DOCSLIB.ORG

Submission No. 507

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Submission No. 507 PUBLIC/JAVNO IT-03-67-T Translation 60828 D60828 - D60816 10 July 2013 AJ BCS original received 26 June 2013 Filed as PUBLIC per President's Office instruction. INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL Case no. IT-03-67 FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE ICTY Date: 24 June 2013 Submission No. 507 T H E P R O S E C U T O R v. VOJISLAV [E[ELJ COMPLAINT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE ICTY Office of the Prosecutor Mathias Marcussen Accused Professor Vojislav [e{elj Experts team assisting the Defence Zoran Krasić Dejan Mirović Milan Terzić Nemanja Šarović Vjerica Radeta Jadranko Vuković Miroljub Ignjatović Nataša Jovanović Petar Jojić Ljiljana Mihajlović Ognjen Mihajlović Filip Stojanović Submission no. 507 - REG37372.doc/ 1 PURL: http://www.legal-tools.org/doc/e0050e/ PUBLIC/JAVNO IT-03-67-T Translation 60827 INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE ICTY T h e P r o s e c u t o r v. Professor Vojislav [e{elj Case no. IT-03-67 COMPLAINT TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE ICTY TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE ICTY THEODOR MERON For ten and a half years my basic human and procedural rights have been continually violated at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). I have had to fight for every right guaranteed to me under all internationally recognised and established regulations. The status of my legal advisors has not been resolved yet, and my privileged communication was suspended unlawfully on a number occasions. In the most recent case, the Registry of the Tribunal, for the umpteenth time, abused the Rules Governing the Detention of Persons awaiting Trial or Appeal before the Tribunal or otherwise Detained on the Authority of the Tribunal, Rev. 9, 21 July 2005 (hereinafter: the Rules of Detention) and prohibited me from having privileged (unsupervised) communication with my legal advisers. This decision of the Registry is nebulous and without any legal basis. Deputy Registrar Kate Mackintosh wrote to me on 21 May 2013 to inform me that it had come to the attention of the Registry that a letter signed in my name might be published in a special edition of Velika Srbija, the official newspaper of the Serbian Radical Party (hereinafter: Velika Srbija) as a copy of that letter was sent by fax to the United Nation Detention Unit on 8 May 2013. The Registry inquired whether I had authored that letter or instructed someone to write it on my behalf. The Deputy Registrar requested that I provide the Registry with an explanation as to how the letter or its content were transmitted to the publishers of Velika Srbija. In a letter dated 7 June 2013, the Deputy Registrar informed me that the registry had learnt that a letter with my signature was published in Velika Srbija and on my website. Since I did not respond to the first letter, she inquired again whether I had authored that letter or instructed someone to write it on my behalf. She asked for an Submission no. 507 - REG37372.doc/ 2 PURL: http://www.legal-tools.org/doc/e0050e/ PUBLIC/JAVNO IT-03-67-T Translation 60826 explanation as to whether I or my legal advisers had taken any steps to prevent the publication of the letter or to retract the already published letter. Ms Mackintosh stated that, based on the information before her, it was her assumption that the letter was not transmitted through the means of communication monitored by the Registry but through the non-monitored communication facilities. I did not respond to these letters because I do not have the facilities to do so. The Detention Unit administration never wanted to photocopy a single page of text for me. The last time I personally wrote to the Registry (Submission No. 504) and requested in a postscript that I be sent a copy of the submission for my records, because the prison authorities would not photocopy anything for me, and to this day I have not received it. This too shows that the Registry does not do its job conscientiously. I simply could not respond to the Registry request because of their negligence. Why should I draft a submission if I cannot keep a copy in my personal files? After a submission is translated, it is not the usual practice of the Registry to send both the Serbian and English versions to the submitting party, although this is practiced by both the Trial Chamber and President of the ICTY. I received a third letter from the Registry on 18 June 2013, in which I was notified of the Registry’s decision to monitor my otherwise privileged communication with legal advisers because there were reasonable grounds to believe