آدرس جدید http://www.internationallaw.ir

(The Hague, 9 October 2006

MO/1121e annex

Your Excellencies,

I am greatly honoured to address this distinguished Assembly today as President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and to present to you the Thirteenth Annual Report of the International Tribunal. This is my first report to the Assembly, having taken office as President on 17 November 2005. Before I highlight key aspects of the Report and update your Excellencies on some of the work of the Tribunal subsequent to the Report, I would like to thank the Members of the Assembly for the crucial support you have given to the historic work of the Tribunal since its inception. It is only with your assistance and ongoing commitment that the Tribunal has been able to have such a fundamental impact upon the development and enforcement of international criminal justice, to advance the rule of law in national jurisdictions in the former Yugoslavia, and to contribute to lasting peace and stability in the region.

By way of overview, since the report of my predecessor last October, the Tribunal has gone through a period of significant change and unprecedented challenges. Nevertheless, the Tribunal has pushed forward a number of innovative reforms and adopted concrete measures to increase the efficient disposal of trials and appeals, without sacrificing due process. As a result, at one point this year, the Tribunal was able to try, for the first time in its history, an unprecedented number of 25 accused in six trials simultaneously. This is due to the fact that three large multi-accused trials involving 21 accused, namely Prlić et al., Milutinović et al., and Popović et al., were commenced in April and July 2006, at least six months earlier than originally planned, allowing for them to be able to finish in 2008.

Furthermore, the Tribunal’s efforts to speed up proceedings have resulted in an increasingly diminishing caseload. To date, cases against 97 accused, out of the total of 161 indicted, have been closed. While proceedings against 64 accused remain to be completed, out of this number, 15 have already been tried and are at the appeals stage, 24 are currently on trial, only 15 are in the pre-trial stage, four are pending Rule 11bis motions for referral, and the remaining six accused are still at large. By the end of this year, the Tribunal is scheduled to close proceedings against two more accused with the issuance of two appeals judgements, resulting in a total of eight proceedings being closed on appeal in the calendar year. This marks the most productive year in the history of the Appeals Chamber. In the first quarter of 2007, the Tribunal will finish trials against four accused and close proceedings against four accused on appeal. At the current rate, all trials of accused now in the custody of the Tribunal are scheduled to be completed no later than 2009.

I add, however, that while this projected date for completion of trials is a noteworthy achievement, the Tribunal is not content to rest with that date. The Tribunal is constantly looking for new, creative ways to complete trials even earlier than planned while upholding due process norms. We intend to work harder than ever to ensure that proceedings against the accused will be completed as soon as possible. This is due to the fact that efficient completion of the work of the Tribunal is not only a matter of meeting Completion Strategy target dates. It is a matter of respecting fundamental human rights norms. Because of the increased pace of proceedings over the past year, the rights of the accused to be tried expeditiously and to not be held in pre-trial detention for unduly lengthy periods of time, are more effectively respected.

I now turn to summarize specific aspects of the work of the Tribunal during the reporting period, beginning first with Chambers. The Trial Chambers issued 447 decisions on pre-trial motions, heard two cases of contempt, and rendered judgments in four cases. The Appeals Chamber rendered 112 pre-appeal decisions and orders, 32 decisions on interlocutory appeal, four judgements and one decision on reconsideration of a judgement. Furthermore, Chambers issued five Rule 11bis referral decisions involving the transfer of nine low to mid-level accused to national jurisdictions in the region as part of its ongoing policy to focus on the prosecution of the most senior accused. All but one of these decisions were considered on appeal.

In addition to their caseload, Judges of the Tribunal were occupied with a number of extraordinary plenaries, which I convened for the sole purpose of implementing internal reforms for increasing the efficiency of Tribunal proceedings, without sacrificing due process. These plenaries were assisted by the reports of two working groups of Judges who were tasked with examining existing practices and Rules of Procedure and Evidence with a view to offering concrete proposals for improving them.

