in protest at the decision to impose a
lawyer, the Beta news agency reported on Tuesday.
Among the thirty - mostly Milosevic's one-time allies
- were former Montenegrin president Momir Bulatovic,
historians Slavenko Terzic and Vasilije Krestic,
writer Momo Kapor and ex-Croatian Serb leader Borislav
Mikelic, Beta reported.
Kay had asked the court on Wednesday to allow
Milosevic to question his witnesses first, followed by
questioning by the assigned counsel. The lawyer said
he believed the witnesses would appear if Milosevic
was the one examining them.
The defence team also demanded new medical tests to
determine if Milosevic was fit enough to represent
himself but both motions were rejected.
Kay has also said he would ask for the trial to be
suspended pending an appeal against his assignment.
The court explicitly refused to grant suspension on
those grounds but nonetheless said that it was likely
that within the adjournment they approved to give Kay
more time the appeal will be decided as well.
Milosevic on Wednesday again blasted the court and his
imposed lawyer.
"I insist you give me back my right to defend myself,
to call my witnesses," he said.
When the judges told him that they forced him to take
counsel because medical reports showed he was too ill
to continue to act as his own lawyer Milosevic blamed
the court for his health problems. ....
"Imposing work and deadlines on me while I was ill ...
led to a serious deterioration of my health,"
Milosevic told the court. ....
==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27
00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-4828957
email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006
intestato ad Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA
causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC
sito internet:
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.htm
Data: Mar 28 Set 2004 15:29:14 Europe/Rome
A: icdsm-italia@ yahoogroups. com
Oggetto: [icdsm-italia] Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense
Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense
1. International Tribunal or Star Chamber? On the ICTY's decision to
impose counsel on Slobodan Milosevic
(BRITISH HELSINKI HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP)
2. Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense: U.S.-Created Court
Gags Yugoslav President
(Sara Flounders / INTERNATIONAL ACTION CENTER)
3. US Policy Analyst James Jatras: 'Groundwork For Terrorist Network'
Laid In Bosnia In 1990s, US Planned War On Yugoslavia In August 1998
4. Milosevic Trial Suspended As Lawyers Grapple With
Unwilling Witnesses
=== 1 ===
International Tribunal or Star Chamber?
BRITISH HELSINKI HUMAN RIGHTS GROUP
http://www.bhhrg.org/LatestNews.asp?ArticleID=47
http://www.artel.co.yu/en/izbor/jugoslavija/2004-09-18.html
Date: 13 September 2004
On 10th September 2004, the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia imposed defence counsel on its most famous defendant,
Slobodan Milosevic. This decision overturned previous rulings: the
Prosecution had tried, at the beginning of the trial, to force a lawyer
on Milosevic, and the judges had addressed the issue several times
during the hearings.
On 3rd July 2001, the very first day of the trial, the presiding judge,
the late Sir Richard May, said, "Mr. Milosevic, I see that you're not
represented by counsel today. We understand that this is of your own
choice. You do have the right, of course, to defend yourself."[1]
On 30th August, Judge May again said, "The accused is entitled to
represent himself."[2] The judge announced that amici curiae would be
appointed in order to ensure that the trial was fair. May emphasised
that the role of the amici would not be to represent the accused.
Despite these clear statements, the Prosecution again argued that
counsel should be imposed. Although Judge May had already ruled on
this, Judge Patrick Robinson intervened and made the following
statement:
"Mr. Ryneveld, I have heard your submission. However, I do not consider
it appropriate for the Chamber to impose counsel upon the accused. We
have to act in accordance with the Statute and our Rules which, in any
event, reflect the position under customary international law, which is
that the accused has a right to counsel, but he also has a right not to
have counsel. He has a right to defend himself, and it is quite clear
that he has chosen to defend himself. He has made that abundantly
clear. The strategy that the Chamber has employed of appointing an
amicus curiae will take care of the problems that you have outlined,
but I stress that it would be wrong for the Chamber to impose counsel
on the accused, because that would be in breach of the position under
customary international law."[3]
(Judge Robinson has since become the presiding judge, following the
death of Judge May.) After Robinson had made his intervention, May
returned to the subject a third time, saying "Let me add this, Mr
Ryneveld: Yes, that is the view of the Trial Chamber, that it would not
be practical to impose counsel on an accused who wishes to defend
himself."[4]
As if this were all not enough, Judge May returned to the subject again
on 11th December. "Mr. Milosevic," he said, "there's one matter we want
to raise with you. It's this: You haven't appointed counsel to defend
you. As you know, it's your right to defend yourself if you wish,
although you may wish to reconsider that in the light of the complexity
and seriousness of these charges. But that's a matter for you."[5]
The reason why the judges kept to this position is indeed that the
right of a accused person to defend himself is indeed enshrined in the
statute of the International Criminal Tribunal. Article 21.4.d states,
"The accused shall be entitled . to defend himself in person." No
qualification or exceptions are laid out here. Although the same
article also says that the accused is entitled "to have legal
assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of justice
so require, and without payment by him in any such case if he does not
have sufficient means to pay for it," it is quite clear that this
article does not mean the court has right to impose counsel, but
instead that the accused has the right to a lawyer if he needs one.
This interpretation is itself used by the ICTY's own "Directive on the
Assignment of Defence Counsel," dated 28th July 2004, which reaffirms
the right of an accused to defend himself (Article 5). This Directive
makes it clear that the assignment of counsel is a right enjoyed by the
accused, not a right of the court to assign one if the accused wishes
to defend himself.
The right to defend oneself is enshrined in other documents too. Using
the very words which have since been integrated into the ICTY's own
statute, Article 6.3.c of the European Convention on Human Rights
states: "Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the following
minimum rights: . to defend himself in person." As with the ICTY
statute, no exceptions or derogations from this are provided for.
Perhaps the ICTY, being a UN body, does not think it is bound by the
European Convention even though it has direct legal force in many
European states. But even the United Nations' own documents also
provide for this right. Article 14.3.d. of the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights also uses the same language: "In the
determination of any criminal charge against him, everyone shall be
entitled to the following minimum guarantees, in full equality: . to
defend himself in person". No exceptions or derogations are provided:
indeed the right to defend oneself in person is a "minimum guarantee".
It is a core right.
In spite of this, on 8th November 2002, the Prosecution again applied
for defence counsel to be imposed. It argued that the defendant should
have counsel imposed for health reasons. Again, the Trial Chamber
rejected this, in an oral ruling on 18th December 2002. On 4th April
2003, the Trial Chamber issued a long document laying out its reasons
for refusing to impose counsel.[6] It reviewed the ICTY's own statute
and concluded rapidly that "A plain reading of this provision [Article
21.4.d] indicates that there is a right to defend oneself in person and
the Trial Chamber is unable to accept the Prosecution's proposition
that it would allow for the assignment of defence counsel for the
Accused against his wishes in the present circumstances."
The Trial Chamber then launched into a long discussion of the relevant
law, drawing on cases from around the world. It argued that the
imposition of counsel was a feature only of inquisitorial systems, not
of the adversarial systems used by the ICTY. In support of its view
that the imposition of counsel was inadmissible, the Trial Chamber
quoted the US Supreme Court case Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806
(1975), which states, "We confront here a nearly universal conviction,
on the part of our people as well as our courts, that forcing a lawyer
upon an unwilling defendant is contrary to his basic right to defend
himself if he truly wants to do so." The Supreme Court held that
imposition of counsel would violate the spirit of the 6th amendment.
The ICTY Trial Chamber commented:
"It [i.e. the Supreme Court] pointed out that only the sixteenth
century Star Chamber in the long history of English legal history
adopted a practice of forcing counsel upon an unwilling defendant in
criminal proceedings, and recounted Stephen's comment on this
procedure: 'There is something specially repugnant to justice in using
rules of practice in such a manner as to debar a prisoner from
defending himself, especially when the professed object of the rules so
used is to provide for his defence.' "
The ICTY Trial Chamber went on, "There is a further practical reason
for the right to self-representation in common law. While it may be the
case that in civil law systems it is appropriate to appoint defence
counsel for an accused who wishes to represent himself, in such systems
the court is fulfilling a more investigative role in an attempt to
establish the truth.
In the adversarial systems, it is the responsibility of the parties to
put forward the case and not for the court, whose function it is to
judge. Therefore, in an adversarial system, the imposition of defence
counsel on an unwilling accused would effectively deprive that accused
of the possibility of putting forward a defence." [emphasis added]. It
also concluded that, "The obligation of 'putting a case,' i.e. putting
forward the defence version of events if it differs from that put
forward by a witness, is reflected in Rule 90 (H) of the Rules. As the
Amici Curiae note, such an obligation cannot be fulfilled by counsel
who is not instructed by an accused as to the defence to put forward."
The Trial Chamber then reviewed some of the other international
documents which uphold the right of a defendant to defend himself,
including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,
mentioned above, the
American Convention on Human Rights (Article 8.2.d), the European
Convention on Human Rights (mentioned aboive), and the Statute of the
new International Criminal Court. (Article 67.1.d) In this statute, the
right to defend oneself is limited only when the defendant behaves in a
disruptive manner in the court room. (The Rwanda tribunal, indeed, has
imposed counsel on a defendant for this very reason.) The Trial Chamber
discussed the imposition of counsel in a case in Germany, a case which
went to the European Court of Human Rights,[7] but rightly found this
case to be irrelevant to the
Milosevic case because the defendant was not defending himself.
Discussing other cases too, the Trial Chamber concluded that the only
relevant case did not allow for exceptions to the general right to
defend oneself (paragraph
36). "The international and regional conventions (in similar language)
plainly articulate a right to defend oneself in person . In the Trial
Chamber's view, it is appropriate to be guided by the ICCPR and the
Human Rights Committee's interpretation of it, which confirms the right
to self-defence and rejects the imposition of defence counsel on an
unwilling accused." (paragraph 37)
The Trial Chamber then turned to practicalities and concluded that
imposition of counsel could simply not work because the defendant would
refuse to instruct counsel (paragraph 38). Winding up its discussion,
it says that the imposition of counsel can occur only when the
defendant behaves in such a disruptive manner that he has to be removed
from the courtroom (paragraph 40) and concludes (paragraph 41) that
although the Trial Chamber has the duty to ensure an expeditious trial,
it may do this only by respecting the rights of the accused as laid out
in Article 21 of its own statute, i.e. by respecting the right of a
defendant to defend himself.
All the main points of this reasoning were summarily thrown out of the
window when Milosevic's defence started. On 10th September 2004, the
Trial Chamber ruled that counsel would be imposed.[8] The reasons given
for this astonishing volte-face are simply disingenuous. Referring to
the 4th April 2003 ruling, Judge Robinson said, "the Trial Chamber,
while holding that the accused had a right to defend himself also held
in paragraph 40 that the right to defend oneself in person is not
absolute." This is disingenuous because the Trial Chamber explicitly
laid down the circumstances in which the right might be limited
(disruptive behaviour leading to expulsion from the court room). Even
though Milosevic's health had been an issue ever since the trial
started in early 2002, the Trial Chamber made no mention of this as a
possible reason for imposing counsel on 4th April 2003.
In September 2004, the Trial Chamber suddenly adopted the Prosecution's
argument that Milosevic had not been taking his medicine as prescribed,
but it seemed not to care that it is obviously a basic human right to
take medication as one sees fit - unless the defendant is mentally
incompetent either to stand trial or regulate his medicinal intake.
Crucially, the Trial Chamber offered no legal argument, i.e. by quoting
precedent or law, for using the health of the accused as a reason for
imposing counsel. It simply rescinded all its earlier decisions, which
had been grounded in law and precedent; it stated that international
and domestic law provided precedents for imposing counsel, without
quoting a single one; and it said that it was "in the interests of
justice" to impose counsel. No definition was given of these interests.
The Trial Chamber concluded, "The fundamental duty of the Trial Chamber
is to ensure that the trial is fair and expeditious," but in fact based
its decision to impose counsel was grounded solely on expediency, at
the expense of fairness. It should also be remembered that the bench in
the Milosevic trial permitted the prosecution to ramble on for months
with irrelevant "expert" testimony consuming sessions far beyond its
original allotted time while the prosecutors tried to induce someone -
anyone - from Serbia, to plead direct incrimination of Milosevic - all
without success.
Even by the appalling standards of the ICTY, the one-sidedness of this
decision to impose defence counsel (after reducing the time available
to the defendant's case to about half that granted to the prosecution)
is shocking.
By going against all its own previous rulings on the matter, the
Tribunal's decision is a pure example of arbitrary rule. As such, the
ICTY has demonstrated itself to be in contempt of the rule of law. It
suggests that achieving a verdict is the overriding concern of the
Tribunal and given that it was the Prosecution which demanded the
imposition of counsel on Mr. Milosevic, it is difficult to avoid the
conclusion that conviction at all costs has become the guiding
principle of the Tribunal.
[1] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010703IA.htm, page 1
[2] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010830SC.htm, page 7
[3] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010830SC.htm, page 17
[4] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/010830SC.htm, page 18
[5] http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/011211MH.htm, page 149
[6] http://www.un.org/icty/milosevic/trialc/decision-e/040403.htm
paragraph 18
[7] Croissant v. Germany, European Court of Human Rights ("ECHR"), Case
No. 62/1001/314/385, Judgement, 25 September 1992 ("Croissant v.
Germany").
[8] http://www.un.org/icty/milosevic/trialc/order-e/040910.htm
=== 2 ===
INTERNATIONAL ACTION CENTER (IAC)
Milosevic denied universal right of self-defense
U.S.-Created Court Gags Yugoslav President
By Sara Flounders
In the most drastic maneuver yet to silence the truth of the U.S./NATO
war on Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia (ICTY) on Sept. 2 denied former President Slobodan Milosevic
of Yugoslavia the internationally recognized right to defend himself in
court. This comes after the prosecution took two years presenting its
side of the case. The
ruling came on the very day Milosevic was finally to begin calling
witnesses in his own defense.
