Background
The General Assembly met this morning to consider the annual reports of the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. The Assembly is also expected to conclude its consideration of the reports of the Secretary-General on the work of the Organization (document A/58/1) and the follow-up to the outcome of the Millennium Summit (document A/58/323). (For summaries of those two reports, see Press Release GA/10167 issued on 6 October.)
The Assembly had before it a note by the Secretary-General transmitting the eighth annual Report of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Genocide and Other Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of Rwanda and Rwandan Citizens Responsible for Genocide and Other Such Violations Committed in the Territory of Neighbouring States between 1 January and 31 December 1994 (document A/58/140-S/2003/707) submitted by its President and covering the court’s work from
July 2002 through June 2003. During that period, the Arusha-based Tribunal, which is responsible for trying cases stemming from the 1994 Rwanda genocide, conducted nine trials. Judgements have been delivered in three cases, involving four accused.
As a result, by 30 June 2003, 11 judgements, involving 13 accused, have been delivered since the Tribunal started its activities in 1995. Of those 13 accused, 12 have been convicted and one acquitted. In four trials involving eight accused, the presentation of evidence has been completed and closing arguments were scheduled to be heard this past July and August. Judgements in those four trials –- Cyangugu case; Kajelijeli case; Kamuhanda case, and Media case –- are expected by the end of the year, bringing the total number of judgements under the court’s second mandate to nine, involving 14 accused. According to the report, this was twice the number of accused tried under the first mandate (1995-1999).
At the operational level, Judge Erik Mose of Norway was elected President of the 16-judge panel this past May, and Judge Andresia Vaz of Senegal as Vice-President. The Tribunal’s judges are split between its three Chambers: three judges serve in each of its trial Chambers and seven serve in the Appeals Chamber; five of its seven members serve in the Appeals Chamber when it is sitting in review. As for the Office of the Prosecutor, during the period of review,
Carla del Ponte and her staff continued to investigate new cases, prepare cases for trial and conduct appeals proceedings.
According to the report, the Office paid particular attention to refining the Tribunal's completion strategy, chiefly regarding the prosecution of those bearing the highest responsibility for war crimes. In that context, it has continuously refined the targets of its current and projected investigations with the aim of fulfilling the Tribunal’s mandate. If the Prosecution receives the proper cooperation, particularly from the States concerned, it expects to finalize the remaining investigations by the end of 2004, and to present all new indictments for confirmation by 2005.
Meanwhile, the Office of the Registrar continued to undertake important missions to help ensure the full cooperation of States whenever required, and to obtain their support and improve the visibility of the Tribunal. Among the countries visited by the Registrar are the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Kenya, United Republic of Tanzania, Ethiopia and the Netherlands. The official emphasized his support for the United States Government’s Rewards for Justice Program.
Full consideration was also given to enhancing full cooperation between the Rwanda Tribunal and the Yugoslavia Tribunal, and following an exchange of visits, the two registrars identified areas and means of working together. Finally, the report reiterates the oft-described challenges facing the Tribunals, including the complexity of cases, the need for voluminous disclosure and translation of documents, the transport of witnesses from all parts of the world and the unavailability of witnesses.
Also before the Assembly is a note by the Secretary-General transmitting the tenth annual Report of 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 (document A/58/297-S/2003/829). The report, which covers the period from 1 August 2002 to 31 July 2003, notes that the pace of the Tribunal’s activities had reached an all-time high. While holding six trials simultaneously, the Tribunal had examined 29 merits cases, as well as three cases of contempt; rendered four final judgements; continued the trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic; and received an increasing number of guilty pleas, including from Biljana Plavsic, former Co-President of the Republika Srpska. The Appeals Chamber also disposed of a greater number of appeals than in years past.
Carrying out its mission with full vigour, the Tribunal pressed ahead with internal reforms designed to improve the efficiency of its proceedings and bring its efforts to an orderly close, states the report. Notably, Security Council resolution 1481 (2003) had amended the Tribunal’s Statute to permit ad litem judges to do pre-trial work in addition to participating in the trials to which they were assigned. Additionally, the Tribunal had reached an agreement with the Office of the United Nations High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina, regarding the establishment of a special chamber for war crimes prosecutions in the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which would constitute a major element in the Tribunal’s completion strategy. The Tribunal should begin transferring some cases of mid- and lower-level accused by the end of 2004 or 2005.
