Karadzic in the dock
The accused in case IT 95 05/18 walked into the otherwise empty court room flanked by two guards, upright and all but expressionless in a smart dark suit, white shirt and red tie. Peered at by those of us in the press and public gallery - on the same level, but behind thick glass running from wall to ceiling - he took a few papers out of his thin brief case and put on his head phones. He sat down, donned a pair of glasses and waited for the judge to appear.
Radovan Karadzic, captured in Belgrade last month, has been forced to shed the disguise that went with a new identity as a long-haired and bearded practitioner of alternative medicine. He has reverted to the familiar wartime almost bouffant hair-do and steely gaze. Throughout the hearing - attentive, courteous but defiant - he said that the court should do the same.
"I am deeply convinced that this court is representing itself falsely as a court of the international community whereas it is, in fact, a court of Nato whose aim is to liquidate me," he said.
The judge asked him to stand to hear the eleven charges against him. After a few seconds hesitation he did. But the judge didn't get very far. He read out the charge of genocide. Mr Karadzic told him he would not enter a plea because of his attitude towards the court. The judge said that, in accordance with the rules, he would enter a plea of not guilty on his behalf.. So he never read the full charges, of indictment to murder, torture, rape and inhumane treatment.
Later, Mr Karadzic attempted a joke - dry, grim or sick according to your temperament:
"May I hold you to your word?" he asked.
"Which word?" the judge replied.
"That I am not guilty."
"We shall see in due course, Mr Karadzic."
The hearing ended with the focus not on the accused but with something of a ticking off for the defence from the judge. They hadn't updated the charges and weren't planning to do so until the end of next month. The judge - who obviously runs a tight court - was not at all amused.
Mr Karadzic will be here again on 17 September when his allegations about the nature of the court will be heard at some length. The court rose and the judge and most legal representatives left the room. Just Mr Karadzic, his guards and ourselves behind the glass were left. As we shuffled out a lawyer came back in and spoke to Mr Karadzic. I have no idea what was being said but, for a moment, the accused's impassive face broke into a very quick grin of amusement.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~11~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Is the second appearance of Karadzic before the Yugoslavia War Crimes Tribunal and his deliberate action to not enter a plea of such importance?
The "otherwise empty court room", into which Karadzic entered to perform his ritual act of defiance and attempt to ridicule the proceedings, probably marks Karadzic as being insignificant and this event as merely a footnote in the annals of European history being written now.
Am I alone in thinking that the current breakdown in the relationship between the democracies of Europe and the autocracy of Russia is perhaps of more consequence than Karadzic's second administrative court appearance in The Hague?
Complain about this comment
NATO court and justice,
come on,
this can convince just blind western readers who think that their governments are always right.
Complain about this comment
far be it from me to join the throngs of your many pedantic readers, but...
bit of slip there regarding who makes the 'charges', that's done by the prosecutors not the defence and it's not just a matter of updating a list. indictments take months to prepare, some in the hague tribunal have taken many months. they are not a list of crimes committed but a working plan for the entire prosecution. once the prosecutors commit to the sub-section of offences they feel they can prove in the restricted time allowed by the courts, that's it. no adding new evidence or witnesses from other areas / municipalities that have been excluded from the indictment. making these critical decisions is the same for any case and not just a war crimes tribunal. however, criminal cases rarely involve almost every town in a country.
the karadic trial is getting all the attention, i guess due to his recent dramatic arrest but the really fascinating trial, for anyone interested must be vojislav seselj's. karadic will be convicted, that is if he is alive at the end of the process. the evidence against him is now fact and has been used multiple times to try and convict his subordinates. this trial will not be a long drawn out affair.
seselj on the other hand, who is a sort of serbian ian paisley type character. a gun loader but not a trigger puller, if you know what i mean. is being tried for crimes in municipalities of the former yugoslavia, which he has never visited. everyone outside the hague tribunal was sure that the prosecutors would pursue a 'hate speech' prosecution along the lines of nuremberg. however they are also, it would seem going after chain of command.
this case is so interesting because it really isn't clear if a conviction will be possible. a nauseating, bellicose, beast of a man, seselj is in fact also a very competent legal mind. very often he has proven, somewhat painfully to be by far the best legal mind in the courtroom. so much so, that the the haggard prosecutors have accused him of manipulating witnesses externally via associates and during examination and cross. they have now requested he loose his right to represent himself. the judges are considering.
the karadic case is a non event. seselj's where the action is.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vojislav_%C5%A0e%C5%A1elj
Complain about this comment
If the trial of Karadzic turns like the one of Milosevic, that will definitely be an embaressment for the international community. If Milosevic was so guilty, it would have been easy to prove his guilt quickly. Instead, he discredited the court, its witnesses and exposed irregularities of the international community on multiple occasions.