President Milosevic vigorously presented his opening statement of his
own defense in person for two days on Aug. 31 and Sept. 1, immediately
before the Trial Chamber decided he "is not fit enough to represent
himself." He was apparently "fit enough" to perform that task.
The former president's introductory remarks set the tone for a strong
indictment of the U.S., Germany and other NATO powers for their 10-year
war of aggression against Yugoslavia. His defense case was expected to
continue in the same manner, exposing the crimes of the imperialist
powers in the Balkans.
Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general and co-chair of the
International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic (ICDSM), stated in
a letter to the court: "Under International Law, every person accused
of a crime has the right to represent himself in person in the court.
"The appearance of President Milosevic representing himself alone
during the prosecution case for over two years, nearly 300 trial days,
cross examining nearly 300 prosecution witnesses, coping with 500,000
documents, and 30,000 pages of trial transcript, then at the very
beginning of his presentation of his own defense being silenced and
lawyers he rejects placed in charge of his destiny, speaks of
injustice."
Canadian attorney and international law expert Tiphaine Dickson, who is
assisting Milosevic's supporters, said: "The prosecutor is attempting,
yet again, to force President Milosevic to accept legal counsel to
represent him, using his poor health as an excuse. President Milosevic
has insisted that he represent himself from the onset. Within the U.S.,
the Supreme Court has recognized this as a right under the Sixth
Amendment to the Constitution. To refuse to allow him this right would
turn the already illegal ICTY hearings into a star-chamber proceeding."
Historically, even in past stage-managed trials where the prosecution
held total control and a guilty verdict was assured beforehand, many
defendants have had the right to represent themselves. Nelson Mandela
facing a racist apartheid court in South Africa, Fidel Castro brought
before the court of the Bastita dictatorship, or Georgi Dimirov before
the Nazi court in the 1930s could speak in their defense.
Over 100 legal experts, lawyers and jurists from 17 countries signed a
letter entitled, "Imposition of Counsel on Slobodan Milosevic Threatens
the Future of International Law and the Life of the Defendant." This
letter urges the United Nations to allow Milosevic to continue
defending himself against war crimes charges.
The internationally circulated letter warns that imposing a defense
lawyer against Milosevic's wishes would violate international law. It
is illegal even under the statute of the Yugoslav tribunal and also
under the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights.
IMPOSING COURT-APPOINTED LAWYERS
Tiphaine Dickson, who drafted the petition, said the UN tribunal
prosecuting Milosevic is trying to impose a defense counsel to strip
him of a defense "that may be embarrassing" to the court.
Ramsey Clark's letter also points out that "The very lawyers appointed
by the Trial Chamber have a direct conflict of interest. They have
served by appointment of the court as 'friends of the Court.' You
cannot serve two masters. Having served as friend of the Court, that
same counsel selected by the Court to represent President Milosevic
cannot ethically serve as his counsel."
The two lawyers who have been appointed as defense council against
Milosevic's express wishes are Stephen Kay and his daughter Gilian Kay
Higgins. The two were appointed Amicus Curiae (friends of the court)
against Milosevic's wishes in the prosecution part of the trial. In
that appointed position, Stephen Kay was made very much aware of
Milosevic's insistence on his legal right to conduct his own defense.
Stephan Kay has long played a highly dubious role as appointed council
in earlier trials of both the Yugoslav and the Rwanda Tribunals. Where
he was appointed there were convictions in the trials. His appointment
also allowed the courts to establish dangerous legal precedents for
other trials.
Many outrageous judicial abuses have been legitimized by the ICTY over
the past 10 years. The court accepts the use of hearsay evidence,
offers reduced sentences in exchange for testimony, and allows the use
of anonymous witnesses and closed sessions.
ICTY transcripts show pages and pages blanked out because sensitive
issues have been discussed in court. "Sensitive" issues means those
relating to the U.S. role.
In December 2003, when the former supreme commander of NATO, Wesley
Clark, testified in the Milosevic trial, the court agreed to let the
Pentagon censor its proceedings. The transcripts were not released
until Washington had given its approval.
A COURT TO JUSTIFY OCCUPATION
U.S. Secretary of State Madeline Albright was behind this court's
creation in 1993. Since then, it has been financed and organized by
funds from the U.S. and Britain. Its 1,300 personnel are also
overwhelmingly from Britain and the U.S.
From the very beginning the court has functioned to justify the U.S.,
British and NATO role in the break-up of the Yugoslav Federation.
The decision to charge President Milosevic with war crimes was made
toward the end of the 78-day U.S./NATO bombing of Yugoslavia. By
charging the elected Yugoslav president, the U.S./NATO forces placed
increased pressure on him to capitulate rather than participate in the
cease-fire negotiations or oppose the long-term U.S./NATO occupation of
Kosovo.
The entire 1999 U.S. war against defenseless Yugoslavia, the bombing of
every major city, the destruction of 480 schools and 33 hospitals,
along with bridges, roads and the entire industrial infrastructure, was
all presented by the imperialist propaganda machine as necessary to
stop an alleged genocide in the Serbian province of Kosovo.
NATO officials constantly referred to "mountains of corpses" and
"killing fields." In April 1999, the U.S. State Department claimed that
500,000 Kosovo Albanians had been rounded up and killed by Serbs. Other
reports used the number of 100,000 feared dead.
NO MASS GRAVES
Just as the weapons of mass destruction have never been found in Iraq,
the charge of massacres, mass graves, ethnic cleansing and genocide
proved to be an utter fabrication in Kosovo.
Immediately after the war, 20 forensic teams were sent to Kosovo by the
International Criminal Court at The Hague from 15 NATO countries,
including the U.S.. They dug all summer of 1999 at the very sites where
supposed witnesses had reported mass graves.
By October 1999 they reported back to Chief Prosecutor for the Tribunal
Carla Del Ponte that they had been unable to find any mass graves in
Kosovo at all. They had found a total of 2,108 corpses in individual
graves. How many of that number may have been killed by the NATO
bombing they did not speculate.
All of this material, including the reports of NATO destruction of
Yugoslav cities and the Tribunal's own forensic teams' inability to
find mass graves, was to be part of Milosevic's rebuttal. The attempt
to remove Milosevic as his own attorney is an admission that President
Milosevic is not guilty of the war-crimes charges. It adds to the U.S.
and NATO guilt in planning,
executing and carrying out a 10-year war that broke up a strong and
successful Yugoslav Federation into a half- dozen weak colonies and
neo-colonies subservient to U.S. and Western European imperialism.
The breakup of the Yugoslav Federation meant that the many industries
of Yugoslavia, including steel, auto, pharmaceuticals, chemical plants,
railroads, mines, refining and processing, that had previously been
owned by the whole population or by the workers in those plants have
been forcibly
privatized. U.S., British and German corporations now own them. Social
programs, pension funds, free education and free health care have been
decimated. It is this history of the crime of occupation that NATO's
court is trying to silence by depriving Yugoslav President Milosevic of
his right to present his own defense.
---
Flounders is co-director of the International Action Center. She was
scheduled to testify in the opening phase of former Yugoslav President
Slobodan Milosevic's defense at the International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia at The Hague, Netherlands. Flounders had met with
President Milosevic in Scheveningen Prison at The Hague for six hours
on June 28 to help prepare testimony for the defense. Milosevic has
been held for three years at the prison. Material from a book published
by the International Action Center in 2002, Hidden Agenda: U.S./NATO
Takeover of Yugoslavia, edited by Flounders and John Catalinotto, was
to be the basis of her testimony at the trial.
posted: September 10, 2004
International Action Center
39 West 14th Street, Room 206
New York, NY 10011
email: iacenter@action-mail. org
En Espanol: iac-cai@action-mail. org
web: http://www.iacenter.org
=== 3 ===
http://www.seeurope.net/en/Story.php?StoryID=53101&LangID=1
Seeurope.net
September 9, 2004
Bosnia Helped Give Birth to Terrorist Network, Expert
Says
A former U.S. policy analyst, testifying for the
defense at Slobodan Milosevic's war-crimes trial
yesterday, said part of the groundwork for what became
the al Qaeda terrorist network was laid during the
Bosnian war in the 1990s breakup of Yugoslavia.
The testimony of analyst James Jatras appeared to be
aimed at showing that the U.S. government probably
knew that Islamic fundamentalists were fighting in
Bosnia during the 1992-95 war and in the Serbian
province of Kosovo in the 1990s.
Milosevic has claimed that the Serbs in Kosovo and the
former Yugoslav republics were fighting wars of
self-defense against what he described as persecution
by Croats and Muslims. In his opening statement last
week, he accused the United States of being part of an
anti-Serb conspiracy that also included Germany, NATO,
Islamic countries and the Vatican.
....
Jatras, testifying at Milosevic's resumed trial, had
compiled several reports on Yugoslavia when he worked
for the Senate Republican Policy Committee from 1985-
2000.
Reinforcing his earlier conclusions, Jatras said the
U.S. commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001,
attacks on the United States had found that the
"groundwork for a true terrorist network was being
laid" in 1990s Bosnia.
He called it "a small footprint movement" that later
became recognized as al Qaeda.
Jatras was questioned by Steven Kay, a lawyer assigned
last week as Milosevic's defense counsel over the
defendant's angry objections. The former Serb leader
conducted his own defense for two years until doctors
ruled that he was in danger of a heart attack if he
continued.
---
http://www.b92.net/english/news/
index.php?&nav_category=2&nav_id=29798&order=priority&style=headlines
B92 (Serbia and Montenegro)
September 9, 2004
Racak “excuse” for NATO bombing
THE HAGUE – A defence witness for Slobodan Milosevic
has told the Hague Tribunal that former US president
Bill Clinton had decided to bomb Serbia in August
1998.
James Jatras, who was a senior foreign policy analyst
in the Republican party at the time, said that the
claim of a massacre of Albanian civilians in the
village of Racak in January 1990 provided a pretext
for the attacks to begin.
Jatras told the court that this meant that the
decision to attack Yugoslavia had been taken two
months before the date on which the Hague indictment
claims that Milosevic had begun to conduct his “joint
criminal enterprise” against Kosovo Albanians.
=== 4 ===
http://www.turkishpress.com/turkishpress/news.asp?ID=27294
Agence France-Presse
September 15, 2004
Milosevic Trial Suspended As Lawyers Grapple With
Unwilling Witnesses
THE HAGUE - The UN court here has suspended the trial
of Slobodan Milosevic until October 12 to allow the
defence lawyers assigned to the former Yugoslav
president more time to prepare their case, the judges
said.
Presiding judge Patrick Robinson said he was giving
British lawyer Steven Kay and his co-counsel more time
to get "an overview of the witness situation."
Kay had earlier said he would need more time and
resources to deal with the witness list as Milosevic
was not cooperating with his defence counsel.
He said the delay would enable him to get to grips
with Milosevic's original witness list of 1,631 names
and see who should be called first.
Kay earlier complained that many witnesses scheduled
to appear in the defence case had refused to come
because Milosevic is no longer conducting his own
defense.
"Of the 23 witnesses we have been able to contact, 20
have refused to testify ... We have got senior people
from foreign governments refusing to cooperate,
ambassadors," Kay said.
Milosevic insisted that he had nothing to do with the
witnesses refusal to show up.
"It is up to the witnesses. I do not want to influence
the witnesses in any way," he said.
To show why people were unwilling to take the stand he
quoted from a letter of the former Canadian ambassador
to Yugoslavia from 1990 to 1992, James Bissett, who
called the proceedings in The Hague "a Stalinist show
trial".
"I do not want to be part of this travesty of
justice," Milosevic quoted Bissett as saying.
Russian parliamentarian Nikolai Ryzhkov publically
announced he had refused to testify last week. A group
of five French witness also announced they would not
come if they were questioned by the imposed lawyers.
A group of thirty defence witnesses from
Serbia-Montenegro also said they would not testify at
the trial in protest at the decision to impose a
lawyer, the Beta news agency reported on Tuesday.
Among the thirty - mostly Milosevic's one-time allies
- were former Montenegrin president Momir Bulatovic,
historians Slavenko Terzic and Vasilije Krestic,
writer Momo Kapor and ex-Croatian Serb leader Borislav
Mikelic, Beta reported.
Kay had asked the court on Wednesday to allow
Milosevic to question his witnesses first, followed by
questioning by the assigned counsel. The lawyer said
he believed the witnesses would appear if Milosevic
was the one examining them.
The defence team also demanded new medical tests to
determine if Milosevic was fit enough to represent
himself but both motions were rejected.
Kay has also said he would ask for the trial to be
suspended pending an appeal against his assignment.
The court explicitly refused to grant suspension on
those grounds but nonetheless said that it was likely
that within the adjournment they approved to give Kay
more time the appeal will be decided as well.
Milosevic on Wednesday again blasted the court and his
imposed lawyer.
"I insist you give me back my right to defend myself,
to call my witnesses," he said.
When the judges told him that they forced him to take
counsel because medical reports showed he was too ill
to continue to act as his own lawyer Milosevic blamed
the court for his health problems. ....
"Imposing work and deadlines on me while I was ill ...
led to a serious deterioration of my health,"
Milosevic told the court. ....
==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27
00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-4828957
email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006
intestato ad Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA
causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC
sito internet:
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.htm
Da: ICDSM Italia
Data: Mar 28 Set 2004 15:39:46 Europe/Rome
A: icdsm-italia@ yahoogroups. com
Oggetto: [icdsm-italia] Voices of solidarity with president Slobodan
Milosevic !
Voices of solidarity with president Slobodan Milosevic !