The Tribunal, which currently comprises a total of 23 judges from
24 nations, including 16 permanent and eight ad litem judges, held two regular and two extraordinary plenary sessions to amend the Rules of Procedure and Evidence to clarify the standards for referral of cases to competent national courts, permit the replacement of a judge in certain cases of judicial disability even without the consent of the accused when the interests of justice so warranted, and to give the Trial Chambers greater power to limit the quantity of information provided by the Prosecution. An Association of Defence Counsel, to which all attorneys representing accused persons at the Tribunal must belong, had also been established; they were now subject to a code of professional conduct and a disciplinary system.
However, the report also notes that while the Serbian Government’s law enforcement efforts, invigorated in the wake of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjic’s assassination on 11 March 2003, had led to the arrest and transfer to the Tribunal of several important accused, nearly 20 indictees, notably Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic, remain at large.
ERIK MØSE, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, said that the Tribunal had, in 2003, harvested the fruits of the hard work of previous years. Three judgments involving four accused had already been handed down, and another four judgments involving eight accused were expected by the end of the year or very early next year. This reflected a 100 per cent increase in the number of accused tried during the Tribunal’s second mandate (1999-2003) over those tried during the first mandate (1995-1999). The Tribunal would soon have rendered 15 judgments involving 21 accused since the first trials started in January 1997. Moreover, two voluminous trials involving ten accused, which had begun under the second mandate, continued. That brought the total number of those whose trials had been completed or were in progress to 31.
The four new trials involving ten accused, which had begun during the second half of 2003, were the consequence of the Assembly’s election of a pool of 18 ad litem judges in June 2003, he added. The first ad litem judge had taken up his office on 1 September and the others would arrive in Arusha within the next couple weeks. However, much work remained to be done; at present, 22 detainees awaited trial and the Tribunal was anxious to begin those trials as soon as possible. For that reason, the Tribunal had requested the Security Council to increase the number of ad litem judges who could sit at any one time from four to nine. That would increase the capacity of the Tribunal from four to six permanent Trial Chamber sections and give it the same capacity to conduct trials enjoyed by the Yugoslav Tribunal. Another significant reform would be to increase the competence of ad litem judges to do pre-trial work.
Those changes, he continued, were instrumental to the timely completion of the Tribunal’s mandate. The Tribunal had made the elaboration of a Completion Strategy its priority during its third mandate. In the Completion Strategy, it was estimated that, with the four ad litem judges, the Tribunal would be in a position to finalize all on-going trials, as well the cases involving the
22 detainees, by 2007. However, only eight accused -- out of a group of
16 indictees and 26 suspects still at large -- could be brought to trial by the 2008 deadline set by the Security Council. Yet, the increase of ad litem judges proposed by the Tribunal would place it in a better position to finalize most trials by the 2008 deadline.
Noting that, by its resolution 1503 (2003), the Security Council had established a separate Prosecutor for the Rwanda Tribunal, he thanked
Carla del Ponte, the previous Prosecutor, for her great contributions and welcomed the new Prosecutor, Hassan Jallow. Turning to reforms intended to increase the efficiency of the Tribunal, he said that the establishment of the “New Trial Committee”, had facilitated the commencement of four new trials. Moreover, during the trials, time had been saved by the simultaneous translation from Kinyarwanda into English and French in all Trial Chambers. Amendments to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence to allow a trial to continue with a substitute judge when the first judge fell ill, died, resigned or was not re-elected, and to facilitate plea agreements in cases where the accused pled guilty, had also increased the Tribunal’s efficiency.
International criminal justice, he noted, was necessary but costly, with many of the expenses related to the defence teams. Having requested a report on its legal aid system from a British consultant, the Tribunal had already implemented some of the proposals contained therein and would continue to seek solutions to reduce costs without curtailing the right to an effective defence. Another challenge that the Tribunal had faced in 2002 -- the slow flow of witnesses from Rwanda –- had been ameliorated in the past months. That was gratifying, as the Tribunal wished to maintain and develop a harmonious relationship that contributed to reconciliation within Rwanda. Two groups of
10 Rwandan judicial officers had already visited the Tribunal, and it was hoped that other representatives of Rwandan society would soon visit as well.
Recalling that the events of 1994 had given rise to three sets of judicial proceedings –- at the local, national and international levels –- he reiterated that those three levels were not mutually exclusive, but supplemented each other. In 2000, the Tribunal had endorsed the principle of compensation for victims, but the responsibility for processing and assessing claims was not a task for it. The President of the Human Rights Commission, presently in Arusha, had committed herself as an advocate for the creation of a special Trust Fund for victims of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.
