Please note that this is not a verbatim transcript of the Press Briefing. It is merely a summary.

ICTY Weekly Press Briefing
Date: 25 August 1999
Time: 11:30 p.m.

REGISTRY AND CHAMBERS
Jim Landale, Spokesman for the Registry and Chambers made the following announcements:

First in the Tadic case, the sentencing hearing on the additional counts that he was found guilty on in the judgement of the Appeals Chamber that was scheduled for Monday has been cancelled by the Appeals Chamber. A scheduling order from 23 August 1999 reaffirmed that "the Parties are to file by 25 August 1999 written submissions on the issue as to whether the Appeals Chamber should remit to a Trial Chamber, and, if so, to which Trial Chamber, the question of sentencing the Appellant in respect of the counts on which the Appellant has been found guilty…."

So, pending a decision by the Appeals Chamber on the submissions that it receives from the parties, a Trial Chamber could be directed to hold a sentencing hearing. If this happens, a date for that sentencing hearing will be announced in the near future. If, however, it is decided that the Appeals Chamber is to hold the sentencing hearing, this will most likely take place in the next two weeks.

Only after a decision on the sentencing on the additional counts will the Appeals Chamber determine the accused’s appeal against the sentencing judgement handed down by Trial Chamber II, which consisted of Judge Gabrielle Kirk McDonald (Presiding), Judge Stephen and Judge Vohrah. We will, of course, keep you posted of any developments.

Next, the resumption of the contempt of court proceedings in the Tadic trial will resume on Monday afternoon at 2.30 pm in Courtroom I.

And, the Jelisic trial for genocide will start on Monday at two o’clock in Courtroom III.

Finally, issue number 6 of the Judicial Bulletin is now available. We have copies of that and all the other documents I have mentioned for those interested.

Justice Louise Arbour, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), greeted the assembled press corps and said that this was likely to be her last press briefing at the Tribunal. She added that she would remain in office until 14 September 1999, however, that she would be on leave from the middle of next week. She confirmed that if any matter, (either press or Tribunal) required her attendance before this time, she would of course be available.

The Prosecutor confirmed that she had today and yesterday held meetings with Prosecutor designee, Carla Del Ponte at the Tribunal. She described their discussions as excellent and she added that she was happy to highlight not only the appointment of Carla Del Ponte, but also the appointment process itself which she described as having produced excellent results. She added that in early June when her departure date was announced, alarmist signals emerged indicating the possibility of a dramatically long transition period and difficulty in generating a consensus on the issue of her replacement. She noted that the selection process and that the way in which the appointment of Mrs. Del Ponte had been handled testified to the unfailing commitment of the Secretary-General and of the Security Council. The process was taken very seriously, she concluded. The success of the process in itself should dispel the remaining sentiment that the Tribunal might be construed as a fragile institution.

In her view, the Tribunal, in general and in particular the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) was in excellent shape. She added that the Tribunal was poised to continue doing some of its best work, both with respect to the OTP in investigations and prosecutions and in courtroom proceedings. She believed that the deployment of the investigative efforts in Kosovo demonstrated that the Tribunal was now a mature institution that had demonstrated its capacity to work in a real time environment. She felt very positive in handing over her office to new leadership, she said.

She added that the Tribunal needed to continue to fine-tune the proceedings and operations in future. It would be unthinkable for such a novel institution as the Tribunal to become settled in its ways. She could see that the Tribunal needed to seek and value the advice given by many of its observers. What she was more concerned about was the suggestion that the Tribunal required a major ‘overhaul’ to correct a ‘deficiency’, which in her view was sometimes exaggerated, this being the so-called slowness of the procedures. Firstly, the Tribunal ought to be rigorous in identifying problems appropriately before examining corrective measures to be taken. She believed that the structure conceived by the Security Council and developed by the judges in their conception of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence was fundamentally sound.

The structure was consistent with the major international instruments with respect to human rights and had developed a procedural environment that, in her view, was correct, sound and respectful of the interests of the Prosecution, the accused and the general interest of justice. She believed that, as the Tribunal engaged in a process of attempting to perform more expeditiously, it ought to be careful not to jeopardize some of the values reflected in the current system.

Almost two weeks ago, the Prosecutor visited the Tribunal offices in Kigali and Arusha, where she had an exceptionally positive visit, including discussions with members of the Government of Rwanda. She added that she was pleasantly surprised by a more supportive and positive attitude towards the work of the Tribunal generally and especially towards the work of the OTP. This she said was due largely to the arrest operations conducted since the summer of 1997 and regularly thereafter, targeting high ranking officials and obtaining the support of many African governments including Kenya early on and subsequently those of many west African countries. She added that the signals had been the most positive received in her three years attending to the activities of the Tribunal for Rwanda. The question of the speed of proceedings was raised constantly, and again she reiterated that the Tribunal must seek ways to collectively improve performance and to meet the expectations of the population. In Rwanda, the remaining challenge with respect of the OTP was not only efforts made to depict genocide as a major criminal enterprise of conspiracy and to bring these cases to completion, but to complete all the remaining challenging parts of the investigative agenda.

