YouSaid · the spoken record

Obradovic

lines on the record: 37
first: 2015-06-03
most recent: 2016-06-08
sittings or episodes: 2
sources: un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“We must not be discouraged in our efforts to bring about reconciliation and cooperation and that includes through trying those responsible for crimes in domestic courts. The victims will not be forgotten and we must not allow the crimes to be repeated. Instead of a conclusion, let me take this opportunity to commend all hardworking officials and the staff of the Tribunal and the Residual Mechanism for the relentless efforts they continue to invest, despite all the challenges. My personal cooperation with many of them over the past 15 years was my highest professional privilege. My thanks are also due to the Security Council for its continued monitoring of this important international issue.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“1108 of 27 December 2011 in which it is said: "France has no judicial foundation at its disposal that would permit it to act on the request for the arrest of Ms. Florence Hartmann and her transfer to the Tribunal." The difference, though, is in the consequences: unlike on 13 October 2015 in the case of Serbia, President Meron did not report to the Security Council the failure of a Government to cooperate with the ICTY in arresting its citizen. Is it that the principle of the sovereign equality of all Member States assumes a different light once refracted through the prism of the ICTY? Nevertheless, the decision of the Serbian court in no way precludes Serbia's determination to continue to cooperate with the ICTY in the most active manner so as to enable it to accomplish its mission.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Yet, on 18 May, for the first time in the history of Serbia's cooperation, the High Court in Belgrade decided that the legal conditions for the executions of the Tribunal's warrants were not fulfilled in this case, because the law on cooperation stipulates that only the indictment for core statutory crimes, that is, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949; violations of the laws or customs of war; genocide and crimes against humanity, provide a legal ground for the execution of ICTY arrest warrants, unlike an indictment for contempt of court. Perhaps some more light would be shed on the reasoning ofthe Belgrade High Court ifjuxtaposed with the explanation given to the Tribunal by the Embassy of France in The Hague in its note verbale no.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“No particular explanation of such a precedent was provided. My Government, however, was fully aware of the need to respect ICTY decisions and orders. For that reason, it decided to continue with the domestic case for arrest and transfer of the three accused to the ICTY and, pursuant to the law on cooperation with the ICTY, the Ministry of Justice conveyed the case file to the domestic court for further procedure.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“As a compromise solution, a communication was made with the ICTY President to consider the possibility of referring the case to the domestic judiciary proprio motu, in accordance with ICTY Rule 11 bis. In the View of my Government, such a referral would be fully in accordance with resolution 1503 (2003) calling on the ICTY to concentrate on the trial of the most senior leaders suspected of being most responsible for crimes within its jurisdiction and to transfer cases involving those who may not bear that level of responsibility to competent national jurisdictions. On 5 February, however, the ICTY President informed the Serbian Government that contempt matters did not fall within the scope of cases that may be referred to the domestic courts of a State pursuant to 11 bis of the Rules.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Once again, let me point out that Serbia never asked the Tribunal for a waiver of its international obligations; it asked only for a postponement of an execution while the accused, Seselj, was on provisional release, under circumstances that endangered the bilateral relations with countries of the region of former Yugoslavia. The postponement of the execution would not set an example; after all, we read in the annals of the Tribunal that Shefqet Kabashi appeared in the courtroom only in 2011, four years after a warrant of arrest for contempt of court had been issued against him in 2007. Meanwhile, the ICTY Presidents did not report to the Security Council the non-cooperation by the United States. The Serbian Government did not want to protect the accused persons from criminal prosecution.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“In such a case, the domestic law on cooperation with the ICTY provides for a possibility to raise an objection to the International Tribunal. On the other hand, the ICTY Rules of Procedure and Evidence provides for no reason to establish a moratorium on ministering the orders of the Tribunal. Therefore, while the Security Council can defer International Criminal Court proceedings for a period of 12 months by a resolution, such a procedural solution does not exist in cases before the ICTY; consequently, the Trial Chamber dismissed the arguments presented by Serbia.