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.