The problem with ex-Yu is , this is not at all similar to the trials of Nazis in Germany where it is pretty obvious whos fault WWII was. The history, inter-ethnic hatred lasting many centuries, unresolved genocides from the past, unfair interference of the international community, illegal bombings and premature recognitions of ex-Yu republics have indeed created a very complex situation that will never be resolved with the trial neither of Karadzic nor of Mladic.
Complain about this comment
From where does this 'court' derive its legitimacy? Who are the citizens whose interests it presumes to represent? Whose system of justice does it practice?
The USA, Russia and China - and many other countries - don't recognise this 'court'.
I don't remember British citizens being asked to vote for its establishment - or approve its jurisdiction, so it sure doesn't represent me.
As I've said before, whether guilty or innocent, there is no chance of Karadzic getting a fair trial.
Complain about this comment
To all these people that agree with Karadzic that this is a NATO court: It is, perhaps, a European Court that is dealing with a European Issue and all you non-Europeans should mind your own business. What is at stake is humble justice to man that deserves much more than death.
Complain about this comment
@ skeptic #5
sorry, but you sound a little confused.
the i.c.t.y. derives it's legitimacy from a united nations mandate to prosecute those accused of war crimes in the former yugoslavia wars.
that is the united nations. that includes the usa, russia, china and pretty much the rest of the planet. including all the countries of the former yugoslavia.
the court very definitely represents you, whether you like it or not, as the united kingdom government fully supported and still supports the mandate of the i.c.t.y.
i can only suspect that your confusion arises from your inability to distinguish between the international criminal court and the i.c.t.y.
the i.c.t.y. received full support from u.n. member states because it's mandate was restricted to a set location and time. no chance of having their own toes stepped on.
the i.c.c. however is not limited to one location or time period (although retrospective prosecutions are not possible). this was a little more challenging for some countries, who had a vested interest in the current international climate of impunity for genocide and crimes against humanity.
the usa, china and russia have all refused to comply with the i.c.c. because they know only too well, that it would be only a matter of time before they found their own leaders indicted.
physical support for the darfur genocide, guantanamo bay / abu ghraib and recent events in georgia. all made possible by the impunity granted to these countries by not complying with the i.c.c.
whether you think karadic will receive a fair or unjust trial, you must surely agree he will at least receive a trial, unlike those eight thousand men and boys from srebrenica, his paramilitaries machine gunned into pits and buried with bulldozers, as they lay dying.
Complain about this comment
billy_carryduff @7,
Thank you for the clarification.
I remain sceptical, however, that he will receive a fair trial. The Serbs are this decade's bogeymen.
Complain about this comment
I am not surprised that the court room is divided by a wall of thick glass. It makes one wonder whether or not judge is afraid that someone, in the audience, might hear what the defendant says!??
Most well informed people know that this court is not genuine! It only exists for the leaders of countries hostile to NATO control and its corrupt, capitalist ideology.
The Hague's War Crimes Tribunal was given only "reactionary evidence," not the one that caused the mayhem, in former Yugoslavia, over which Mr. Karadzic and other leaders had no knowledge, never mind ability to prevent the unfolding events.
The "evidence that caused" the breakdown of Yugoslavia, also incriminates the accusers, namely, NATO states. They are smart enough to have shredded the incriminating evidence, by now, to erase the paper trail that would reveal how it all came to be, and who was behind it all along!
Most people know who does not like communism, one of the very reasons why NATO came into being. NATO does not spend 10 billion and counting to protect ethnic minorities in their own countries, much less in other countries, unless it is something they can not afford to ignore, like communism - CUBA in the middle of Europe!
Dissenting ethnic minorities unilaterally imposed war on the Yugoslav government. What followed was simply out of any one's control, including NATO states!
Complain about this comment
Nowaday, could be believe in BBC reports?
Complain about this comment
That is nice that Karadzic is in the docks in The Hague, what is the next step...in the long process.
Complain about this comment
dennisjunior1 @ 11
The lawyers involved all check their current healthy bank statements and then calculate how much money they are going to make out of the judicial process ........ they then start looking at properties and yacht brochures for their future agrandisement.
Am I being cynical? Yes, but less cynical than the legal professionals involved in this farce.
Complain about this comment
@Gheryando (6)
how mightily 'progressive' of you, convicting someone without a shred of evidence of his 'guilt'.