Finally, he concluded, the Tribunal’s appreciation for the agreements concluded with Benin, Mali and Swaziland for those countries to enforce the sentences handed down by the Tribunal must be repeated. Thus far, Mali had received five convicts. Moreover, a sentence enforcement agreement had been concluded with France in March, and similar agreements were likely to be concluded with other countries. He thanked all Member States for their cooperation with respect to arrests, transfers of indicted persons and travel of witnesses.
THEODOR MERON, President of the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, said that the past year had been one of great progress and accomplishment for the court. “Our Trial and Appeals Chambers have heard more cases than ever before”, he said, adding that an increasing number of defendants had decided to plead guilty, express remorse for their crimes and offer assistance to the Prosecution in their respective cases. A significant number of important human rights offenders had been brought to justice.
As he and the Tribunal’s other top officials continued their efforts to bring the Tribunal’s work to a close, in a timely and equitable manner, they continued to implement internal reforms designed to improve efficiency, while respecting international norms and judicial due process. The officials had also pressed ahead with efforts to enable the Tribunal to refer certain mid and lower-level offenders to courts in the States of the former Yugoslavia, especially the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
“Still, much work remains to be done”, he said, adding that even more changes were necessary to further improve the Tribunal’s efficiency. The Security Council’s decision to mandate ad litem judges to participate in pre-trial matters had been helpful. The Court’s top officials also planned to move full speed ahead with efforts to help establish national courts in the region that would be capable of hearing war crimes and genocide cases without any taint of ethnic, religious or national prejudice. They would also step up their efforts to ensure that the peoples of the former Yugoslavia were provided with a balanced and honest account of the Tribunal’s work. The Tribunal would also keep striving for complete cooperation from all Member States, particularly those in the region, to ensure justice for the thousands and thousands of victims of the Yugoslav conflicts.
Turning to the Tribunal’s work for the past year, he reiterated that the pace of activities was at an “all time high” -– with morning and afternoon sessions in its three courtrooms and its trial Chambers conducting between four and six trials simultaneously. On the trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, he stressed that the defendant’s health had caused a great many delays, further complicating an already extraordinarily complex case. The proceedings had brought together three separate indictments -– for Kosovo, Croatia and Bosnia -– with 66 counts, hundreds of witnesses and thousands of documents that had to be translated. But, the prosecution’s case was coming to a close soon, and the timetable for the defense’s case was currently being set.
He went on to say that, outside the Tribunal, another event had occurred that would add momentum towards completing the court’s work in a timely manner, chiefly, stepped up efforts to create a special War Crimes Chamber in Bosnia and Herzegovina’s State Court. Establishment of such a chamber in Sarajevo would provide a venue to which the Tribunal could transfer a number of mid and low-level cases. Transfers should begin by 2005.
Looking ahead, he stressed that while the Tribunal was striving in every way to adhere to its completion strategy, with all trials set to end in 2008 and all appeals by 2010, the completion date of judicial proceedings could not be predicted with “scientific accuracy”. Some factors were in the Court’s control and others were not, and while, he was happy to report that the Tribunal should be able to complete the trials of all individuals currently in custody by the
2008 deadline, difficulties in ensuring that fugitives were turned over may hamper prosecution of some other cases.
The handing over of fugitives depended above all on the cooperation of the States of the former Yugoslavia, he said, calling on the Assembly to press regional authorities to fully and promptly cooperate with the Tribunal’s work. While, on a recent trip to Belgrade, he had been encouraged by an emerging spirit of cooperation with the Tribunal and its goals, much remained to be achieved -– on the arrests of fugitives, access to evidence and facilitation of witness testimony, especially by present and former officials.
He added that while current calculations revealed that it would not be possible to accommodate any new indictments within the current timetable, strict adherence to targets would not result in impunity. Once legal process had been started, they would be followed through. Still, he stressed that fugitives, particularly Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic and Ante Gotovina, must be arrested and turned over to the Tribunal promptly. “Only then would the Tribunal be able to complete the important mission assigned by the Security Council a decade ago”.
Statements
ISMAIL MUSTAPHA (
Malaysia) pointed out that the importance of the work of the Tribunals in the fight against impunity was not to be underestimated since it demonstrated that genocide and other serious violations of international humanitarian law would not be tolerated, and that the perpetrators of such crimes would be held accountable. He noted the continued efficiency of the Rwanda Tribunal and the improvements made to accelerate its work, particularly to the availability of simultaneous translation and the changes to the Rules of Procedure and Evidence to facilitate proceedings. Also timely was the creation of the Coordination Council, the Management Committee and the External Relations and Strategic Planning Section. He believed the election of the 18 ad litem judges, would allow the Tribunal to increase its productivity and meet the demands of the anticipated rise in the number of cases.
