Karadzic si oppone al trasferimento in una galera del Regno Unito / Caso Mladic: "sentenza d'appello" in programma per l'8 giugno
[english / srpskohrvatski / italiano]
What to Expect from the Hague "Tribunal"
1) Karadzic si oppone al trasferimento in una galera del Regno Unito
– Lettera Aperta al Telegraph, Daily Mail, The Spectator, non pubblicata
– An Unpublished Open Letter to The Telegraph, Daily Mail, The Spectator
– Radovan Karadzic requests that the President decline to designate the United Kingdom as the State in which his sentence must be served
2) Caso Mladic: "sentenza d'appello" in programma per l'8 giugno
Stephen Karganovic: Judge Prisca Matimba faces a new Srebrenica challenge / Судиница Приска Матимба на новом сребреничком испиту
=== 1: KARADZIC ===
Lettera Aperta al Telegraph, Daily Mail, The Spectator, non pubblicata
15 maggio 2021
Gentile Signore,
Il ministro degli Esteri Dominic Raab ha torto nel suggerire che la Gran Bretagna dovrebbe essere orgogliosa del fatto che il leader serbo Radovan Karadzic sia stato inviato qui per scontare l'ergastolo inflittogli dal Tribunale Internazionale per i Crimini di Guerra per l'ex Jugoslavia (ICTY). Nella sua qualità di giovane avvocato che ha aiutato il tribunale a redigere le disposizioni per tali trasferimenti, il signor Raab sarà ben consapevole che il dottor Karadzic è stato processato da un tribunale internazionale costituito illegalmente, per il quale la Carta delle Nazioni Unite non prevedeva alcuna disposizione.
L'ICTY ha costantemente introdotto nuove leggi contro l'istruzione processuale rigorosa, come il concetto di impresa criminale congiunta per massimizzare le possibilità di condanna. Karadzic è stato condannato, e condannato sulla base di prove forensi che non sono mai state rivelate né alla difesa né all'accusa. La Croazia e la Bosnia hanno entrambe approvato leggi specifiche per garantirne la continua repressione.
Fino ad oggi i corpi dei 7.000 uomini e ragazzi presentati (dichiarati) come prova del genocidio non sono mai stati prodotti. È difficile conciliare gli autobus serbi di donne e bambini musulmani allontanati in sicurezza da Srebrenica con intenti genocidi. Tutte le ricerche indipendenti nel corso degli anni indicano che la stragrande maggioranza dei morti era vittima di combattimenti legittimi.
Il tribunale penale internazionale per la Jugoslavia era essenzialmente una creazione politica e sostenere una simile parodia della giustizia è motivo di vergogna piuttosto che di orgoglio nazionale.
Un ulteriore motivo di vergogna e di grave preoccupazione è l'attacco con rasoio quasi fatale da parte di 3 prigionieri musulmani radicali nel 2010 al generale serbo Radislav Krstic, che allora scontava 35 anni nella prigione di Wakefield.
Gli avvocati del dottor Karadzic hanno buone ragioni per temere che l'ergastolo in Gran Bretagna possa benissimo equivalere a una condanna a morte.
Distinti saluti.
Christopher Black (avvocato internazionale in materia di diritto penale e diritti umani)
Diana Johnstone (autrice "Fools’Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO & Western Delusions") George Bogdanich (giornalista e produttore cinematografico "Una guerra evitabile") Stefan Karganovic (Presidente, Società storica di Srebrenica)
Marko Gasic (portavoce serbo e commentatore internazionale)
Laurie Mayer (ex conduttrice e giornalista)
Professor Philip Hammond (accademico e scrittore)
George Szamuely (accademico e commentatore)
Tim Fenton (ricercatore)
Ariana Beatty (ricercatrice)
Jovan Milojevich (accademico, Università della California)
Jeannie Toschi Marazzani Visconti (giornalista e autrice)
Jonathan Rooper (ex giornalista).
---
An Unpublished Open Letter to The Telegraph, Daily Mail, The Spectator
15 May 2021
Dear Sir
Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab is quite wrong to suggest that Britain should take pride in the fact that the Serb leader Radovan Karadzic is being sent here to serve the life sentence imposed on him by the international war crimes tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). As a young lawyer who helped the court draft the arrangements for such transfers Mr Raab will be well aware that Dr Karadzic was tried by an illegally constituted international court for which the UN Charter made no provision.
