ICTY - Radovan Karadžić and Slobodan Milošević

In March 2016, the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) gave judgment in the case of Radovan Karadžić, former President of Republika Srpska (RS) - see the Tribunal's judgment [pdf 2615 pages], this Information Sheet and the earlier post of 24th March. 


The Tribunal's Press Release of 24th March states:  "Trial Chamber III of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) today convicted Radovan Karadžić, former President of Republika Srpska (RS) and Supreme Commander of its armed forces, of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war committed by Serb forces during the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), from 1992 until 1995. He was sentenced to 40 years’ imprisonment.

Karadžić was convicted of genocide in the area of Srebrenica in 1995, of persecution, extermination, murder, deportation, inhumane acts (forcible transfer), terror, unlawful attacks on civilians and hostage-taking. He was acquitted of the charge of genocide in other municipalities in BiH in 1992."

Karadžić has lodged an appeal - see here

The judgment in Karadžić is analysed in this article by Andy Wilcoxson and it highlights aspects of the Tribunal's judgment concerning Slobodan Milošević.

International Criminal Tribunal for former Yugoslavia - conviction of Radovan Karadžić

Tribunal convicts Radovan Karadžić for crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Trial Chamber III of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) today convicted Radovan Karadžić, former President of Republika Srpska (RS) and Supreme Commander of its armed forces, of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war committed by Serb forces during the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), from 1992 until 1995. He was sentenced to 40 years’ imprisonment.

Parties have the right to appeal the judgement.

Karadžić is entitled to credit for time spent in detention thus far. He has been in custody since 21 July 2008.

Nuclear weapons

The Rt. Hon. Jeremy Corbyn MP (Leader of the Opposition) has expressed his personal views about the UK's nuclear weapon capability - BBC News 30th September - Jeremy Corbyn row after "I'd not fire nuclear weapons" comment.   Corbyn's personal views are not - (at least not yet) - the policy position of the Labour Party which remains supportive of the need for UK nuclear weapons.  Mr Corbyn insists that he is seeking a mature debate on this subject.  Such a debate seems timely given that the government is to make its decision on Trident replacement in 2016.  The costs of replacement are massive (see BBC 9th April 2015) and that in itself adds another dimension to the debate at a time when the government insists that financial austerity is necessary and when many public services are under severe financial pressure.

It has been argued in some quarters (e.g. CND Trident and International Law) that renewal of Trident would be a breach of the UK's nuclear disarmament obligations under the 1968 Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Treaty.   CND argue that:

"The Geneva Convention Protocol from 1977 states that ‘the civilian population shall not be the object of attack’ and prohibits ‘methods or means of warfare which are intended, or may be expected, to cause widespread, long-term and severe damage to the natural environment’.  (See here)
 
It is impossible to use a nuclear weapon selectively, meaning that launching Trident would certainly be illegal as there would be a huge number of civilian casualties and devastation of the natural environment. The ensuing radioactive contamination of the area would also violate the population’s ‘right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family’, as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights."

A House of Commons Briefing Paper (SN06526 of 10th March 2015) has this to say:

"The UK’s Disarmament Obligations  Article VI of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty commits the recognised nuclear weapon states to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control”. 

Successive Governments have insisted that replacing Trident is compatible with the UK’s obligations under the NPT, arguing that the treaty contains no prohibition on updating existing weapons systems and gives no explicit timeframe for nuclear disarmament.  It also insists it has taken a number of steps in support of the NPT, pointing to the significant downsizing of the British nuclear arsenal since the end of the Cold War, with the withdrawal of all other nuclear weapons systems except for Trident, the reduction to fewer than 200 warheads in the overall stockpile and the reductions in the operational status of the deterrent. 

 

Furthermore, the Government insists that sustainable nuclear disarmament can only be achieved through a multilateral process. The UK has the smallest nuclear arsenal of the five recognised nuclear powers and says it will be willing to place its remaining weapons on the table for negotiation when Russia and the US have reduced their arsenals to similar levels.  Others believe the Government could do more to advance the cause of nuclear disarmament by reducing the UK arsenal further."