@MaxSceptic (5)
this kangaroo 'court' doesn't represent me either. Nor does the EU, or NATO, or any other of those malign sovereignty-undermining forms of government (EU) or institutions (NATO, UN, etc).
What happened in Yugoslavia is patently obvious. Western Europe and the USA didn't like the idea of a Yugoslavia which would look to Moscow. So they decided to enflame ethnic and religious tensions to break Yugoslavia up into several smaller states, most of which would owe their 'existance' and therefore allegiance to the Western Europeans and USA.
Complain about this comment
Well, its pretty much a formality to prove him guilty, as far as I know. Everyone knows about his role in the war.
Complain about this comment
6. At 7:33pm on 29 Aug 2008, Gheryando wrote:
To all these people that agree with Karadzic that this is a NATO court: It is, perhaps, a European Court that is dealing with a European Issue and all you non-Europeans should mind your own business. What is at stake is humble justice to man that deserves much more than death.
Have you ever heard the concept of presumption of innocence ? That is exactly why the whole world consider this court biased: Karzdzic is already guilty without even a trial. And you call this freedom? And you wonder why other countries do not want to give up their citizens to the mercy of your free european courts?
Complain about this comment
I can't believe some comments that I am reading here: "Well, its pretty much a formality to prove him guilty, as far as I know. Everyone knows about his role in the war." Civil War is the most brutal war of all. ANY leader in the civil war must make tough decisions. Any leader who fought a civil war can be found guilty of certain crimes. I am not tying to find excuses for Karadzic, but give the man a chance to defend himself. He is not guilty until proven so.
Complain about this comment
Send him in Srebrenica and let them decide if he is guilty or not! Now that will be justice, and brits and Americans will stop complaining were their tax money is going! There are thousands raped women, mothers, wifes and sisters who lost their loved ones! It must be terrible for them watching him now nicely dressed, in a nice comfortable room, fed, washed....while their beloved ones were killed like infected dogs! Think how you would feel if this happened to you and your close ones!
Mark, I hope you will not find this comment offending too….if you do then I will be offended and millions who suffered from his ideas!
Complain about this comment
At Ardi74,
well said...I am all about freedom and innocent until proven guilty, but it seems as if some people here would even question whether Hitler was guilty.
Complain about this comment
Gheryando @18
If you are all about freedom and innocent until proven guilty, may I ask how you know Hitler was guilty?
Was this because of something you read? Some video you saw? Something you were taught at school? Something a relative told you?
I don't recall Hitler's trial and him being proven 'guilty'! Was he not innocent until proven guilty?
A Presumption of guilt is not Justice it is a revengeful mindset!
Karadzic is getting a trial. I question whether he will get a fair trail as, like Hitler, he is already condemned because of ill-informed people having opinions that 'believe' he is guilty before he has had an opprotunity to defend his actions?
The PREsumption that Karadzic IS guilty before his trial IS the problem. That is not Justice, it is not fair and it is all about those with sins themselves being able to cast the first stone.
I am not a sympathiser with the actions of the Serbian Nation in the 1990s but then I am not sympathetic to the Croats or Bosnians who were as on the opposite sides of that three-way-fight.
I believe that there were atrocities committed by many people on all sides of the Balkans Conflicts but let the perpertrators be proven guilty rather than it be presumed they are guilty.
To have a court case be used simply to justify a presumption of guilt is dishonest, makes it a kangeroo court and simply makes a mockery of the word "Justice!"
Complain about this comment
let's begin our consideration of who is and who is not guilty with sarajevo, the crime itself.
everybody in the world witnessed the terror hanged over the city. history of vandalism has been repeated once more. only this time everybody in the world was the eye-witness.
vandals or roman citizens? we have no doubts whom to blame. just chase and find the plunderers. give them fair trial, a chance to prove it was not them, but somebody else, having plundered the city.
however, one has no doubts about the sides. siege of sarajevo was an act against entire civilisation.
Complain about this comment
Ardi74
So should we hand Bush and Blair over to the Iraqis? Should we hand Thatcher over to the Argentinians, Tudjman over to the Serbs?
You mention thousands of Raped women? If you actually go and read a UNICEF or UN report you will find out that once on the ground there wasnt even enough evidance of rape on all three sides to even setup a councelling centre! Unfortunately for you and your mates you cant convict someone because of a news report! In the world of news you dont need evidance to report something but in a court of law you do.
Nuremberg was over very quickly because the charges where easy to prove. The ICTY couldn't prove Milosevics guilt in 4 years!
Complain about this comment
It's amazing how some people try to relativize, dilute the fact that we are talking about the worst war criminal in Europe since WWII. He is responsible for the death of more tha 100000 people, for 100ths of mass graves for torturing Sarajevo for 4 years, for the worst single massacre - Srebrenica, for the barbaric ethnic cleansing, for torturing, raping etc.