Against strict instruction ICTY constantly introduced new law, such as the concept of joint criminal enterprise, to maximise the chance of conviction. Karadzic was convicted and sentenced on the basis of forensic evidence that was never disclosed to either the defence or prosecution. Croatia and Bosnia have both passed specific laws to ensure its continued suppression.
To this day the bodies of the 7,000 men and boys claimed to be the evidence of genocide have never been produced. It is hard to reconcile the Serb bussing of Muslim women and children away from Srebrenica to safety with genocidal intent. All independent research over the years indicates the vast majority of the dead were victims of legitimate combat.
The international criminal court for Yugoslavia was essentially a political creation and to support such a travesty of justice is rather a cause for shame than national pride.
A further cause for shame and grave concern is the almost fatal razor attack in 2010 by 3 radical Muslim prisoners on Serb General Radislav Krstic, then serving 35 years in Wakefield gaol. Lawyers for Dr Karadzic have good reason to fear his life imprisonment in Britain could well amount to a death sentence.
Yours faithfully
Christopher Black (International criminal and human rights lawyer)
Diana Johnstone (author “Fools’ Crusade: Yugoslavia, NATO & Western Delusions”)
George Bogdanich (journalist and film producer “An Avoidable War")
Stefan Karganovic (President, Srebrenica Historical Society)
Marko Gasic (Serbian spokesman & international commentator)
Laurie Mayer (former news anchor and reporter)
Professor Philip Hammond (academic and writer)
George Szamuely (academic and commentator)
Tim Fenton (researcher)
Ariana Beatty (researcher)
Jovan Milojevich (academic, University of California)
Jeannie Toschi Marazzani Visconti (journalist & author)
Jonathan Rooper (former journalist)
---
Source: IRMCT'S PUBLIC REDACTED VERSION OF DEFENCE SUBMISSIONS ON DESIGNATION OF ENFORCEMENT STATE
Dr. Radovan Karadzic, UN DU
6 May 2021
No. MICT-13-55-ES 18
Hague branch IRMCT
Cc: Mr. Peter Robinson
This is in response to your letter of May 5, 2021, pertaining to a State of a possible serving my sentence
I regret to inform you that the United Kingdom as a "State in which I may serve my sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Appeals Chamber..." is not acceptable, for several reasons.
Taking into account the fact that my late father had been a great admirer (an Anglophile) of the British system and society, I do not want to give any publicity to this rejection, and I will not if possible. My reasons are as follows:
- The Great Britain (Government) was a very active participant in the Yugoslav crisis, with the significant engagement on the side of the Serb opponents, in spite of the International Law and it's obligations towards the Serbs, the British allies in all the wars in the region and Europe.
- Particularly in the conflict in Bosnia the Great Britain took a hostile stance towards the Serbs, and significantly supported the Islamic-fundamentalist Party (SDA) and its regime, rejecting to support even the Muslim secular parties, which were in accord with the Serbs, in trying to avoid the war.
- Also, I had been falsely accused, indicted and sentenced for an alleged "taking UN soldiers as hostages" and among them the British soldiers too.
- In addition, the Great Britain Government has all the evidence on responsibilities for the events in Bosnia, but it demonstrated a very poor interest for establishing the truth and for a triumph of justice. There will come a time that it would be known to everyone, and the countries that participated in this unjust endeavor will be ashamed, which I do not want to the Great Britain.
- We didn't fight against the Great Britain, nor I was a war prisoner of this Empire and it's troops, but my serving the sentence in this country would make me so.
- One of the most important reasons is a matter of security. Namely, the example of jeopardy of life of General Radislav Krstic in the British prison is sufficiently illustrative, and the fact that he had to be transferred to other country only supports my standpoint. My personality would be a greater temptation for some extremists.
- Even now some think that the Great Britain had killed Napoleon Bonaparte. This is not comparable with my humble person, but the Great Britain does not need something like that. Otherwise, the Serbs will once forget and forgive the British betrayal if there will be no a new, additional reasons to remember, like the British attempts in the UN to have the Serbs labeled as a genocidal nation.
