Da: ICDSM Italia
Data: Mer 16 Mar 2005 21:11:30 Europe/Rome
A: icdsm-italia @ yahoogroups.com
Oggetto: [icdsm-italia] ICDSM CONFERENCE (1)
ICDSM CONFERENCE (1)
The Milosevic Case: Legal Aspects
The Hague, Feb. 26th, 2005
1. Experts in int'l law back Milosevic defense
By John Catalinotto on Workers World
2. SLOBO'S SPIRIT IS UNBROKEN! says RAMSEY CLARK
by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (CDSM UK), reporting from The Hague
3. ICTY 'undermines Nuremberg principles' says JOHN LAUGHLAND
report by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (at The Hague)
---( 1 )---
http://www.workers.org/2005/world/milosevic-0317/
Experts in int'l law back Milosevic defense
By John Catalinotto
Published Mar 9, 2005 4:10 PM
Might doesn't make right. NATO forces were able to break up Yugo slavia
but that doesn't make its kidnapped former leader a criminal.
Fifty people interested in the defense of the former Yugoslav president
attended an international conference here Feb. 26 to discuss "The Hague
Proceedings against Slobodan Milosevic: Emerging Issues in
International Law."
The group was concerned that the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is attempting to cut short his legal
defense.
And even as Milosevic fights for time to rebut the charges against him,
the U.S. and the puppet Iraqi regime have plans to put another former
leader of an invaded country on trial: Saddam Hussein.
The meeting brought together top jurists in international law, mainly
from Europe and the United States but including a representative from
India. The speakers made persuasive presentations exposing the
illegitimacy of the ICTY and the case against President Milosevic.
The case has gone through a number of phases since NATO forces
kidnapped the Serb leader from prison in Belgrade in June 2001. When
the proceedings opened in February 2002, the media dubbed them the
"trial of the century." Milosevic and Serbia were to be blamed for 10
years of civil war in the Balkans in the 1990s.
However, Milosevic was able, even with the minimal assistance available
to him and despite serious medical problems, to turn the tables on the
ICTY during cross-examination and indict the leaders of NATO for 10
years of aggression aimed at destroying Yugoslavia.
The result was that the corporate media stopped reporting on the trial,
thus turning it into a de facto secret kangaroo court. Now the
prosecution is attempting to limit Milosevic's active defense case and
bring the trial to a close as rapidly as possible.
International jurists
Present at the Feb. 26 conference were former U.S. Attorney General
Ramsey Clark, former Bulgarian presidential candidate Professor Velko
Valkanov, Pro fes sor Dr. Hans Köchler of Austria, Professor Aldo
Bernardini of Italy, Canadian international attorney Chris topher
Black, Dr. John Laughland of Britain and Pro fessor Bhim Singh, chair
of the Jammu Kashmir National Panther Party. Maitre Tiphaine Dickson of
Quebec had to cancel her appearance but submitted a paper read by one
of the participants.
Clark, a founding member of the Inter national Action Center, said his
visit to Milosevic the day before had showed the "triumph of the human
spirit" and called the president "undaunted." Clark said "the violence
and deaths of the wars on Yugo slavia were caused by others" and "the
real crime was that of organizing the war."
Clark compared the situation in Yugo slavia to that of the U.S. Civil
War, although in the Balkans the reactionary side won. "He [Milosevic]
was blamed for doing what Abraham Lincoln did in the American Civil
War--and that was trying to preserve the Union. Lincoln said many times
that his sole purpose was to preserve the Union, yet here the United
States' sole purpose was to destroy Yugoslavia, so that the 'end of
history' would appear real," said Clark.
"To do that you had to demonize and destroy the leadership that aimed
to preserve the Yugoslav union," he added. "And to have its way the
United States had to corrupt the United Nations and international
justice."
Professor Valkonov pointed out that with regard to both Serbia and
Iraq, "the United States violated all laws" to carry out military
attacks on these countries.
Vladimir Krsljanin of the International Committee for the Defense of
Slobodan Milosevic announced plans to staff an office in The Hague. Two
young activists will help Milosevic prepare his defense case in the
remaining time and publicize the results. Krsljanin asked for the
necessary financial and organizational support from those who
understand the importance of refusing to allow NATO powers to be the
sole ones to write the recent history of the Balkans.