What is the position in international law?

International Criminal Court

Anyone wishing to know something about the International Criminal Court should read their document Understanding the International Criminal Court (49 pp. pdf).

The court was established by the Rome Statute  which dates from 1998  but which entered into force on 1st July 2002.  The court has NO jurisdiction for events prior to that date.  The court is also a "last resort" and acts where national authorities are not acting to bring alleged perpetrators to justice.

Effect is given in the United Kingdom to the ICC by the International Criminal Court Act 2001

Watching the Law blog 4th September 2012 - Tutu and Blair: The International Criminal Court

North Korea ~ The Hidden Gulag

Update 7th July 2015 - Public executions in North Korea since 2000



Update 21st January 2015 - UN dismisses North Koera's claim that damning human rights report is invalid - The Guardian.

Original post:

On 21 March 2013, at its 22nd session, the United Nations Human Rights Council  established the Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK).

Resolution A/HRC/RES/22/13 mandated the body  to investigate the systematic, widespread and grave violations of human rights in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, with a view to ensuring full accountability, in particular for violations which may amount to crimes against humanity.

Among the violations to be investigated are those pertaining to the right to food, those associated with prison camps, torture and inhuman treatment, arbitrary detention, discrimination, freedom of expression, the right to life, freedom of movement, and enforced disappearances, including in the form of abductions of nationals of other States.  Read more about the Commission... 

The Commission's report and supporting documentation is HERE.

Although North Korea has been referred to as The Hidden Gulag the world has no excuse any longer to claim lack of knowledge of the North Korean situation of today.

The Democratic People's Republic of North Korea did not co-operate with the Commission's investigation.  The Commission shared its findings with the North Korean government.

Other Links:

Wikipedia - North Korea - Political Prison Camps

International Coalition to Stop Crimes against Humanity in North Korea

The Hidden Gulag

The International Criminal Tribunals

Former Yugoslavia:

In May 2012, I blogged about the Ratko Mladic trial before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) - Ratko Mladić - Trial at the ICTY   His trial commenced on 16th May 2012 and updates on the trial are available via the ICTY website - Mladic.  Judgment in his case is expected in November 2017.

The other particularly notable trial, again still on-going, is that of  Radovan Karadzic - see ICTY Karadzic  - his trial commenced on 26 October 2009.  His trial has concluded and judgment is expected in the first quarter of 2016.

It is reported that Mladic refused to testify for the defence in Karadzic's trial - The Guardian 28th January 2014.   "Karadzic had a list of six questions he wanted to ask of Mladic, focusing on the general's knowledge of the Srebrenica massacre and the Serb siege of the capital Sarajevo, and how much of that information he had passed to Karadzic.  Karadzic was expected to argue that the two had no common plan and that he was unaware of his most senior general's activities, and so could not be held personally responsible for the worst bloodshed in Europe since the second world war.  Mladic gave the same response in answer to each question: "I cannot and do not wish to testify ... because it would impair my health and prejudice my own case," he said, offering instead to read a seven-page statement he said he had written the previous evening – an offer the judges refused.  Proceedings were complete after less than two hours and Mladic was led out, exchanging nods with Karadzic."

The ICTY's website pages on 20 Years of International Justice are particularly interesting. 

For lawyers,

Maritime Piracy Protection

Attacks by pirates on two vessels within four days indicates a resurgence of piracy - Ship Management 16th October.  Marine piracy cost the global economy £3.8bn last year.  Just over £1.25bn was spent on hiring armed guards to protect valuable cargo and £40m was spent on ransoms.  A new device is enhancing the protection of ships against those who wish to get on board using ladders and grappling hooks.  See Marine Security Solutions. 

There is considerable concern about the existence of various websites which indicate the position of ships and the cargo being carried.

