RSS
Print This PageHayes: Karadzic More Like Taylor than Milosevic
Niamh Hayes, a PhD candidate the Irish Centre for Human Rights and an intern on the Karadzic case, has a very useful guest post at the International Law Bureau about how the Trial Chamber might respond to Dr. Karadzic’s boycott. The entire post is well worth a read, but I was particularly struck by Niamh’s suggestion that Dr. Karadzic’s actions more closely resemble Charles Taylor’s than Milosevic’s or Seselj’s:
The Tribunal’s decisions in this regard and whether they amount to penalising Dr. Karadžić for having the unmitigated temerity to insist on exercising his acknowledged right to self-representation have been discussed elsewhere and could easily form the subject of an entire post. What is worth noting is that, despite the almost uniform characterisation by the media of Dr. Karadžić’s absence this week as intentionally disruptive, politically motivated or equivalent to the obstructive tactics employed by Slobodan Milošević or Vojislav Šešelj, up to this point he has shown exemplary and consistent co-operation with the Tribunal. Perhaps a better comparison would be with Charles Taylor, who famously refused to attend court and fired his defence team on the opening day of his trial in June 2007, after many months of failed motions to be granted adequate time or facilities for his defence. Taylor also submitted a letter to the Court which explained his decision not to attend the trial, and outlined fair trial concerns quite similar to those highlighted by Dr. Karadžić last week. The letter famously concluded “I choose not to be the figleaf of legitimacy for this process.”
While there was an inevitable delay to the commencement of the proceedings against him, which eventually began in January 2008, Mr. Taylor’s concerns regarding the time and facilities for his defence were addressed and he has since proven to be entirely co-operative with the Court and the trial process.
This comparison does not sit well with the media’s preferred narrative, which is to paint Dr. Karadzic — despite months of evidence to the contrary — as just another meglomaniacal Serbian political leader hell-bent on undermining the Tribunal’s authority. Little wonder, then, that no one in the media has bothered to examine the record to determine whether Dr. Karadzic’s complaints have any merit. After all, real reporting is much more difficult than serving as the prosecution’s stenographer.
7 Responses
Trackbacks and Pingbacks
-
[...] on Karadžić Trial November 3, 2009 F de Londras Leave a comment Go to comments Via Kevin Heller at the wonderful Opinio Juris comes a post alerting us to the guest contribution of Niamh Hayes, [...]
The day will come when the “judges” will be on trial. But let us at least celebrate now that they announce the reality of their institution by their brutalizing of basic procedural fairness.
at 1:45 am EST Pensans
The comparison does not stand because of one single fact: Taylor chose to be represented by counsel. Also, Karadzic’s advisors are already suggesting in the media that he will go on a hunger strikes if his boycott bares no fruit. That sounds more like the Seselj strategy.
Karadzic’s main focus during the pre-trial phase of the proceedings against him was on the Holbrooke motion and immunity. Besides that litigation, which any lawyer with the basic knowledge of ICTY jurisprudence knew had no chance of success, a number of other motions were filed on Karadzic’s behalf by tens of lawyers, professors, interns etc. The purpose of those motions was more to: flood the Tribunal, make a name for the footnoted author, be an experiment for those authors to test their academic ideas since they had no real access to the Tribunal. One cannot but wonder how many of the people affiliated to Karadzic’s defence have actually assisted him in the preparation of his defence. Media should focus on that as well perhaps.
at 5:53 am EST Strauss
Strauss,
It must be nice to be psychic, able to peer into the souls of the people working on the Karadzic case. Care to provide any actual evidence for your claims?
at 7:25 am EST Kevin Jon Heller
Some truths are self-evident…
at 11:00 am EST Advocatus
Grain of salt, guys…
at 2:34 pm EST ameL
Here is some evidence:
http://www.nrc.nl/international/article2405205.ece/Top_lawyers_give_Karadzic_unpaid_legal_advice
NRC Handelsblad (Amsterdam)
4 November 2009
Top lawyers give Karadzic unpaid legal advice
By Cees Banning
The former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic may be defending himself – when
he does appear – at the International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague, but he
has an international team of top lawyers at his disposal.
The Karadzic team of lawyers is led by the American Peter Robinson, the Dutchman
Mark Sladojevic and the Serb Goran Petronijevic. Robinson is coordinating
procedure, Petronijevic heads up the legal advisers and Sladojevic acts as a
sort of private secretary responsible for day-to-day business. He speaks to
Karadzic three times a day, either by telephone or in the prison in
Scheveningen. This Dutch lawyer of Serb origin was also part of the legal team
of the Serb president Slobodan Milosevic and Momcilo Krajisnik, a confidante of
Radovan Karadzic.
Karadzic also has three case managers and two researchers at his disposal, paid
for by the UN court. They receive 25 euros per hour. And he can call on around
forty professors, (former) politicians, researchers and lawyers who work for
him unpaid. These volunteers come from the Netherlands, Germany, Italy, Greece,
Switzerland, Canada, the US, New Zealand and Australia. Some of the lawyers have
already worked for the Yugoslavia Tribunal, like Alexander Zahar (Griffith
University, Australia) and Gideon Boas (Monash University, Australia).
Professor Andreas O’Shea also worked at the International Criminal Court in The
Hague and the Rwanda Tribunal.
Lawyer Kevin Jon Heller (University of Auckland, New Zealand) lost friends
because he advises Karadzic, he writes on his legal blog (opiniojuris.org). In
defence Heller writes that the trials of the Serb president Slobodan Milosevic
and the ultra-nationalistic Serb Vojislav Seselj were a fiasco. The legacy of
the Yugoslavia Tribunal will be decided by the Karadzic trial, according to
Heller. Whatever the sentence, the trial must be conducted transparently and
honestly. This is why he joined the team of legal advisers.
In the Netherlands, professor Elies van Sliedregt (Free University, Amsterdam)
advised Karadzic’s defence on the scope and content of individual liability in
international law – the subject in which she graduated. It was, she says, a
‘one-off consultation’. Not least because her friend, the British Howard
Morisson, is one of the judges in the Karadzic trial.
Professor Göran Sluiter (Amsterdam University) also advises Karadzic. “You must
be open when someone calls on your specialised knowledge. Scholars must share
their knowledge with society and Karadzic is part of society,” says Sluiter who
has also advised prosecutors at the UN court in the past. He thinks a strong
defence is crucial for the development and quality of international
trials.Sluiter: “In fact my contribution to Karadzic’s defence is aimed at an
improvement in international law.”
Ramsey Clark, former US attorney general, and top French lawyer Jacques Vergès,
are also advising Karadzic. Clark and Vergès were also part of the team of
advisers for Slobodan Milosevic, who also conducted his own defence in court.
at 9:48 am EST Strauss