Visit our website: HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.ORG.UK
---------------------------------------------

[For some reason the author seems to be an admirer of
Mr. Kostunica, but otherwise his points are worth
taking.]

CRIMES UNDER THE GUISE OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Dr. Milan Tepavac
September 1, 2001 
It seems to me that I've never in my life read
something so disgusting, distorting and poisonous as
this piece of a NGO which calls itself "Human Rights
Watch" (see below). If Goebels and  Zdanov were alive
they would die of envy. We have here an example of
what the Orwellian New World Order has done to the
mind and soul of some people.This is my first and last
time that I pay any attention to that organization. 
1. Can the United Nations Security Council establish
an international court? 
Of course not. The fact is that the Security Council,
when adopting the resolution 827, "establishing"
International Criminal Tribunal for Former
Yugososlavia (ICTY) acted ultra vires and the passing
of time cannot validate it. Quod initio invalidum est,
non potest tractu temporis convalescere. That
resolution is really a "black hole" of international
law, and - I do not hesitate to say - that those
fifteen sitting in the SC who adopted it are criminals
under international law because they delivered a death
blow to international law and should be accountable
for it under its very law - Article 7(4) of its
Statute. Many international lawyers have the same
opinion about ICTY. A German NGO from Berlin simply
states: 
  1. The "indictment" [against Mr. Milosevic] issued
by the "Chief Prosecutor" of the so-called
"International Criminal Tribunal for the Former
Yugoslavia" is legally invalid because this "Tribunal"
has no jurisdiction whatsoever in the present or any
other case. 
  2. The "Tribunal" derives its raison d'�tre
exclusively from Security Council resolution 827,
adopted at the Council's 3217th meeting on 25 May
1993. In this resolution, establishing the so-called
"International Criminal Tribunal," the Security
Council states that it acts "under Chapter VII of the
Charter of the United Nations." 
  3. When adopting the above resolution, the Security
Council acted ultra vires. According to the provisions
of the U.N. Charter, the Council has no competence
whatsoever in judicial matters. The provisions of
Chapter VII determine the Council's competence in
matters of international security but not in matters
of criminal justice or other judicial matters. The
sole authority in international judicial matters rests
with the International Court of Justice 
Now, any further discussion about ICTY from the legal
point of view should stop here. But, let's, for the
sake of argument, suppose that it were established
legally. 
So, even if ICTY were established according to
international law, its Statute would invalidate it
with many of its provisions and - its omissions! 
The Security Council had no right whatsoever to
formulate substantive rules of international criminal
law and prescribe penalties for them, since it is not
legislative body!!. But, omissions are even more
interesting! It lacks the prime, supreme international
crime - the crime of aggressive war, whether
international or internal, civil war. It was purposely
done by those fifteen criminals in the Security
Council: in order to protect from criminal
responsibility those who planned, instigated, ordered,
committed or otherwise aided and abetted in the
planning, preparation or execution of the secessionist
wars in Yugoslavia and NATO aggression against it. So,
we have the situation that a Bosnian peasant worker
gets life imprisonment, while real culprits - Tudjman,
Kucan, Izetbegovic, Gligorov, Genscher, Kohl, Clinton,
Pope, Badinter, Carrington, Albright, Zimmermann,
Eagelberger, Wesley Clark and many more - get red
carpets. So, those fifteen of the SC made a mockery of
international law and irreparable damage to the
concept of justice. It is a deadly blow to our
civilization. Maybe the greatest crime today against
international law and order is the attempt to impose
the pronouncements of such a Tribunal as international
law! 
2. "Indictment" against president Milosevic 
Now, let us turn to the "indictment" against Mr.
Milosevic, disregarding, again for the sake of
argument, the illegality of the ICTY and its Statute.
The conditio sine qua non for the application of the
international humanitarian law is the existence of the
"war" or "armed conflict" on a given territory.