that I had breached Rule 64 bis (A) of the Rules of Detention, by using communication facilities available to me at the Detention Unit to contact the media, in order to publish an address in a special edition of Velika Srbija and on the website “vseselj.com”, featuring my signature, without seeking prior approval of the Registrar. The Registry said that it seemed that my address was transmitted through the monitored means of communication, which strongly indicated that I had used non- monitored communication facilities to do this and there were reasonable grounds to believe that I had abused the non-monitored communication facilities. I was also notified that my communications with legal advisers would be monitored for a period of 30 days, after which the Registrar would review this decision. The Registry based its decision on Rule 65 of the Rules of Detention. Rule 65 (A) provides that, “Each detainee shall be entitled to communicate fully and without restraint with his legal representative, with the assistance of an interpreter where necessary.” Rule 65 (B) provides that “All such communications shall be privileged, unless the Registrar has reasonable grounds to believe that the privilege is being abused in an attempt to: i. arrange an escape; ii. interfere with or intimidate witnesses; iii. interfere with the administration of justice; or iv. otherwise endanger the security and safety of the Detention Unit. Submission no. 507 - REG37372.doc/ 3 PURL: http://www.legal-tools.org/doc/e0050e/ PUBLIC/JAVNO IT-03-67-T Translation 60825 “Prior to such communications being monitored, the detainee and his counsel shall be notified by the Registrar of the reasons for monitoring. The detainee may at any time request the President to reverse any decision made by the Registrar under this Rule.” It is clear that the decision of the Registry is nebulous and ill-intentioned and that it has no legal basis. How could I organise an escape from Scheveningen? Why would I do that if I went to The Hague of my own accord? Why would I do that given that in the course of the proceedings I demonstrated my absolute superiority over the Tribunal? Who are the witnesses whom I could interfere with or intimidate? It is common knowledge that the last witness in the trial against Dr Vojislav [e{elj was examined on 7 July 2010, and that the trial was concluded with closing arguments delivered between 5 and 20 March 2012, and no new witnesses in this case are to be examined. The statement of the Registry asserts that there are reasonable grounds to believe that through my address I could interfere with the administration of justice or otherwise endanger the security and safety of the United Nations Detention Unit. This assertion is vague and contrary to common sense. How can I interfere with the administration of justice by addressing my constituents, which was totally public, and how could this jeopardise the safety and security of the Detention Unit!? The Registry alleged that I had used the means of communication to contact the media in order to address the citizens and that the letter, which was published in Velika Srbija and on my website, carried my personal signature. I have written many letters and proclamations to address the citizens of Serbia or citizens of individual municipalities in Serbia, and all these addresses were drafted in the headquarters of the Serbian Radical Party based on the general approval I had given to my associates before going to The Hague. The Party has a facsimile of my signature, and it is used with my general consent to sign these addresses. As for this last letter, my colleagues drafted it in three versions, and all three versions were sent to me by fax. I did not have any special comments, and I had no need to express any and, based on the three versions, they produced a single text. I only sent one letter illegally from the detention unit, and this was nine years ago. When I was under an absolute blackout in 2004, deprived of any telephone communication, visits or even contact with the family, I sent that letter, and the Registry has never established how I sent that letter. This is proof that I have numerous channels here through which to send letters. I have at least ten of those, and the Registry can neither detect nor plug them up. It is unacceptable that the Registry, because of its incompetence, should make an arbitrary conclusion as to which channel I am supposed to have used. A reminder here that my farewell letter was read out at the funeral of Slobodan Milo{evi} and subsequently published in Velika Srbija. I had provided only the basic Submission no. 507 - REG37372.doc/ 4 PURL: http://www.legal-tools.org/doc/e0050e/ PUBLIC/JAVNO IT-03-67-T Translation 60824 outline for that letter, and the text was drafted in full by the current Deputy Prime Minister of Serbia, Aleksandar Vu~i}, who also read the letter.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Human Rights Defenders in Serbia
