That Someone Guilty Be Punished - Open Society Foundations
That Someone Guilty Be Punished - Open Society Foundations
That Someone Guilty Be Punished - Open Society Foundations
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
legal framework for Rule 11 bis transfers 803 Resolving these issues has inevitably complicated<br />
the processing of early cases before the chamber. In similar fashion, some of the requirements<br />
built into the transfer process, which were designed to protect the integrity of ICTY indictments,<br />
804 ensure the safety of witnesses who provided evidence to the ICTY prosecutor and<br />
preserve the value of other ICTY-generated evidence, have given rise to legal challenges and<br />
cumbersome processes that necessarily result in delays. 805<br />
Yet any fundamentally new court like the BWCC would face novel legal challenges,<br />
regardless of whether it was bound to honor special rules concerning the transfer of cases<br />
from an international court. (Indeed, the ICTY itself had to resolve a raft of legal challenges<br />
in its early trials.) In the view of BWCC officials, far more difficult challenges have come<br />
from Republika Srpska leaders who oppose an institution whose very existence represents an<br />
enhancement of central authority and which could credibly prosecute war crimes. 806<br />
If ICTY requirements for the transfer of cases have at times complicated early BWCC<br />
trials, the Tribunal has also been a helpful resource in resolving many of the BWCC’s early<br />
challenges. According to staff in the OSCE Mission to Bosnia, ICTY jurisprudence has provided<br />
valuable guidance to the BWCC in its resolution of thorny legal issues, including some<br />
that may have arisen in part out of the BWCC’s desire to comply with standards emanating<br />
from The Hague.<br />
The OSCE Bosnia mission cites an example relating to a problem that arose early in the<br />
chamber’s life: The BWCC was widely criticized for going too far in its efforts to protect victimwitnesses<br />
in two early cases involving allegations of systematic rape, excluding the public from<br />
almost the entire trial proceedings in the cases of Radovan Stanković and Nedo Samardžić. 807<br />
Since then, the chamber has been more judicious in its use of closed sessions. While widespread<br />
criticism of the closed trials was doubtless a key factor, the OSCE Mission to Bosnia<br />
believes that the standards for witness protection developed by the ICTY, along with public trial<br />
standards developed in the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, have provided<br />
importance guidance to the BWCC as it has adjusted its approach to witness protection. 808<br />
b. Transfer of evidence<br />
Another byproduct of Rule 11 bis was that the transfer of evidence that accompanied transferred<br />
indictments provided the fledgling SDWC a helpful boost in its early years, enabling it<br />
to go to trial without having to undertake the same level of extensive investigation already done<br />
by the ICTY. In fact, the SDWC’s first prosecution of an 11 bis case was “based only on Hague<br />
evidence,” according to the first chief prosecutor of BiH, Marinko Jurčević. 809<br />
Yet the process of transferring evidence was hardly seamless. Two suspects were transferred<br />
to the state court in Bosnia before the evidence supporting their indictments arrived<br />
there 810 Branko Perić, then president of Bosnia’s High Judicial and Prosecutorial Council<br />
(HJPC), dryly recalled the dilemma facing state court prosecutors: “We have an indicted guy<br />
120 IMPACT ON DOMESTIC WAR CRIMES PROSECUTIONS