Previous post on piracy:

Piracy - A major problem in modern times - 14th February 2012.

22nd October - Suspected Somali pirates captured by navy led forces after attack on supertanker

4th November 2013 - The Horn of Plenty: How piracy becamse a $413m business

Rwandan Genocide 1994: Conviction of Callixte Nzabonimana

Rwandan Genocide 1994:

In 1994, whilst the world stood by, the Rwandan Genocide occurred - see History Rwanda Genocide

From April to July 1994, members of the Hutu ethnic majority in the east-central African nation of Rwanda murdered as many as 800,000 people, mostly of the Tutsi minority. Begun by extreme Hutu nationalists in the capital of Kigali, the genocide spread throughout the country with staggering speed and brutality, as ordinary citizens were incited by local officials and the Hutu Power government to take up arms against their neighbours. By the time the Tutsi-led Rwandese Patriotic Front

International Criminal Court - First Judgment - The Prosecutor v Thomas Lubanga Dyilo

Thomas Lubanga stands convicted, as a co-perpetrator, by the International Criminal Court ICC)  of the war crime of  of conscripting and enlisting children under the age of 15 and using them to participate actively in hostilities from 1 September 2002 to 13 August 2003. It is the first verdict issued by an ICC Trial Chamber.  The court delivering judgment may be seen here.

These crimes were committed in the context of an internal armed conflict that took place in the Ituri (the Democratic Republic of the Congo) and involved the Force patriotique pour la libération du Congo (Patriotic Force for the Liberation of the Congo) (FPLC), led by Thomas Lubanga Dyilo, against the Armée Populaire Congolaise and other militias, including the Force de résistance patriotique en Ituri. A common plan was agreed by Mr Lubanga Dyilo and his co-perpetrators to build an army for the purpose of establishing and maintaining political and military control over Ituri. This resulted in

Piracy - A major problem in modern times

The extent of the problem:

Piracy is an extremely serious problem to shipping.   The International Maritime Bureau (IMB) has published figures for piracy and armed robbery incidents reported to the IMB in 2012.  Up to the end of January, 37 attacks worldwide were reported - read  Piracy News and Figures   Further IMB material shows that attacks are getting bolder (IMB 14th July 2011 - an article with some truly frightening information).   Nevertheless, the IMB indicated that although world piracy had a hit a new high, more ships were escaping from Somali pirates - see IMB 18th October 2011  This article stated:

"Demanding millions of dollars in ransom for captured ships and their crews, Somali pirates are intensifying operations not just off their own coastline, but further afield in the Red Sea – particularly during the monsoon season in the wider Indian Ocean. With unprecedented boldness, this August pirates also boarded and hijacked a chemical tanker at anchor in an Omani port, under the protection of coast state security.

But although Somali pirates are initiating more attacks – 199 this year, up from 126 for the first nine months of 2010 – they are managing to hijack fewer vessels. Only 24 vessels were hijacked this year compared with 35 for the same period in 2010. Hijackings were successful in just 12% of all attempts this year, down from 28% in 2011."

The IMB reported a doubling of piracy across the world in the first half of 2009 - see Maritime Terrorism Research Center 16th July 2009  and an interactive map for 2010 is also available.   See further the Piracy and Armed Robbery interactive maps for 2011 and 2012.

Legal definitions:

The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982 (UNCLOS) places a duty on

Srebrenica

Cemetery at Srebrenica

"I hope the very mention of the name “Srebrenica” will remind every child in the world that pride in our own religious and ethnic heritage does not require or permit us to dehumanize or kill those who are different. I hope and pray that Srebrenica will be for all the world a sober reminder of our common humanity" - President Clinton on 20th September 2003.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has already concluded that the 1995 events at Srebrenica amounted to the crime of genocide - see Radislav Krstić appeal.   The International Court of Justice agreed with this in 2007 when the ICJ held that Serbia had violated its obligation to prevent genocide (12 votes to 3) and also that Serbia had failed in its obligation to transfer Mladic for trial (14 votes to 1).  Suspicions remain that Serbia had sheltered Mladic even after the ICJ ruling. 