The Working Group on Speeding up Appeals completed its report and presented a package of recommended amendments to the Rules, which were unanimously adopted by the Judges in a plenary held in November 2005. These amendments have resulted in shortening the time limits for the filing of appeals, avoiding repetitious filings, and expediting the disposal of appeals by expanding the use of written as opposed to oral submissions. Details of the amendments adopted and their impact upon the efficiency of Appeals are found in the Tribunal’s Fourth Completion Strategy Report to the Security Council (S/2005/532).

The Working Group on Speeding Up Trials also completed its comprehensive report detailing measures for increasing the efficiency of the Tribunal’s trials. The Working Group’s proposals focused on ways Judges can make a fundamental shift in their conduct of trials, away from a party-driven process to a judicially-controlled process, with only minimal amendments to the existing Rules. Details of the concrete measures adopted by Judges following the Working Group’s Report and their subsequent impact upon the efficiency of trials are detailed in the Tribunal’s Fifth Completion Strategy Report to the Security Council (S/2006/353). However, I will highlight some of these significant measures for you as follows.

In April 2006, Judges of the Tribunal adopted the recommendations of the Working Group on pre-trial proceedings in plenary and, as a result, Pre-Trial Judges are playing a much more active role in preparing cases for trial and in ensuring that cases are trial ready upon the vacancy of courtrooms. In the conduct of pre-trial conferences, Pre-Trial Judges are insisting on the establishment of work plans which set strict deadlines on the parties’ disclosure of material and reaching agreement on facts. The Pre-Trial Judges are also requiring the Prosecution to provide greater details on its trial strategy and obliging both parties to file their Pre-Trial briefs and witness and exhibit lists well before the start of their cases.

Furthermore, in order to facilitate the pro-active role taken by Pre-Trial Judges, a new policy has been adopted whereby, wherever possible, cases are assigned at the pre-trial stage to a Judge who is anticipated to be one of the Judges that will hear the case at trial. As a result, not only are Pre-Trial Judges taking increased measures to efficiently prepare a case for trial, but Trial Chambers have also been encouraged to require the Prosecution to focus its case at trial by limiting the presentation of evidence and fixing the number of crimes sites or incidents contained in one or more of the charges in the indictment. Trial Chambers have been able to do so because one of their members has specific knowledge of a case from having previously served on it pre-trial. The policy of Pre-Trial Judges sitting on trial was applied to the two multi-accused cases of Prlić et al. and Milutinović et al., and has resulted in greater efficiency in both.

Following the Working Group’s recommendations for enhancing the efficiency of trials in addition to pre-trial proceedings, the Judges of the Tribunal were recently convened in another extraordinary plenary on 13 September 2006 to adopt amendments to the Rules incorporating those proposals. That plenary led to the adoption by the Judges of two new provisions, Rules 92 ter and 92 quater. In essence, the amendments have increased the ability of Trial Chambers to consider written statements and transcripts of witnesses in lieu of oral testimony where that evidence goes to the acts and conducts of an accused. Trial Chambers are now empowered to decide whether a witness should appear for cross-examination where written statements or transcripts are used, and to allow the admission of written evidence of witnesses who are not available to attend as witnesses at the Tribunal.

The Judges have also taken action to expedite trial proceedings by placing limits upon the Prosecution’s cases, such as by narrowing the breadth and scope of the Prosecutor’s indictments. If the Tribunal is to come close to meeting Completion Strategy targets, it will be necessary for the Prosecution’s cases to be limited. Accordingly in May 2006, the Judges adopted an amendment to Rule 73bis to authorise Trial Chambers to either invite or direct the Prosecution to select those counts in the indictment on which to proceed. The Judges of the Tribunal considered that this Rule amendment was necessary to ensure respect for an accused’s right to a fair and expeditious trial and to prevent unduly lengthy periods of pre-trial detention. Regrettably, the Prosecutor strongly opposed this amendment, even though focusing the scope of indictments is part of responsible trial management, is commonly used in national jurisdictions and does not impact upon prosecutorial prerogatives.

