PRESS BRIEFING BY YUGOSLAVIA TRIBUNAL PROSECUTOR

PRESS BRIEFING BY YUGOSLAVIA TRIBUNAL PROSECUTOR

The Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia told correspondents at a Headquarters press briefing today that she was in a very difficult position, because she was receiving no cooperation from Belgrade.

Carla Del Ponte, who is also Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), explained that she visited both Washington, D.C., and the United Nations to inform United States officials and permanent members of the Security Council about the difficulties she was facing in receiving cooperation from the Yugoslav Government.

"Were it not for Milosevic, we would be in the same situation as last year", Ms. Del Ponte said.  The Tribunal faced obstruction by federal authorities and received only selective and limited cooperation from Serbian authorities.  The excuse for not cooperating had been the same for the past seven years, namely that there would be no cooperation without internal law.

The arrest of indictees was part of the problem facing the prosecution,

Ms. Del Ponte explained.  About half of the Tribunal's fugitive indictees -- 32 in total -- were presently in the former Yugoslavia, in particular the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.  Both federal and Serbian authorities were fully aware of the whereabouts of the fugitive indites, including Ratko Mladic, who up until a couple of weeks ago enjoyed official protection by the Yugoslav army, with the blessing of the Federal Presidency.  The arrest and transfer of the indictees would greatly enhance the Tribunal's efficiency, since 10 of the fugitives could be joined with other accused in the Court's six existing trials.

Cooperation was also a matter of access to archives, Ms. Del Ponte said.  By access to archives, she did not mean sweeping access to all archives, but rather selective access to relevant files.  She had received no response to requests for access to what were the most important archives for the prosecution, including both Federal and Serbian archives.  Instead, she had been offered unsolicited access to much less important archives.  In most cases, Serbian and Yugoslav authorities only provided access to material of little sensitivity.

A correspondent asked Ms. Del Ponte to comment on regulations for the United States military tribunals to try Al Qaeda prisoners, including provisions that would give defendants no right of appeal in civilian courts.  Ms. Del Ponte said that in the International Tribunal, defendants had the full right to appeal sentences.  She had no comment on whether that provision should be applicable to the United States military tribunals.

Regarding the case of Ratko Mladic, did Ms. Del Ponte have any reason to believe that he was no longer under federal protection? a correspondent asked.  Ms. Del Ponte said that she had indeed been informed that Mr. Mladic was no longer under the army's protection.  She assumed that he was still in Serbia. 

Asked whether she had been formally informed that United States officials would be allowed to testify before the Court, Ms. Del Ponte confirmed that American officials would appear as witnesses in Court.  It had not yet been decided whether they would testify in open or closed sessions.  It was up to the Trial Chamber to decide, if requested by the parties.  The Office of the Prosecutor would not request a closed session.

Would a United Nations tribunal, rather than a United States military tribunal, be a better forum to address the Al Qaeda prisoners? a correspondent asked.  Ms. Del Ponte said that, while she did have personal opinions, she could only answer as Prosecutor for the International Tribunals.  The international justice provided by the Tribunals legitimized the prosecution of special crimes, such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Regarding a 31 March deadline for the United States to decide if it would give aid to Serbia and Yugoslavia, she said she had not discussed policy with United States authorities, but rather the problems she faced as Prosecutor.  She had, however, come before the end of March to inform the United States officials about the cooperation issue.  Secretary of State Colin Powell had informed her that before a decision was made, the situation would be analyzed in detail.

Was there any credibility to a story out of London that Ms. Del Ponte had met a Chechnyan political leader and assured him that she would explore the possibility of war crimes charges against Russia? a correspondent asked.  

Ms. Del Ponte said she was aware of the reaction in Russia to a meeting she had had with a well-known human rights activist and actress, Vanessa Redgrave.  Ms. Redgrave, who had been accompanied by three other individuals, had requested the meeting, which was of an informal nature.  The visitors had wanted to familiarize themselves with the work of the Tribunals.  It was true that

Mr. Zakhrayev was among those attending the meeting.  The meeting, however, was held with the full understanding of the visitors that the Prosecutor had a very clear mandate limited to the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.  Hundreds of people visited the Tribunal every week to learn more about international humanitarian law. 