Ratko Mladic now stands indicted for his alleged part in the appalling events which are described here.

An exhumed body with blindfold and hands tied behind the back

Massacre of prisoners in Iran - "Do you think we should have given them sweets?" - The Iran Tribunal

Iran

Vietnam - The Russell Tribunal

In 1966, the British philosopher and mathematician Lord Russell (1872-1970) set up, along with Jean Paul Sartre, a tribunal to consider United States Foreign Policy and Military Intervention in Vietnam. Representatives of 18 countries participated and hearings were held in 1967 in Stockholm and Copenhagen. Twenty-five notable persons formed the tribunal including a number of Nobel Prize winners.   Neither Vietnam nor the United States of America participated and the tribunal was largely ignored by the media. The Tribunal reached, unanimously, a number of verdicts finding against the United States on matters such as the use of weaponry forbidden by the laws of war, inhumane treatment of prisoners etc - see Russell-Sarte Tribunal on Vietnam.  It was inevitable that the tribunal was criticised as a "Kangaroo Court" by those who had the opportunity to participate but declined to do so.  Of course, the tribunal had no legal force and could not try particular individuals.

This form of tribunal - essentially a private enterprise - contrasts with the approach to some events such as the International Criminal tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY).

Iran in the 1980s - Report by Geoffrey Robertson QC - the Iran Tribunal

Iran Tribunal

This idea of a Tribunal has been adopted recently in relation to events which it is said took place in IRAN in the 1980s, a decade in which there was major war between Iraq and Iran resulting in the loss of in excess of half a million lives.  The war lasted until August 1988 when it came to an end as a result of United Nations effort and Security Council Resolution 598.  However, in the second half of 1988 there were many executions in Iran - some estimates say in excess of 4500.  Those executed appear to be political dissidents who were opposed to the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini.  Writing in The Guardian on 7th June 2010, Geoffrey Robertson QC called upon the United Nations to enforce international law by setting up a court to try the perpetrators of the massacres.  Mr Robertson has produced a detailed report on the massacres.

In his Guardian article, Robertson stated that - "Most of the judges and officials who implemented the fatwa are still in high office in Tehran – under a supreme leader who, when asked about killing prisoners replied: "Do you think we should have given them sweets?"

A Tribunal - (intended to operate on similar lines to the Russell-Sartre Tribunal) - has been set up and John Cooper QC has become Chairman of a Steering Committee.  The February 2011 Press release explains the way it is hoped to develop the Tribunal's work.  John Cooper stated - “The work of the Steering Committee in creating, advising and facilitating the establishment of the Iran Tribunal will be vital if due process is to be observed at the future hearings. We are determined that the Tribunal discovers the truth about what happened to thousands of Iranian people and that justice is finally done.”

The HOME Page of the Tribunal sets out the background and the aims of the Tribunal and ways of supporting the tribunal may also be seen. 

Further material is available at Amnesty International - "Iran: The 20th Anniversary of 1988 prison massacres"

Camp Ashraf and Iran Freedom

Camp Ashraf, Iraq

Many exiled Iranians are at Camp Ashraf in Iraq.  The European Union has recently called on Iraq to respect their rights - see Declaration of 9th April 2011.  This article in The Spectator is interesting.

See also British Parliamentary Committee for Iran Freedom

Death of a distinguished jurist - Moshe Landau

A former Chief Justice of Israel - Moshe Landau - died on 1st May 2011 - aged 99.  His contribution to Israeli law was truly outstanding.

See these articles reporting his death and looking at his remarkable career - Israel National News and Haaretz

In particular, his conduct of the trial of Adolf Eichmann will long stand as an example of how a fair trial can be achieved even when the defendant is an arch-enemy of the State.  The 14 week trial was held in 1961 and, in accordance with Israeli law, three judges sat - Moshe Landau, Benjamin Halevy and Yitzhak Raveh.  Sentence of death was passed in December 1961 and carried out on 31st May 1962.  Eichmann's ashes were scattered in the Mediterranean Sea.