- Still, the main jeopardy would be the foreign extremists. The only measure against this jeopardy would be a solitary cell for me, but that would not be a humane conditions for the rest of my life. The verdict does not codify this additional punishment, and no one else is entitled to impose it.
- Beside that, I do not intend to give up any of my humane attributes, or cultural, or professional needs and interests, which means that I would need many books and publications, as well as a computer for writing and an axes to Internet, thou in a controlled conditions. I do intend to continue to fight for the justice, for my freedom, as well as to continue to write my books (poetry, proses, dramas, memoires) I am not sure I would have an understanding for these needs in the British prisons.
Sincerely, Dr. Radovan Karadzic
No. MICT-13-55-ES 19
=== 2: MLADIC ===
---------- Forwarded message ---------
Da: Стефан Карганович
Date: lun 31 mag 2021 alle ore 22:27
Subject: Strategic Culture Fundation: Judge Prisca Matimba faces a new Srebrenica challenge
STRATEGIC CULTURE FOUNDATION
Judge Prisca Matimba faces a new Srebrenica challenge
By Stephen Karganovic
We will soon be lucky enough to learn the answer to one of the few remaining mysteries of the Yugoslav Tribunal at the Hague. At this point it is entirely irrelevant how you choose to call it, ICTY or The Mechanism (the latter being the official, sinister-sounding name of its final incarnation). The issue concerns the appellate judgement in the case of General Ratko Mladic, commander of Serbian forces in the 1992 – 1995 Bosnian war. He stands accused, and in the trial verdict was found guilty, of the long list of usual heinous offences, topped by genocide and Srebrenica, that a person of his stature and ethnicity would normally have to face at the Hague Tribunal. On June 8, at the end of the appellate phase of the proceedings, we shall find out what the appeals chamber think about it.
The interesting thing about Mladic’s appellate chamber is that, in contrast to past practice, it is not composed of “good ole boys” drawn mostly from NATO countries. It is a chamber whose complexion, at least since the surprisingly successful recusal in 2016 of good ole boys Meron, Agius and Pocar, after a defence complaint of bias, BLM would probably approve (though the unsuspected presence of Uncle Toms can never be entirely discounted). Still, the new set of Mladic appellate chamber judges have solid Third World credentials. How that will impact their ruling, we shall soon find out.
But by far the most interesting member of this group is its presiding judge, Zambian jurist Prisca Matimba. In 2012 she sat on the trial chamber of General Mladic’s right-hand man, General Zdravko Tolimir, whom the majority found guilty and packed off to life imprisonment. Mrs. Matimba, however, sent shock waves by composing a fascinating dissenting opinion in which she compellingly argued that there was no evidence of Gen. Tolimir’s guilt on any of the charges laid against him (see chapter XIII of Judgment) and that instead of being sent to prison the defendant should be sent home. In the best British legal tradition, Zambian judge Matimba turned the tables. She supported her conclusion with a brilliant legal analysis reinforced by a panoply of lethally formulated First World arguments. But her singlehanded bravado performance failed to make even the slightest dent in her majority colleagues’ determination to reach a diametrically opposite result. Nevertheless, she in effect demolished not just her fellow-judges’ legal findings in the Tolimir trial but implicitly thrashed her institutional employer, the Hague Tribunal, as well.
Theoretically, on June 8 judge Matimba could tweak the Tribunal’s tail again by repeating her memorable 2012 performance. There is no ostensible reason for her to now take a different position in the Mladic case. Not only are all the basic charges the same as against Tolimir but, more importantly, so is the evidence, for whatever it is worth. Major witnesses are much the same and the crime base, as alleged by the prosecution, is also virtually identical, certainly in the key segments of genocide and Srebrenica. But before getting one’s expectations too high, worth pondering is the career of another ICTY judge, Christoph Flügge, who also briefly got out of line and then had to fight hard for “rehabilitation” (meaning job, salary and benefits).