In connection with the fact that next week marks the 60^th anniversary of the initiation by Hitler of World War Two, the Prosecutor was asked for her opinion of the meaning of the work of the Tribunal, what she believed had changed in the last 60 years, and whether she believed any progress had been made. She replied that there had been more progress made in the last five years than in the proceeding 50 with respect to the enforcement of International Humanitarian law. In the last five years the Tribunal had brought to the forefront the necessity to control the worst fallout of modern armed conflict and warfare. Whether this was sufficiently progressive to elevate the recourse to armed conflict as a way of settling a dispute in the international forum, she believed this to be for historians to answer. She believed that the Tribunal had shown enough determination for these efforts to be sustained and the permanent court be set in place. We should be entitled to see in the longer term a deterrent effect that would alleviate the suffering not only associated with war, but associated with the commission of atrocities during a time of war, a time when civilian populations were at their utmost vulnerability, when their protectors had either collapsed or were antagonistic to their own well being in the case of internal armed conflict. To think that the Tribunals had now launched proceedings which were supported by not only the Security Council but by the international community, made it very clear that the culture of impunity of the mighty was no longer part of the landscape of the next millenium.

Asked whether she was satisfied with the success of the OTP, Arbour replied that she felt that the Prosecution was successful if justice was done. That did not mean that you had to be the winner of any or all factual and legal propositions that were advanced, particularly in an environment in which these factual and legal propositions were very novel and were advanced on the basis of an analysis of a body of law that were still not fully developed. For instance, an unsuccessful attempt in maintaining something that was clearly a crime against humanity was not also a grave breach of the Geneva Conventions, must not be seen as a failing of the prosecution. In general terms what is seen in the courtrooms of both Tribunals was never meant to be a vindication of the Prosecution, but a demonstration of the capacity of the international community to do justice in a just, fair transparent, public and acceptable way. She stated that she believed that judged against these conditions, the two institutions had been very successful and as good as any model of criminal justice you would want to turn to in any of the major functioning sophisticated democracies.

With the numbers of arrests having multiplied by five since her arrival, the Prosecutor was asked whether it was a major disappointment that the most famous names were still at large. She replied on many occasions that it would be a great service to justice, in particular to victims of the kinds of atrocities that the Tribunal was exposing, if in fact we stayed away from a characterisation of success solely based on name recognition. In both Tribunals there were people who might not have names known in general public opinion, names as startling as Karadzic or Milosevic, but whose position and commission of crime deserved serious attention. This did not mean to suggest that she would not be looking forward to pressing for the arrest of all the indictees. There was significance to demonstrating in concrete terms that no one would ever be outside the reach of the law. The small fish - big fish debate had not been heard for a least a year. It had been noted that people were being indicted and arrested at the level of responsibility that showed that the momentum was well on its way and that everyone should feel very seriously exposed. She added that she might have liked to see a speedier rate of arrest than she had seen, however there were not a lot of grounds for complaint as to the commitment of SFOF which was now solidly established.

Asked whether she was confident that some day Karadzic and Milosevic would be detained by SFOR, she replied that she could not say publicly why she was confident and that she would not expose strategies the OTP had initiated or what kind of discussion it was having with others to explore various avenues to bring everyone to justice. It would be counter productive to be explicit but she believed that as you observed the process there was no doubt that the indictments were being targeted at a higher level. Only occasionally were older indictments revisited when opportunities presented themselves. There was a clear pattern of accused being brought into custody that were of a rank that two years ago might have led them to believe that they were outside the reach of any international effort. She was confident on those grounds that the momentum was moving in the right direction with the right resources.

Asked in her experience how cooperation with certain countries had improved, she replied that this process had its low points and the lowest one was when formal action had to be taken; when the Tribunal felt that the lack of cooperation in crippling the investigative efforts. With regards to the rest, she would not issue periodic reports with respect to the performance of either the usual willing partners or of those who had in the past been less inclined to be supportive of the Tribunal. In general terms, we had no reason not to be confident that the Security Council will in some way by realistic means bring compliance, she said. Like any relationship, we had on-going information providers, who sometimes become distracted on other issues and might be less supportive of a particular initiative the Tribunal was pursuing. This could be and was managed in the normal course of business, she added.

