Hjemmeside for flygtninge og
positiv fred
Arne Hansen -
Sønderjyllands Alle 35 - DK-9900 Frederikshavn - tlf. 98
42 55 42 - email arnehans@post3.tele.dk
NATO-leaders are accused of war crimes in Kosovo by The International
Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
York University
Osgoode Hall Law School
4700 Keele Street
Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M3J 1P3
Professor Michael Mandel
Telephone: 416-736-5039
Fax: 416-736-5736
E-mail: mmandel@yorku.ca
The Honourable Madam Justice Louise Arbour,
Prosecutor,
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia,
Churchillplein 1, 2501 EW,
The Hague,
Netherlands
SENT BY COURIER AND ELECTRONIC MAIL
July 26, 1999
Dear Madam Justice Arbour:
Re William J. Clinton et al.
According to press reports, investigators for your Tribunal have been
uncovering shocking evidence of war crimes in Kosovo. The list of
reported massacres of civilians, including children, appears to grow
longer and more hideous with each day of NATO's occupation.
As you are no doubt aware, NATO leaders have been using this evidence
to justify their bombing campaign of Yugoslavia. We find the
chronological logic of this claim impossible to accept, since the
atrocities now being reported and cited in justification of the
attack all happened after the bombing started on March 24.
Furthermore, nobody seems to doubt that they were provoked by the
bombing itself, even if, putting NATO's case at its strongest, the
attack only provided an excuse for the massacre of ethnic Albanians
left defenceless by the withdrawal of the international monitors. But
there were doubtless a combination of factors involved in crimes
against civilians in Kosovo -- the extent and nature of which, of
course, remain to be established -- including predictably brutal anti-
guerilla war tactics aimed at rooting out KLA fighters, as well as
revenge for the massive bombing of Serbian civilians by the KLA's
NATO allies. And we know that civilians died from NATO's own bombs
(along the Prizren-Djavkovica road on April 15 and in Korisa on May
15 for two admitted examples).
The point we want to make is that, whatever the explanation, most of
these crimes would not have been committed and most of the victims
would be alive today if not for NATO's bombing. Nothing remotely like
this had occurred in the three years of civil conflict that preceded
the war, and nobody is saying anything like it would have occurred
but for NATO's belligerence.
This means that, far from these crimes making NATO leaders feel
justified, they should be weighing heavily on their consciences.
These crimes should, in fact, be added to the terrible costs of
NATO's bombing, along with the loss of life and limb by thousands of
Serb civilians (including children), the billions of dollars of
property and infrastructure damage, and the environmental disaster
now spreading through the region from the bombing of chemical plants
and the damage to the ozone layer, as well as the leftover effects of
depleted uranium and cluster bombs. To this must also be added the
revenge killing, looting and "ethnic cleansing" being perpetrated
against Serbs in Kosovo since the entry of NATO forces.
Naturally this doesn't excuse the Serb leadership from their
responsibility for the crimes in Kosovo. But neither can it permit
NATO leaders to wash their own hands of responsibility for NATO's
undeniable and unforgiveable contribution to the tragedy, especially
since NATO's adventure in Kosovo was not just wrongful and harmful;
it was, as we and many others have submitted to you, clearly illegal
and, indeed, criminal.
That is why, when we met in the Hague last month, we were at pains to
point out how critical a moment this is for the "anti-impunity"
movement that you have been championing throughout your tenure.
Charging the war's victors, and not only its losers, would be a
watershed in international criminal law. It would inspire the world
with a concrete demonstration that no one is above the law, not even
the leaders of the world's most powerful countries. On the other
hand, a failure to act notwithstanding the clear requirements of the
law and the evidence would deal a mortal blow to the credibility of
international law. It would show it to be nothing more than an
instrument of the powerful countries -- a modern version of "might is
right."
Unfortunately, as you know, many doubts have already been raised
about the impartiality of your Tribunal. In the early days of the
conflict, after a formal and, in our view, justified complaint
against NATO leaders had been laid before it by members of the
Faculty of Law of Belgrade University, you appeared at a press
conference with one of the accused, British Foreign Secretary Robin
Cook, who made a great show of handing you a dossier of Serbian war
crimes. In early May, you appeared at another press conference with
US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, by that time herself the
subject of two formal complaints of war crimes over the targeting of
civilians in Yugoslavia. Albright publicly announced at that time
that the US was the major provider of funds for the Tribunal and that
it had pledged even more money to it. Within two weeks, indictments
had been issued against Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic and
four other Serb leaders, in what, with the greatest respect, might
reasonably have seemed to an impartial observer to be a very indecent
haste -- one dictated not by the needs of justice (which surely could
have waited), but by NATO pressure in the face of flagging popular
support for its war effort. And, of course, this flagging popular
support was due precisely to the mounting civilian casualties that
NATO leaders defined as "collateral damage" and the law defines as
war crimes.
And now, after the bombing has stopped, with 185 member states in the
United Nations, your Tribunal appears to have trusted only
investigators from a few of the 19 NATO countries, led by the FBI and
Scotland Yard, for the sensitive job of investigating war crimes in
Kosovo. We cannot help thinking that this is a terrible mistake. NATO
investigators, whose governments are themselves the subject of well-
grounded complaints of war crimes committed in Kosovo and Serbia,
have every incentive to falsify and cover up the evidence in order to
protect their governments and to justify the war. The caché of
illegal cluster bombs that resulted in the deaths of British and KLA
soldiers is just one suspicious example. Not only is there a real
danger of permanently tainting the evidence (we ask you to imagine
the effect on an ordinary criminal investigation of sending a suspect
to gather the evidence), there is also a grave risk to the Tribunal's
reputation for impartiality and, by extension, to the cause of
international criminal law.
As you know, last summer in Rome the US government opposed the
establishment of an International Criminal Court with universal
jurisdiction to punish crimes against humanity. Perhaps the US feels
it has nothing to lose if the whole idea is discredited by the
experience in Yugoslavia. But there is a lot at stake for those of us
who insist that any "New World Order" be a democratic and law-
governed one.
We trust that you share our concerns for impartial justice and the
future of international criminal law. We therefore urge you to make
every effort to bring the NATO leaders to justice. In our respectful
submission, the Tribunal is already possessed of more than enough
evidence to meet the established standards for prosecution. However,
as we promised you in June, we will continue to accumulate and submit
evidence in order to satisfy you that there is really no alternative
for law or justice but to prefer indictments against these NATO
leaders.
Yours very sincerely,
Michael Mandel,
Professor,
- for myself and for
Alejandro Teitelbaum, American Association of Jurists, 80 Quai Gillet, 69004 Lyon, France;
- and
Glen Rangwala, Movement for the Advancement of International Criminal
Law, Trinity College, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB2 1TQ,
United Kingdom.
cc. Alexander Lykourezos, Attorney at Law, 19 Dimokritou St., 10673,
Athens, Greece.