1. US "witnesses" write to President Milosevic
2. High-Ranking French, German, Russian Political And Military
Officials Refuse To Testify At Hague Show Trial
3. Former Russian PM Yevgeny Primakov: No to violation of International
Law at The Hague
4. General Ivashov: The Hague and true war criminals
5. International Progress Organization: Statement on Yugoslavia Tribunal
6. Statement by the Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace
(EEDYE)
7. Protest Letters by: CHRISTOPHER BLACK (ICDSM), professor R.K. Kent,
peace activist W. Spring
=== 1 ===
Da: actioncenter.balkan@ organizerweb.com
Data: Dom 12 Set 2004 23:55:49 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: [IAC] Letter to Pres. Slobodan Milosevic
President Slobodan Milosevic
12 September 2004
Dear President Milosevic,
We, the undersigned, are outraged by the decision of the Hague Tribunal
(ICTY) to impose counsel on you against your will and to deprive you of
your lawful and fundamental right to self-defense. Although we
previously had agreed to testify in your defense, under these
conditions we cannot and will not participate as witnesses in these
proceedings.
Not only does the Tribunal's decision violate basic legal and ethical
norms, it brazenly disregards its own rules. Under Article 21,
paragraph 4 of the Statute of the ICTY, a defendant is entitled to
certain "minimum guarantees," including the right "to defend himself in
person or though legal assistance of his own choosing." The Statute
furthermore states that a trial should be conducted "with full respect
for the rights of the accused." We can only comment that our
understanding of the word "guarantee" evidently differs markedly from
that of the Court's.
We can assure you that we remain ready and willing to appear as
witnesses in the event that your right to self defense is restored to
you and you choose to invite us. We stand united in our belief that the
charges against you are false and that they represent a continuation of
the war against Yugoslavia and the Serbian people by the U.S. and its
NATO allies. We are sending a copy of this letter to the court to
inform them of our decision.
Signed,
Gregory Elich
Sara Flounders
Barry Lituchy
Michael Parenti
cc.: ICTY Registry, The Hague
The International Action Center
http://www.iacenter.org
mail to:iacenter@ iacenter. org
=== 2 ===
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/10/1094789688748.html
Sydney Morning Herald (Australia)
September 11, 2004
Milosevic witnesses refuse to testify in protest over
lawyers
Just days after judges assigned two British lawyers to
defend Slobodan Milosevic, his war crimes trial ran
into new difficulties as scheduled witnesses pulled
out in protest.
Twelve high-ranking witnesses expected to appear this
month to defend Milosevic, the former Yugoslav
president, have sent notice that they will not come to
the tribunal, according to Milosevic's aides. As a
result, Monday's hearing has been cancelled, and it is
unclear when the next witness will appear.
Zdenko Tomanovic, one of the aides, denied that
Milosevic was trying to discourage the witnesses from
attending, saying two had appeared earlier in the
week.
He said the witnesses had objected to the proceedings
after the court deprived Milosevic of the right to
defend himself.
Over protests from Milosevic, the judges in the case
appointed lawyers to represent Milosevic after
cardiologists agreed he was not fit enough to bear the
strain of defending himself. Hearings for the multiple
war crimes charges have been cancelled more than a
dozen times because of Milosevic's heart problems.
In recent days, Milosevic told the three judges
several times he wanted his right to defend himself
restored and would appeal.
Now, the court-appointed lawyers have taken the first
step to appeal, following Milosevic's wishes,
according to a document released by the court on
Thursday. So the defence team is appealing against its
own presence.
The defence lawyers, Steven Kay and Gillian Higgins,
have come to know Milosevic's aides well - both have
attended the trial as "friends of the court" to ensure
fairness of the proceedings [sic].
On Thursday Mr Kay begged witnesses chosen by
Milosevic to come to The Hague and testify in his
support. "We welcome all Milosevic's witnesses to give
evidence and indeed to co-operate," he told the court.
"Not attending will not do the defence case any good
at all."
Refusals have come from four German, two Russian and
five French witnesses, most of them former
high-ranking politicians and military officers,
according to Mr Tomanovic.
The New York Times
Agence-France Presse
=== 3 ===
I have learned that the Hague International Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia deprived former President of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic
of his right to defend himself in person and imposed on him counsels
against his will.
In my opinion, that is a direct violation of word and spirit of the
International Law. In the emerged circumstances, I am forced to
renounce my decision to testify as a defense witness. As before, I am
ready to take part in the process, but only in the case that Mr.
Slobodan Milosevic gets back his undisputable right to conduct his
defense in person.
Yevgeny
Primakov
Moscow,
21 September 2004
=== 4 ===
Leonid Grigor'evich Ivashov
STATEMENT
I, Leonid Grigor'evich Ivashov, citizen of the Russian Federation, in
response to the invitation of President of the former Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia (FRY) Slobodan Milosevic, have agreed to testify for his
defense in the process before the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). I have acted that way in full
consciousness, aiming to contribute towards achieving the objectivity
and truth on the issues of Europe and FRY in the period 1997-2000.
For me, the participation in the Hague process was important due to the
following circumstances. First, I was a direct participant of the
events considered. Second, I cannot stay away from the fact that the
prosecution had as its witnesses several persons who were directly
preparing and executing the armed aggression against a sovereign state
- the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and who are responsible for
killing of hundreds of people and violation of the norms of the
International Law.
However, the recent decisions of the tribunal have forced me to change
my earlier decision. The ICTY, in violation of its own Statute (Article
21, point 4) imposes a counsel on Slobodan Milosevic, who was until
then exercising his right to defend himself in person. Among the duties
of the imposed counsel are the ones to determine who will appear as
defense witness, what will be the character of the testimony and its
interpretation. It cannot be considered normal that the counsel imposed
against the will of Slobodan Milosevic is a citizen of the country that
has been stepping on the norms of the International Law, letter and
spirit of the UN Charter and several times performed aggressions
against sovereign states, including FR Yugoslavia.
In such conditions, when my testimony as a defense witness can be used
against Slobodan Milosevic and will not serve the objectivity and
adoption of a just ruling, I refuse to take part in the process.
At the same time, I confirm my readiness to appear in the process as
soon as ICTY creates legally correct and just conditions and respect of
norms of the International Law.
Head of the Main Directorate for International Military Cooperation of
the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation 1996-2001,
Vice-Chairman of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems,
Doctor of Historical Sciences,
general-colonel (in reserve)
Leonid Ivashov
Moscow, 9 September 2004
=== 5 ===
STATEMENT ON THE ASSIGNMENT BY "TRIAL CHAMBER III" OF THE SO-CALLED
"INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL" OF COUNSEL TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF
YUGOSLAVIA
AGAINST HIS WILL
http://i-p-o.org/yu-tribunal-statement-sept04.htm
Vienna, 8 September 2004/P/RE/18849c
In reference to the Memorandum, dated 27 May 1999, on the lack of legal
validity of the indictment of the former President of Yugoslavia by the
so-called "International Tribunal" and lack of legitimacy of said
tribunal under basic rules of international law, the International
Progress Organization would like to emphasize the following points in
regard to the assignment of counsel by oral order of the so-called
"Trial Chamber III" to the former President of Yugoslavia against his
will:
1. The "International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons
Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law
Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991" lacks
moral as well as judicial legitimacy. Its creation by the UN Security
Council was an act ultra vires; decisions of the "Tribunal's" officials
have no legal validity.
2. Apart from its intrinsic illegitimacy, the decision to impose
counsel upon Mr. Milosevic against his will is in blatant violation of
the "Tribunal's" own "Statute" Art. 21 (Rights of the accused), Par. 4
(d) of which states that the accused shall be entitled "to defend
himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing." It
is to be noted that the "Statute's" additional provision ("to have
legal assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of
justice so require") is not applicable in this particular situation.
3. The fact that there is no written order, outlining the "Trial
Chamber's" legal reasons for the imposition of counsel (the communiqué
of 2 September, CC/P.I.S./889-e, announcing the wording of the "oral
order" appears to omit two paragraphs), while there exists a detailed
written "Order on the modalities to be followed by court assigned
counsel," dated 3 September 2004, further underlines the arbitrariness
and political nature of this decision.
4. The imposition of counsel against the declared will of the former
President of Yugoslavia constitutes a serious violation of the
accused's basic human rights as enshrined in international covenants.
5. The "Trial Chamber's" decision has documented one more time that
this "International Tribunal" is not a court of law, but a political
undertaking.
6. The reservations expressed by the former President of the Council of
Ministers of the USSR, Mr. Nikolai Ryzhkov, according to wich "Slobodan
Milosevic didn't get an assigned counsel, but another prosecutor who
will only act using other means" are well founded. Mr. Ryzhkov's
refusal to appear, under these circumstances, as a defense witness is
fully understandable.
7. The operation of the "Tribunal" in the Hague, as an essentially
political project, is further undermining the important cause of
universal jurisdiction as represented by the International Criminal
Court.
Dr. h.c. Dr. Hans Koechler
President
Memorandum dated 27 May 1999
http://i-p-o.org/yu-tribunal.htm
Global Justice or Global Revenge? by Hans Koechler (2004)
http://i-p-o.org/global_justice-springer-2003.htm
INTERNATIONAL PROGRESS ORGANIZATION
Information Service
A-1010 Vienna, Kohlmarkt 4, Austria
Telefax: +431-5332962
E-mail: info@i-p-o. org
Homepage: http://i-p-o.org
=== 6 ===
Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace (EEDYE)
Athens September 15 2004
To the International Committee for the Defense of Slobodan Milosevic
To the Organization SLOBODA of Serbia & Montenegro
To the International Association of Democratic Lawyers
Dear friends
It is with great concern and anger that we follow the developments
around the "trial" of the former president of the FR of Yugoslavia
Slobodan Milosevic at the famous "International Criminal Tribunal for
Yugoslavia (ICTY)", where basic rights of the defendant and every sense
of democratic and human rights are being violated day by day.
Since two years and around 300 days of trial the accusations being
presented are aiming in legitimizing the crimes of NATO during the
barbarous and inhuman bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
During this period various violations of fundamental rights to which
any defendant is entitled to, have been marked. Slobodan Milosevic was
hindered systematically in his communication with his family and his
advisors, which led (amongst others) to obstacles in the collection of
new elements of evidence and means for his innocence. Furthermore the
time for his preparation and defense was drastically suppressed along
with the fact that the number of defense witnesses was restricted and
the list of charges was extended after the trial had already started.
Culmination of the violations constitutes the fact that despite the
clear reference of the ICTY-statute (Art.21 Par.4), which is stating
that the defendant has the right "to be tried in his presence, and to
defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own
choice", we are witnessing the flagrant violation of this right through
the imposition of counsel of defence by the court, against the strong
and categorical objection of Slobodan Milosevic and his insistence to
defend himself.
We believe that this development confirms the political character of
the court and trial itself, a procedure that constitutes a provocation
for every lawyer but as well for any legal system humanity has
experienced.
The right Slobodan Milosevic is being deprived of was not refused by
the Apartheid regime to Nelson Mandela, or even by the Nazis to Georgi
Dimitrof.
On behalf of the Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace
and of all peace loving people in Greece, we express our vehement
protest to the United Nations Organization, for this parody of trial,
which is not serving the slightest guaranty for a free and fair trial.
We express from the bottom of our heart our solidarity to the peoples
of Yugoslavia in their struggle for peace and progress, against the
imperialist plans on the Balkans
For the Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace (EEDYE)
Evangelos Mahairas
President of EEDYE
President of Honor of the World Peace Council (WPC)
Former President of the Lawyers Association of Athens
=== 7 ===
An Open Letter
The International Criminal Tribunal For Yugoslavia, an association of
criminals which is neither international nor a judicial body, was
created in violation of international law, and in violation of and
against the founding principles of the United Nations Charter. It makes
false charges, arrests and detains without legal authority, and
conducts what it calls "trials" in violation of international law and
all national laws and standards of justice. It serves as a weapon with
which the United States and its allies attempt to destroy the
fundamental principle of sovereignty of nations which is the essential
basis of the self-determination of peoples and democracy for which the
Allies of World War II ostensibly fought the fascists of Germany, Italy
and Japan.
Now, the fascists have risen anew and, having seized power in the
United States and among its allies in the other Nato countries, pretend
to create a New World Order in which they alone will decide who lives
and who dies, who is free and who is imprisoned and the economic and
social conditions under which we will all live.
In the name of freedom they create slavery. In the name of justice and
human rights they maim and kill. In the name of international law they
established the rule of ruthless power. In the name of democracy they
destroy democracy. In the name of the people they make a world
dictatorship.
An essentiel part of the dictatorship is the system of unlaw and
uncourts they have created known as the ad hoc criminal tribunals whose
sole purpose is to support the New World Order and destroy any nation
or national leadeship which opposes it.
The uncourts known as the ICTY, its sister, The ICTR for Rwanda, and
its half-sisters for Sierre Leone, Cambodia, and East Timor were
established and are maintained and controlled principally by the United
States in order to demonize those who resist its diktats, to destroy
the sovereignty of those countries and by implication and effect the
sovereignty of all
nations except the United States and to act as propaganda machines that
present false histories of the events that took place in those
countries, without exception turning the victims of US aggression into
scapegoats and "criminals" and, to cover up the true role of the United
States and its allies in thoe events.
The ICTY was established with these aims in order to destroy Yugoslavia
and all progressive forces in Yugoslavia and to control the Balkans and
threaten Russia. The ICTR was established to destroy Rwanda as a
progressive African state and to control the immense resources of
central Africa. The hybrid UN-national tribunals for Sierre Leone,
Cambodia and East Timor were similarly created to crush opposition to
US and its allies interest in those regions.
In each case the United States, using its influence in the Security
Council, has created criminal bodies which claim to be courts, which
have officials parading before the public in fancy dress, who have high
sounding titles and a proportionately low moral sense and which have
drafted "Statutes", empty pieces of paper signifying nothing but
purporting to give themselves a legal gloss immediately denied by their
rules of procedure and evidence which are designed to prevent fair
trials and the truth from ever being known.
The supporters of these bodies claim they are acting in accord with
justice, law and humanity. The imposition of counsel on President
Milosevic, an action which could only take place because of the
complete abscence of ethics in the family of lawyers named Kay selected
by the tribunal to silence him and cripple his defence, is the most
heinous action of all of the triumvirate of Nato stooges wearing the
red robes of the Inquisition and who are a self-parody of judges.