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Government agencies have been ordered to exercise no control over his behaviour and political conduct and, immediately upon his release, Mr. Seselj began to create difficulties for the Government, in particular with respect to the bilateral relations of the country with its neighbours. The timing of the arrest of his close associates is indicative of the lack of regard for the political and social realities in Serbia. In that context and acting faithfully upon the ICTY request, my Government made a necessary security analysis and decided that it could not execute the orders at the critical moment because of national security risks. It was of the opinion that there were serious and justifiable reasons to delay execution, especially because the investigation in this case lasted many years.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“The election will be one of the priorities of the new Government, expected to be formed soon. In the meantime, the Serbian war crimes prosecution continues to be fully operational under the leadership of the First Deputy Prosecutor and eight indictments for war crimes against 15 individuals have been confirmed in Serbia in 2016. Now, I will say a few words in explanation of the reported failure by Serbia to execute the warrants of arrest issued by the ICTY Trial Chamber in the case of contempt of court against three individuals. The arrest warrants were issued two months after the provisional release of the accused Vojislav Seselj, the leader of an opposition political party, under the unprecedented conditions ordered for his stay in Serbia.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“We all should be well advised to watch developments in this case. Respect for ICTY judgments was also requested following the acquittal of Kosovo Liberation Army commanders Ramush Haradinaj and Fatmir Limaj for crimes committed against Serbs. The Judges noted, however, that the Trial Chamber gained "a strong impression that the [Haradinaj] trial was being held in an atmosphere where witnesses felt unsafe". A new light has been shed on the ICTY failure to successfully prosecute the crimes committed by Kosovo and Metohija Albanians by the establishment of a new internationalized judicial mechanism to prosecute those crimes. Serbia has been criticized also for not electing a new war crimes prosecutor. Indeed, the process of election did fail, but a new recruitment is under way.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“The Serbian Government has been continually requested to fully respect the judgments of the ICTY, especially in the case of the acquittals of General Gotovina and other Croatian generals, despite the factual findings that murders and other serious violations were committed against Serb civilians in Operation Storm. The Serbian Government has also been asked not to comment on the judgments in the cases of Bosnian war commanders Naser Orie and Rasim Delie, whose superior responsibility for crimes of murder and torture in prison camps, including decapitation of Serbian soldiers by mujahideen units, could not be established. However, Naser Oric' is now being tried by a Bosnian court on the basis of evidence of individual criminal liability provided by the Serbian War Crimes Prosecutor.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Notwithstanding that need, however, mention should also be made in this regard that, according to the official data of the International Commission on Missing Persons, more than 70 per cent of the 40,000 persons who went missing during the armed conflict in the former Yugoslavia have been accounted for. This ratio has not been equalled anywhere in the world, and no small credit for it is due to the efforts made by the country that I come from. Admittedly, the Prosecutor's report before us is critical of some of Serbia's recent activities. I shall now briefly address that criticism. An impression has been created, particularly in the region, that Serbia is somehow responsible for the recent acquittal ofVojislav Seselj. That is not fair.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Serbia fully understands and shares the Prosecutor's concern about evident regression in regional cooperation and calls once again on the United Nations to find a way for strict and continuous international monitoring in the field. Accountability is a regional issue and national war-crimes prosecutors must cooperate faithfully in fighting impunity without political interference. The Serbian national strategy therefore envisages the convening of a regional conference in which all open issues of regional cooperation would be addressed and resolved. Serbia also supports the View of the ICTY Prosecutor that the search for missing persons needs to be intensified.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“The relevant Croatian agencies have been instructed by decision of the Croatian Government of 3 June 2015 "not to provide cooperation to foreign judiciaries in certain war crimes cases in which the indictment alleges that members of Croatian civilian and military bodies participated in a joint criminal enterprise to commit international crimes or that the Croatian military participated in widespread and systematic attacks against civilian populations". This information is alarming, and Serbia expects the Security Council to react adequately. Otherwise, our efforts will be ineffective, and justice will be denied or remain selective.