Lessons of the Milosevic Trial

Yesterday, Human Rights Watch published a new report on the Milosevic trial. Although the trial could not be completed due to the defendant's death, HRW rightly points out that there have been positive aspects of the trial, and more importantly that lessons could still be learned for future cases. I have not read the whole report, but I get the sense that overall they have got things right (I don't always agree with HRW). The most significant contribution of the Milosevic trial was the historical record, something that often gets overlooked when discussing international criminal justice. The prosecution, despite the many slip ups, has been quite successful in presenting evidence of Belgrade's involvement in the war in Bosnia and Croatia. Whether this evidence would have been enough to convict Slobo will never be known, but it was put into the public domain, and contributed to the process of reconcilliation. No one in Serbia can deny the role Belgrade's security forces played in Krajina or Bosnia. One of the most poignant examples is the so-called Scorpions video, on which a paramilitary unit associated with/under the command of the Serbian Interior Ministry (MUP) executes six young Bosnian Muslim men from Srebrenica. The video had a great impact on Serbia's reconing process, and was first made public during a defence witness testimony at the Milosevic Trial. It is the best example of the impact the ICTY can and should have. The problem however is for the International Courts to capitalize on such successes - unfortunately their Outreach programmes remain a joke, and the failures of the ICTY have somehow taken root at the ICC(ok, many of its staff were previously with the ICC).

What about the lessons? They all make great sense to me, but it was not necessary to wait until the end of the trial to come up with them. HRW suggests that in future courts should:
• Ensure an adequate pretrial period for an expeditious trial in order to narrow the issues and allow all parties to fully prepare;
• Limit charges against the accused to the most serious crimes alleged, and avoid duplication;
• Limit the number of crime scenes in the trial of a high-level official;
• Require that the right to represent oneself be subject to the defendant’s ability to fulfill the role of counsel and attend court sessions regularly; and,
• While increased use of written testimony can expedite proceedings, care should be taken to ensure that observers have access to the written testimony and can follow the cross-examination.

The question is whether Prosecutors will learn them...

Second Thoughts... And a cartoon

One of my favourite blogs is America Abroad. It is written by a number of top people within the international security field, and is usually full of excellent and informed exchanges. Very difficult to keep up with, but worth a regular visit. I found this funny cartoon in one of the posts on Rummy - did you know he said he found the notion of "war on terror" problematic? A bit late to say that now, but then again, seeing how much W values loyalty and lack of dissent, it understandable - I mean, the guy kept his job until it became just absurd. I hope that some of my Conduct of Contemporary Warfare students have picked this up - quite a few are doing an essay on the topic.

Rewarding Failure and Cowardice

The Dutch Government has awarded medals to members of the Dutchbat - the Dutch peacekeeping battalion, famous for its failure to stand up to Bosnian Serb forces in Srebrenica ( see the news story). Ok, so it was not all their fault, and the mission sucked etc. But surely you should reward acts of bravery and sacrifice, rather than those that just followed orders, which resulted in the largest single massacre on European soil since World War II? Just a thought.