Judgment in Eichmann's case

A particularly striking article about Landau may be seen at the Ruthfully Yours blog.

Throughout his remarkable career in the law, Landau stands out as a truly independently minded judge who paid meticulous attention to detail.  Above all, he had that one absolutely essential characteristic for a judge: courage.

The Telegraph 15th May - Obituary of Moshe Landau

In Memoriam - Halabja - 16th March 1988

Halabja Memorial

Never Forget Halabja
As Sulaymānīyah - Iraq

In March 1988 Halabja was subjected to an horrific gas attack which killed some 5000 people and caused severe injury to many more.  On 25th January 2010 the man who ordered this attack - Ali Hassan Al Majid (a cousin of Saddam Hussein) - was executed in Baghdad.  The full horror is well recorded by the Gallery of Muslim Massacres website.  The City of Manchester, in Northern England, has a modest memorial to Halabja 16th March 1988.  It is a tree - (pictured) - and a small memorial stone.  They are located in a busy part of the city centre.  Today, 16th March 2011, a small group of people met there and placed flowers in remembrance of those who had died.

The Halabja massacre took place toward the end of the Iraq-Iran War (September 1980-August 1988).  Of course, much was to unfold before the Saddam Hussein regime was finally brought to an end as a result of military action against Iraq.   There was the action (under United Nations mandate) to remove Iraqi Forces from Kuwait - (August 1990 to February 1991).  Later there was the 2003 military invasion of Iraq by Coalition Forces.  This action remains highly controversial and, in the U.K., has been the subject of a number of inquiries the latest of which is the Chilcot Inquiry which has been referred to in several posts on this blog.  The coalition action against Iraq raised numerous issues in international law and the justification for military action by the U.K. remains the subject of intense debate.  Nevertheless, Halabja is a constant reminder of the abysmal regime headed by Saddam Hussein.

The Responsibility to Protect (UN Security Council Resolution 1674/2006) emerged as one outcome of these and other atrocious events.
An "Inconvenient Atrocity": The Chemical Weapons Attack on the Kurds of Halabja, Iraq

The killing fields of Cambodia - "justice" at last ?

Appalling cruelty from one individual to his fellow men seems to be endemic in the human race.  This was never more so than in Cambodia (formerly Kampuchea) under the Khmer Rouge regime of the 1970s.

From 1975 to 1979 the S-21 Security Centre operated in Cambodia.  Over 12,000 people were ruthlessly killed by the Khmer Rouge regime.  The leader of S-21, an appalling individual called Kaing Guek Eav (alias Duch), has been sentenced to 35 years imprisonment for his prominent role in these atrocities which amounted to crimes against humanity and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions 1949.  See The Guardian 25th July 2010.

He was sentenced by the "Extraordinary Chamber in the Courts of Cambodia" which is a national court but United Nations appointed judges and prosecutors were used.

In passing the sentence, the court found that there was mitigation: co-operation with the Chamber; admission of responsibility; limited expressions of remorse and the coercive atmosphere in the country at the time and potential for rehabilitation.  The informed reader may well doubt some of those and, even if they are accepted, the reader may well feel that the immense seriousness of his criminality merited nothing less than the remainder of his life in prison.  It is little wonder that the few known survivors are unhappy with the outcome - see BBC "Tears and Disbelief at his sentence".  The court's statement may be read on their website - see here.

It is reported that Duch will appeal against his sentence - BBC 28th July.  This may be his right but it hardly shows a jot of remorse.

Addendum 30th July:   A film "Enemies of the People" deals with aspects of the Khmer Rouge regime in Kampuchea.  The film is co-directed by Thet Sambath.  An interesting and rather moving article appeared in The Guardian 27th July and see also New York Times 29th July.  Thet Sambath's views about justice not being vindictive are very powerful.  In Cambodia there is a museum at Tuol Seng dedicated to the genocide which took place.