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“At the meeting of the General Assembly (see A/70/PV.31) on the 2015 annual report of the ICTY (see A/70/226), I submitted that, in so doing, the Croatian Government sought to establish impunity for its citizens and, for some reason, there has been no reaction from the United Nations. Moreover, the judicial bodies of Croatia and Kosovo have ceased to cooperate in acceding to Serbia's requests for assistance in the meantime. Notwithstanding this situation, the ICTY Prosecutor has now confirmed in his written report that the Croatian Government established impunity for its citizens.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“In that context, let me recall that, since June 2015, I have drawn the attention of the Council to the fact that, in spite of the ICTY and International Court of Justice findings that murders, inhuman acts and cruel treatment were perpetrated against the civilians of Serb ethnicity during and after Operation Storm in 1995, Croatia has had only one final conviction for the war crime of murder committed in that operation. The representative of Croatia never contested my assertion. I also advised that the Croatian Government attempted to deprive Serbia of jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the crimes perpetrated by Croatian nationals.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“As suggested in my statement to the Council in December 2015 (see S/PV.7574), the Serbian Government has now adopted a national strategy on the prosecution of war crimes. The strategy is aimed at improving the efficiency of domestic war crimes proceedings and at promoting regional cooperation in this sensitive area. It reflects my Government's commitment to accountability for core international crimes, regardless of the national, ethnic or religious status of the perpetrator or the victim. For this and other reasons, Serbia rightly expects that all other countries of the former Yugoslavia share the same objectives and act in accordance with the principles of international humanitarian law.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“The ICTY Prosecutor acknowledges in his report (S/2016/453, annex II) that he has free access to evidence located in Serbia, such as documents, archives and witnesses, while the same conditions, in accordance with the principle of equality of arms, are maintained for defence counsel. So far, Serbia has received 2,170 requests for assistance from the Office of the ICTY Prosecutor and 1,331 requests from various defence teams; no pending requests for assistance or disputes in that regard are recorded. These statistics are a telling illustration of the dedication of my country to the process of cooperation with the ICTY, and they stack up quite well against the records of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, for instance. The efforts behind the statistics deserve full international recognition.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Franko Simatovie and of convicted individuals Radivoje Miletie and Drago Nikolie, who passed away while he was in Serbia. The terms and conditions of their provisional release were determined by the ICTY Judicial Chambers and sometimes included surveillance 24 hours a day. Serbia has a perfect record in carrying out the guarantees its Government provided for the process of provisional release. In addition, it has fully complied with its specific duty to report to the Appeals Chamber on the progress of the medical treatment of indictee Vojislav Seselj during his provisional stay in Serbia.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Franko Simatovie, the two indictees acquitted by the Trial Chamber, whose first-instance judgment was quashed on appeal on 15 December 2015. These ICTY arrest warrants were the first to be executed, dating back to the time of the arrest, in 2011, of indictees Ratko Mladie and Goran HadZie, who were also arrested by my country. Somehow this important information did not find its way into the Prosecutor's report. Today, the ICTY completion strategy relies heavily on the cooperation of the Serbian Government, in particular in cases of provisional release. In the past six months, Serbian agencies were called upon to report to the ICTY, in some cases on a daily basis, on the compliance with the terms of their provisional release of indictees Goran Hadzic', Jovica Stanisic' and Mr.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“I thank you, Sir, for the opportunity to speak to the Council again. Before I proceed to address the important topic on the Council's agenda today, I would like to welcome our esteemed guests from The Hague, the Presidents and Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals. I thank them for their semi-annual reports. Serbia remains firmly committed to cooperating with the ICTY, while the Serbian domestic judiciary continues to fight impunity for core international crimes perpetrated during the armed conflict in the former Yugoslavia. In the reporting period, my Government duly executed warrants of arrest against Mr. Jovica Stanisic' and Mr.”