Recognizing that it is critical that Judges and the Prosecution work together in order to complete the work of the Tribunal, Trial Chambers have worked to build consensus with the Prosecutor by finding other ways to focus her cases apart from mandatorily directing her to narrow the scope of her indictments. For example, strict time limits have been set for the presentation of the Prosecution’s cases in Prlić et al. and Milutinović et al., resulting in the reduction of the anticipated length of trial by at least one-third and one-half respectively. In addition, in these cases as well as in Popović et al., the Trial Chambers have placed restrictions on the amount of evidence that may be adduced in relation to some of the counts in the indictments. Furthermore, restrictions have been placed on the time permitted for each accused to conduct their cross-examination. In the Šešelj case, while the Trial Chamber is examining the indictment for purposes of reducing its scope by one-third, it has invited the Prosecutor to make proposals for that purpose.

As a final note with regard to the judicial work of the Tribunal during this reporting period, I draw the attention of the Assembly to Security Council resolution 1660 (2006), adopted on 28 February 2006. This resolution allowed the Secretary-General to appoint ad litem reserve Judges to the three largest trials of multi-accused. These Judges are available to replace a Judge who is unable to continue sitting on a case and, thus, prevent delay that would be caused by having to restart the trial. Moreover, the Tribunal’s reserve ad litem Judges are being assigned to other cases to hear them as ad litem Judges proper, or to do pre-trial work. Their contribution to the efficient work of the Tribunal cannot be overstated.

I now turn to the activity of the Office of the Prosecutor in the past year. In accordance with the Tribunal’s Completion Strategy, there were no new indictments, except for contempt of court, issued by the Office of the Prosecutor during the reporting period. The Prosecutor focused her efforts on obtaining cooperation from relevant governments and international institutions to secure arrests or surrender of the remaining fugitives. Notably, in the second half of 2005, Milan Lukić, Dragan Zelenović and Ante Gotovina were arrested and subsequently transferred to the Tribunal.

However, I must emphasize that it is of grave concern to the Tribunal that six high-level fugitives, in particular Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić, remain at large. The Tribunal must not close its doors before these accused are brought to justice. Otherwise, the message and legacy of the Tribunal that the international community will not tolerate serious violations of international humanitarian law will be thwarted. I stress that the capacity of the Tribunal to complete its mandate in accordance with Completion Strategy target dates hinges significantly upon the co-operation of all States now, specifically those in the region, in apprehending these fugitives to stand trial. Regrettably, the authorities of Serbia have failed to achieve any progress in locating, arresting and surrendering Ratko Mladić to the International Tribunal, despite a number of promises made and the passing of several deadlines. Likewise, no progress has been made by the Republika Srpska towards locating Radovan Karadžić.

While on the topic of cooperation with States in the former Yugoslavia, another issue of great importance to the Tribunal concerns the furtherance of the rule of law in national courts in the region. In the reporting period, the Tribunal increased its involvement in the region through working visits and training programs to enhance the judicial and prosecutorial capacity of national jurisdictions and the profile of the Tribunal’s work. Your Excellencies, I firmly believe that this activity is a key component of the mission and legacy of the Tribunal. It is these courts that will continue the work of the Tribunal in trying perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide. Furthermore, it is crucial for reasons of stability and reconciliation in the region that these national trials uphold the highest standards of due process such that justice is done and is seen to be done. I would also note that, at present, development of the rule of law in the former Yugoslavia is also necessary for reasons of the Tribunal’s Completion Strategy. If fair trials for low to mid-level accused transferred to the region under Rule 11bis are not guaranteed, they may be referred back to stand trial before the Tribunal under our Rules.