This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww @ workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe @ workersworld.net
Support independent news
http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
---( 2 )---
http://www.free-slobo-uk.org/documents_clark
SLOBO'S SPIRIT IS UNBROKEN!
says RAMSEY CLARK
by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (CDSM UK), reporting from The Hague (posted: March
1, 2005)
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC remains “absolutely undaunted," and his "fighting
spirit is higher than ever,” despite years of illegal imprisonment and
separation from friends and family, former US Attorney General Ramsey
Clark declared at the weekend.
Mr Clark, who led a delegation to meet President Milosevic at his Hague
prison on Friday (February 25, 2005), reported that "his fighting
spirit is higher than ever," despite poor health and the fact that
Milosevic has been denied visits from his wife and children for more
than a year.
Delivering a keynote address to approximately 80 delegates from across
Europe at a "Free Milosevic" seminar in The Hague, Mr Clark conveyed
the President’s best wishes to supporters everywhere who are fighting
to expose the truth over the West’s role in the destruction of
Yugoslavia throughout the 1990s.
The veteran American legal expert and peace campaigner said of
Milosevic: "His spirit is absolutely undaunted. For almost four years
of confinement he has been cut off from family, cut off from friends,
cut off from all forms of support and demonised constantly.
"I’ve watched the law for a long time and I don’t know of a more heroic
resistance of an individual, under every form of adversity, who has
stood up tall and resisted [like Milosevic has].
"And, more than those that hurt him can understand, he is one who has
demonstrated that the real criminal acts were by those who were
breaking up the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and not those who were
trying to preserve the union."
Milosevic’s real crime was standing up to the US-led New World Order,
Clark suggested.
"Those who heroically resist - as President Milosevic did - the
aggression and domination of their countries, pay the price."
Mr Clark told the conference, organised by the ICDSM to examine the
legal aspects of the Milosevic case, that the peoples of the former
Yugoslavia were destined to be “servants in the basement of Europe”
unless they can unite in a new Balkans federation.
Following the collapse of East European socialism, Yugoslavia
maintained an alternative economic model in the region, was
independent-minded and “hard to kick around.” As such, it had to go,
said Mr Clark.
“If, by US standards, this was to be ‘the end of history’ there could
only thereafter be one form of Government – and that is capitalist
plutocracy.”
Mr Clark explained how the US Congress encouraged the destruction of
Yugoslavia by demanding that each of its six republics held immediate
independence referendums or be subject to sanctions and a freeze on aid.
He compared the situation in Yugoslavia to that of the American Civil
War albeit with the secessionists and their powerful international
backers winning out in the Balkans in contrast to the victory of the
Union in the United States.
“He [Milosevic] was blamed for doing what Abraham Lincoln did in the
American civil war – and that was trying to preserve the Union. Lincoln
said many times that his sole purpose was to preserve the union yet
here the United States sole purpose was to destroy Yugoslavia, so that
the ‘end of history’ would appear real,” said Clark.
“To do that you had to demonise and destroy the leadership that aimed
to preserve the Yugoslav union,” he added.
“And to have its way the United States had to corrupt the United
Nations and international justice.”
This was achieved by railroading the UN Security Council into setting
up its International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)
at The Hague – a sham victor’s court, ultra vires the UN Charter which
undermined the principles established at the Nuremberg trials after
World War II and further obstructed the establishment of an
International Criminal Court.
“You can read the UN Charter all you want and you will never find any
provision that authorises the creation of the ICTY. There would never
have been a United Nations if there had been any suggestion that the
Charter had contained the power to create an international criminal
court.
“Because the people who wrote the charter would never have permitted
themselves to be subjected to the power of that court. Because they
don’t intend to be accountable to anyone, which is why we see the
United States so feverishly opposing the ICC.
“The supreme international crime is the war of aggression [as
established at Nuremberg] and the war of aggression that was waged
against Yugoslavia was not only political and economic it was military
from beginning to end and it’s still going on there.
“Equality is the mother of justice – if equal justice under law is the
founding principle of the rule of law then the ICTY fails to meet most
of the standards because it persecutes only the enemies of the United
States to ensure further domination of the region. In a sense it’s more
deadly than the bombs.”
---( 3 )---
http://www.free-slobo-uk.org/documents_conference_laughland
ICTY 'undermines Nuremberg principles'
says JOHN LAUGHLAND
report by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (at The Hague)
Posted: March 3, 2005
BRITISH writer John Laughland exploded the myth that the Hague tribunal
is a modern equivalent of the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals.