    Humanitarian Law Center Research, Documentation and Memory 67 Makenzijeva, 11110 Belgrade, Serbia and Montenegro Tel/Fax: +381 11 3444 313 +381 11 3444 314 Email: [email protected] Home Page: http://www.hlc.org.yu 26 March 2006 Human Rights Defenders in Serbia Throughout the rule of Slobodan Milošević, Human Rights Organizations and Human Rights Defenders were treated as harmless marginal groups and individuals. Between 1991 and 1999 the regime of Slobodan Milošević did not ban a single anti-war demonstration by nongovernmental organizations because they served as proof to the international community of his ‘democratic’ attitude towards the ‘handful’ that did not support him. The regime and its media paid little attention to the reports of domestic human rights organizations on human rights and humanitarian law violations during the armed conflict because the regime felt secure and supported by the majority of citizens. The period of the NATO bombing campaign from 24 March until 9 June 1999 united the opposition, civil society and regime. Nongovernmental organizations led the way in criticizing the international community and urging the citizens to keep their differences with the government aside as long as bombs kept dropping on the country. It was in those circumstances that several Human Rights Defenders and human rights organizations became the target of government media and secret services above all for publicly pointing out that the regime was taking advantage of the NATO campaign to settle with the Albanians. Because of its attitude during the NATO campaign, the Humanitarian Law Centre (HLC) was twice visited by members of the military security service, who threatened to bring charges of espionage against the HLC Executive Director; also, financial police examined the organization’s accounts and financial records for three weeks.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights in Serbia 2019
    HUMAN RIGHTS IN SERBIA 2019 Belgrade Centre for Human Rights The Belgrade Centre for Human Rights was established by a group of human rights experts and activists in February 1995 as a non-profit, non- governmental organisation. The main purpose of the Centre is to study human rights, to disseminate knowledge about them and to educate individuals engaged in this area. It hopes, thereby, to promote the development of democracy and rule of law in Serbia. Since 1998 Belgrade Centre for Human Right has been publishing Annual Human Rights Report. This Report on Human Rights in Serbia analyses the Constitution and laws of the Republic of Serbia with respect to the civil and poli- tical rights guaranteed by international treaties binding on Serbia, in particular the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), the European Convention on Human Rights and Funda- mental Freedoms (ECHR) and its Proto- cols and standards established by the jurisprudence of the UN Human Rights Committee and the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Where relevant, the Report also re- views Serbia’s legislation with respect to standards established by specific inter- national treaties dealing with specific human rights, such as the UN Convention against Torture, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, the UN Convention on the Elimina- tion of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. For its achievements in the area of human rights, the Centre was awarded the Bruno Kreisky Prize for 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights and Democracy Violation Early Warning Weekly Newsletter No
    YUCOM Komitet pravnika za ljudska prava / Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights 17 Svetogorska Street, 11000 Belgrade, Republic of Serbia Tel/Fax: +381 11 33 44 235; 33 444 25; e-mail yucomoffice@ gmail.com www.yucom.org.rs Human Rights and Democracy Violation Early Warning Weekly Newsletter No. 42 ICTY Sentence in the Milan and Sredoje Lukić Case On the 20th of July 2009 Court Chambers of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) with Patrick Robinson as a Presiding Judge, has sentenced Milan Lukić for a life term of imprisonment and his cousin Sredoje Lukić to a prison sentence of 30 years. Milan and Sredoje Lukić were sentenced for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed against Bosnian Muslims in the Eastern-Bosnian town of Višegrad during the period from June 7th, 1992 until October 10th, 1994. Milan Lukić was found guilty for: persecution, murder, extermination, inhumane acts and cruel treatment as crimes against humanity and war crimes, while Sredoje Lukić was found guilty for committing and aiding and abetting crimes of: persecution, murder, cruel treatment and inhumane acts. Milan Lukić has committed the above named crimes in connection with six separate incidents : 1. Killing of 5 Bosnian Muslim men on the bank of River Drina on or about June 7 th , 1992; 2. Killing of 7 Bosnian Muslims in “Varda” furniture factory on or about June 10 th , 1992; 3. Burning alive 59 people (including women and children) in a barricaded house in Pionirska street in Višegrad on or about the June 14 th , 1992; 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Parliamentary Insider