He said the splitting of the prosecutorial duties for the two Tribunals, which had previously been under Prosecutor Carla Del Ponte, was essential at a time when both Tribunals were moving towards their respective completion strategies. The move would enable the respective prosecutors to focus their attention on the conduct of outstanding investigations and prosecutions. He noted that the Yugoslav Tribunal was in its eleventh year, and the reform process to speed up the meting out of justice was proceeding smoothly with 35 cases completed, 74 individuals indicted, 56 currently facing the Tribunal and
51 persons in detention. However, 17 individuals were still at large, and the delayed apprehension of Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic should be a matter of serious concern to the international community. The mandate of the Tribunal would not be complete if they remained at large. He added that the mandate and objectives of the two Tribunals would only be achieved with the fullest cooperation of the international community, particularly the countries in the regions concerned.
MIRZA KUSLJUGIC (
Bosnia and Herzegovina) said the Tribunal had played an important role in the process of inter-ethnic reconciliation in his country, as well as in southeastern Europe. Each verdict of the Tribunal helped to alleviate some of the pain of those victimized by war crimes. For many in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Tribunal’s activities were the only hope left that justice would eventually be served. Also, he believed that the trial of Slobodan Milosevic, in particular, would unveil some information regarding the atrocities committed between 1992 and 1995, thus providing new facts about the true nature of the conflict in the region.
He noted with disappointment that, eight years after the war ended in his country, 17 publicly indicted war criminals still remained at large, including the two most notorious, Radovan Karadzic and Ratko Mladic. He welcomed the establishment of a Special War Crimes Chamber in the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a major element in the external component of the Tribunal’s completion strategy. He expressed his country’s readiness to work with the international community to bring about an early establishment of that chamber, which would enable the Tribunal to begin transferring some mid and low-level cases by the end of next year. Yet, he expected that the apprehension and trial of the most notorious offenders would remain the responsibility of the United Nations and the international community.
He urged Member States to provide all the necessary technical, financial and political support for the forthcoming preparatory activities, and to pledge generously at the donors’ conference to be held on 30 October in The Hague.
ALDO MANTOVANI (Italy), speaking on behalf of the European Union and associated States, said that the Rwanda Tribunal had made a substantial contribution to replacing a culture of impunity with a culture of accountability, and had played an important role in the national reconciliation of Rwanda and the maintenance of regional peace and security. Together, with the Yugoslav Tribunal, it had contributed to the development of international criminal law.
The Tribunal had faced a number of practical difficulties, he added, including the complexity of its cases, the need for voluminous disclosure and translation of documents, and the transport and availability of witnesses from all parts of the world. However, it had put considerable effort into overcoming such obstacles and had adopted a number of measures aimed at expediting pre-trial and trial proceedings. He welcomed the election in June of a pool of 18 ad litem judges and recommended increasing the number of ad litem judges allowed to sit at once, as recommended in the report of the Tribunal, so as to ensure the meeting of deadlines set under the Tribunal’s Completion Strategy.
All the Tribunal’s branches had shown continued dedication to their work, he concluded, particularly that of the Prosecutor. Expressing his appreciation for the efficient and knowledgeable work done by Carla del Ponte in her position as Chief Prosecutor for both Tribunals, he welcomed her continued commitment as Prosecutor for the Yugoslav Tribunal. He welcomed the prompt appointment of Hassan Bubacar Jallow as the new Prosecutor for the Rwanda Tribunal and wished him well in his new position. The Presidents and Prosecutors of both Tribunals should continue their cooperation to maximize the efficient use of their intellectual and financial resources.
Turning to the Yugoslav Tribunal, he supported efforts to establish a Special Chamber for War Crimes Prosecutors in the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina -– the “War Crimes Chamber” –- and welcomed the cooperation between the Tribunal and the Office of the High Representative, in that respect. Further, he urged the Tribunal to ensure that standards of fair trial, independence and full respect for human rights were also respected within trials in national courts.
While, it had been emphasized many times that the success of the Tribunal depended largely on the full cooperation of States and their willingness to implement its decisions and orders, he noted that the Tribunal continued to encounter obstacles and resistance. In that regard, he called on States to improve their cooperation with respect to the arrest and transfer of indictees still at large, requests for documents, access to archives and ready availability of witnesses. Additionally, he reiterated the need to intensify efforts to transfer Radovan Karadic, Ratko Mladic and Ante Gotovina to the Tribunal for trial. He added that full cooperation by the countries of the western Balkans with the Tribunal remained an essential element of the Union’s stabilization and association process, as failure to fully cooperate with the Tribunal would seriously jeopardize their further movement towards the Union.