Addendum 28th March 2011:   The appeal by Eav against his sentence has commenced.  In a heavily criticised move, it has already been commuted to 19 years imprisonment - The Guardian 28th March 2011.

Addendum 2nd February 2012:  Eav's sentence was increased to life imprisonment to reflect to gravity of his offending - BBC 2nd February 2012.

Armenia and Turkey

The Republic of Armenia is a landlocked country to the NE of Turkey and to the north of Iran - see Geography.  This is a strategically important region.  The country's modern constitution dates from July 1995 though it became independent of the former Soviet Union in 1991.  There is a long standing disagreement between Armenia and Turkey regarding the horrific events during World War I when possibly well in excess of one million Armenians were killed - see here for more detail.


In October 2009, Turkey and Armenia signed a historic accord normalising relations between them after a century of hostility. However, Armenia wants Turkey to recognise the killings as an act of genocide but successive Turkish governments have refused to do so.  See Armenia, Turkey sign historic agreement.

A vote in a committee of the United States legislature has called upon President Obama to classify the killings as genocide and, in consequence, Turkey withdrew its Ambassador to the U.S. - see The Times 5th March 2010.  Ankara accepts that many thousands of Christian Armenians living in what was then eastern Anatolia died in blood-letting by Muslim Ottoman troops in 1915.  It rejects the term “genocide” and says that the 1.5 million figure for the final death toll is exaggerated.  Experts, including some of Turkey’s own most respected historians, disagree.  Many governments, including the US and the UK, have refused to use the term genocide in connection with those events.

An analysis of the situation is the opinion of Geoffrey Robertson QC which was published in 2009.  The learned author concludes that the treatment of the Armenians in 1915 answers to the description of genocide.  See also Armenian Embassy London.

There is little doubt that what is now referred to as genocide existed as an international crime prior to the Genocide Convention of 1948 but it was ill-defined and tended to be classified under the more general heading of "crimes against humanity".  A Resolution of the UN General Assembly in 1946 described genocide as a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups and went on to affirm that it was a crime under international law.  However, prior to the 1948 convention, the crime was not well-defined though events such as the extermination of Jews was an obvious example.  It required the 1948 Convention to provide a definition and to impose obligations on States to criminalise genocide through their national law and to co-operate judicially so as to suppress the crime.  According to the Italian jurist Antonio Cassese (International Criminal Law 2nd Edition at p.127) - "Genocide acquired autonomous significance as a specific crime in 1948, when the UN GA adopted the Genocide Convention."  

In recent years various International Tribunals have sought to interpret the Convention and to offer judicial rulings on the various elements of the crime.  Cases have arisen in the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. 

It is reported that The White House has now moved to block the Armenian Genocide Bill which is going throught the US Congress - see here.

The vote in the US Congress is unlikely to assist the process of reconciliation between Armenia and Turkey and probably the involvement of other nations, other than maybe as honest brokers, is also unlikely to be helpful.  It would seem desirable in the longer-term interests of both Turkey and Armenia that some form of resolution is achieved but it is unclear at the present time how, if at all, a satisfactory resolution will be brought about..

In English Law, the crime of genocide is now to be found in the International Criminal Court Act 2001.

Addendum Monday 8th March:   Norman Stone (Professor Emeritus of Modern History at Oxford) argued in The Times that the horrific events of 1915 ought not to be classified as genocide and he points out that the Turks actually put 1600 men on trial and executed a governor.  He sees the US Resolution as counterproductice and likely to encourage Turkey to turn away from the West and look toward China who, he says, are "quite active" in Ankara.

See also Denial of Armenian Genocide (Wikipedia).

A blog returns

This blog is now back in use. On 25th August 2006 I discontinued using this blog. I have now brought it back into use and there will be occasional posts on human rights and the fascinating subject of international law.