Without a war or armed conflict there are no
violations of the rules of IHL. So, the "chief
prosecutor" of the ICTY Louise Arbour had to have a
war or armed conflict in the sense of international
humanitarian law. She needed it. So, she just invented
it by stating that there was in Kosovo the state of
war! Let's look at the positive international
humanitarian law: Protocol Additional to the Geneva
Conventions of August 12, 1949 and Relating to the
Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed
Conflicts (Protocol II) in para 1 of Article 1 states
that it "develops and supplements Article 3 common to
the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 without
modifying its existing conditions of application".
Then in para 2 states: "2. This Protocol shall not
apply to situations of internal disturbances and
tensions, such as riots, isolated and sporadic acts of
violence and other acts of a similar nature, as not
being armed conflicts." That is exactly what we had in
Kosovo. There was no war there. Even when the real war
started on March 24, 1999, it was the war between NATO
and Yugoslavia, and not a civil war between Albanian
and non-Albanian inhabitants of Kosovo. We have now
similar situation in Macedonia, although Macedonia
even uses helicopters and jets against the rebels, 
and before it we had it at southern Serbia. No one, as
far as I know, those situations characterizes as "war"
or "armed conflict" in the sense of IHL. They are
internal disturbances which are dealt with the
legitimate measures of state organs in accordance with
para 2 of Article 1 of the Protocol II. Of course, in
those situations also crimes could be committed, and
they as a matter of fact  were committed by all
involved, but those crimes are ordinary crimes under
national legislations, and are not of the concern of
international humanitarian law. I sincerely hope that
Mr. Milosevic will endure in his determination to
fight from the dungeons in the Hague for the truth and
justice to the end and show to the world the
monstrosity of the NWO and its institution called
ICTY. He must. But equally we must help him. Because
the only "crime" he and his people committed is that
they dared to defend their country and themselves from
armed secessionist (remember: it was ARMED sesession
as it was in the USA in 1861-65, not just secession
and it has been said time and again that if Milosevic
is war criminal then Lincoln many times gretar for the
war in which more than 600.000 young Americans lost
their lives!) vultures and their masters from abroad
and NATO aggression without having the permission for
it from Washington. To succumb would mean that the
concept of truth and justice, the very basis of our
civilization,  has perished from the face of the Earth
and that the monsters have won and overtaken the world
into their hands. The attachment to this message -
which is his statement presented to ICTY - assures us
that he will endure. 
3. "The transfer of Milosevic from a Belgrade jail to
the Hague was a clear obligation under the United
Nations Charter..." says HRW. 
It was neither "transfer" nor "deportation" but
KIDNAPPING, thus in violation of Yugoslav
Constitution, Yugoslav law and international law,
especially Universal Declaration of Human Rights and
International Covenant of Civil and Political Rights.
What we have here? A human rights organization which
justifies kidnapping of a former head of state instead
of protecting human beings agaist violations of their
basic human rights!! Really Orwellian. 
The International Committee to Defend Slobodan
Milosevic (ICDSM) was established immediately after
Mr. Milosevic was arrested in Belgrade by the Belgrade
puppet government at the end of March 2001. Its
petition to immediately free Milosevic is by now
signed by more than 1400 people from all over the
world, among them international lawyers, writers,
intellectuals, politicians. Many have spoken and
written condemning his arrest and kidnapping. 
Here is, for example, what Professor Marjorie Cohn
from Thomas Jefferson School of Law says. Although she
does not use the word "kidnapping", it is fair and
honest presentation of the case: 
  The deportation of former Yugoslav leader Slobodan
Milosevic to the International Criminal Tribunal for
the Former Yugoslavia was a direct result of blackmail
by the United States. Desperate to rebuild its
economy, the Serbian government capitulated to U.S.
threats: deliver Milosevic to the war crimes tribunal
in The Hague, Netherlands, or the U.S. would see to it
that Yugoslavia didn't get the foreign aid it
critically needs. 