In fact the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY) undermines important Nuremberg principles set after World War
II, Laughland told ICDSM activists at the campaign's Hague legal
conference (26/2/05).
The ICTY was a classic example of how the New World Order, as
proclaimed by George Bush Sr in 1990, has “radically reformed” the
legal basis of international relations in favour of powerful nations
such as the United States, he explained.
Today’s ‘war on terror’ is a “perfect illustration” as ‘terror’ is, by
definition, a criminal activity whereas war is an inter-state activity.
“So by proclaiming the war on terror George Bush Jr…has proclaimed a
new international system which treats the entire world as if it were
part of the domestic jurisdiction of the United States of America. And
that’s why anybody who fights back, in whatever capacity, and lives in
whatever country, is regarded as a criminal.
"It’s obvious that the ICTY comes directly out of this logic – comes
directly out of this transformation of the free association between
states which used to constitute international law into something
resembling the criminal procedures of a [unitary] state.
"One of the many perversities of the Hague tribunal is that it does not
operate on what the law is, but on what it would like the law to be – a
form of behaviour which is about as perfect an expression of
lawlessness as one can imagine.
"Anybody who looks at international law – the International Court of
Justice, customary international law and the facts of the world can see
that this is a rogue tribunal and therefore ought to be dissolved."
The ICTY has fashioned its image on the International Military
Tribunals at Nuremberg in an attempt to win legitimacy, right down to a
similarity of name. However, that is where comparisons end, says
Laughland.
Whereas Nuremberg held ‘crimes against peace’ (for example, the German
invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland) to be the primary war crimes
for which leading Nazis were tried, the ICTY has no such statute
(ruling out prosecutions of NATO leaders for their 1999 aggression
against Yugoslavia) and rides roughshod over the basic principle of
national sovereignty in place of an easily manipulated ‘human rights’
agenda.
Those who champion vague concepts of ‘human rights’ over international
law are misguided because “that is not a judicial reasoning that is, at
best, the reasoning of a vigilante,” says Laughland.
“The Nuremberg jurisprudence actually based itself on [national
sovereignty] because the Nazis radically questioned, both in their acts
and their writings, the notion of state sovereignty.
“The Nazis invoked over-riding concerns for human rights when they
declared war and invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland,” supposedly to
protect the human rights of German minorities, he added. "The entire
Nazi war effort had as its starting point the doctrine of humanitarian
intervention.
"The primary crime of which the Nazis were accused and were convicted
was the crime against peace – the crime of planning and executing a war
of aggression.”
In fact, Nuremberg expressly ruled out the kind of tribunal set up by
the UN Security Council at the ICTY. It stated that no such court can
be set up to judge alleged crimes in a sovereign state where
independent government holds power [as is the case of the former
Yugoslav republics today]. Nuremberg was legitimate because the Nazis
had temporarily, but unconditionally, surrendered German sovereignty to
the victorious allies at the end of World War II.
“Of all the many perversities of the Milosevic trial, none is perhaps
more striking than this extraordinary charge that he was pursuing a
Greater Serbia. I can only think that this comes from the attempt to
impose the Nuremberg jurisprudence on what happened in Yugoslavia in
the 1990s.
“It’s almost like putting a large-fitting suit onto a small man.
Obviously the Nazis were accused and convicted of creating a Greater
Germany and so it seems almost as if the people at The Hague have
attempted to take the Nuremberg jurisprudence off the peg and tried to
fit it onto the events of 60 years later.”
==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27
00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-4828957
email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
*** CONTRIBUISCI E FAI CONTRIBUIRE:
Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006
intestato ad Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA
causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC ***
IL NOSTRO SITO INTERNET:
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.htm
IL TESTO IN LINGUA ITALIANA DELLA AUTODIFESA DI MILOSEVIC, IN CORSO
DI REVISIONE E CORREZIONE, E' TEMPORANEAMENTE OSPITATO ALLA PAGINA:
https://www.cnj.it/documentazione/autodifesa04.htm
LE TRASCRIZIONI "UFFICIALI" DEL "PROCESSO" SI TROVANO AI SITI:
http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/transe54.htm (IN ENGLISH)
http://www.un.org/icty/transf54/transf54.htm (EN FRANCAIS)
==========================
Data: Mer 16 Mar 2005 21:11:30 Europe/Rome
A: icdsm-italia @ yahoogroups.com
Oggetto: [icdsm-italia] ICDSM CONFERENCE (1)
ICDSM CONFERENCE (1)
The Milosevic Case: Legal Aspects
The Hague, Feb. 26th, 2005
1. Experts in int'l law back Milosevic defense
By John Catalinotto on Workers World
2. SLOBO'S SPIRIT IS UNBROKEN! says RAMSEY CLARK
by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (CDSM UK), reporting from The Hague
3. ICTY 'undermines Nuremberg principles' says JOHN LAUGHLAND
report by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (at The Hague)
---( 1 )---
http://www.workers.org/2005/world/milosevic-0317/
Experts in int'l law back Milosevic defense
By John Catalinotto
Published Mar 9, 2005 4:10 PM
Might doesn't make right. NATO forces were able to break up Yugo slavia
but that doesn't make its kidnapped former leader a criminal.