    Table of content Open Parliament Newsletter PARLIAMENTARY INSIDER Introductory remarks 5 Issue 12 / March - April 2020 From discussing weapons to reviewing the fundamental role of the MPs in the state of emergency 5 Month in the parliament 7 Parliament in numbers 9 OUR HIGHLIGHTS: Analysis of the Open Parliament 11 Women in Parliament: XI Legislature 11 Introductory remarks: Selection of law abstracts 14 From discussing weapons to reviewing the fundamental role Law concerning the confirmation of the Protocol amending the Convention for the of the MPs in the State of Emergencynaslovna Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data 14 Proposal of the Law amending the Law on ID card 16 Open Parliament Analysis Proposal of the Law amending the Law on Road Safety 18 Women in Parliament: XI Legislature Law amending the Law on Local Elections 19 Summaries of the laws Law amending the Law on Election of the Members of Parliament 20 Law concerning the confirmation of the Protocol amending Law amending the Law on Population Protection from the Infectious Diseases 20 the Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Automatic Processing of Personal Data Law amending the Law on Local Elections Summaries of the audio reports Strofa, Refren, Replika Law amending the Law on Election of the Members of Parliament 24th episode Law amending the Law on Population Protection from the Infectious Diseases 25th episode 26th episode Audio reports #StrofaRefrenReplika 27th episode 28th episode 29th episode 30th episode 31st episode INTRODUCTORY REMARKS From discussing weapons to reviewing the fundamental role of the MPs in the state of emergency The key highlights of March and April in the Parliament are the reduced activities of the MPs during Spring Session, proclamation of the state of emergency and convening of the first sitting during the state of emergency.
    [Show full text]
  • PUBLIC/JAVNO 738 MICT-16-99-A A738-A547 07 February 2017 AJ
    MICT-16-99-A 738 PUBLIC/JAVNO A738-A547 07 February 2017 AJ BCS original received 19 December 2016 Filed as PUBLIC per Appeal Chamber's instruction. Mechanism for International Case No: MICT-16-99-A Criminal Tribunals IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER Before: Judge Theodor Meron, Presiding Judge Lee G. Muthoga Judge Florence Rita Arrey Judge Ben Emmerson Judge Ivo Nelson de Caires Batista Rosa Registrar: Mr John Hocking Date: 19 December 2016 Submission number 7sl. THE PROSECUTOR v. PROFESSOR VOJISLAV ŠEŠELJ PROFESOR VOJISLAV SEŠELJ’S RESPONDENT’S BRIEF The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr Mathias Marcussen Ms Barbara Goy The Accused: Prof essor Vojislav Šešelj Expert team assisting the defence: Zoran Krasi ć Nataša Jovanovi ć Milan Terzi ć Petar Joji ć Nemanja Šarovi ć Ljiljana Mihajlovi ć Vjerica Radeta Ognjen Mihajlovi ć Jadranko Vukovi ć Filip Stojanovi ć Miroljub Ignjatovi ć Jovo Ostoji ć MICT-16-99-A 737 PUBLIC/JAVNO Translation MECHANISM FOR INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS The Prosecutor v. Professor Vojislav Šešelj Case No: MICT-16-99-A Submission number 7sl. PROFESSOR VOJISLAV ŠEŠELJ’S RESPONDENT’S BRIEF MAIN RESPONSE TO THE PROSECUTION APPEAL Introduction 1. With the Practice Direction related to the requirements and procedures for appeals of 6 August 2013 (Hereinafter: Practice Direction MICT/10) the President of the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (hereinafter: MICT), judge Theodor Meron, regulated the formal and procedural requirements as well as the substance of appeals claims, from the Notice of Appeal to all possible submissions to follow in the appeals proceeding before the MICT. 2. On 2 May 2016 the Prosecution filed its Notice of Appeal pursuant to 2 MICT-16-99-A 736 PUBLIC/JAVNO Translation Article 23 of the MICT Statute and Rule 133 of the MICT Rules of Procedure and Evidence against the judgement of Trial Chamber III (of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia – hereinafter: ICTY), in the case of The Prosecutor v.
