Page 60 [60]
OCR
VIOLETA BESIREVIÉ ICTY, can be blamed for making such a mistake. Acquittals did happen both in Nuremberg and in The Hague.“ It is a different issue whether all the responsible for grave crimes were brought to justice, either before the IMT or the ICTY. As to Nuremberg, particular attention is often drawn to the fact that war crimes committed by the Allies were not subject to trial. The slogan “victor’s justice” associated with the IMT well explains this flaw. Whether “victors’ justice” could be true and complete justice is an enduring question which, in my opinion, should be answered negatively. But leaving this question for some other discussion, important here to emphasize is that neither moving from the victor’s justice to ad hoc justice before the ICTY did bring all responsible for international crimes to justice, although the ICTY had jurisdiction over all parties included in the conflict. Thus, the guilt of none of the leading state representatives involved in the conflict at the territory of the former Yugoslavia has not been determined in the Hague. True is, unfortunate developments, mostly connected with their death either during the trial or before the indictment was confirmed, prevented the establishment of the guilt. Thus, death prevented the proceeding against Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of Serbia, from being closed with a judgment, while Franjo Tudjman, the former Croatian president, died right before the indictment against him was to be issued." Nevertheless, one cannot resist the impression that the Hague Prosecutor too guickly and too easily decided not to press charges against those most responsible for crimes committed during NATO intervention in Serbia, such as the bombing of the major TV station in Belgrade, which resulted in civilian casualties. All things considered, it can be argued that selective justice, however incomprehensively pursued, did not manage to blur the fact that the trials before the IMT and ICTY succussed in the international criminalization of internal atrocities. On this point, lessons from Nuremberg were crucial for international prosecutions in The Hague. But in early 1990s it was perceived that it was time to do justice differently from what was done in 1946: retributive justice, that included trials, punishment and reparations was not enough. When doing justice in the region of the former Yugoslavia became urgent, the politics of international criminal justice was enriched with relational approaches to justice, i.e. combined with peacebuilding and reconciliation.’ For the acquittals in Nuremberg, see Cryer, Nuremberg, 442; for the persons acquitted of all charges before the ICTY, see https://www.icty.org/en/about/chambers/acquittals. 15 AFP, UN Court Exposes Uneasy Legacy of Croatia’s ‘father’ Tudjman, France 24 (17 December 2017), https://www.france24.com/en/20171217-un-court-exposes-uneasylegacy-croatias-father-tudjman. 15 For more on relational approaches to justice, see Jennifer J. Llewellyn — Daniel Philpott (eds.), Restorative Justice, Reconciliation, and Peacebuilding, Oxford, OUP, 2014. « 58 «