Fifty people interested in the defense of the former Yugoslav president
attended an international conference here Feb. 26 to discuss "The Hague
Proceedings against Slobodan Milosevic: Emerging Issues in
International Law."
The group was concerned that the International Criminal Tribunal for
the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is attempting to cut short his legal
defense.
And even as Milosevic fights for time to rebut the charges against him,
the U.S. and the puppet Iraqi regime have plans to put another former
leader of an invaded country on trial: Saddam Hussein.
The meeting brought together top jurists in international law, mainly
from Europe and the United States but including a representative from
India. The speakers made persuasive presentations exposing the
illegitimacy of the ICTY and the case against President Milosevic.
The case has gone through a number of phases since NATO forces
kidnapped the Serb leader from prison in Belgrade in June 2001. When
the proceedings opened in February 2002, the media dubbed them the
"trial of the century." Milosevic and Serbia were to be blamed for 10
years of civil war in the Balkans in the 1990s.
However, Milosevic was able, even with the minimal assistance available
to him and despite serious medical problems, to turn the tables on the
ICTY during cross-examination and indict the leaders of NATO for 10
years of aggression aimed at destroying Yugoslavia.
The result was that the corporate media stopped reporting on the trial,
thus turning it into a de facto secret kangaroo court. Now the
prosecution is attempting to limit Milosevic's active defense case and
bring the trial to a close as rapidly as possible.
International jurists
Present at the Feb. 26 conference were former U.S. Attorney General
Ramsey Clark, former Bulgarian presidential candidate Professor Velko
Valkanov, Pro fes sor Dr. Hans Köchler of Austria, Professor Aldo
Bernardini of Italy, Canadian international attorney Chris topher
Black, Dr. John Laughland of Britain and Pro fessor Bhim Singh, chair
of the Jammu Kashmir National Panther Party. Maitre Tiphaine Dickson of
Quebec had to cancel her appearance but submitted a paper read by one
of the participants.
Clark, a founding member of the Inter national Action Center, said his
visit to Milosevic the day before had showed the "triumph of the human
spirit" and called the president "undaunted." Clark said "the violence
and deaths of the wars on Yugo slavia were caused by others" and "the
real crime was that of organizing the war."
Clark compared the situation in Yugo slavia to that of the U.S. Civil
War, although in the Balkans the reactionary side won. "He [Milosevic]
was blamed for doing what Abraham Lincoln did in the American Civil
War--and that was trying to preserve the Union. Lincoln said many times
that his sole purpose was to preserve the Union, yet here the United
States' sole purpose was to destroy Yugoslavia, so that the 'end of
history' would appear real," said Clark.
"To do that you had to demonize and destroy the leadership that aimed
to preserve the Yugoslav union," he added. "And to have its way the
United States had to corrupt the United Nations and international
justice."
Professor Valkonov pointed out that with regard to both Serbia and
Iraq, "the United States violated all laws" to carry out military
attacks on these countries.
Vladimir Krsljanin of the International Committee for the Defense of
Slobodan Milosevic announced plans to staff an office in The Hague. Two
young activists will help Milosevic prepare his defense case in the
remaining time and publicize the results. Krsljanin asked for the
necessary financial and organizational support from those who
understand the importance of refusing to allow NATO powers to be the
sole ones to write the recent history of the Balkans.
This article is copyright under a Creative Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww @ workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe @ workersworld.net
Support independent news
http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php
---( 2 )---
http://www.free-slobo-uk.org/documents_clark
SLOBO'S SPIRIT IS UNBROKEN!
says RAMSEY CLARK
by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (CDSM UK), reporting from The Hague (posted: March
1, 2005)
SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC remains “absolutely undaunted," and his "fighting
spirit is higher than ever,” despite years of illegal imprisonment and
separation from friends and family, former US Attorney General Ramsey
Clark declared at the weekend.