I am sure all of that will be proved in the next couple of years. Also, I am sure that some people will remain deaf and blind to it, and will continue blame CIA, NATO, Sun protuberances and God knows what else.
Before Bosnia, crimes have happened in Croatia , and later in Kosovo. Both included ethnic cleansing, cities destructions and civilian murdering by the serbian army. The most numerous officers in the former YU army were Serbs who took control of almost all weapon and infrastructure only to use it for creation of Greater Serbia under the command of mr. Milosevic and further down the hierarchy his leutenants in Bosnia and Croatia, Karadzic and Martic respectively. They were well supplied and supported by the regular army from Serbia.
Complain about this comment
@mcdv-1975 (13)
“What happened in Yugoslavia is patently obvious. Western Europe and the USA didn't like the idea of a Yugoslavia which would look to Moscow. “Awww it seems you have missed the part where Tito rejected Stalin back in 1948. You also must have missed the part about Yugoslavia not being in the Eastern Block. Tisk tisk.
@Gheryando (14)
“Well, it’s pretty much a formality to prove him guilty, as far as I know.”
As far as you know, you and @mcdv-1975 could be twins, both of you know nothing. Karadzic gets way too much credit. It is people like you that Karadzic and Seselj need… you bring them up so much that you are reluctant to see them for what they are, war profiteers who profited of their own people’s fears.
@VasiliiChapaev (16)
“Any leader who fought a civil war can be found guilty of certain crimes.” Ohhh too bad Milosevic, Tudjman and Izetbegovic are all dead. Karadzic is guilty move on.
Look at the demographics of Sarajevo, the before, the after. People on this msg board have never even goggled “Yugoslavia”
Bosnians, Croats, Serbs ALL living together. Look at it now. The civil war accomplished its self. There are Croats and Bosnian Muslims in the ICTY because they killed Serbs who lived across Yugoslavia for the same reason why Croats and Bosnian Muslims where killed by Serbs. Civilians…90% civilians. Think that over Titiano.
Complain about this comment
Titiano
Deaths of more the 100000 people? Pleas quote a reliable source for these number's! Unfortunately the Ex YU wars where made worse by people like yourself just blabbing out numbers like that! If you quote me one reliable source with that number, I will take it on the chin and accept!
Complain about this comment
regarding evidence.
i myself have made the comment, earlier in this list, that karadic's trial will be straight forward and that his guilt will be proven. some people have suggested that such comments are biased and deny the accused his right to innocence until proven guilty.
the reason we can say with some certainty that karadic is guilty is the large number of trials involving his direct subordinates that have resulted in them being found guilty. karadic was part of a 'joint criminal enterprise' and as such if we find every other member of his executive guilty of war crimes and he was the senior official within that executive and had total control over the actions taken and orders given, then his guilt is implicit but not proven until the evidence is heard in his own case. had he been arrested 10 years ago, he would have been tried in a joint case with his associates who are already serving their sentences. as he was on the run, he could not be included in the main trial.
there is a lot of evidence against karadic. not just the witness statements of his victims but hard documented evidence. orders signed by him, speeches made by him, confessions of his direct subordinates implicating his guilt. every single (no exaggeration) phone call and radio message sent by karadic during the bosnian war, was intercepted by n.a.t.o. these intercepts, which show the unguarded karadic, have been used in several trials to convict his subordinates and associates. they are openly available as part of court transcripts on the i.c.t.y. website.
this evidence has not only been used in the i.c.t.y. courts but also the national courts of bosnia, croatia and even serbia. there have been hundreds of domestic convictions for war crimes, carried out in the courts of the countries of the former yugoslavia. the i.c.t.y is only there to try those people (presidents, war 'heroes' etc) who could not possibly get a trial free from impartiality in their own country. the rank and file ethnic cleansers have been tried again and again and sentenced, by their own courts in their own countries. i doubt anyone would call a serbian state court, a nato court.
and of course there is karadic himself, who has on a number of occasions made claims regard a negotiated impunity from prosecution. why would an innocent party require impunity from prosecution?