  Ten years of punishing sanctions against the people
of Yugoslavia coupled with U.S.-led NATO's 78-day
bombing campaign have left the country's economy in
shambles. Damage to the Yugoslav economy is estimated
at $4 billion. One million people live below the
poverty level, half the population is unemployed, and
Yugoslavia has an annual inflation rate of 150 percent
and a foreign debt of $12 billion. 
   The U.S. destroyed the economy of Yugoslavia,
killed or wounded thousands of its people - including
civilians - and then promised megabucks to the Serbs
if they would cough up Milosevic. Usually the ransom
is paid to end the kidnapping. This time it was ponied
up as a reward for the kidnap. And the payoff? $1.28
billion in aid from the July 29 donors conference,
orchestrated by the United States. Serbian Prime
Minister Zoran Djindjic arranged the deportation by
circumventing the recently elected President of
Yugoslavia, Vladimir Kostunica. According to Sara
Flounders, National Co-Director of the International
Action Center, "Milosevic was sold to the 
U.S. by their man in Belgrade. Imagine a governor of a
state in the 
U.S. 
overriding the federal government and constitution to
surrender a U.S. citizen to another country." 
  Kostunica, adamantly committed to due process,
insisted that Yugoslavia's judicial procedures be
followed before Milosevic was delivered to the ICTY in
The Hague. The deportation, which Kostunica said could
not be characterized as legal and constitutional,
violated Yugoslavia's constitution, parliament,
Constitutional Court, and decisions of President
Kostunica. Former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark
denounced the deportation as "an enormous tragedy for
Yugoslavia, the Serbian people and the rule of law."
While the leaders of the Western world cheer the
"extradition" of Milosevic - a misnomer because he
wasn't sent to another country, but to an
international tribunal - the fragile democracy in
Yugoslavia has been dealt a severe blow. Ramsey Clark
thinks the real purpose of the deportation, sanctions,
bombing and demonization of the Serbs "is to reduce
all of the former Yugoslavia to the status of a
U.S./NATO colony." 
        Kostunica has decried the impartiality of the
ICTY for its hypocrisy in indicting Serbs, but
refusing to indict NATO leaders for war crimes
committed in the course of the 1999 bombing. NATO
bombs killed 1500-2000 civilians and injured thousands
more. When I was in Yugoslavia last year, I saw
schools, hospitals, bridges, libraries and homes
reduced to rubble. The ICTY statute prohibits the
targeting of civilians. And even though it also
forbids the use of poisonous weapons calculated to
cause unnecessary suffering, NATO used depleted
uranium and cluster bombs whose devastating character
is widely known. NATO also targeted a petrochemical
complex, releasing carcinogens into the air that
reached 10,600 times the acceptable safety level... 
  The prosecutors of the Vietnam War - Lyndon Baines
Johnson, Henry Kissinger and Robert McNamara - were
never tried for war crimes for causing the deaths of 3
million Vietnamese people. It was McNamara who defined
most of the Vietnamese countryside, populated by
peasants, as a free-fire zone. He wrote in a letter to
LBJ in 1967: "The picture of the world's greatest
superpower killing or seriously injuring 1,000
noncombatants a week, while trying to pound a tiny
backward nation into submission on an issue whose
merits are hotly disputed, is not a pretty one."
McNamara admitted his complicity in a 1995 memoir. 
  Indeed, the hypocrisy of the United States
government is no more evident than in its refusal to
ratify the statute for the International Criminal
Court, out of fear that U.S. leaders might become
defendants in war crimes prosecutions. Yet, our
government was baffled when the United States 
-- the world's human rights policeman -- was voted off
the United Nations Commission on Human Rights... 
        A fundamental principle of international law
is complementarity: the international tribunals
complement - they don't supplant - the courts of
nation states. Most of the former Latin American
military leaders charged with human rights abuses that
occurred in the 1970s and 1980s are facing justice in
their respective countries. The Yugoslavians should be
able to judge their own leaders before the they are
judged by the international community. 