The fascist nature of these tribunals is openly revealed. The justice
of the cause of President Milosevic is plain.
The people of the world must recognize that President Milosevic and all
the other prisoners of the New World Order are hostages of that order,
held as an example to us all. The people of the world must act to stop
these injustices from continuing before we all become its victims. The
prisoners of all these ad hoc tribunals must be released. The tribunals
must be shut down. Those who created them must face justice before
their national courts for the war crimes they have committed. The
sovereignty of nations and international law must be restored.
International law will be restored. Together, the power is in our hands
to restore it.
Christopher Black
Vice Chair and Chair, Legal Committee
ICDMS
Arusha, Tanzania
---
To the so-called “Tribunal” trying
Slobodan Milosevic as a war criminal
implicated in “genocide.”
12. 09. 04
The writer of the ensuing words. after half a dozen texts made public,
should not be a stranger to this “Tribunal, “established by Madeleine
Albright with initial funds from two Muslim states. From its inital
South African prosecutor, through his Canadian successor, down ro the
current Swiss parody, called Carla del Ponte, the “tribunal” has
already “convicted” Slobodan Milosevic IN THE PUBLIC MEDIA THROUGHOUT
THE WEST FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS NOW. It has even denied him the most
basic right of the COLLECTIVE Western Civilisation, namely
self-defense.Under the cover of a transparent CHARADE about “concern”
for his health, the “Tribunal” has declared, magister dixit, “that he
is unable to defend himself,” despite and because of the AMPLE
DEMONSTRATION TO THE CONTRARY over a SUSTAINED period of time.
My first question is WHY TRY HIM AT ALL? Just incarcerte him for the
maximum, keep presenting “the Serbs” as neo-Nazi butchers of the
Twentieth century’s last decade, attack anyone who defends him as
eitrher a neo-Communist, an Orthodox Greek, a pro-Milosevic Serb,or any
other variety of “incorrect” persons.Just end this travesty of sick,
insane, misguided, stupid, asinine, deplorable, disgusting, politically
filthy, juridically contemptible, NATO-serving (with its cluster-bombs
and depleted uranium war-crime) aggressions against civilians in the
Serbian part of Bosnia, at Kosovo and in Serbia proper. Oh, yes, and
have a nice day at the “Court.”
What you do not wish to know, is that all of you at the “Tribunal” are
really watched, named and catalogued as footnotes to infamy that
destroyed internatioanl law, and behaved in criminal, racist and
Fascisto-Stalinist kangaroo ways toward the accused and his own
ethnicity. You will be neither forgotten nor forgiven. Cancer has
already taken “Judge” May, that non-entity from the bottom-ladder of
the British court system (in the Midlands - no Sir Ifor Evans is he).
Some other form of cosmic retribution will strike every one of you,
sooner or later. Predictably, and at the very least, your guilty
individual brains (assuming you have any left) will suffer individually
from Catatonic Narcolepsy with all of its pernicious and unpredictable
consequences. “Darkness at Noon” seemed like a novel but the Tribunal
has gone beyond, into the Twilight Zone while it believed that it
controls the vertical and the horizontal as a well-paid, perks-replete
puppet. One last word to the “judges” at the Tribunal.: For a fistfull
of dollars your souls are already in the Satan’s twitching hand. Sleep
well as you dehumanize yourselves with the pitiful amount of power
granted from elsewhere. You can also laugh this text off but the last
laugh will not be on thee.
Without respect,
Raymond K. Kent (Emeritus)
History Department, U. of Califormia
at Berkeley (510/642-1971)
---
UK peace activist William J Spring is making a formal complaint to the
Bar Council re UK barristers Stephen Kay and Gillian Higgins alleging
they are acting unethically and unprofessionally in agreeing to
represent Mr Milosevic at the Hague when he has made it clear he does
not want them to represent him.
William Spring comments: " it is basic to UK and European law that you
can represent yourself in a criminal trial.
" If illness is so bad as to render this difficult the answer is to
suspend the trial or to grant bail so the prisoner can recover his
health, not impose counsel against the provisions of the ECHR.
This is effective torture of the prisoner, especially one as well
qualified and fluent as Mr Milosevic, and impermissible to a servant of
the Supreme Court here in England."
"Further Stephen Kay has already expressed himself of sentiments
prejudicial to Mr Milosevic and we also believe he has links with
British intelligence and the security services.
"If you were to justify imposing representation, Stephen Kay is most
obviously disqualified from such a role."
Further information telephone 0208 376 1454
==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27
00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-4828957
email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006
intestato ad Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA
causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC
sito internet:
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.htm
Data: Mar 28 Set 2004 15:39:46 Europe/Rome
A: icdsm-italia@ yahoogroups. com
Oggetto: [icdsm-italia] Voices of solidarity with president Slobodan
Milosevic !
Voices of solidarity with president Slobodan Milosevic !
1. US "witnesses" write to President Milosevic
2. High-Ranking French, German, Russian Political And Military
Officials Refuse To Testify At Hague Show Trial
3. Former Russian PM Yevgeny Primakov: No to violation of International
Law at The Hague
4. General Ivashov: The Hague and true war criminals
5. International Progress Organization: Statement on Yugoslavia Tribunal
6. Statement by the Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace
(EEDYE)
7. Protest Letters by: CHRISTOPHER BLACK (ICDSM), professor R.K. Kent,
peace activist W. Spring
=== 1 ===
Da: actioncenter.balkan@ organizerweb.com
Data: Dom 12 Set 2004 23:55:49 Europe/Rome
Oggetto: [IAC] Letter to Pres. Slobodan Milosevic
President Slobodan Milosevic
12 September 2004
Dear President Milosevic,
We, the undersigned, are outraged by the decision of the Hague Tribunal
(ICTY) to impose counsel on you against your will and to deprive you of
your lawful and fundamental right to self-defense. Although we
previously had agreed to testify in your defense, under these
conditions we cannot and will not participate as witnesses in these
proceedings.
Not only does the Tribunal's decision violate basic legal and ethical
norms, it brazenly disregards its own rules. Under Article 21,
paragraph 4 of the Statute of the ICTY, a defendant is entitled to
certain "minimum guarantees," including the right "to defend himself in
person or though legal assistance of his own choosing." The Statute
furthermore states that a trial should be conducted "with full respect
for the rights of the accused." We can only comment that our
understanding of the word "guarantee" evidently differs markedly from
that of the Court's.
We can assure you that we remain ready and willing to appear as
witnesses in the event that your right to self defense is restored to
you and you choose to invite us. We stand united in our belief that the
charges against you are false and that they represent a continuation of
the war against Yugoslavia and the Serbian people by the U.S. and its
NATO allies. We are sending a copy of this letter to the court to
inform them of our decision.
Signed,
Gregory Elich
Sara Flounders
Barry Lituchy
Michael Parenti
cc.: ICTY Registry, The Hague
The International Action Center
http://www.iacenter.org
mail to:iacenter@ iacenter. org
=== 2 ===
http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/09/10/1094789688748.html
Sydney Morning Herald (Australia)
September 11, 2004
Milosevic witnesses refuse to testify in protest over
lawyers
Just days after judges assigned two British lawyers to
defend Slobodan Milosevic, his war crimes trial ran
into new difficulties as scheduled witnesses pulled
out in protest.
Twelve high-ranking witnesses expected to appear this
month to defend Milosevic, the former Yugoslav
president, have sent notice that they will not come to
the tribunal, according to Milosevic's aides. As a
result, Monday's hearing has been cancelled, and it is
unclear when the next witness will appear.
Zdenko Tomanovic, one of the aides, denied that
Milosevic was trying to discourage the witnesses from
attending, saying two had appeared earlier in the
week.
He said the witnesses had objected to the proceedings
after the court deprived Milosevic of the right to
defend himself.
Over protests from Milosevic, the judges in the case
appointed lawyers to represent Milosevic after
cardiologists agreed he was not fit enough to bear the
strain of defending himself. Hearings for the multiple
war crimes charges have been cancelled more than a
dozen times because of Milosevic's heart problems.
In recent days, Milosevic told the three judges
several times he wanted his right to defend himself
restored and would appeal.
Now, the court-appointed lawyers have taken the first
step to appeal, following Milosevic's wishes,
according to a document released by the court on
Thursday. So the defence team is appealing against its
own presence.
The defence lawyers, Steven Kay and Gillian Higgins,
have come to know Milosevic's aides well - both have
attended the trial as "friends of the court" to ensure
fairness of the proceedings [sic].
On Thursday Mr Kay begged witnesses chosen by
Milosevic to come to The Hague and testify in his
support. "We welcome all Milosevic's witnesses to give
evidence and indeed to co-operate," he told the court.
"Not attending will not do the defence case any good
at all."
Refusals have come from four German, two Russian and
five French witnesses, most of them former
high-ranking politicians and military officers,
according to Mr Tomanovic.
The New York Times
Agence-France Presse
=== 3 ===
I have learned that the Hague International Tribunal for the former
Yugoslavia deprived former President of Yugoslavia Slobodan Milosevic
of his right to defend himself in person and imposed on him counsels
against his will.
In my opinion, that is a direct violation of word and spirit of the
International Law. In the emerged circumstances, I am forced to
renounce my decision to testify as a defense witness. As before, I am
ready to take part in the process, but only in the case that Mr.
Slobodan Milosevic gets back his undisputable right to conduct his
defense in person.
Yevgeny
Primakov
Moscow,
21 September 2004
=== 4 ===
Leonid Grigor'evich Ivashov
STATEMENT
I, Leonid Grigor'evich Ivashov, citizen of the Russian Federation, in
response to the invitation of President of the former Federal Republic
of Yugoslavia (FRY) Slobodan Milosevic, have agreed to testify for his
defense in the process before the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). I have acted that way in full
consciousness, aiming to contribute towards achieving the objectivity
and truth on the issues of Europe and FRY in the period 1997-2000.
For me, the participation in the Hague process was important due to the
following circumstances. First, I was a direct participant of the
events considered. Second, I cannot stay away from the fact that the
prosecution had as its witnesses several persons who were directly
preparing and executing the armed aggression against a sovereign state
- the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and who are responsible for
killing of hundreds of people and violation of the norms of the
International Law.
However, the recent decisions of the tribunal have forced me to change
my earlier decision. The ICTY, in violation of its own Statute (Article
21, point 4) imposes a counsel on Slobodan Milosevic, who was until
then exercising his right to defend himself in person. Among the duties
of the imposed counsel are the ones to determine who will appear as
defense witness, what will be the character of the testimony and its
interpretation. It cannot be considered normal that the counsel imposed
against the will of Slobodan Milosevic is a citizen of the country that
has been stepping on the norms of the International Law, letter and
spirit of the UN Charter and several times performed aggressions
against sovereign states, including FR Yugoslavia.
In such conditions, when my testimony as a defense witness can be used
against Slobodan Milosevic and will not serve the objectivity and
adoption of a just ruling, I refuse to take part in the process.
At the same time, I confirm my readiness to appear in the process as
soon as ICTY creates legally correct and just conditions and respect of
norms of the International Law.
Head of the Main Directorate for International Military Cooperation of
the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation 1996-2001,
Vice-Chairman of the Academy of Geopolitical Problems,
Doctor of Historical Sciences,
general-colonel (in reserve)
Leonid Ivashov
Moscow, 9 September 2004
=== 5 ===
STATEMENT ON THE ASSIGNMENT BY "TRIAL CHAMBER III" OF THE SO-CALLED
"INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL" OF COUNSEL TO THE FORMER PRESIDENT OF
YUGOSLAVIA
AGAINST HIS WILL
http://i-p-o.org/yu-tribunal-statement-sept04.htm
Vienna, 8 September 2004/P/RE/18849c
In reference to the Memorandum, dated 27 May 1999, on the lack of legal
validity of the indictment of the former President of Yugoslavia by the
so-called "International Tribunal" and lack of legitimacy of said
tribunal under basic rules of international law, the International
Progress Organization would like to emphasize the following points in
regard to the assignment of counsel by oral order of the so-called
"Trial Chamber III" to the former President of Yugoslavia against his
will:
1. The "International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons
Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law
Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991" lacks
moral as well as judicial legitimacy. Its creation by the UN Security
Council was an act ultra vires; decisions of the "Tribunal's" officials
have no legal validity.
2. Apart from its intrinsic illegitimacy, the decision to impose
counsel upon Mr. Milosevic against his will is in blatant violation of
the "Tribunal's" own "Statute" Art. 21 (Rights of the accused), Par. 4
(d) of which states that the accused shall be entitled "to defend
himself in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing." It
is to be noted that the "Statute's" additional provision ("to have
legal assistance assigned to him, in any case where the interests of
justice so require") is not applicable in this particular situation.
3. The fact that there is no written order, outlining the "Trial
Chamber's" legal reasons for the imposition of counsel (the communiqué
of 2 September, CC/P.I.S./889-e, announcing the wording of the "oral
order" appears to omit two paragraphs), while there exists a detailed
written "Order on the modalities to be followed by court assigned
counsel," dated 3 September 2004, further underlines the arbitrariness
and political nature of this decision.
4. The imposition of counsel against the declared will of the former
President of Yugoslavia constitutes a serious violation of the
accused's basic human rights as enshrined in international covenants.
5. The "Trial Chamber's" decision has documented one more time that
this "International Tribunal" is not a court of law, but a political
undertaking.
6. The reservations expressed by the former President of the Council of
Ministers of the USSR, Mr. Nikolai Ryzhkov, according to wich "Slobodan
Milosevic didn't get an assigned counsel, but another prosecutor who
will only act using other means" are well founded. Mr. Ryzhkov's
refusal to appear, under these circumstances, as a defense witness is
fully understandable.
7. The operation of the "Tribunal" in the Hague, as an essentially
political project, is further undermining the important cause of
universal jurisdiction as represented by the International Criminal
Court.