Following the apprehension of Radovan Karadzic, Flügge was appointed a pre-trial judge in that case. But in 2009, in an inexplicable outburst of nonconformism, he told Der Spiegel that the term “genocide” in his view was no longer judicially viable: “Which is why I believe that we should consider devising a new definition of the crime. Perhaps the term mass murder would eliminate some of the difficulties we face in arriving at legal definitions. It would also work in Cambodia, where Cambodians killed large numbers of Cambodians. What do you call that? Suicidal genocide? Sociocide?” Still, as a properly repentant German, he concluded his academic musings on this delicate subject by maintaining that “strictly speaking, the term genocide only fits the Holocaust”.
But it turned out that the Tribunal would have none of Flügge’s new definitions and Massenmoerder nonsense because it understands all too well the nature of its overriding political task. It is to aim straight for the jugular, which in plain terms is genocide. After this incautious interview, Flügge promptly vanished from the Karadzic pre-trial panel. It is a matter of speculation in which political re-education camp judge Flügge spent the next year or so of his life (the ones in Xinjiang had not yet been officially opened) but after some time he emerged as a totally new and right-thinking man. He even apparently managed to regain a modicum of his employers’ trust, which included the privilege of serving on the Mladic trial chamber. And after his remarkable genocide epiphany he was happy to sign the verdict, in which the “genocide” charge evidently no longer bothered his delicate conscience.
The Flügge precedent is therefore something well to keep in mind when calibrating expectations from judge Prisca Matimba, without derogating in the least from the significance of her extraordinary dissenting opinion in the Tolimir case. No matter what, that will remain a unique and inspiring expression of professional integrity and can still be inhaled as a rare breath of fresh air in the miasmic swamp of the Hague Tribunal.
On June 8, General Ratko Mladic’s appointed judgment day, we will find out if there are any limits to the power of the Hague Tribunal to reengineer recalcitrant human souls. Should it succeed in whipping into line even the brave Zambian lady and superb legal professional Prisca Matimba, that will come as a sad disappointment indeed but also as another ringing confirmation of the inherent fallenness of human nature.
---
Судиница Приска Матимба на новом сребреничком испиту
Ускоро ћемо сазнати одговор на једну од малобројних преосталих мистерија Трибунала у Хагу. Више не игра улогу како ћете га називати, МКТБЈ или Механизам, како гласи званична фирма, са врло злослутним призвуком, његовог последњег отелотворења. Ради се о жалбеној пресуди у предмету генерала Ратка Младића, команданта српске војске у рату у Босни од 1992 до 1995. Он је оптужен, и у првостепеној пресуди оглашен је кривим, за дугачак списак ужасавајућих преступа, на челу са геноцидом и Сребреницом, за шта је сасвим нормално да особа његовог ранга и етницитета одговара пред хашким Трибуналом. На крају жалбене фазе овог поступка, 8. јуна, сазнаћемо шта жалбено веће мисли о свему томе.
Интересантна ствар у вези са Младићевим жалбеним већем је да се, за разлику од раније праксе, не састоји од „добрих старих дечака“ регрутованих углавном из НАТО земаља. После изненађујућег изузећа из његовог састава 2016. године добрих старих дечака Мерона, Ађијуса и Покара, и то на приговор о пристрасности који је уложила одбрана, то је веће чију би боју коже организација БЛМ, која води рачуна о таквим стварима, вероватно одобрила (мада се прикривено присуство Ујка Тома никада не може потпуно искључити). Ипак, нова екипа Младићевих жалбених судија има солидне референце из Трећег света. Како ће то утицати на њихову пресуду, сазнаћемо ускоро.
Али далеко најзанимљивија личност из ове гарнитуре је председавајућа судиница, правница из Замбије Приска Матимба Нијамбе. Она је 2012. године седела у првостепеном већу које судило десној руци генерала Младића, генералу Здравку Толимиру, кога је већина огласила кривим и послала на издржавање доживотне робије. Госпођа Матимба је том приликом све шокирала написавши посебно и противно мишљење где је убедљиво изнела став да није било доказа за Толимирову кривицу по било којој тачки оптужнице против њега и да зато оптуженог, уместо у затвор, треба послати кући (и овде). У најбољој британској правној традицији, замбијска судиница Матимба је из основа преокренула ствар. Свој закључак она је поткрепила блиставом правном анализом подржаном бројним убитачно сроченим аргументима из јуристичког арсенала Првога света. Међутим, овај усамљени храбри иступ није се уопште дотакао њених већинских колега, које су биле непоколебљиве у намери да извуку дијаметрално супротне закључке. Без обзира, она не само да је немилосрдно уништила правне налазе колега судија на процесу Толимиру, него је имплицитно залепила шамарчину и свом послодавцу хашком Трибуналу, о истом трошку.