Mr Clark, who led a delegation to meet President Milosevic at his Hague
prison on Friday (February 25, 2005), reported that "his fighting
spirit is higher than ever," despite poor health and the fact that
Milosevic has been denied visits from his wife and children for more
than a year.
Delivering a keynote address to approximately 80 delegates from across
Europe at a "Free Milosevic" seminar in The Hague, Mr Clark conveyed
the President’s best wishes to supporters everywhere who are fighting
to expose the truth over the West’s role in the destruction of
Yugoslavia throughout the 1990s.
The veteran American legal expert and peace campaigner said of
Milosevic: "His spirit is absolutely undaunted. For almost four years
of confinement he has been cut off from family, cut off from friends,
cut off from all forms of support and demonised constantly.
"I’ve watched the law for a long time and I don’t know of a more heroic
resistance of an individual, under every form of adversity, who has
stood up tall and resisted [like Milosevic has].
"And, more than those that hurt him can understand, he is one who has
demonstrated that the real criminal acts were by those who were
breaking up the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and not those who were
trying to preserve the union."
Milosevic’s real crime was standing up to the US-led New World Order,
Clark suggested.
"Those who heroically resist - as President Milosevic did - the
aggression and domination of their countries, pay the price."
Mr Clark told the conference, organised by the ICDSM to examine the
legal aspects of the Milosevic case, that the peoples of the former
Yugoslavia were destined to be “servants in the basement of Europe”
unless they can unite in a new Balkans federation.
Following the collapse of East European socialism, Yugoslavia
maintained an alternative economic model in the region, was
independent-minded and “hard to kick around.” As such, it had to go,
said Mr Clark.
“If, by US standards, this was to be ‘the end of history’ there could
only thereafter be one form of Government – and that is capitalist
plutocracy.”
Mr Clark explained how the US Congress encouraged the destruction of
Yugoslavia by demanding that each of its six republics held immediate
independence referendums or be subject to sanctions and a freeze on aid.
He compared the situation in Yugoslavia to that of the American Civil
War albeit with the secessionists and their powerful international
backers winning out in the Balkans in contrast to the victory of the
Union in the United States.
“He [Milosevic] was blamed for doing what Abraham Lincoln did in the
American civil war – and that was trying to preserve the Union. Lincoln
said many times that his sole purpose was to preserve the union yet
here the United States sole purpose was to destroy Yugoslavia, so that
the ‘end of history’ would appear real,” said Clark.
“To do that you had to demonise and destroy the leadership that aimed
to preserve the Yugoslav union,” he added.
“And to have its way the United States had to corrupt the United
Nations and international justice.”
This was achieved by railroading the UN Security Council into setting
up its International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)
at The Hague – a sham victor’s court, ultra vires the UN Charter which
undermined the principles established at the Nuremberg trials after
World War II and further obstructed the establishment of an
International Criminal Court.
“You can read the UN Charter all you want and you will never find any
provision that authorises the creation of the ICTY. There would never
have been a United Nations if there had been any suggestion that the
Charter had contained the power to create an international criminal
court.
“Because the people who wrote the charter would never have permitted
themselves to be subjected to the power of that court. Because they
don’t intend to be accountable to anyone, which is why we see the
United States so feverishly opposing the ICC.
“The supreme international crime is the war of aggression [as
established at Nuremberg] and the war of aggression that was waged
against Yugoslavia was not only political and economic it was military
from beginning to end and it’s still going on there.
“Equality is the mother of justice – if equal justice under law is the
founding principle of the rule of law then the ICTY fails to meet most
of the standards because it persecutes only the enemies of the United
States to ensure further domination of the region. In a sense it’s more
deadly than the bombs.”
---( 3 )---
http://www.free-slobo-uk.org/documents_conference_laughland
ICTY 'undermines Nuremberg principles'
says JOHN LAUGHLAND
report by CHRISTOPHER JAMES (at The Hague)
Posted: March 3, 2005
BRITISH writer John Laughland exploded the myth that the Hague tribunal
is a modern equivalent of the Nuremberg trials of Nazi war criminals.
In fact the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
(ICTY) undermines important Nuremberg principles set after World War
II, Laughland told ICDSM activists at the campaign's Hague legal
conference (26/2/05).