Dr. h.c. Dr. Hans Koechler
President
Memorandum dated 27 May 1999
http://i-p-o.org/yu-tribunal.htm
Global Justice or Global Revenge? by Hans Koechler (2004)
http://i-p-o.org/global_justice-springer-2003.htm
INTERNATIONAL PROGRESS ORGANIZATION
Information Service
A-1010 Vienna, Kohlmarkt 4, Austria
Telefax: +431-5332962
E-mail: info@i-p-o. org
Homepage: http://i-p-o.org
=== 6 ===
Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace (EEDYE)
Athens September 15 2004
To the International Committee for the Defense of Slobodan Milosevic
To the Organization SLOBODA of Serbia & Montenegro
To the International Association of Democratic Lawyers
Dear friends
It is with great concern and anger that we follow the developments
around the "trial" of the former president of the FR of Yugoslavia
Slobodan Milosevic at the famous "International Criminal Tribunal for
Yugoslavia (ICTY)", where basic rights of the defendant and every sense
of democratic and human rights are being violated day by day.
Since two years and around 300 days of trial the accusations being
presented are aiming in legitimizing the crimes of NATO during the
barbarous and inhuman bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
During this period various violations of fundamental rights to which
any defendant is entitled to, have been marked. Slobodan Milosevic was
hindered systematically in his communication with his family and his
advisors, which led (amongst others) to obstacles in the collection of
new elements of evidence and means for his innocence. Furthermore the
time for his preparation and defense was drastically suppressed along
with the fact that the number of defense witnesses was restricted and
the list of charges was extended after the trial had already started.
Culmination of the violations constitutes the fact that despite the
clear reference of the ICTY-statute (Art.21 Par.4), which is stating
that the defendant has the right "to be tried in his presence, and to
defend himself in person or through legal assistance of his own
choice", we are witnessing the flagrant violation of this right through
the imposition of counsel of defence by the court, against the strong
and categorical objection of Slobodan Milosevic and his insistence to
defend himself.
We believe that this development confirms the political character of
the court and trial itself, a procedure that constitutes a provocation
for every lawyer but as well for any legal system humanity has
experienced.
The right Slobodan Milosevic is being deprived of was not refused by
the Apartheid regime to Nelson Mandela, or even by the Nazis to Georgi
Dimitrof.
On behalf of the Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace
and of all peace loving people in Greece, we express our vehement
protest to the United Nations Organization, for this parody of trial,
which is not serving the slightest guaranty for a free and fair trial.
We express from the bottom of our heart our solidarity to the peoples
of Yugoslavia in their struggle for peace and progress, against the
imperialist plans on the Balkans
For the Greek Committee for International Détente and Peace (EEDYE)
Evangelos Mahairas
President of EEDYE
President of Honor of the World Peace Council (WPC)
Former President of the Lawyers Association of Athens
=== 7 ===
An Open Letter
The International Criminal Tribunal For Yugoslavia, an association of
criminals which is neither international nor a judicial body, was
created in violation of international law, and in violation of and
against the founding principles of the United Nations Charter. It makes
false charges, arrests and detains without legal authority, and
conducts what it calls "trials" in violation of international law and
all national laws and standards of justice. It serves as a weapon with
which the United States and its allies attempt to destroy the
fundamental principle of sovereignty of nations which is the essential
basis of the self-determination of peoples and democracy for which the
Allies of World War II ostensibly fought the fascists of Germany, Italy
and Japan.
Now, the fascists have risen anew and, having seized power in the
United States and among its allies in the other Nato countries, pretend
to create a New World Order in which they alone will decide who lives
and who dies, who is free and who is imprisoned and the economic and
social conditions under which we will all live.
In the name of freedom they create slavery. In the name of justice and
human rights they maim and kill. In the name of international law they
established the rule of ruthless power. In the name of democracy they
destroy democracy. In the name of the people they make a world
dictatorship.
An essentiel part of the dictatorship is the system of unlaw and
uncourts they have created known as the ad hoc criminal tribunals whose
sole purpose is to support the New World Order and destroy any nation
or national leadeship which opposes it.
The uncourts known as the ICTY, its sister, The ICTR for Rwanda, and
its half-sisters for Sierre Leone, Cambodia, and East Timor were
established and are maintained and controlled principally by the United
States in order to demonize those who resist its diktats, to destroy
the sovereignty of those countries and by implication and effect the
sovereignty of all
nations except the United States and to act as propaganda machines that
present false histories of the events that took place in those
countries, without exception turning the victims of US aggression into
scapegoats and "criminals" and, to cover up the true role of the United
States and its allies in thoe events.
The ICTY was established with these aims in order to destroy Yugoslavia
and all progressive forces in Yugoslavia and to control the Balkans and
threaten Russia. The ICTR was established to destroy Rwanda as a
progressive African state and to control the immense resources of
central Africa. The hybrid UN-national tribunals for Sierre Leone,
Cambodia and East Timor were similarly created to crush opposition to
US and its allies interest in those regions.
In each case the United States, using its influence in the Security
Council, has created criminal bodies which claim to be courts, which
have officials parading before the public in fancy dress, who have high
sounding titles and a proportionately low moral sense and which have
drafted "Statutes", empty pieces of paper signifying nothing but
purporting to give themselves a legal gloss immediately denied by their
rules of procedure and evidence which are designed to prevent fair
trials and the truth from ever being known.
The supporters of these bodies claim they are acting in accord with
justice, law and humanity. The imposition of counsel on President
Milosevic, an action which could only take place because of the
complete abscence of ethics in the family of lawyers named Kay selected
by the tribunal to silence him and cripple his defence, is the most
heinous action of all of the triumvirate of Nato stooges wearing the
red robes of the Inquisition and who are a self-parody of judges.
The fascist nature of these tribunals is openly revealed. The justice
of the cause of President Milosevic is plain.
The people of the world must recognize that President Milosevic and all
the other prisoners of the New World Order are hostages of that order,
held as an example to us all. The people of the world must act to stop
these injustices from continuing before we all become its victims. The
prisoners of all these ad hoc tribunals must be released. The tribunals
must be shut down. Those who created them must face justice before
their national courts for the war crimes they have committed. The
sovereignty of nations and international law must be restored.
International law will be restored. Together, the power is in our hands
to restore it.
Christopher Black
Vice Chair and Chair, Legal Committee
ICDMS
Arusha, Tanzania
---
To the so-called “Tribunal” trying
Slobodan Milosevic as a war criminal
implicated in “genocide.”
12. 09. 04
The writer of the ensuing words. after half a dozen texts made public,
should not be a stranger to this “Tribunal, “established by Madeleine
Albright with initial funds from two Muslim states. From its inital
South African prosecutor, through his Canadian successor, down ro the
current Swiss parody, called Carla del Ponte, the “tribunal” has
already “convicted” Slobodan Milosevic IN THE PUBLIC MEDIA THROUGHOUT
THE WEST FOR ALMOST THREE YEARS NOW. It has even denied him the most
basic right of the COLLECTIVE Western Civilisation, namely
self-defense.Under the cover of a transparent CHARADE about “concern”
for his health, the “Tribunal” has declared, magister dixit, “that he
is unable to defend himself,” despite and because of the AMPLE
DEMONSTRATION TO THE CONTRARY over a SUSTAINED period of time.
My first question is WHY TRY HIM AT ALL? Just incarcerte him for the
maximum, keep presenting “the Serbs” as neo-Nazi butchers of the
Twentieth century’s last decade, attack anyone who defends him as
eitrher a neo-Communist, an Orthodox Greek, a pro-Milosevic Serb,or any
other variety of “incorrect” persons.Just end this travesty of sick,
insane, misguided, stupid, asinine, deplorable, disgusting, politically
filthy, juridically contemptible, NATO-serving (with its cluster-bombs
and depleted uranium war-crime) aggressions against civilians in the
Serbian part of Bosnia, at Kosovo and in Serbia proper. Oh, yes, and
have a nice day at the “Court.”
What you do not wish to know, is that all of you at the “Tribunal” are
really watched, named and catalogued as footnotes to infamy that
destroyed internatioanl law, and behaved in criminal, racist and
Fascisto-Stalinist kangaroo ways toward the accused and his own
ethnicity. You will be neither forgotten nor forgiven. Cancer has
already taken “Judge” May, that non-entity from the bottom-ladder of
the British court system (in the Midlands - no Sir Ifor Evans is he).
Some other form of cosmic retribution will strike every one of you,
sooner or later. Predictably, and at the very least, your guilty
individual brains (assuming you have any left) will suffer individually
from Catatonic Narcolepsy with all of its pernicious and unpredictable
consequences. “Darkness at Noon” seemed like a novel but the Tribunal
has gone beyond, into the Twilight Zone while it believed that it
controls the vertical and the horizontal as a well-paid, perks-replete
puppet. One last word to the “judges” at the Tribunal.: For a fistfull
of dollars your souls are already in the Satan’s twitching hand. Sleep
well as you dehumanize yourselves with the pitiful amount of power
granted from elsewhere. You can also laugh this text off but the last
laugh will not be on thee.
Without respect,
Raymond K. Kent (Emeritus)
History Department, U. of Califormia
at Berkeley (510/642-1971)
---
UK peace activist William J Spring is making a formal complaint to the
Bar Council re UK barristers Stephen Kay and Gillian Higgins alleging
they are acting unethically and unprofessionally in agreeing to
represent Mr Milosevic at the Hague when he has made it clear he does
not want them to represent him.
William Spring comments: " it is basic to UK and European law that you
can represent yourself in a criminal trial.
" If illness is so bad as to render this difficult the answer is to
suspend the trial or to grant bail so the prisoner can recover his
health, not impose counsel against the provisions of the ECHR.
This is effective torture of the prisoner, especially one as well
qualified and fluent as Mr Milosevic, and impermissible to a servant of
the Supreme Court here in England."
"Further Stephen Kay has already expressed himself of sentiments
prejudicial to Mr Milosevic and we also believe he has links with
British intelligence and the security services.
"If you were to justify imposing representation, Stephen Kay is most
obviously disqualified from such a role."
Further information telephone 0208 376 1454
==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27
00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-4828957
email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006
intestato ad Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA
causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC
sito internet:
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.htm
RITORNO DALLA ZASTAVA DI KRAGUJEVAC
Viaggio del 10-13 settembre 2004
(resoconto di viaggio a cura Gilberto Vlaic del gruppo ZASTAVA Trieste)
Questa relazione e’ suddivisa in cinque parti:
Introduzione
Si costruiscono nuovi ponti di solidarieta'
Materiale trasportato
Cronaca del viaggio
Il sostegno a un gruppo di profughi da Pec (Kosovo)
Il microprogetto artigianato
Conclusioni
[di seguito: intervento all’assemblea dei lavoratori della Zastava di
Kragujevac il 12 settembre 2004]
Come vedete manca la parte che sempre chiude questi resoconti, e cioe'
un aggiornamento sullo stato attuale della Zastava e sulla situazione
generale in Serbia. Questa parte viene omessa in questa relazione
perche' il viaggio si e' effettuato solo due mesi dopo il precedente e
non vi sono novita' di rilievo da segnalare.
Introduzione
Vi invio un resoconto del viaggio appena concluso alla Zastava di
Kragujevac per consegnare le adozioni a distanza che fanno capo al
Gruppo Zastava di Trieste e al Coordinamento Nazionale RSU CGIL.
Questo resoconto si lega alle altre relazioni scritte con cadenza
praticamente trimestrale.
Sono tutte reperibili su diversi siti, tra i quali
- il sito del coordinamento RSU, all’indirizzo:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/
seguendo il link: Solidarietà con i lavoratori della Jugoslavia:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/guerra.htm
dove sono anche descritte in dettaglio tutte le iniziative in corso.
L'ultima relazione relativa al viaggio di luglio 2004 si trova
all'indrizzo
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/doc/altri2004/
2004_0704zastava_relazione.htm
Nello stesso sito segnalo un interessantie articolo di Enrico Vigna,
della associazione SOS Jugoslavia di Torino, che ha incontrato a marzo
scorso Cedomir Pajevic, vice segretario del Sindacato Samostalni della
Zastava, e Ruzica Milosavljevic, che dello stesso sindacato della
Zastava è stata segreteria generale. Ne è uscita fuori una vasta
intervista che descrive in dettaglio il drammatico quadro della realtà
serba post bellica.
Segnalo inoltre come molto interessante la relazione del viaggio svolto
a maggio scorso dall'associazione di Roma ABC, solidarieta' e pace
all'indirizzo
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/doc/altri2004/2004_0527_abc.zip
Tutti i nostri resoconti sono presenti anche sul sito del Coordinamento
Nazionale per la Jugoslavia, all'indirizzo:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
che contiene inoltre centinaia di articoli sulla situazione nei Balcani
difficilmente reperibili sulla stampa nazionale.
Si costruiscono nuovi ponti di solidarieta’
Come forse ricorderete, abbiamo preso in carico da marzo scorso due
fratellini colpiti da una malattia assai rara alla pelle (epidermiolisi
bollosa), ai quali forniamo periodicamente le bende per coprire le
piaghe di cui sono ricoperti (vedi relazione di marzo 2004, al
paragrafo Materiale trasportato e cronaca del viaggio).
Non e’ purtroppo una malattia curabile, si possono solo lenire le loro
sofferenze.
Abbiamo scoperto l’esistenza di una ONLUS in Italia che si occupa di
questa malattia, fondata a Catania 11 anni fa da un gruppo di genitori
di bambini colpiti da questa malattia.
Abbiamo avuto con loro un contatto per e-mail il 24 agosto, ci hanno
telefonato il 3 settembre, e il giorno 8 settembre ci e’ arrivato un
grosso scatolone contenente una grande scorta di bende e garze, per un
valore superiore ai 2000 euro. Abbiamo portato gran parte di queste
bende con noi; per dicembre questi nuovi amici ci hanno promesso altro
materiale.
Il Dr. Rodolfo Gallo di Fossalta di Piave ha organizzato a luglio a
casa sua una grande lotteria a sostegno delle nostre iniziative e ci ha
consegnato 1065 euro.