Asked about the contents of the meeting with Mrs. Del Ponte, Louise Arbour replied that she would not divulge the contents of their discussion, only that they were very productive in the short time at their disposal, several matters were reviewed and a number of informal discussions were had. She assured Del Ponte that she would be available for further meetings if necessary. It was a very fruitful and productive visit and everyone was looking forward to her imminent arrival, she said.

Asked what advice she had for Mrs. Del Ponte, the Prosecutor replied that any advice she might have would be communicated in private. She added that she could offer her own perception on many issues, but no advice to a particularly competent and professional prosecutor.

Asked whether document IT-99-35 was an indictment for the Croatian President, Landale replied that IT-99-35 was a miscellaneous file for cases and correspondence and documents that did not necessarily relate to anything specific. He added that various comments had been taken out of context in a certain Croatian wire service which had caused some excitement over the issue.

Asked how many ongoing cases related to genocide and why it was so difficult to get the evidence in these cases, Landale replied that the Jelisic case was the only genocide case actually in the trial process at this moment. Jelisic had pleaded guilty to all other counts on the original indictment but not guilty to the one genocide charge. For that reason the trial for that one count would begin on Monday, he said.

Asked why it was so difficult to prove genocide, Arbour replied that she did not believe it was difficult to prove, however, that it had many very specific elements, including the intention to eliminate a group in whole or in part. Some intent could be argued to be inferred by the magnitude of the extermination efforts. In other cases an assessment would be made of what kind of evidence could be tendered, for example statements made by the accused and or his co- conspirators. In the Akayesu case in Rwanda, virtually all the cases had genocide counts in them. There was not a single case left where the charge was simply crimes against humanity. As the cases moved through trial, the Tribunal could assess what would be required to prove genocide. Sometimes that element was provable by words spoken by the accused or by literature and propaganda emanating from the accused and or his co conspirators that showed very explicitly the purpose of the extermination mission. In other cases that purpose was not expressly stated and circumstantial evidence was required to infer that the intention was in fact genocidal.

Asked whether she had discussed sealed indictments with Carla Del Ponte, Arbour replied that amongst other Prosecution strategies in place in the OTP, sealed indictments had been discussed.

On the question of her view of the role of the media in the coverage of the Tribunal and the two conflicts, Arbour replied that the role of the media in covering the tribunal was critical beyond anything one would expect in a national criminal justice system for the reason that the fundamental values of criminal justice that were essential to its credibility was traditionally local and public. Certainly in the common law world the roots of the jury system were based on the idea of the trial in the market place where the community came together in a criminal trial to reaffirm its commitment to shared values and to see that justice was done in an acceptable manner, that the system was not worse behaved than the offenders themselves. One of the great challenges of international criminal justice was to preserve these characteristics in the market place of Kigali or Belgrade. To perform this, the Tribunal relied on the modern means of the media and through particularly a free and independent press. The role of an educated and fair press was absolutely fundamental. What role it played in the conflict spoke for itself. It was now a feature of the documentation of armed conflict that the media is now more interested, not only in unfolding warfare but also the atrocities of human rights taking place.

Asked what she would say to outgoing NATO Secretary-General Javier Solana and NATO SACEUR General Wesley Clark if she saw them today, she replied that she would say thank you and goodbye.

The briefing was reconvened for the Prosecutor, Justice Louise Arbour to make the following announcement on the arrest of General Momir Talic:

"On 12 March 1999, the Prosecutor, Justice Louise Arbour, signed an indictment charging General Momir Talic, the Chief of Staff of the Army of Republika Srpska, together with Radislav Brdjanin, with a crime against humanity, namely persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds. The indictment, which was confirmed by Judge Rodrigues on 14 March 1999, alleges that during 1992 the accused, as members of the Crisis Staff (Krizni Stab) of the Autonomous Region of Krajina (ARK), ordered, implemented, supported and assisted a plan designed to expel the Bosnian Muslim, Bosnian Croat and other non-Serb populations from the municipalities designated as part of the ARK, including the Prijedor municipality of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

On 6 July 1999, the accused Radislav Br|anin was arrested by SFOR troops in Bosnia and Herzegovina and was transferred to The Hague where he is awaiting trial.

Acting on information that the accused Momir Talic was travelling to Austria to attend a conference, on 24 August 1999 the Prosecutor arranged for a warrant of arrest directed to the Republic of Austria to be delivered to the Austrian authorities. Acting on this warrant, Momir Talic was arrested today and taken into custody in Vienna by those authorities. It is expected that the accused will appear before the local courts in Austria before his eventual surrender to the Tribunal in the near future.

The Prosecutor wishes to express her gratitude to the Austrian authorities for acting promptly on the warrant of arrest and for their very professional actions in apprehending Momir Talic. It is anticipated that the accused Momir Talic and Radislav Brdjanin will be tried together in a joint trial".

*****