  Count 1 of the Indictment against Slobodan Milosevic
charges him with "Deportation, a crime against
humanity . . " He must be accountable for what he has
done. But the U.S.-engineered deportation of Milosevic
is a crime against the people of Yugoslavia. 
        http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forumnew25.htm ) 
(As I write this text I hear from TV that a Dutch
court rejected a request by former Slobodan Milosevic
to order his immediate release. "The Dutch court is
incompetent to rule" on Milosevic's demand for
release, the judge said. Nico Varkevisser, head of an
international support group for Milosevic, said he
will appeal the ruling, and "will go to the highest
Dutch court." He said he might return the case to the
European human rights court, on the grounds that
Milosevic's detention amounted to "kidnapping". In my
opinion, the ruling of the Dutch court is untenable
and a shame for the people of that supposedly
democratic country, for the simple reason that the
slavery is not permitted on the soil of the
Netherlands under its constitution. The kidnapping of
Mr. Milosevic in Belgrade by ICTY and his detention on
the Netherland's soil amounts to slavery). 
        *** 
I take this opportunity to warn all anti-Serbian
racists and vultures thirsty of Serbian blood that I
firmly believe that the time will come that they will
be called to answer for their crimes,  for their
crimes without precedence in human history: to
genocide a nation by lies, distortions, satonization,
sanctions, secessionist wars, naked aggression. Alfred
Rosenberg was hanged, justly, for being the Nazi
Party's ideologist and propagandist, for developing
and spreading Nazi doctrines in the newspapers
"Voelkischer Beobachter" and "N S Monatshefte". The
present-day anti-Serbian vultures have done and are
doing far more greater crimes against Serbian nation.
The Serbs must find a way to stop them before it is
too late, before the genocide against them is
completed. We here in Belgrade, in Serbia, in
Yugoslavia, impoverished to one dollar a day for
biological survival, just can't endure any more the
terror of anti-Serbian vultures disguised in human
rights robes. 
 
========================================= 
http://www.hrw.org/press/2001/08/milo-0829.htm 
Human Rights Watch 
- Press Release - 
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 
MILOSEVIC: JUSTICE PROCEEDS 
(New York, August 29, 2001) -- As former Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic prepared for a second
appearance before the Hague tribunal, Human Rights
Watch expressed its disagreement with several
contentions in the motion that Milosevic filed with
the court in August. 
Mr. Milosevic had charged that the tribunal was
illegitimate and selective. A hearing before the war
crimes court will take place on Thursday, August 30 to
chart the course for Milosevic's trial. 
"This is not victors' justice - this is justice for
the victims of horrific crimes," said Richard Dicker,
director of International Justice for Human Rights
Watch.  "Slobodan Milosevic was at the top of the
chain of command of military and security forces that
wrought mayhem in Kosovo in early 
1999. 
He needs to be held to account, with all the
protections of a fair trial, for the ethnic cleansing
and killings there." 
Human Rights Watch documented scores of killings by
Serb forces during the 1998-1999 conflict that took an
estimated 10,000 Kosovar Albanian lives. The most
egregious abuses took place during the NATO bombing
period from March to June 1999 when Serbian and
Yugoslav forces conducted a brutal ethnic cleansing
campaign in which thousands of ethnic Albanians were
killed. Throughout Kosovo villages were systematically
cleansed, with long columns of displaced persons
leading along roads, into cities and then out of the
country. 
In his motion of August 9, Mr. Milosevic claimed that
the tribunal had no authority over him because "his
extradition violated" the constitutions of Yugoslavia
and Serbia. 
"The transfer of Milosevic from a Belgrade jail to the
Hague was a clear obligation under the United Nations
Charter and the 1995 Dayton Peace Accords that ended
the war in Bosnia.  Slobodan Milosevic signed the
Dayton accord on behalf of Yugoslavia. The authorities
in Belgrade had a clear obligation under international
law to turn him over to face justice," said Dicker. 
Below please find a short Q & A on Milosevic's case
before the Tribunal. 
THE MILOSEVIC CASE: QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS 
Question:  Can the United Nations Security Council
establish an international court? 