Gaetano da Fossalta ci ha consegnato 800 euro, frutto di sottoscrizioni
da lui raccolte, che si aggiungono ad altri 800 che ci aveva consegnato
a giugno..
Venanzio da S. Elena (che ha gia' sei adozioni a suo carico) ci ha
inviato per i bambini figli di profughi da Pec 1000 euro, a seguito di
una trasmissione su Radio Cooperativa di Padova curata da Mario in cui
si illustravano le catastrofiche condizioni in cui sono costretti a
sopravvivere.
Un gruppo di lavoratori di una azienda di Spinea ci ha consegnato
prodotti alimentari e di igiene personale per un valore superiore a
1000 euro; inoltre hanno raccolto 210 euro per il finanziamento al
sostegno dei bambini di Pec e molti scatoloni di vestiario nuovo ed
usato.
Vera e Giorgio da Trieste ci hanno consegnato medicinali per piu' di
1000 euro (soprattutto integratori vitaminici pediatrici).
Si tratta di ingenti quantita' di denaro, medicinali e merci per le
quali ringraziamo vivamente tutte le persone e le associazioni che si
sono impegnate per reperirle; il nostro impegno a Kragujevac e' pero'
cresciuto di molto nell'ultimo anno e quindi invitiamo tutti a
contribuire con generosita'.
Materiale trasportato
La delegazione era costituita da Gilberto e Zdravko da Trieste, Mario e
Luisa da Padova, Giandomenico e Gino da Conegliano, da Feredica e Nadia
da Fossalta di Piave.
Per il viaggio abbiamo utilizzato un pullmino fornitoci gratuitamente
dalla Associazione Triestina di Solidarieta' Internazionale.
Ricordo che le spese di viaggio sono state direttamente sostenute dai
partecipanti, senza alcuno storno dai fondi ricevuti per le quote di
adozione a distanza da distribuire (come del resto in tutti i
precedenti viaggi effettuati). Il viaggio e' costato complessivamente
(tra gasolio, pedaggi autostradali, pernottamenti e pasti) poco meno di
900 euro.
All'ultimo momento si sono aggiunti a noi con la loro auto Maurizio e
Miro della associazione Il nido del cuculo di Rimini.
Avevamo una ventina tra scatole e valigie di vestiario usato, circa 50
paia di scarpe ed una dozzina di pacchi di regali alle famiglie
jugoslave da parte delle famiglie adottanti italiane.
Inoltre una valigia con gli integratori vitaminici e gli altri
medicinali (per un valore complessivo di circa 3000 euro).
Le adozioni da distribuire erano 111, di cui 4 nuove, per un valore
complessivo di 11755 euro. La maggior parte erano quote trimestrali da
75 euro.
Infine avevamo 1081 euro frutto della vendita dei prodotti di uncinetto
di circa 15 operaie che ci avevano inviato i loro lavori in conto
vendita a maggio scorso per mezzo dell'Associazione Zastava Brescia,
all’interno del microprogetto artigianato.
Avevamo già acquistato a Kragujevac materiale scolastico e per igiene
personale per un totale di 1904 euro, da distribuire ai nostri ragazzi
e ai bambini di Pec.
Si trattava di
1200 quaderni formato A4
1200 penne biro
200 album da disegno
200 scatole da 12 pennarelli
200 squadrette
200 righelli
600 matite
200 gomme
per una spesa di 1152 euro.
Con questo materiale sono stati preparati 200 pacchetti; circa 130 sono
stati distribuiti nell'assemblea di consegna delle quote di adozione,
ed i restanti sono stato consegnati all'Ufficio Adozioni per una
successiva distribuzione alle famiglie con piu' bisogno. Si tratta di
una ben poca cosa rispetto alle reali necessita' dei lavoratori e delle
loro famiglie, ma ' stato il massimo che potevamo fare.
Inoltre sono stati acquistati:
130 saponette
65 bottiglie di shampoo da 1 litro
65 spazzolini
130 dentifrici
65 barre di cioccolato da 300 grammi
65 sacchetti di caramelle
130 pacchi da un kilo di biscotti secchi
per una spesa di 752 euro.
Sono stati preparati 65 sacchetti da distribuire ai bambini del campo
profughi.
Cronaca del viaggio
Siamo partiti da Trieste alle 9 del mattino e siamo arrivati a
Kragujevac alle 8 di sera, senza alcun problema durante il
viaggio.Tempo bello sia durante il viaggio che durante i due giorni
trascorsi a Kragujevac.
Dopo lo scarico del furgone, cena con Rajka e Milja dell'ufficio
adozioni del Sindacato Samostanli, e con Delko e Rajko, rispettivamente
segretario e vicesegretario dello stesso Sindacato.
Il mattino del sabato abbiamo verificato le liste delle adozioni e
preparato le buste con il denaro.
Ci siamo poi recati all'incontro con i profughi da Pec (di cui scriverò
dopo)
Ottimo pranzo a casa della famiglia la cu figlia e' adottata da Mario e
Luisa.
Pomeriggio dedicato alla visita di varie famiglie con figli adottati
dai membri della delegazione; le condizioni di queste famiglie sono
sempre difficili, e non si vedono prospettive per il futuro, ma questi
incontri si svolgono sempre in un clima di festa e di vera amicizia.
Dobbiamo sempre stare attenti a non esagerare con gli squisiti dolci
che ci offrono.
Durante una di queste visite ho intervistato a lungo un lavoratore, che
ha partecipato alla rimozione delle macerie e alla fase di
ricostruzione della fabbrica. Ha detto cose molto interessanti.
Inviero' in un secondo la tracrizione di questo colloquio, perche' devo
ancora trascrivere la cassetta su cui e' registrata l'intervista.
La sera siamo stati a cena da una famiglia che avevamo gia' incontrato
due volte (l'ultima a dicembre scorso).
Sono Kossovari giunti alcuni anni fa a Kragujevac; due figli, madre
casalinga e padre cassaintegrato; avevano iniziato a costruirsi la
casa, ma la situazione degli anni dell'embargo e successiva al 1999
aveva permesso loro di finire una sola stanza in cui hanno abitato per
anni; la madre partecipa al progetto artigiananto e ci hanno mostrato
con orgoglio una nuova stanza (la cucina) appena finita utilizzando per
l'acquisto dei materiali necessari i proventi ricavati dalla vendita
dei prodotti tessili.
Il mattino di domenica abbiamo distribuito le quote delle adozioni
delle nostre associazioni; la grande sala della direzione dove
avvengono questi incontri era praticamente al suo limite di capienza
(alcune centinaia di persone). L'atmosfera e' stata come al solito
festosa, siamo stati sommersi di bottiglie di rakja fatta in casa, di
marmellate, di miele, di prodotti tessili, doni che riporteremo con noi
in Italia e che, pur con qualche difficolta' di tipo geografico,
consegneremo alle famiglie italiane.
Sono stati inoltre distribuiti i pacchi contenenti il materiale
scolastico.
Alla fine dell’assemblea abbiamo consegnato il ricavato della vendita
dei prodotti di artigianato degli ultimi due mesi dicembre-marzo e
prelevato ulteriore materiale che le donne avevano preparato; come
sempre ci e' stato consegnato in conto vendita.
Il pomeriggio abbiamo visitato altre famiglie; una e' formata da padre
serbo e madre albanese, con tre figli; il padre nel salutarci ha usato
parole bellissime paragonando gli uomini alle pietre che se messe
insieme formano mura indistruttibili.
In un'altra famiglia il ragazzo adottato aveva usato parte della quota
consegnata a luglio per comperare un carretto adattato alla
preparazione di pop-corn, con il quale durante l'estate ha girato per
le strade della citta' in modo da integrare il reddito della famiglia.
Negli spostamenti tra una famiglia e l'altra abbiamo attraversato il
suggestivo Parco della Rimembranza di Kragujevac, dove il 21 ottobre
1941 furono sterminate per rappresaglia dai nazisti 7300 persone, tra
le quali 2500 operai della Zastava e gli studenti del locale liceo,
insieme ai loro professori. Molti monumenti costruiti con pietre
provenienti dalle varie Repubbliche che costituivano la Repubblica
Federativa Socialista di Jugoslavia ricordano quell'eccidio. Abbiamo
deposto sul monumento centrale i fiori che Federica, Luisa e Nadia
avevano ricevuto in dono durante l'assemblea del mattino.
La sera abbiamo discusso con i rappresentanti del sindacato i possibili
progetti di solidarieta' futuri e abbiamo definito la data del prossimo
viaggio che si svolgera' dal 17 al 21 dicembre prossimi.
Lunedi' durante il viaggio di ritorno ci siamo fermati a Belgrado dove
abbiamo attraversato il viale delle ambasciate, che ospita tutta una
serie di edifici pubblici completamente distrutti dai bombardamenti del
1999.
Siamo arrivati a Trieste verso le 7 di sera di lunedi' 13 settembre.
L'incontro con profughi di Pec
Dobbiamo ricordare che in Serbia vivono circa un milione di profughi
provenienti dalle varie repubbliche (nate dopo la dissoluzione della
RFSJ) e dal Kosovo; la loro è una situazione disperata, senza aiuti,
senza prospettive. Sono invisibili a tutto il mondo.
Avevamo gia' incontrato un gruppo di famiglie profughe da Pec e
Pristina nel viaggio dello scorso luglio.
Sono ammassate nella periferia di Kragujevac in un piccolo centro
commerciale; con tramezzi di legno sono state ricavate "stanze" di
circa 20 metri quadrati dove sopravvivono 45 famiglie, in totale circa
200 persone; ciascuna stanza è occupata da una famiglia, spesso
allargata a nonni e zii.
Un solo bagno a disposizione di tutti, senza riscaldamento, in
condizioni alimentari igieniche e sanitarie tragiche.
Manca tutto, ma proprio tutto quello che dovrebbe salvaguardare almeno
i diritti minimi, l'essenziale per la sopravvivenza.
Avevamo fornito a luglio ai 65 bambini che vivono li' il materiale
scolastico per il questo anno scolastico.
Grazie soprattutto alle insistenze di Barbara, che aveva partecipato al
viaggio di luglio, e a un inatteso finanziamento, abbiamo deciso di
mantenere in piedi questo rapporto, distribuendo ai bambini il
materiale elencato nel capitolo "Materiale trasportato" di questa
relazione.
L'incontro e' avvenuto in strada, in un clima molto diverso dalla volta
precedente.
Siamo stati accolti con una bella tradizionale forma di benvenuto: ci
hanno offerto del pane e del sale.
Un breve saluto da parte nostra seguito dalla consegna di una bandiera
della pace bilingue (PACE MIR) che e' stata subito issata sul tetto;
poi una donna a nome di tutti ci saluta con queste parole:
"Nessuno viene a trovarci, viviamo dall'oggi al domani, non sappiamo
che cosa succedera'. Il contratto scade nel 2005, tra tre mesi. Ci sono
45 famiglie in questo centro profughi, tutti abbiamo lo stesso destino,
la stessa incertezza; A nome del nostro centro profughi vi ringraziamo
per l'appoggio che ci avete dato e ringraziamo la vostra amicizia, che
per noi e' molto preziosa; vi ringraziamo di non aver dimenticato
questi bambini; ogni aiuto per loro e' prezioso, dalla mano
dell'amicizia alle cose piu' semplici, perche' hanno bisogno di tutto e
loro non hanno nessuna colpa di quello che e' successo.
Sarete sempre I benvenuti, la porta del nostro centro e' sempre aperta
per voi."
Dopo la consegna dei pacchi, la gente vuole che entriamo nell'edificio,
e con molta dignità ci mostra le proprie condizioni di vita; le
barriere linguistiche cadono di fronte agli sguardi, e si capisce tutta
l'impotenza di questi genitori, fino a ieri operai che potevano sperare
in un futuro per i loro figli, ed ora senza alcuna prospettiva per il
domani.
Per il prossimo viaggio vorremmo poter continuare in questa operazione
di solidarieta', ad esempio consegnando una pacco ad ogni famiglia ed
uno a ogni bambino. Tutto dipendera' dai nostri sottoscrittori.
Il microprogetto artigianato
Questo progetto e' iniziato nel maggio 2003; il numero di donne
coinvolte e' salito a circa 20.
Esse ci forniscono prodotti di ricamo e di uncinetto e li poniamo in
vendita.
Si tratta di un salto di qualita' all'interno della campagna di
solidarieta'. Nel campo delle adozioni infatti c'e' inevitabilmente la
differenza tra chi da' e chi riceve; qui invece c'e' un rapporto
assolutamente paritario tra chi produce una merce e chi la compra.
La vendita di questi lavori si era svolta fino a marzo scorso nelle
forme a noi consuete, attraverso rapporti personali con gli acquirenti,
nelle sagre e nelle feste a cui partecipiamo con i nostri banchetti.
La presenza delle COOP ha fatto per il momento decollare questo
progetto, in quanto si sono allargati notevolmente i canali di
vendita, soprattutto grazie al prezioso lavoro di Gaetano, Nadia e
Antonella.
Da segnalare che un nuovo canale di vendita si e' aperto in Piemonte
attraverso due nuovi adottanti, Filippo di Dronero e Bianca di Torino.
Ci e' comunque chiaro che nelle forme attuali il progetto non potra'
durare ancora a lungo; sara' necessario inventare nuovi meccanismi che
ci permettano la vendita di questi prodotti, fatto salvo il principio
dell'assenza di intermediari.
In questo viaggio abbiamo consegnato alle donne la cifra di 1081 euro,
Il totale generale del denaro consegnato fino ad ora è giunto quindi a
3.947,50 euro.
Anche questa volta abbiamo riportato in Italia una grande quantita' di
materiale prodotto; c'e' da sperare che le prossime festivita' di fine
anno ci aiutimo a mantenere in piedi questa forma di solidarieta'.
Conclusioni
Non riporto in questa relazione nuovi dati aggiornati, visto che la
precedente ci era stata consegnata due mesi fa; gli aggiornamenti sulla
situazione generale del popolo serbo e dei lavoratori di Kragujevac in
particolare sono rimandati alla prossima relazione di dicembre.
In modo generale possiamo dire che lavoratori jugoslavi continuano ad
essere in condizioni di oggettiva debolezza e devono fare i conti con
la necessità di una ricostruzione post-bombardamenti che ha ormai da
tre anni assunto una chiara direttrice iper-liberista.
Lo Stato, fortemente allettato e subordinato alle promesse di aiuto
occidentali, ha lasciato al libero mercato ogni decisione. Così i
prezzi aumentano, le scuole e la sanità diventano prestazioni
disponibili solo per i più ricchi, le fabbriche, le zone industriali
sono all’asta di profittatori occidentali che comprano tutto a prezzi
bassi e ponendo condizioni di lavoro inaccettabili. Sono evidenti e
stridenti le contraddizioni tra una estrema poverta' diffusa nella
quasi totalita' della popolazione una ricchezza esibita attraverso i
suoi tipici simboli, soprattutto le auto di lusso.
Le famiglie che aiutiamo materialmente esprimono la loro gratitudine
per questi aiuti che sono indispensabili per la loro sopravvivenza; una
delle loro grandi preoccupazioni e’ di non rimanere soli, abbandonati
ed invisibili al resto del mondo.
Dobbiamo continuare i nostri sforzi affinche’ giunga a loro la nostra
solidarieta’ e fratellanza materiale e politica.
---
Intervento, a nome del coordinamento RSU-CGIL, del gruppo ZASTAVA
Trieste, e dell’Associazione”Non bombe ma solo Caramelle” - ONLUS
svolto da Gilberto Vlaic all’assemblea dei lavoratori della Zastava di
Kragujevac il 12 settembre 2004 in occasione della consegna delle
adozioni a distanza
Care lavoratrici e cari lavoratori della Zastava,
carissime bambine, carissimi bambini,
Come promesso a luglio, eccoci di nuovo tra voi.
Prima di tutto vi porto il piu’ affettuoso e fraterno saluto delle
associazioni che qui rappresentiamo:
il gruppo Zastava Trieste
il coordinamento delle Rappresentanze Sindacali Unitarie della CGIL
l’associazione Non bombe ma solo Caramelle
le Cooperative dei lavoratori del nord-est.
Per quanto riguarda me, essere qui con voi ancora una volta mi fa
sentire a casa, insieme alla mie sorelle e ai miei fratelli jugoslavi.
In questo viaggio portiamo piu' di 110 adozioni, di cui 4 sono nuove.
Voglio dire ancora una volta che questo gesto di solidarieta' tra
lavoratori italiani e lavoratori jugoslavi non ha niente di
caritatevole, ma e' un esempio concreto della solidarieta' tra
lavoratori, perche' i nostri interessi materiali come classe sociale
sono gli stessi indipendentemente dal Paese dove abitiamo e dalla
lingua che parliamo.
Su un muro della mia sezione di partito c’e’ una lapide che riporta
alcuni versi del poeta turco Nazim Hikmet
Credi al grano
Al mare alla terra
Ma soprattutto credi nell’uomo
(e nella donna, aggiungo io).
Noi siamo qui proprio perche’ crediamo nell’uomo e nella dignita'
dell'uomo.
E per noi dignita' dell'uomo vuol dire
Lavoro, Pace, Liberta' e Solidarieta' internazionalista.
Dobbiamo esse uniti e decisi a respingere l'idea che sia possibile per
una potenza economica imporre a tutto il mondo, a tutti i popoli, le
sue leggi e i suoi interessi, attraverso le sue guerre con cui sta
insanguinando il mondo.
Non ci sono guerre giuste o umanitarie. Ci sono solo guerre
imperialiste per l'egemonia territoriale, politica ed economica. Per il
controllo della terra e delle sue risorse, per lo sfruttamento dei
lavoratori, a cui si negano tutti i diritti e si impongono salari da
fame.
Noi invece vogliamo un mondo di giustizia e di pace; una pace per la
quale sara' necessario lottare ancora, con decisione, con convinzione.
Una pace che ha nei lavoratori una forza insostituibile e decisiva; la
solidarieta' tra i lavoratori puo' essere piu' forte di qualsiasi
cannone.
Ma torniamo alla nostra assemblea.
Care bambine, cari bambini tra poco riceverete le buste contenenti gli
aiuti materiali dei vostri amici italiani.
Vi rinnovo l'invito di scrivere a queste persone, specialmente quelli
di voi che riceveranno adozioni nuove.
Infatti nel mio Paese si parla poco di voi, molti sono convinti che vi
abbiamo portato democrazia, liberta’ e benessere e che comunque la
vostra situazione e’ migliorata dalla fine dell’aggressione.
Noi sappiamo che non e’ cosi’. Noi cerchiamo in tutti i modi di
mantenere vivo il ricordo della primavera del 1999 e di descrivere la
vostra attuale situazione, ma le vostre parole, le vostre testimonianze
valgono piu’ di mille dei nostri discorsi e dei nostri dibattiti.
SVE VAS VOLIM
Kragujevac, 12-9-2004
Viaggio del 10-13 settembre 2004
(resoconto di viaggio a cura Gilberto Vlaic del gruppo ZASTAVA Trieste)
Questa relazione e’ suddivisa in cinque parti:
Introduzione
Si costruiscono nuovi ponti di solidarieta'
Materiale trasportato
Cronaca del viaggio
Il sostegno a un gruppo di profughi da Pec (Kosovo)
Il microprogetto artigianato
Conclusioni
[di seguito: intervento all’assemblea dei lavoratori della Zastava di
Kragujevac il 12 settembre 2004]
Come vedete manca la parte che sempre chiude questi resoconti, e cioe'
un aggiornamento sullo stato attuale della Zastava e sulla situazione
generale in Serbia. Questa parte viene omessa in questa relazione
perche' il viaggio si e' effettuato solo due mesi dopo il precedente e
non vi sono novita' di rilievo da segnalare.
Introduzione
Vi invio un resoconto del viaggio appena concluso alla Zastava di
Kragujevac per consegnare le adozioni a distanza che fanno capo al
Gruppo Zastava di Trieste e al Coordinamento Nazionale RSU CGIL.
Questo resoconto si lega alle altre relazioni scritte con cadenza
praticamente trimestrale.
Sono tutte reperibili su diversi siti, tra i quali
- il sito del coordinamento RSU, all’indirizzo:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/
seguendo il link: Solidarietà con i lavoratori della Jugoslavia:
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/guerra.htm
dove sono anche descritte in dettaglio tutte le iniziative in corso.
L'ultima relazione relativa al viaggio di luglio 2004 si trova
all'indrizzo
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/doc/altri2004/
2004_0704zastava_relazione.htm
Nello stesso sito segnalo un interessantie articolo di Enrico Vigna,
della associazione SOS Jugoslavia di Torino, che ha incontrato a marzo
scorso Cedomir Pajevic, vice segretario del Sindacato Samostalni della
Zastava, e Ruzica Milosavljevic, che dello stesso sindacato della
Zastava è stata segreteria generale. Ne è uscita fuori una vasta
intervista che descrive in dettaglio il drammatico quadro della realtà
serba post bellica.
Segnalo inoltre come molto interessante la relazione del viaggio svolto
a maggio scorso dall'associazione di Roma ABC, solidarieta' e pace
all'indirizzo
http://www.ecn.org/coord.rsu/doc/altri2004/2004_0527_abc.zip
Tutti i nostri resoconti sono presenti anche sul sito del Coordinamento
Nazionale per la Jugoslavia, all'indirizzo:
http://it.groups.yahoo.com/group/crj-mailinglist/messages
che contiene inoltre centinaia di articoli sulla situazione nei Balcani
difficilmente reperibili sulla stampa nazionale.
Si costruiscono nuovi ponti di solidarieta’
Come forse ricorderete, abbiamo preso in carico da marzo scorso due
fratellini colpiti da una malattia assai rara alla pelle (epidermiolisi
bollosa), ai quali forniamo periodicamente le bende per coprire le
piaghe di cui sono ricoperti (vedi relazione di marzo 2004, al
paragrafo Materiale trasportato e cronaca del viaggio).
Non e’ purtroppo una malattia curabile, si possono solo lenire le loro
sofferenze.
Abbiamo scoperto l’esistenza di una ONLUS in Italia che si occupa di
questa malattia, fondata a Catania 11 anni fa da un gruppo di genitori
di bambini colpiti da questa malattia.
Abbiamo avuto con loro un contatto per e-mail il 24 agosto, ci hanno
telefonato il 3 settembre, e il giorno 8 settembre ci e’ arrivato un
grosso scatolone contenente una grande scorta di bende e garze, per un
valore superiore ai 2000 euro. Abbiamo portato gran parte di queste
bende con noi; per dicembre questi nuovi amici ci hanno promesso altro
materiale.
Il Dr. Rodolfo Gallo di Fossalta di Piave ha organizzato a luglio a
casa sua una grande lotteria a sostegno delle nostre iniziative e ci ha
consegnato 1065 euro.
Gaetano da Fossalta ci ha consegnato 800 euro, frutto di sottoscrizioni
da lui raccolte, che si aggiungono ad altri 800 che ci aveva consegnato
a giugno..
Venanzio da S. Elena (che ha gia' sei adozioni a suo carico) ci ha
inviato per i bambini figli di profughi da Pec 1000 euro, a seguito di
una trasmissione su Radio Cooperativa di Padova curata da Mario in cui
si illustravano le catastrofiche condizioni in cui sono costretti a
sopravvivere.
Un gruppo di lavoratori di una azienda di Spinea ci ha consegnato
prodotti alimentari e di igiene personale per un valore superiore a
1000 euro; inoltre hanno raccolto 210 euro per il finanziamento al
sostegno dei bambini di Pec e molti scatoloni di vestiario nuovo ed
usato.
Vera e Giorgio da Trieste ci hanno consegnato medicinali per piu' di
1000 euro (soprattutto integratori vitaminici pediatrici).
Si tratta di ingenti quantita' di denaro, medicinali e merci per le
quali ringraziamo vivamente tutte le persone e le associazioni che si
sono impegnate per reperirle; il nostro impegno a Kragujevac e' pero'
cresciuto di molto nell'ultimo anno e quindi invitiamo tutti a
contribuire con generosita'.
Materiale trasportato
La delegazione era costituita da Gilberto e Zdravko da Trieste, Mario e
Luisa da Padova, Giandomenico e Gino da Conegliano, da Feredica e Nadia
da Fossalta di Piave.
Per il viaggio abbiamo utilizzato un pullmino fornitoci gratuitamente
dalla Associazione Triestina di Solidarieta' Internazionale.
Ricordo che le spese di viaggio sono state direttamente sostenute dai
partecipanti, senza alcuno storno dai fondi ricevuti per le quote di
adozione a distanza da distribuire (come del resto in tutti i
precedenti viaggi effettuati). Il viaggio e' costato complessivamente
(tra gasolio, pedaggi autostradali, pernottamenti e pasti) poco meno di
900 euro.
All'ultimo momento si sono aggiunti a noi con la loro auto Maurizio e
Miro della associazione Il nido del cuculo di Rimini.
Avevamo una ventina tra scatole e valigie di vestiario usato, circa 50
paia di scarpe ed una dozzina di pacchi di regali alle famiglie
jugoslave da parte delle famiglie adottanti italiane.
Inoltre una valigia con gli integratori vitaminici e gli altri
medicinali (per un valore complessivo di circa 3000 euro).
Le adozioni da distribuire erano 111, di cui 4 nuove, per un valore
complessivo di 11755 euro. La maggior parte erano quote trimestrali da
75 euro.
Infine avevamo 1081 euro frutto della vendita dei prodotti di uncinetto
di circa 15 operaie che ci avevano inviato i loro lavori in conto
vendita a maggio scorso per mezzo dell'Associazione Zastava Brescia,
all’interno del microprogetto artigianato.
Avevamo già acquistato a Kragujevac materiale scolastico e per igiene
personale per un totale di 1904 euro, da distribuire ai nostri ragazzi
e ai bambini di Pec.
Si trattava di
1200 quaderni formato A4
1200 penne biro
200 album da disegno
200 scatole da 12 pennarelli
200 squadrette
200 righelli
600 matite
200 gomme
per una spesa di 1152 euro.
Con questo materiale sono stati preparati 200 pacchetti; circa 130 sono
stati distribuiti nell'assemblea di consegna delle quote di adozione,
ed i restanti sono stato consegnati all'Ufficio Adozioni per una
successiva distribuzione alle famiglie con piu' bisogno. Si tratta di
una ben poca cosa rispetto alle reali necessita' dei lavoratori e delle
loro famiglie, ma ' stato il massimo che potevamo fare.
Inoltre sono stati acquistati:
130 saponette
65 bottiglie di shampoo da 1 litro
65 spazzolini
130 dentifrici
65 barre di cioccolato da 300 grammi
65 sacchetti di caramelle
130 pacchi da un kilo di biscotti secchi
per una spesa di 752 euro.
Sono stati preparati 65 sacchetti da distribuire ai bambini del campo
profughi.
Cronaca del viaggio
Siamo partiti da Trieste alle 9 del mattino e siamo arrivati a
Kragujevac alle 8 di sera, senza alcun problema durante il
viaggio.Tempo bello sia durante il viaggio che durante i due giorni
trascorsi a Kragujevac.
Dopo lo scarico del furgone, cena con Rajka e Milja dell'ufficio
adozioni del Sindacato Samostanli, e con Delko e Rajko, rispettivamente
segretario e vicesegretario dello stesso Sindacato.
Il mattino del sabato abbiamo verificato le liste delle adozioni e
preparato le buste con il denaro.
Ci siamo poi recati all'incontro con i profughi da Pec (di cui scriverò
dopo)
Ottimo pranzo a casa della famiglia la cu figlia e' adottata da Mario e
Luisa.
Pomeriggio dedicato alla visita di varie famiglie con figli adottati
dai membri della delegazione; le condizioni di queste famiglie sono
sempre difficili, e non si vedono prospettive per il futuro, ma questi
incontri si svolgono sempre in un clima di festa e di vera amicizia.