@ Boris_oz
i find your comments regarding the crime of rape during the yugoslav wars utterly irresponsible. there were tens of thousands of rapes carried out by armed forces, regular and irregular and from all sides. sometimes the rape was opportunistic but most often it was systematic and repeated. rape during arrest and interrogation, rape in detention centre and rape in specially created rape prisons.
you claim there is no documented proof of this. that i am afraid, is an untruth. amnesty international, human rights watch and unicef have all made shocking and damning reports regarding the widespread use of rape as a war crime during the conflicts. there have been a number of confession from the guilty. why unicef? because some of the victims of the rape prisons, appartments where women were held for months and raped around the clock by soldiers returning from the front lines, were as young as twelve years old.
anyone who doubts this can google the word rape and the word foca (a bosnian town) together. the vast majority of these convictions for rape have been made by national courts and not the i.c.t.y. even by courts in the republika srpksa.
the figure of 100,000 deaths relates to all the dead in the bosnian war, from all sides. it does not include deaths from the croatian, slovenian or kosovar wars, although the numbers were much smaller in these conflicts. the figure originates, i believe from u.n.h.c.r.
Complain about this comment
I am not going to dignify with a proper answer the ones that decided to ignore the truth and become blind for the facts!
Boris_Oz,I do not read Serbian and Russian “official” reports! I have witnessed the criminal deeds of the war! And to be honest we are so bored in our luxurious lives that we decided to invent Srebrenica massacre, juts to put some excitement in our lives! I apologise to the surviving victims for mentioning Srebrenica only and not other crimes, but if I do so someone will find my comments offending, hurtful, xenophobic….
Complain about this comment
Karadzic was doing just as Georgia did to South Ossetia. The difference is the oil stake in the Geogia region; read last week's Business Week.
Complain about this comment
To Ardi74 and Billy_carryduff
Reporting "Serbian Genocide" became a highly profitable industry that produced pullitzer prize winners and million dollar best-sellers! Media careers and fortunes were made through a campaign of anti-Serb hate and hysteria. Due to the above I understand misinformed opinion's. There was no need to invent the Srebrenica massacre as there was real Genocide happening in Rwanda at the same time, up to 1 million people where murdered and mamed! There was no coverage no public outcry nothing! Why are the lives of a few thousand Europeans worth more then 1 million African's? I will tell you why, Political Interest! I will never ever believe that the American's or English will ever do anything without their own interests at heart!
Complain about this comment
I am not a big fan of genocide and believe Karadzic should pay for his crimes.
However, not through this court which has been an insult of justice so far.
Personally, I believe in Serbia and in its democratically elected government.
Why not to allow serbian judge to decide on his fate?
Complain about this comment
First off it was a Civil War and not a War of aquisition. Second Izetbegovics was eually responsible for the activities of the Bosnian militias which murdered many people especially the foreign Moslem fighters. He sure was not endited.
Third: what exactly did Karadzics do?
As for the Serbs of Bosnia. The vote for independence was really tight. The Muslim Bosniaks got the majority only with the support of the 17% Croats in that republic. They however had their own agenda. Also separation and seccession to Croatia proper. The Serb minority was in the 40% range and I say it was not suiscidal but criminal to declare independence with such opposition.
As for Srebrenica: first it was 5000 then 7000 and now 8000 murdered. We do not know the detail but I do know that if it did happen as they describe it rather then a seriess of skirmishes where the Serbs prevailed (and yes there were some summary executions) But they were also done by the Muslims and Croats. Did Karadzics give the orders to kill these people? I doubt it.
I support the concept of international court but only under the condition that it will not be politicised. This one unfortunatelly does not meet that standard.
Complain about this comment
billy_carryduff, the figure of 100,000 dead in the Bosnian war was arrived at as the result of painstaking research by Mirsad Tokaca of the Research and Documentation Centre in Sarajevo. He estimates that the figure might eventually rise to about 110,000.
Complain about this comment
85% of civilians killed in the Bosnian war were Bosniaks, indicative of the pattern of violence.
The figure of 100,000 deaths was the outcome of painstaking and rigorous investigation conducted by Mirsad Tokaca at the Research and Documentation Centre in Sarajevo.
The number of confirmed deaths at Srebrenica has risen gradually towards the figure of the reported dead and missing. The disinterment of mass graves with mixing of the remains and secondary burials followed even by tertiary reburials was clearly planned to confuse and destroy evidence of the crimes.
The continued existence of the enclave of Srebrenica within Bosnian Serb territory had to be ended in order to complete the ethnic cleansing of the Drina valley. Karadzic clearly indicated that the national border between Bosnia and Serbia that followed the course of the Drina had to be removed.
The effective unification of Serbia with the arc of land running up the Drina valley, through the Posavina and Eastern Slavonia on to the Bosnian and Croatian Krajina was the strategic goal of the campaign conducted through Serbia's Bosnian Serb proxies. This was not a civil war, it was essentially a war of aggression conducted under the guise of inter-communal conflict.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS