Statement
of
Ambassador dr. Ivan Šimonovic
Permanent Representative of the Republic of Croatia to the United Nations
to the Security Council
Agenda item "The situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina"
New York, December 19, 1997
Mr President,
Since I have already elucidated Croatia´s general views on the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina in the General Assembly debate on Monday, it is my intention to limit my comments today to the role and the results of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia as they relate to Bosnia and Herzegovina.
I wish to emphasize that Croatia assigns special significance to the ICTY and its work. Indeed, my country was instrumental in the Tribunal´s establishment. When ultimately established in May 1993, one of its primary aims was to contribute to peace by dispensing justice. This laudable aim is not reflected in the results to date.
Mr President,
Croatia does not condition its cooperation with the Tribunal upon the reciprocal cooperation of any other country or entity. Croatia has always considered cooperation to be its legal, political and moral duty. We believe that all other countries should have the same attitude towards the Tribunal.
Due to its limited capabilities in comparison to the magnitude of the crimes committed, it is apparent that the Tribunal can only carry out its work in a selective manner. Therefore, the discretion in deciding which crimes and perpetrators to pursue carries significant weight. Croatia cannot be wholly satisfied with the exercise of this discretion to date.
Foreign intelligence sources have estimated that Bosnian Croats and Muslims are responsible for about 10 percent of all of the crimes committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the conflict, while Bosnian Serbs are responsible for 90 percent. Yet, at this moment, Bosnian Croats represent 73 percent of those in the custody of the Tribunal. Furthermore, in spite of ample evidence, no indictments are forthcoming for the crimes committed against Bosnian Croats. The Croatian government maintains its insistence that the Tribunal must take action in respect of these crimes.
The Tribunal´s objective of dispensing justice, in which my country and Bosnia and Herzegovina have placed much hope, cannot be achieved if the present pattern is maintained.
Mr President,
Concerning the recent arrest of the two Bosnian Croats, we wish to affirm that it is partly in order to avoid the risk associated with the use of force that the Republic of Croatia has encouraged the voluntary surrender of indictees. Moreover, whilst the arrests are based on international law and are within the scope of SFOR´s mandate, they have brought the already existing disproportion of detainees in terms of the involvement of their ethnic group in war crimes to an even higher level.
While this debate proceeds, the architects of ethnic cleansing walk freely in Serbia and Republika Srpska. General Mladic attends sporting events in Belgrade, fraternizing with other former and present senior Yugoslav army officers, some of whom are responsible for the atrocities committed in Vukovar. Radovan Karadzic gives interviews for television from Pale where he pulls the strings in Republika Srpska. Milan Martic, who ordered the shelling of Zagreb and is indicted by the Tribunal for that crime, lives in a villa in the immediate vicinity of the SFOR headquarters in Banja Luka. We should ask ourselves what kind of message does this send?
Mr. President,
It is doubtless that responsibility for war crimes is always individual and that all perpetrators have to be brought to justice. At the same time, due to its limited resources the Tribunal cannot prosecute all perpetrators. Therefore, it is essential for the peace process that the Tribunal in its future work better reflect the level of involvement and degree of responsibility of the different sides to the conflict. The fact that it has not so far, detracts from the achievement of justice and reconciliation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Thank you Mr. President.
Press releases
