The Balkan Conflicts Research Team is continuously producing superb, hard-hitting and intellectually provocative Twitters about Srebrenica and the Hague Tribunal. We highly recommend them to our readers who may follow them by visiting their Twitter account at: Balkan Conflicts Research Team@ResearchTeam
You may view this Tweet at: https://twitter.com/ResearchTeam/status/1268827074883706880?s=20
Has the Hague Tribunal been properly monitored and supervised by the UN?
No. The Security Council insisted that it would not be appropriate for it to intervene in the affairs of the ICTY and the UN itself has only produced only general reports of the Tribunal’s work.
Were fundamental questions such as the legality of the ICTY and the acceptability of its Statute ever examined?
No. Great care was taken to ensure that this did not happen.
Surely the UN has a statutory duty to maintain proper review and accountability for any organ it creates?
Yes – and this would be no more than a minimum requirement. The creation of an international criminal court was a highly sensitive matter for the UN and the world.
Then why did they let the Tribunal do as it wished?
We can only guess. But there are good grounds for believing that no other member of the Security Council wanted to challenge the USA on this matter and that the UN was equally reluctant. General-Secretary Boutros-Ghali had made himself unpopular with Madeleine Albright merely for advising the Security Council that the UN had no power under its Charter to create the ICTY. She later vetoed his reappointment for a second term.
Weren’t there others who could have held the ICTY to account?
Yes. The international legal community could have drawn attention to the many deficiencies of the ICTY’s Statute and procedures. The American Bar Association made powerful criticisms early on, noting more than 150 serious concerns, but did not follow through. It wasn’t that the ICTY’s abuses went unnoticed – just that nobody was prepared to rock the boat.
Anyone else?
The forensic and DNA communities had good cause to question the way the ICTY managed the collection and presentation of scientific evidence. They too kept uncharacteristically silent.
Why?
International Tribunals mushroomed quickly after the creation of the ICTY. Lucrative new areas were opening up for professional work in these disciplines. And of course the mantra was that the ICTY was bringing justice for victims of ‘humanitarian disaster’.
Does it matter?
Hugely. The net effect of The Hague Tribunal has been injustice on a scale seldom, if ever, seen before. What makes this so tragic is that it has been facilitated by an organisation, the United Nations, which was established to guard us all against such criminality.