Теоретски, 8. јуна судиница Матимба би опет могла да повуче Трибунал за реп тако што би поновила свој перформанс из 2012. године. Не постоји никакав видљив разлог зашто би овом приликом, у Младићевом предмету, заузела другачији став. Не само што су оптужбе суштински исте као код Толимира него – и то је много важније – практично су исти и докази, шта год тај појам значио у Хагу. Сви главни сведоци су мање више исти, а база злочина – по тврђењу тужилаштва – такође је готово истоветна, свакако у оним деловима који се односе на геноцид и Сребреницу. Али пре него што дозволимо да нам очекивања исувише нарасту, било би поучно посветити пажњу каријери једног другог судије МКТБЈ, Кристофа Флиге, који је такође накратко иступио из строја да би после тога имао да се подоста потруди да буде поново „рехабилитован“ (што у Хагу подразумева приземне ствари, да задржи радно место, плату, пензију и бенефиције).
После хапшења Радована Караџића, Флиге је био именован као предпретресни судија у том предмету. Али 2009. године, у необјашњивој провали неконформизма, Флиге је изјавио Дер Шпиглу да по његовом мишљењу израз „геноцид“ више нема правог оправдања, услед чега „ја сматрам да би требали да приступимо разрађивању новог одређења тог злочина. Можда би се изразом ‘масовно убиство’ отклониле неке од тешкоћа са којима се суочавамо када покушавамо да осмислимо ту правну дефиницију. Тако нешто имало би смисла у Камбоџи, где су Камбоџани убили велики број Камбоџана. Како би ви то назвали? Самоубилачки геноцид? Социоцид?“ Ипак, као прописно покајани Немац, Флиге своја размишљања на ову деликатну тему закључује тврдо се држећи става да је „строго говорећи, израз геноцид примерен искључиво Холокаусту.“
Али како се испоставило, Трибунал уопште није био расположен за Флигеове новотарске дефиниције и Massenmoerder глупости зато што јако добро схвата из чега се састоји његов превасходни политички задатак. А то је да без околишења удари право у вратну жилу, што може да буде једино геноцид и ништа друго. Флиге је тренутно нестао из Караџићевог предпретресног већа. Могло би се нагађати у којем је логору за политичко преваспитавање Флиге провео следећих годину и кусур дана свога живота (онај у Зинђангу тада још није почео са радом) али после извесног времена он се опет обрео, само сада као потпуно нови и правомислећи човек. Чак му је пошло за руком и да донекле поврати поверење својих послодаваца, за шта је био награђен привилегијом да седи у Младићевом претресном већу. После ванредног просветљења које је доживео, додуше не на путу за Дамаск него натраг за Хаг, радо је потписао Младићеву пресуду, све са оптужбом за геноцид, што је очигледно престало да смета његовој осетљивој савести.
Преседан судије Флиге је, према томе, нешто што би било добро држати на уму када одмеравамо наша очекивања у односу на судиницу Приску Матимба, што не одузима ни најмање од значаја њеног издвојеног и супротног мишљења у предмету Толимир. Без обзира на било шта друго, то ће остати као јединствен и надахњујући пример професионалне честитости и моћиће се и даље удисати као дашак свежег ваздуха у затрованој мочвари хашког Трибунала.
Осмог јуна 2021, по некима судњег дана генералу Ратку Младићу, сазнаћемо има ли граница моћи хашког Трибунала да преумљује непокорљиве људске душе. Ако буде успео да укроти чак и одважну даму из Замбије и врхунску професионалку Приску Матимба, биће то у овој долини плача још једно тужно разочарање, али уједно и још једна убедљива потврда палости људске природе.
Стефан Карганович