2016-06-08 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7707 (2016) · source
“Also, we reaffirm our previous humanitarian request with respect to the enforcement of sentences and the possibility that convicted persons could serve their sentences in Serbia as well, under international monitoring. Instead of a conclusion, I take this opportunity to commend all the hard-working officials and staff of the Tribunals and the Residual Mechanism for the relentless efforts they continue to invest despite all the challenges and lack of resources they face. They can always count on the full and unstinting support of the Serbian Government.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“My Government does not share Vojislav Seselj's political ideas and repudiates his statements, but it does urge the Tribunal to conclude his case. The seriousness of the accusations cannot undermine respect for the human rights of the defendant. I call on the members of the Security Council to pay attention also to the human rights aspect ofthis case, and not only to the unacceptable political statements made by the defendant, which are, incidentally, targeted more often than not at the democratically elected Government of Serbia and its pro-European orientation. I would like to reiterate my country's interest in the future dialogue on questions related to the ICTY archives.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“He was convicted of contempt of court three times. Finally, he refused to run the defence case. The trial was closed on 20 March 2012, nine years after his voluntary surrender. More than three years later, he is still waiting for the trial judgement - a situation without precedent in modern case law. If such a situation appeared before a Serbian court, one can only imagine the hue and cry that would be raised in the European Court for Human Rights over the disrespect of the rights of the accused. In November 2014, at the time of defendant Seselj's first provisional release, which was proprio motu, for humanitarian reasons and without any specific duties assigned to the Serbian Government, the Security Council discussed the unacceptable political statements he had made.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“The Serbian Government is concerned about many aspects of this odd case, particularly with regard to the respect for the defendant's rights. Vojislav Seselj surrendered to the Tribunal voluntarily in February 2003, a week after the indictment against him was publicly issued. He waited in detention for the commencement of the trial for over four years. He never made a request to the Trial Chamber for a provisional release and declared his unwillingness to accept the guarantees of the Government regarding such a procedural treatment. His trial has been characterized by many procedural dilemmas and general disorder. The accused opted for self-representation. He had an ongoing conflict with the organs of the Tribunal, which culminated in a long hunger strike, during which his life was in danger.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“Accordingly, further improvement of regional cooperation on war crimes issues and the full implementation of bilateral agreements, as requested in the Prosecutor's report, are a condition sine qua non for regional peace, stability and reconciliation. With your permission, Sir, I shall now address the case of the Hague defendant Vojislav Seselj. Serbia joins all those frustrated by the long and ineffective trial. We understand the emotions of the victims of the crimes of which defendant Seselj, the politician, has been accused. We condemn those crimes, regret that they were committed and sympathize profoundly with the victims and their families. However, the criminal responsibility of the Serbian national has not yet been determined, and the presumption of innocence in his case must be fully respected.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“All countries created from the former Yugoslavia have an obligation to investigate and prosecute those who committed atrocities without discrimination on the basis of the national or ethnic origin of either the perpetrator or the victim. In that context, the serious crimes of murder, inhuman acts and cruel treatment committed by Croatian Government forces against citizens ofSerb ethnicity during Operation Storm in 1995 were recognized in the Judgment of the International Court of Justice of 3 February. So far, however, Croatia has had only one final conviction for the war crime of murder committed during that Operation. That sad fact should be taken into account by the European Parliament, as well as by the Council.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“Yet, action continues to be taken in the European Parliament. The new argument, proffered in a letter to the Parliament dated 27 May, calls - in a pretty cavalier manner, I might add - for the primacy of the principle of the legal certainty of European citizens over the war crimes prosecution that they may be subjected to in Serbia. My Government is all for the legal certainty of those citizens; yet, in the context of certainty, they must be certain that there will be no impunity for the crimes they have committed. War crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide are never under the exclusive jurisdiction of the State on whose territory they were committed. Delicta contra juris gentium - they are recognized as a concern of the international community as a whole.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“That provision was necessitated by the fact that, even though the territory of Serbia was not engulfed by the armed conflicts of 1991-1995, some among the refugees who sought and found shelter in Serbia did commit war crimes. The Serbian War Crimes Prosecutor has rarely had an opportunity to prosecute the citizens of other countries. There are no war crime trials in absentia in Serbia. Only those nationals of other countries found on Serbian territory and against whom no charges have been brought in their countries are tried before the Serbian War Crimes Chamber. Finally, the February 2015 report ofthe OSCE mission to Serbia confirms that the exercise ofjurisdiction in the case of one Croatian citizen before the Serbian court is in accordance with both the customary rules of international law and with Serbian domestic law.