    [Show full text]
  • Adobe Photoshop
    HISTORY OVERSHADOWED BY TRIVIA Regional Media Coverage of Radovan Karadzic Arrest Sarajevo, 2009. PUBLISHER: BIRN BIH in cooperation with the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, Sarajevo, 2009. PUBLICATION EDITORS: Nidzara Ahmetasevic and Marcus Tanner EDITORIAL TEAM: Gordana Igric, Ana Petruseva MONITORS: Nidzara Ahmetasevic and Merima Husejnovic PROOFREADING: Nadira Koric (Bosnian/Croatian/Serbian) and Anna McTaggart (English) TRANSLATION: Sunita Hasic and Haris Nezirovic DTP: Lorko Kalas CIRCULATION: 2,000 ------------------------------------------------- CIP - Katalogizacija u publikaciji Nacionalna i univerzitetska biblioteka Bosne i Hercegovine, Sarajevo 316.774:[341.44:929 Karadžić R. HISTORY averschadowed by trivia : regional media coverage of Radovan Karadzic arrest / [publication editors Nidzara Ahmetasevic and Marcus Tanner ; translation Sunita Hasic and Haris Nezirovic]. - Sarajevo : BIRN BiH : Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 2009. - 90 str. ; 21 cm ISBN 978-9958-9005-1-8 1. Ahmetašević, Nidžara 2. Tanner, Marcus COBISS.BH-ID 17153542 ------------------------------------------------- CONTENTS 5 Introduction 7 ANALYSIS 9 Bosnia and Herzegovina: War Criminal or Poet? Nidzara Ahmetasevic 13 Serbia: Difference Between Tabloids and Serious Media Erased Aleksandar Roknic 19 Montenegro: Reading between the Lines Nedjeljko Rudovic 23 Croatia: Karadzic as Celebrity Goran Jungvirth 27 Kosovo: The Two Last Cards Krenar Gashi 31 MONITORING 33 Bosnia and Herzegovina 55 Serbia 69 Montenegro 79 Croatia 89 Life of Radovan Karadzic 5 INTRODUCTION: For the media, the arrest of Radovan Karadzic was certainly the most interesting event of 2008. However, a general look at media reports in Serbia, Montenegro, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Koso- vo reveals that, while the public was almost overloaded with news pertaining to the arrest, it was at the same time deprived of certain basic, but very important, pieces of information.
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Report on the Implementation of the National Strategy for the Prosecution of War Crimes
    Initial Report on the Implementation of the National Strategy for the Prosecution of War Crimes 1 ISBN 978-86-7932-089-6 ISBN Initial Report on the Implementation of 1 the National Strategy for the Prosecution of War Crimes Belgrade, December 2017 Embassy of Switzerland in the Republic of Serbia The project was supported by the European Union and the Embassy of Switzerland to the Republic of Serbia and to Montenegro. The views herein expressed are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official position of the European Union or the Embassy of Switzerland to the Republic of Serbia and to Montenegro. Initial Report on the Implementation of the National Strategy for the Prosecution of War Crimes 2 Initial Report on the Implementation of the National Strategy for the Prosecution of War Crimes Content Acronyms and Abbreviations............................................................................................................................4 Preface....................................................................................................................................................................5 Introduction..........................................................................................................................................................7 General Findings on the Implementation of the National Strategy Implementation............................9 I. Case Prosecution Based on the Priorities Established in Accordance with the Criteria Defined by the Prosecutorial Strategy............................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Transitional Justice Report 1999-2005
    Transitional Justice Report Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo, 1999-2005 Summary 1. Introduction reform, vetting and dismissals, or a combination thereof”.1 The report deals with state and civil initiatives to establish and tell the truth< with domestic and 2. The truth-finding initiatives international war crimes trials, and with repara- tions and other endeavours by society in Serbia The first official truth-telling initiative in Serbia was and Montenegro to come to terms with the mas- launched as a result of growing pressure by the sive crimes committed in the recent past. As to international community on the new government in Kosovo, the report discusses only trials for war Serbia and in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia crimes and ethnically motivated crimes, above all (FRY) to cooperate with International Criminal TRANSITIONAL JUSTICE REPORT SERBIA, MONTENEGRO AND KOSOVO 1999 - 2005 JUSTICE REPORT