Last, but certainly not least, the Registry of the International Tribunal continued to play a crucial role at the Tribunal by providing administrative and judicial support. Moreover, the Registry worked successfully to enhance public interest in the Tribunal by carrying out a diverse range of public relations activities in the former Yugoslavia via the Outreach Program, producing a number of publications in the languages of the region, and implementing and participating in conferences, round tables and workshops. The Outreach Program also brought numerous persons and groups from the region to the seat of the Tribunal, frequently through the support and cooperation of Members of this Assembly.

The Registry Advisory Section pursued the action plan of the Registrar to obtain ten more relocation of witnesses and enforcement of sentences agreements and assisted co-operation with domestic courts in the former Yugoslavia regarding the transfer of cases. During 2005, the Advisory Section, in cooperation with the General Services Section, continued its active work on Tribunal legacy issues, which includes ongoing legal responsibilities and the disposition and management of the Tribunal's archives. It is anticipated that the entirety of the Tribunal’s public jurisprudence should be available online on the Judicial Database by the end of 2006.

In March 2006, the remodelling project for the Tribunal’s three courtrooms and support facilities to allow trials of up to 21 accused at the same time was completed. Technical alterations were made to allow simultaneous interpretations in four languages and to implement the e-Court system, which integrates all documents into a central electronic database. Following a successful pilot run at the end of 2005, e-Court was applied to all trials at the Tribunal during the reporting period.

The Registry continued to facilitate the rights of defendants through a diverse and competent force of defence counsel, defence assistants and experts. Cooperation and coordination with defence counsel has improved and the Registry is seeing the benefits of a tightened regime of qualification requirements. Moreover, the Office for Legal Aid and Detention Matters has developed a separate IT network for defence counsel to allow them to access the Tribunal’s Judicial Data Base from any location.

During the reporting period, the UN Detention Unit was operating at a high activity level, especially following the deaths of Mr. Milan Babić, a detained witness previously convicted by the ICTY who committed suicide on 5 March 2006, and of Mr. Slobodan Milošević, who died of natural causes on 11 March 2006. An audit conducted by representatives of the Swedish Government thereafter found the quality of care and security to generally be positive but also made a number of recommendations, which are currently being implemented by a Working Group.

In conclusion, this Thirteenth Annual Report to the Assembly demonstrates that, notwithstanding the significant challenges encountered in the last year, the International Tribunal pressed on full-speed ahead with its judicial and prosecutorial work, resulting in a very productive period in the Tribunal’s history. I stress that, as demonstrated by the concrete measures taken during this reporting period, the Tribunal is absolutely committed to doing all within its power to meet its obligations under the Completion Strategy while upholding norms of due process. In looking to the future, the International Tribunal will make every effort to develop additional tools to improve the efficiency of its trial and appeals proceedings. In addition, the Tribunal will intensify ongoing efforts to contribute towards building judicial and prosecutorial capacity in the former Yugoslavia.

Your Excellencies, again, I emphasize that the noteworthy achievements of the International Tribunal thus far have been possible because of your steadfast support. Through your assistance, the Tribunal has demonstrated to the world that international criminal justice, which upholds due process norms, is possible. The existence and success of the Tribunal in prosecuting war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in the past 13 years, have sent a clear message that the international community is committed to preventing such crimes from going unpunished. Furthermore, the experience and jurisprudence of the Tribunal has paved the way for prosecution of serious violations of international humanitarian law in jurisdictions around the globe.

I cannot stress enough how important your continued support will be in the last few years of the Tribunal’s mandate. We still have much work to do. I call upon all Member States to assist us in our commitment to seeing that work through to the end, which includes the trials of our six remaining high-level accused and in particular, Mladić and Karadzić. This is not only necessary for ensuring that the historic work of the Tribunal is not undermined by a premature closing of its doors. More importantly, it is essential for the cause of international justice and the continued fight against impunity in the interests of promoting international peace and security.

Your Excellencies, I thank you for the attention and time you have given me today.