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“When the ICTY Prosecutor reports to the Council that "Serbian judicial authorities [would] need to process a large number of war crimes cases that [would] predominantly, but not exclusively, involve Serbian nationals" (S/2015/342, annex 11, para. 52), one European Union Member State called for the cessation or limitation of the jurisdiction ofthe Serbian judiciary for war crimes. And an action to that effect has been brought before the European Parliament, contrary to the main objectives of contemporary international criminal law. Our 2003 Law provides for Serbia's jurisdiction over the whole territory of the former Yugoslavia, regardless of the citizenship of perpetrators or victims.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“The trials in those cases are closely monitored by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) mission in Belgrade and several domestic non-governmental organizations, and the rulings by Serbia in these cases have never been second-guessed as biased or unfair to defendants of non-Serbian nationality or ethnic origin. However, we are also well aware that some aspects of the relevant domestic procedures need improvement. We have therefore read the Prosecutor's report carefully and thank Prosecutor Brammertz and his hard-working team for their continued assistance and monitoring activities. In that context, I would like to draw the Council's attention to a glaring and hardly comprehensible absurdity.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“So far, the Serbian War Crimes Prosecutor has indicted 175 individuals, of whom 68 have been convicted and 32 acquitted. Another 51 accused persons are currently on trial in 16 cases. In addition, 4 cases against 14 individuals are on appeal. The data on the ethnic affiliations of the accused that I have submitted to the Council for perusal and information are illustrative of my country's justice blindness in the field of ethnicity. Out of 175 accused individuals, 2 are Bosniacs, 2 ethnic Croats, one ofwhom is from Croatia and the other from Bosnia and Herzegovina, 22 are Albanians, of whom 17 have recently been acquitted, and 149 are ethnic Serbs.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“These crimes are investigated and tried in my country, as reported and welcomed by the Prosecutor. Going forward in addressing those crimes, an action plan in line with the European Union negotiating framework, on which we reported in November 2014, is in the final stage of preparation, while the Ministry of Justice has set up a working group to draft an overarching national strategy on war crimes, including many aspects ofpost- conflict justice. That will be done in cooperation with independent international experts, including the Office of the ICTY Prosecutor, the International Commission for Missing Persons and other relevant stakeholders. All along, the Serbianjudicial organs have continued to investigate and prosecute war crimes.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“In particular, we note with dissatisfaction that in almost all major cases in which the victims have been groups or individuals of Serb ethnicity, the accused have been acquitted. Nevertheless, the Government of the Republic of Serbia has never stopped cooperating and has continued to fulfil its international obligations in good faith. I can assure the Council that this approach will be maintained and that the Government of my country will exert its best efforts to create a social milieu in which the legacy of the Tribunal will be assessed objectively. Surely, time will help too, as Mr. Brammertz suggested in his statement to the Council at its previous meeting. In its position on war crimes perpetrated in the 1990s, Serbia is not confined solely to the process of cooperation with the ICTY.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“It has executed ICTY arrest warrants, including those against its highest State and Government officials, to an extent and in numbers never requested from any other United Nations Member State either before or after the establishment of the ICTY. It has provided reams of evidence, including strictly confidential documents and testimony of its highest officials to the ICTY and judicial parties. Serbia has, moreover, achieved a level of execution of requests for assistance issued by the ICTY Trial Chambers and Prosecution that is much more expeditious than the procedure between any two European countries under bilateral treaties on mutual assistance in criminal matters. That task - the task of State cooperation - has not been easy either. Nevertheless, the ICTY has rendered some controversial decisions.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“We have taken note of all the important elements of the report of the ICTY President (S/2015/342, annex I) and that of its Prosecutor, and we appreciate the acknowledgement of Serbia's important role in ensuring the successful completion of the Tribunal's remaining trials and appeals, as reported by the Office ofthe Prosecutor. The ICTY has, no doubt, made important pioneering efforts in establishing and further developing the standards of international criminal law, combating impunity and attempting to bring a sense ofjustice to the victims of obnoxious atrocities. That task has not been not easy. Over the past 15 years, Serbia has made a significant contribution to those endeavours.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source
“It is an honour and a privilegeto speakto the Security Council, and to be doing it for the first time only magnifies that. Before making my statement, I would like to welcome the esteemed Presidents and Prosecutors of the International Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the Residual Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals, and to thank them for their semi-annual reports. As a country with a major stake in the ICTY's proceedings, Serbia has followed the Tribunal's activities related to implementing its completion strategy and transitioning smoothly to the Residual Mechanism with great attention and interest.”
2015-06-03 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.7455 (2015) · source