Answer: The Security Council has, under Chapter VII of
the United Nations Charter, "paramount responsibility"
for dealing with threats to international peace and
security. Under this authority the Security Council
has taken many steps, including dispatching
peacekeepers to conflict zones, including the former
Yugoslavia. On May 25, 1993, the Security Council
adopted Resolution 827 establishing a court to try
those responsible for the worst crimes committed in
the Yugoslav conflict. When an earlier defendant
before the tribunal challenged its creation, his
claims were unanimously dismissed by Tribunal judges
from Italy, Egypt, China, Canada, and Pakistan. 
The Security Council also established a similar
tribunal to try those responsible for the 1994
genocide in Rwanda. The United Nations General
Assembly has no such authority. 
Question:  Is there an "anti-Serb bias" at the
Tribunal? 
The Tribunal is empowered to investigate anyone,
regardless of nationality, who committed serious
crimes in the course of the conflicts in the former
Yugoslavia.  As of March 2001, the Tribunal had
publicly indicted 66 individuals, 50 of them Serbs. 
It recently handed a down a forty-five year prison
sentence against a Croatian army general accused of
war crimes.  From its field investigations of the
conduct of all sides to the conflicts in the former
Yugoslavia, Human Rights Watch has found that the
majority of crimes were committed by Serb forces. Not
insignificantly, Serb forces were the only ones to
participate in each of the conflicts 
- in 
Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, and Kosovo. 
Question:  Can Slobodan Milosevic get a fair trial
before this Court which is strongly supported by NATO
countries?  Isn't the trial of Milosevic "victors'
justice"? 
While the tribunal is not perfect (no court is), the
ICTY functions according to the highest standards of
international justice. This means that Mr. Milosevic
will receive all the guarantees necessary for a fair
trial. Its proceedings have to date resulted in the
acquittal of a number of defendants, including Serbs,
on various charges. If the Tribunal falls short in
protecting any of Milosevic's rights to mount a
vigorous defense, it should be criticized and change
its practice. 
The ICTY is an international court.  The pre-trial
judges hearing the initial proceedings are from the
United Kingdom, Jamaica, and Morocco. As of April
2001, the Tribunal employed a staff of 1,103 from 74
different countries.  While certainly there are
citizens from NATO countries serving at all levels of
the Tribunal, if there is a specific conflict of
interest, that individual should recuse him or herself
from the proceedings. 
Question:  Why hasn't the Tribunal tried NATO
officials for war crimes in Yugoslavia? 
The tribunal carried out an investigation into the
conduct of NATO forces during the conflict in Kosovo
and concluded that there was insufficient evidence to
support a prosecution. 
Human Rights Watch itself conducted extensive field
research into the 1999 NATO air war against
Yugoslavia. We found that 500 civilians were killed
and 90 targets were selected inappropriately because
they were civilian targets. We concluded that these
incidents, which violated the laws of war, did not,
however, rise to the more serious level of "grave
breaches" or war crimes that the tribunal is empowered
to prosecute. 
If other evidence of NATO culpability for war crimes
does arise, it would be essential for the tribunal to
investigate those allegations. If the evidence
warrants, the court should investigate and, if need
be, prosecute those responsible for the alleged
crimes. 
For a short assessment of what happened on the ground
in Kosovo, including the "chain of command"
establishing Milosevic's authority, see 
http://www.hrw.org//press/2001/07/chain-of-command.htm
. 
For more information, please contact: 
Richard Dicker in The Hague: +31 6 229 36 503
(mobile); +31 70 362 4371 (Park Hotel) Elizabeth
Andersen, Washington: +1 202 612 4326 Jean-Paul
Marthoz in Brussels: +32 2 732 2009

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email alerts & NEW webcam video instant messaging with Yahoo! Messenger
http://im.yahoo.com

-------------------------------------------------
This Discussion List is the follow-up for the old stopnato @listbot.com that has been 
shut down

==^================================================================
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84x2u.a9spWA
Or send an email To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
This email was sent to: [email protected]

T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================



Reply via email to