The ICTY was a classic example of how the New World Order, as
proclaimed by George Bush Sr in 1990, has “radically reformed” the
legal basis of international relations in favour of powerful nations
such as the United States, he explained.
Today’s ‘war on terror’ is a “perfect illustration” as ‘terror’ is, by
definition, a criminal activity whereas war is an inter-state activity.
“So by proclaiming the war on terror George Bush Jr…has proclaimed a
new international system which treats the entire world as if it were
part of the domestic jurisdiction of the United States of America. And
that’s why anybody who fights back, in whatever capacity, and lives in
whatever country, is regarded as a criminal.
"It’s obvious that the ICTY comes directly out of this logic – comes
directly out of this transformation of the free association between
states which used to constitute international law into something
resembling the criminal procedures of a [unitary] state.
"One of the many perversities of the Hague tribunal is that it does not
operate on what the law is, but on what it would like the law to be – a
form of behaviour which is about as perfect an expression of
lawlessness as one can imagine.
"Anybody who looks at international law – the International Court of
Justice, customary international law and the facts of the world can see
that this is a rogue tribunal and therefore ought to be dissolved."
The ICTY has fashioned its image on the International Military
Tribunals at Nuremberg in an attempt to win legitimacy, right down to a
similarity of name. However, that is where comparisons end, says
Laughland.
Whereas Nuremberg held ‘crimes against peace’ (for example, the German
invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland) to be the primary war crimes
for which leading Nazis were tried, the ICTY has no such statute
(ruling out prosecutions of NATO leaders for their 1999 aggression
against Yugoslavia) and rides roughshod over the basic principle of
national sovereignty in place of an easily manipulated ‘human rights’
agenda.
Those who champion vague concepts of ‘human rights’ over international
law are misguided because “that is not a judicial reasoning that is, at
best, the reasoning of a vigilante,” says Laughland.
“The Nuremberg jurisprudence actually based itself on [national
sovereignty] because the Nazis radically questioned, both in their acts
and their writings, the notion of state sovereignty.
“The Nazis invoked over-riding concerns for human rights when they
declared war and invaded Czechoslovakia and Poland,” supposedly to
protect the human rights of German minorities, he added. "The entire
Nazi war effort had as its starting point the doctrine of humanitarian
intervention.
"The primary crime of which the Nazis were accused and were convicted
was the crime against peace – the crime of planning and executing a war
of aggression.”
In fact, Nuremberg expressly ruled out the kind of tribunal set up by
the UN Security Council at the ICTY. It stated that no such court can
be set up to judge alleged crimes in a sovereign state where
independent government holds power [as is the case of the former
Yugoslav republics today]. Nuremberg was legitimate because the Nazis
had temporarily, but unconditionally, surrendered German sovereignty to
the victorious allies at the end of World War II.
“Of all the many perversities of the Milosevic trial, none is perhaps
more striking than this extraordinary charge that he was pursuing a
Greater Serbia. I can only think that this comes from the attempt to
impose the Nuremberg jurisprudence on what happened in Yugoslavia in
the 1990s.
“It’s almost like putting a large-fitting suit onto a small man.
Obviously the Nazis were accused and convicted of creating a Greater
Germany and so it seems almost as if the people at The Hague have
attempted to take the Nuremberg jurisprudence off the peg and tried to
fit it onto the events of 60 years later.”
==========================
ICDSM - Sezione Italiana
c/o GAMADI, Via L. Da Vinci 27
00043 Ciampino (Roma)
tel/fax +39-06-4828957
email: icdsm-italia @ libero.it
*** CONTRIBUISCI E FAI CONTRIBUIRE:
Conto Corrente Postale numero 86557006
intestato ad Adolfo Amoroso, ROMA
causale: DIFESA MILOSEVIC ***
IL NOSTRO SITO INTERNET:
http://www.pasti.org/linkmilo.htm
IL TESTO IN LINGUA ITALIANA DELLA AUTODIFESA DI MILOSEVIC, IN CORSO
DI REVISIONE E CORREZIONE, E' TEMPORANEAMENTE OSPITATO ALLA PAGINA:
https://www.cnj.it/documentazione/autodifesa04.htm
LE TRASCRIZIONI "UFFICIALI" DEL "PROCESSO" SI TROVANO AI SITI:
http://www.un.org/icty/transe54/transe54.htm (IN ENGLISH)
http://www.un.org/icty/transf54/transf54.htm (EN FRANCAIS)
==========================