Dobbiamo sempre stare attenti a non esagerare con gli squisiti dolci
che ci offrono.
Durante una di queste visite ho intervistato a lungo un lavoratore, che
ha partecipato alla rimozione delle macerie e alla fase di
ricostruzione della fabbrica. Ha detto cose molto interessanti.
Inviero' in un secondo la tracrizione di questo colloquio, perche' devo
ancora trascrivere la cassetta su cui e' registrata l'intervista.
La sera siamo stati a cena da una famiglia che avevamo gia' incontrato
due volte (l'ultima a dicembre scorso).
Sono Kossovari giunti alcuni anni fa a Kragujevac; due figli, madre
casalinga e padre cassaintegrato; avevano iniziato a costruirsi la
casa, ma la situazione degli anni dell'embargo e successiva al 1999
aveva permesso loro di finire una sola stanza in cui hanno abitato per
anni; la madre partecipa al progetto artigiananto e ci hanno mostrato
con orgoglio una nuova stanza (la cucina) appena finita utilizzando per
l'acquisto dei materiali necessari i proventi ricavati dalla vendita
dei prodotti tessili.
Il mattino di domenica abbiamo distribuito le quote delle adozioni
delle nostre associazioni; la grande sala della direzione dove
avvengono questi incontri era praticamente al suo limite di capienza
(alcune centinaia di persone). L'atmosfera e' stata come al solito
festosa, siamo stati sommersi di bottiglie di rakja fatta in casa, di
marmellate, di miele, di prodotti tessili, doni che riporteremo con noi
in Italia e che, pur con qualche difficolta' di tipo geografico,
consegneremo alle famiglie italiane.
Sono stati inoltre distribuiti i pacchi contenenti il materiale
scolastico.
Alla fine dell’assemblea abbiamo consegnato il ricavato della vendita
dei prodotti di artigianato degli ultimi due mesi dicembre-marzo e
prelevato ulteriore materiale che le donne avevano preparato; come
sempre ci e' stato consegnato in conto vendita.
Il pomeriggio abbiamo visitato altre famiglie; una e' formata da padre
serbo e madre albanese, con tre figli; il padre nel salutarci ha usato
parole bellissime paragonando gli uomini alle pietre che se messe
insieme formano mura indistruttibili.
In un'altra famiglia il ragazzo adottato aveva usato parte della quota
consegnata a luglio per comperare un carretto adattato alla
preparazione di pop-corn, con il quale durante l'estate ha girato per
le strade della citta' in modo da integrare il reddito della famiglia.
Negli spostamenti tra una famiglia e l'altra abbiamo attraversato il
suggestivo Parco della Rimembranza di Kragujevac, dove il 21 ottobre
1941 furono sterminate per rappresaglia dai nazisti 7300 persone, tra
le quali 2500 operai della Zastava e gli studenti del locale liceo,
insieme ai loro professori. Molti monumenti costruiti con pietre
provenienti dalle varie Repubbliche che costituivano la Repubblica
Federativa Socialista di Jugoslavia ricordano quell'eccidio. Abbiamo
deposto sul monumento centrale i fiori che Federica, Luisa e Nadia
avevano ricevuto in dono durante l'assemblea del mattino.
La sera abbiamo discusso con i rappresentanti del sindacato i possibili
progetti di solidarieta' futuri e abbiamo definito la data del prossimo
viaggio che si svolgera' dal 17 al 21 dicembre prossimi.
Lunedi' durante il viaggio di ritorno ci siamo fermati a Belgrado dove
abbiamo attraversato il viale delle ambasciate, che ospita tutta una
serie di edifici pubblici completamente distrutti dai bombardamenti del
1999.
Siamo arrivati a Trieste verso le 7 di sera di lunedi' 13 settembre.
L'incontro con profughi di Pec
Dobbiamo ricordare che in Serbia vivono circa un milione di profughi
provenienti dalle varie repubbliche (nate dopo la dissoluzione della
RFSJ) e dal Kosovo; la loro è una situazione disperata, senza aiuti,
senza prospettive. Sono invisibili a tutto il mondo.
Avevamo gia' incontrato un gruppo di famiglie profughe da Pec e
Pristina nel viaggio dello scorso luglio.
Sono ammassate nella periferia di Kragujevac in un piccolo centro
commerciale; con tramezzi di legno sono state ricavate "stanze" di
circa 20 metri quadrati dove sopravvivono 45 famiglie, in totale circa
200 persone; ciascuna stanza è occupata da una famiglia, spesso
allargata a nonni e zii.
Un solo bagno a disposizione di tutti, senza riscaldamento, in
condizioni alimentari igieniche e sanitarie tragiche.
Manca tutto, ma proprio tutto quello che dovrebbe salvaguardare almeno
i diritti minimi, l'essenziale per la sopravvivenza.
Avevamo fornito a luglio ai 65 bambini che vivono li' il materiale
scolastico per il questo anno scolastico.
Grazie soprattutto alle insistenze di Barbara, che aveva partecipato al
viaggio di luglio, e a un inatteso finanziamento, abbiamo deciso di
mantenere in piedi questo rapporto, distribuendo ai bambini il
materiale elencato nel capitolo "Materiale trasportato" di questa
relazione.
L'incontro e' avvenuto in strada, in un clima molto diverso dalla volta
precedente.
Siamo stati accolti con una bella tradizionale forma di benvenuto: ci
hanno offerto del pane e del sale.
Un breve saluto da parte nostra seguito dalla consegna di una bandiera
della pace bilingue (PACE MIR) che e' stata subito issata sul tetto;
poi una donna a nome di tutti ci saluta con queste parole:
"Nessuno viene a trovarci, viviamo dall'oggi al domani, non sappiamo
che cosa succedera'. Il contratto scade nel 2005, tra tre mesi. Ci sono
45 famiglie in questo centro profughi, tutti abbiamo lo stesso destino,
la stessa incertezza; A nome del nostro centro profughi vi ringraziamo
per l'appoggio che ci avete dato e ringraziamo la vostra amicizia, che
per noi e' molto preziosa; vi ringraziamo di non aver dimenticato
questi bambini; ogni aiuto per loro e' prezioso, dalla mano
dell'amicizia alle cose piu' semplici, perche' hanno bisogno di tutto e
loro non hanno nessuna colpa di quello che e' successo.
Sarete sempre I benvenuti, la porta del nostro centro e' sempre aperta
per voi."
Dopo la consegna dei pacchi, la gente vuole che entriamo nell'edificio,
e con molta dignità ci mostra le proprie condizioni di vita; le
barriere linguistiche cadono di fronte agli sguardi, e si capisce tutta
l'impotenza di questi genitori, fino a ieri operai che potevano sperare
in un futuro per i loro figli, ed ora senza alcuna prospettiva per il
domani.
Per il prossimo viaggio vorremmo poter continuare in questa operazione
di solidarieta', ad esempio consegnando una pacco ad ogni famiglia ed
uno a ogni bambino. Tutto dipendera' dai nostri sottoscrittori.
Il microprogetto artigianato
Questo progetto e' iniziato nel maggio 2003; il numero di donne
coinvolte e' salito a circa 20.
Esse ci forniscono prodotti di ricamo e di uncinetto e li poniamo in
vendita.
Si tratta di un salto di qualita' all'interno della campagna di
solidarieta'. Nel campo delle adozioni infatti c'e' inevitabilmente la
differenza tra chi da' e chi riceve; qui invece c'e' un rapporto
assolutamente paritario tra chi produce una merce e chi la compra.
La vendita di questi lavori si era svolta fino a marzo scorso nelle
forme a noi consuete, attraverso rapporti personali con gli acquirenti,
nelle sagre e nelle feste a cui partecipiamo con i nostri banchetti.
La presenza delle COOP ha fatto per il momento decollare questo
progetto, in quanto si sono allargati notevolmente i canali di
vendita, soprattutto grazie al prezioso lavoro di Gaetano, Nadia e
Antonella.
Da segnalare che un nuovo canale di vendita si e' aperto in Piemonte
attraverso due nuovi adottanti, Filippo di Dronero e Bianca di Torino.
Ci e' comunque chiaro che nelle forme attuali il progetto non potra'
durare ancora a lungo; sara' necessario inventare nuovi meccanismi che
ci permettano la vendita di questi prodotti, fatto salvo il principio
dell'assenza di intermediari.
In questo viaggio abbiamo consegnato alle donne la cifra di 1081 euro,
Il totale generale del denaro consegnato fino ad ora è giunto quindi a
3.947,50 euro.
Anche questa volta abbiamo riportato in Italia una grande quantita' di
materiale prodotto; c'e' da sperare che le prossime festivita' di fine
anno ci aiutimo a mantenere in piedi questa forma di solidarieta'.
Conclusioni
Non riporto in questa relazione nuovi dati aggiornati, visto che la
precedente ci era stata consegnata due mesi fa; gli aggiornamenti sulla
situazione generale del popolo serbo e dei lavoratori di Kragujevac in
particolare sono rimandati alla prossima relazione di dicembre.
In modo generale possiamo dire che lavoratori jugoslavi continuano ad
essere in condizioni di oggettiva debolezza e devono fare i conti con
la necessità di una ricostruzione post-bombardamenti che ha ormai da
tre anni assunto una chiara direttrice iper-liberista.
Lo Stato, fortemente allettato e subordinato alle promesse di aiuto
occidentali, ha lasciato al libero mercato ogni decisione. Così i
prezzi aumentano, le scuole e la sanità diventano prestazioni
disponibili solo per i più ricchi, le fabbriche, le zone industriali
sono all’asta di profittatori occidentali che comprano tutto a prezzi
bassi e ponendo condizioni di lavoro inaccettabili. Sono evidenti e
stridenti le contraddizioni tra una estrema poverta' diffusa nella
quasi totalita' della popolazione una ricchezza esibita attraverso i
suoi tipici simboli, soprattutto le auto di lusso.
Le famiglie che aiutiamo materialmente esprimono la loro gratitudine
per questi aiuti che sono indispensabili per la loro sopravvivenza; una
delle loro grandi preoccupazioni e’ di non rimanere soli, abbandonati
ed invisibili al resto del mondo.
Dobbiamo continuare i nostri sforzi affinche’ giunga a loro la nostra
solidarieta’ e fratellanza materiale e politica.
---
Intervento, a nome del coordinamento RSU-CGIL, del gruppo ZASTAVA
Trieste, e dell’Associazione”Non bombe ma solo Caramelle” - ONLUS
svolto da Gilberto Vlaic all’assemblea dei lavoratori della Zastava di
Kragujevac il 12 settembre 2004 in occasione della consegna delle
adozioni a distanza
Care lavoratrici e cari lavoratori della Zastava,
carissime bambine, carissimi bambini,
Come promesso a luglio, eccoci di nuovo tra voi.
Prima di tutto vi porto il piu’ affettuoso e fraterno saluto delle
associazioni che qui rappresentiamo:
il gruppo Zastava Trieste
il coordinamento delle Rappresentanze Sindacali Unitarie della CGIL
l’associazione Non bombe ma solo Caramelle
le Cooperative dei lavoratori del nord-est.
Per quanto riguarda me, essere qui con voi ancora una volta mi fa
sentire a casa, insieme alla mie sorelle e ai miei fratelli jugoslavi.
In questo viaggio portiamo piu' di 110 adozioni, di cui 4 sono nuove.
Voglio dire ancora una volta che questo gesto di solidarieta' tra
lavoratori italiani e lavoratori jugoslavi non ha niente di
caritatevole, ma e' un esempio concreto della solidarieta' tra
lavoratori, perche' i nostri interessi materiali come classe sociale
sono gli stessi indipendentemente dal Paese dove abitiamo e dalla
lingua che parliamo.
Su un muro della mia sezione di partito c’e’ una lapide che riporta
alcuni versi del poeta turco Nazim Hikmet
Credi al grano
Al mare alla terra
Ma soprattutto credi nell’uomo
(e nella donna, aggiungo io).
Noi siamo qui proprio perche’ crediamo nell’uomo e nella dignita'
dell'uomo.
E per noi dignita' dell'uomo vuol dire
Lavoro, Pace, Liberta' e Solidarieta' internazionalista.
Dobbiamo esse uniti e decisi a respingere l'idea che sia possibile per
una potenza economica imporre a tutto il mondo, a tutti i popoli, le
sue leggi e i suoi interessi, attraverso le sue guerre con cui sta
insanguinando il mondo.
Non ci sono guerre giuste o umanitarie. Ci sono solo guerre
imperialiste per l'egemonia territoriale, politica ed economica. Per il
controllo della terra e delle sue risorse, per lo sfruttamento dei
lavoratori, a cui si negano tutti i diritti e si impongono salari da
fame.
Noi invece vogliamo un mondo di giustizia e di pace; una pace per la
quale sara' necessario lottare ancora, con decisione, con convinzione.
Una pace che ha nei lavoratori una forza insostituibile e decisiva; la
solidarieta' tra i lavoratori puo' essere piu' forte di qualsiasi
cannone.
Ma torniamo alla nostra assemblea.
Care bambine, cari bambini tra poco riceverete le buste contenenti gli
aiuti materiali dei vostri amici italiani.
Vi rinnovo l'invito di scrivere a queste persone, specialmente quelli
di voi che riceveranno adozioni nuove.
Infatti nel mio Paese si parla poco di voi, molti sono convinti che vi
abbiamo portato democrazia, liberta’ e benessere e che comunque la
vostra situazione e’ migliorata dalla fine dell’aggressione.
Noi sappiamo che non e’ cosi’. Noi cerchiamo in tutti i modi di
mantenere vivo il ricordo della primavera del 1999 e di descrivere la
vostra attuale situazione, ma le vostre parole, le vostre testimonianze
valgono piu’ di mille dei nostri discorsi e dei nostri dibattiti.
SVE VAS VOLIM
Kragujevac, 12-9-2004