SERBIA, MONTENEGRO TRANSITIONAL because this mechanism of international justice is Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Faced most noticeable in that region. with such a situation, the then FRY president, Vojislav Kostunica, decided to set up a truth and With regard to the concept of transitional justice, reconciliation commission, a body presented to we are here using the definition given by the the public as a model of coming to terms with the United Nations (UN) Secretary-General in his past that had the potential to yield better results report of 23 August 2004> “The notion of transi- than trials by the ICTY. It soon emerged, however, tional justice...comprises the full range of process- that the commission represented an attempt on es and mechanisms associated with a society’s the part of a segment of the political elite to con- attempts to come to terms with a legacy of large- vince the international community that the ICTY scale past abuses, in order to ensure accounta- was unnecessary and that instead one should HUMANITARIAN LAW CENTER LAW HUMANITARIAN bility, serve justice and achieve reconciliation.
    [Show full text]
  • War in Serbia (1991-2001): It Did Happen
    War in Serbia (1991-2001): It Did Happen War in Serbia (1991-2001): It Did Happen IMPRESSUM Authors Maja Žilić Anđela Savić Marko Milosavljević For the publisher Youth Initiative for Human Rights Dobračina Street 4, Belgrade Design & layout Ivo Matejin Translation Ivana Radović Printing Draslar List, Belgrade Circulation 1000 The contents of this publication represent the views of the Youth Initiative for Human Rights and do not in any way reflect the views of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Federal Repub- lic of Germany © Youth Initiative for Human Rights, Belgrade, Serbia May 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms 2 Introduction 5 Secret Mass Graves in Serbia 6 Prison camps in Serbia in the 1990s 18 Prison camps for Croats 1991-1992 18 Prison camps for Bosniaks 1995-1996 29 Forcible mobilisation in Serbia 39 Paramilitary Units in Serbia 53 Terrorising Minorities in Serbia in the 1990s 70 Terrorising Croat Minority in Vojvodina in the 1990s 70 Terrorising Bosniaks in Sandžak in the 1990s 80 Insurgency in the South of Serbia (2000-2001) 89 The Anti-War Movement in Serbia (1991-1999) 110 Instead of a Conclusion 126 Bibliography 127 ACRONYMS APV Autonomuos Province of Vojvodina MBT Motorized Brigade of the Yugoslav BH Bosnia and Herzegovina Army BIRN Balkan Investigative Reporting MNCS Muslim National Council of Sandžak Network MNE Montenegro BNC Bosnian National Council MUP Ministry of Internal Affairs of the CZKD Center for Cultural Decontamination Republic of Serbia ECHR European Court for Human Rights NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
    [Show full text]
  • Serbia 2018 International Religious Freedom Report
    SERBIA 2018 INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM REPORT Executive Summary The constitution guarantees the freedom of religion, as well as the right to change one’s religion, forbids the establishment of a state religion, guarantees equality for all religious groups, and prohibits incitement of religious hatred. Some religious groups and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) criticized the government for granting special privileges to seven religious groups it defined as “traditional” and protested difficulties in the registration process, without which religious groups lacked property rights, tax exemptions, and legal status. Four religious groups applied for registration or had applications pending during the year, and the government approved two of them, the Buddhist Religious Community Nichiren Daishonin and the LOGOS Christian Community in Serbia. In March the government appointed a chairperson to the supervisory board charged with overseeing the proper implementation of the law on Holocaust-era heirless and unclaimed property, enabling the board to commence work. During the year, the government restituted to religious groups 1,151.4 hectares (2,845 acres) of land and 1,618 square meters (17,416 square feet) of office and residential space confiscated since 1945. Jehovah’s Witnesses reported two incidents of physical assault and two instances of verbal death threats against their members and said prosecutors failed to respond adequately to the incidents. Protestants said persons frequently branded their religious groups as “sects,” which has a very strong negative connotation in the Serbian language. One Protestant group said its members sometimes hid their religious affiliation for fear of discrimination. Many smaller or nontraditional religious groups reported low-level public bias or discrimination against their members without citing specific examples.
    [Show full text]
  • Letter Dated 18 December 2020 from the President of the Security
    United Nations S/2020/1236 Security Council Distr.: General 21 December 2020 Original: English Letter dated 18 December 2020 from the President of the Security Council addressed to the Secretary-General and the Permanent Representatives of the members of the Security Council I have the honour to enclose herewith a copy of the briefings provided by Judge Carmel Agius, President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, and Mr. Serge Brammertz, Prosecutor of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, as well as the statements delivered by the representatives of Belgium, China, the Dominican Republic, Estonia, France, Germany, Indonesia, the Niger, the Russian Federation, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, South Africa, Tunisia, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the United States of America and Viet Nam, in connection with the video-teleconference on “The International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals” convened on Monday, 14 December 2020. Statements were also delivered by His Excellency Mr. Čedomir Backović, Assistant Minister of Justice of Serbia, and by the representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Rwanda. In accordance with the procedure set out in the letter by the President of the Security Council addressed to the Permanent Representatives of the members of the Security Council dated 7 May 2020 (S/2020/372), which was agreed in the light of the extraordinary circumstances caused by the coronavirus disease pandemic, these briefings and statements will be issued as a document of the Security Council. (Signed) Jerry Matthews Matjila President of the Security Council 20-17547 (E) 231220 250121 *2017547* S/2020/1236 Annex 1 Statement by the President of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals, Judge Carmel Agius [Original: English and French] It is my sincere pleasure to address the Security Council once again to present the seventeenth progress report of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT).
    [Show full text]
  • War Criminals in the 2020 Election Campaign
    WAR CRIMINALS IN THE 2020 ELECTION CAMPAIGN YOUTH INITIATIVE FOR HUMAN RIGHTS / JUNE 2020 / YIHR.RS Introduction Legislative framework Candidates convicted for war crimes Vojislav Šešelj Dragan Vasiljković Candidates engaged in war activities Ljiljana Mihajlović TABLE OF Vjerica Radeta i Petar Jojić Božidar Delić CONTENT Svetozar Andrić Momir Stojanović War criminals as supporters of electoral lists Vladimir Lazarević Veselin Šljivančanin Nikola Šainović Conclusion Recommendations The Youth Initiative for Human Rights wishes to warn and report about the participation of war criminals in public life out of the conviction that their participation is an insult to victims, a threat to regional peace and a hindrance to democratic and European processes of the country. An overview of the participation of war criminals in the election campaign, as well as persons associated with crimes, indicates that regardless of the party they support, INTRODUCTION the pattern is similar and their themes and values are shared: denial of crimes, delegitimization of the Hague Tribunal, opposition to Serbia’s EU accession, and spreading hatred and intolerance towards peoples in the region. Convicted war criminals in Serbia have been glorified by those in power through media and institutions. Seeing how they’ve played quite a large role in this electoral process, it is safe to assume that a war criminal will have a seat in Parliament for the next for another four years. Regular parliamentary, provincial, and local elections, initially scheduled for 24 April, due to the declaration of the state of emergency because of the COVID-19 pandemic, have been postponed for 21 June 2020. Twenty-one electoral lists applied for parliamentary election, while a part of the opposition opted to boycott the elections.
    [Show full text]