Croatia is liberated from Serb occupation August 1995, dr Franjo Tudjman congratulates the forces

ICTY Appeal Chamber has February 8 rejected the application by the government of Republic of Croatia for Friend of the court (amicus curiae) status in the Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markac appeal.

Knowing the attitude that the ICTY seemed to have saddled itself with from its beginnings – don’t trust people because all are guilty – such a rejection, albeit saddening and troublesome, comes with no real surprise. Given that the ICTY Prosecution went on a rampage against the whole of the Croatian leadership with its theory of joint criminal enterprise (i.e. that Croats drove the Serbs out of Croatia in August 1995 at the end of the liberating Operation Storm) the chance of Croatian State being approved as a Friend of the court was slim.

Brief timetable of submissions:

•   18 October 2006, ICTY Trial Chamber refused Croatia’s application for amicus curiae status/ to intervene in the case, assist the court;

•   This application – refused;

• 16 December 2011 Croatia files another submission for amicus curiae status – marked confidential;

• 30 December 2011 the Prosecution files a response to Croatia’s submission – marked confidential;

• 3 January 2012 Croatia files a reply to the Prosecution’s response – marked confidential.

Croatia’s claim, among others, was that since the Trial Chamber had named in its April 2011 judgment against Gotovina and Markac several members of the government at the time, then the government has a right to intervene and explain its position.

Nothing wrong with that logic, as far as I can see. Indeed, if a third party is named in a court’s guilty judgment, without being heard, one would assume that third party has a right of reply – at least. But, the logic of natural justice seems to elude many sectors of the ICTY.

Of course, the Prosecution claimed that States do not have the right to intervene or file statements of interest!

The mind boggles! Why does the ICTY have a right to point the finger at States (or its top government officials as a group) then, if its case is against individuals!?

Tthe Appeals Chamber has found that allowing Croatia’s national interests to enter into the case (Croatia’s application as amicus curiae) is beyond the scope of issues on Appeal.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

The issues on Appeal are centred around joint criminal enterprise concocted by the Trial Chamber not only against Gotovina or Markac, but against government leaders of Croatian state, who represent national interests in anyone’s books, except the ICTY’s.

The contradictions in all of this are staggering. The court and the Prosecution judge Gotovina and Markac individually for a joint enterprise, which according to the court was planned and executed by a group of people it names, and yet that group has no right to defend or explain itself in the same court. No doubt in my mind: the Prosecution at the ICTY has strapped blinkers on and refuses to even acknowledge fairness, or look sideways where the full truth lies or may lie. Ina Vukic, Prof. (Zgb); B.A., M.A.Ps. (Syd)