| Islam,Terrorism and Jihad | |
| 24 Jul 2008, NewAgeIslam.Com | |
| Justice delayed is not justice denied – Arab view on the capture of Radovan Karadzic | |
|
Posted: 23 July 2008 (19 Rajab 1429)
The capture of Radovan Karadzic, the former Bosnian Serb leader responsible for horrendous war crimes during the Bosnian war, is welcome news. It is a victory for justice, for the UN tribunal in The Hague which sought his arrest for 13 long years, for the people of Bosnia and, most poignantly, for the people of Srebrenica where at least 8,000 Muslim men and boys were massacred by his forces in 1995.
His being held responsible for his acts will not wipe out the horror of what happened. For the victims' families, the suffering is lifelong. Nor does it undo the other crimes of which this unrepentant thug is accused, notably the siege of Sarajevo in which 12,000 died. But it does provide some degree of comfort for his victims and their families. It says that he has not got away with his crimes. Justice delayed is not justice denied.
The arrest is good news too for the people of Serbia. It draws to a close a shameful period in their history and opens the door to a prosperous future for them in the European Union. Almost. One figure remains at large: Ratko Mladic, Karadzic's military leader during the war. His arrest will enable the appalling saga of what were Europe's worst atrocities since World War II to be brought to a close. It will happen soon.
That can be said because Karadzic's was no chance arrest. He was able to remain free all these years because he had friends in power in Belgrade who protected him. There is no other explanation. Serbia and the dependent Serb statelet in Bosnia are too small for a fugitive as notorious as he to remain unnoticed all that time.
The arrest was a political move — and it shows the scale of change that has taken place in Belgrade since the victory of pro-EU Boris Tadic in the presidential elections five months ago and again in the parliamentary election in May. That latter election is the key to the arrest. Although Tadic's party won the largest share of the May vote, it was only four weeks ago that a coalition government under new Prime Minister Mirko Cvetkovic was finally agreed and appointed. Its priority is EU membership, the big block to that being Karadzic and Mladic. By arresting Karadzic, President Tadic has sent out a clear signal to Brussels that Serbia is committed to Europe and the rule of law.
The EU is bound to respond favourably. Indeed, once Mladic is caught, it will be surprising if it does not put Serbia on fast track to membership — as was done in the early 1980s with Spain and Portugal — in order to entrench its democratic and European roots. (There would also, however, have to be a solution on Kosovo, whose independence all Serbian politicians refuse to recognize — for the moment.)
Not everyone, however, will be pleased with Karadzic's capture and the political implications. Hardline nationalism remains a powerful force in Serbia. The nationalists, for whom Karadzic is a hero, only just lost the presidential vote in February and came second in the parliamentary elections. They are anti-EU. So too is former Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica. Both want Serbia to move closer to Russia, the other potential malcontent. Moscow wants Serbia in its sphere of influence, rather than in the EU. The new coalition is far from stable. The junior partners are the now firmly pro-European socialists of the late Serbian president and indicted war criminal Slobodan Milosevic. Europe is the only thing they and Tadic's party have in common. They could easily fall out and force new elections.
Copyright: Arab News © 2003 All rights reserved.
|
3:14 AM
Sultan Shahin
1 comments:
Irrefutable Proof ICTY Is Corrupt Court/Irrefutable Proof the Hague Court Cannot Legitimately Prosecute Karadzic Case
This legal technicality indicates the Hague must dismiss charges against Dr karadzic and others awaiting trials in the Hague jail; like it or not.
Unfortunately for the The Signatures Of the Rome Statute United Nations member states instituting the ICC housed at the Hague, in Karadzic and other Hague case, there is no other international court capable; even if there was, the same
United Nations member states that spoke about trading judicial appointments and verdicts for funding when I attended the 2001 ICC Preparatory Meetings at the UN in Manhattan would be morally incapable of constructing another court to hear cases.
My suggestion is to transfer immediately Dr Karadzic and others awaiting trial at the Hague back to Serbia and their respective countries to decide how to proceed next.
================================
I testify to, is an institution at its very conception stages was based upon trading bribery for judicial appointments and verdicts (?)
I witnessed with my own eyes and ears when attending the 2001 Preparatory Meetings to establish an newly emergent International Criminal Court, the exact caliber of criminal corruption running so very deeply at the Hague, that it was a perfectly viable topic of legitimate conversation in those meetings I attended to debate trading verdicts AND judicial
appointments, for monetary funding.
Jilly wrote:*The rep from Spain became distraught and when her country’s proposal was not taken to well by the chair of the meeting , then Spain argued in a particularly loud and noticably strongly vocal manner, “Spain (my country) strongly believes if we contribute most financial support to the Hague’s highest court, that ought to give us and other countries feeding it financially MORE direct power over its decisions.”
Instead of censoring the country representative from Spain for even bringing up this unjust, illegal and unfair judicial idea of bribery for international judicial verdicts and judicial appointments, all country representatives present in the meeting that day all treated the Spain proposition as a ”totally legitimate topic” discussed and debated it between each other for some time. I was quite shocked! The idea was "let's discuss it." "It's a great topic to discuss."
Some countries agreed with Spain’s propositions while others did not. The point here is, bribery for judicial verdicts and judicial appointments was treated as a totally legitimate topic instead of an illegitimate topic which it is in the meeting that I
attended in 2001 that day to establish the ground work for a newly emergent international criminal court.))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
In particular., since "Spain" was so overtly unafraid in bringing up this topic of trading financial funding the ICC for influence over its future judicial appointments and verdicts in front of every other UN member state present that day at the UN, "Spain" must have already known by previous experience the topic of bribery was "socially acceptable" for conversation that day. They must have previously spoke about bribing the ICTY and ICC before in meetings; this is my
take an international sociological honor student.
Could anyone imagine the US Supreme Court having such a discussion about trading money for judicial verdicts and judicial appointments among the judges appointed and those funding it as an institution, and then say claim it was capable
of giving anyone or anything a "fair trial" as the ICTY and ICC claim?
The idea is utterly ridiculous and disgusting morally!
SPAIN HAS TAUGHT THE WORLD THE TRUE DEFINITION OF AN "INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT."
LOLLOLOLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post a Comment