Ms. Del Ponte said she strongly denied alleged attempts at interference in the internal affairs of the Russian Federation or encouragement of any sort to Chechnyan militants.  Interpretations of the meeting she had with Ms. Redgrave were beyond her control or responsibility.

Was Ms. Del Ponte accusing President Kostunica and the Yugoslav Government of lying or of ignorance? a correspondent asked.  All she had said was that she had received no cooperation, Ms. Del Ponte replied.

Asked whether Ms. Del Ponte was pleased with the way the Milosevic trial was going, she said that she avoided making comments on the Milosevic trial.  When a trial started, the Prosecutor spoke only in court.  The discipline of the hearings was in the hand of the President of the Trial Chamber.  The trial was ongoing and the prosecution was presenting its case.

What was wrong with the way the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) was trying to find Mladic and Radovan Karadzic? a correspondent asked.  Mladic was not a point of discussion because he was in Serbia, Ms. Del Ponte said.  There had been two unsuccessful attempts to arrest Karadzic, who had been at large for more than six years.  In her opinion, when a military operation of some 200 soldiers arrived by truck or helicopter, the fugitive would no longer be there.  In the Republika Srpska, Karadzic was well protected and considered a hero.  Nobody had cooperated with the NATO Stabilization Force (SFOR) to locate Karadzic.  It would be good if he were arrested before October, when the trials of Plavsic and Krajisnik were due to start.  Karadzic was the third accused in that indictment.

Noting that Milosevic seemed to be well briefed, a correspondent asked

Ms. Del Ponte to describe the "paper chase" in the Milosevic trial.  Ms. Del Ponte said that, while Milosevic received all the information he needed for his case, the prosecution had no access to information it needed, not only for the Milosevic trial, but for others as well.

What were the chances of Milosevic's conviction if Ms. Del Ponte were unable to have access to information? a correspondent asked.  When a trial commenced, it was because there was enough evidence to obtain a conviction and sentence.  The evidence collected during an investigation must be transferred to the trial, however.  Sometimes witnesses were no longer willing to appear in court.  That could be a problem, although up to now it had not been.

Responding to a question on her meeting with United States officials,

Ms. Del Ponte said she had received full support for the needs of the investigation.  She had been assured that the United States would help the Tribunal achieve its tasks and she had no doubt that it would.

Was the Federal Government providing Milosevic with access to archives? a correspondent asked.  Ms. Del Ponte did not know how Milosevic got his information.  She had seen in court that he was well informed.  Milosevic was assisted by six or seven lawyers behind the door -- not in court -- and was provided with all necessary means for his defence.

Why was Mladic no longer protected? a correspondent asked.  Ms. Del Ponte said that the Serbian Government had informed her that Mladic was no longer protected.  She did not know anything beyond that.

Responding to allegations that French officials had allowed Karadzic to avoid capture, she said that was not true.  She was absolutely sure that France, in collaboration with the United States, was very committed to arresting Karadzic.

Responding to allegations of fee-splitting arrangements between defence lawyers and clients, she said that the allegations were true.  The inquiry into an incident of fee-splitting arrangements at the Former Yugoslavia Tribunal was ongoing.  At the Rwanda Tribunal, the Registrar's Office was taking very precise measures to address the problem. 

Did Ms. Del Ponte look forward to seeing Milosevic question former United States Ambassador Richard Holbrooke? a correspondent asked.  She said the prosecution requested a closed session only for the protection of witnesses.

The rule was that the hearings were open.  Whether Mr. Holbrooke appearing in court would be "good theatre" -- those were the words of the correspondent.

Asked when she expected the Milosevic trial to conclude, she said that while it was difficult to say, calculations indicted that the trial would last at least two years.

* *** *