Former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic refused to accept the jurisdiction of the UN tribunal in The Hague when he attended a pre-trial hearing.
Mr Milosevic - who at the 1995 Dayton peace accords solemnly undertook to co-operate with the tribunal - said in court that the tribunal lacked legitimacy because it had not been set up by the UN's General Assembly.
 I consider this tribunal a false tribunal and the
indictments false indictments - I have no need to appoint counsel to an
illegal organ  |
|
Slobodan Milosevic |
Under the UN Charter, the powers of the General Assembly, which includes all the member states, are severely circumscribed.
Assembly powers
Indeed, chapter IV, which deals with the General Assembly, repeatedly notes that the assembly "may make recommendations" - rather than give instructions - either to the Security Council or to the UN's member states.
By contrast, chapter V contains an explicit provision - article 25 - which binds UN members to "agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council".
Indeed, it is the 15-member Security Council which acts as the UN's effective executive arm, and makes most key decisions.
Its five permanent members - Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States - can each veto any resolution.
The decision to set up the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was reached unanimously in 1993.
Accepting the Security Council
Mr Milosevic's determination to question the UN Security Council's authority also goes against his previous willingness to go along with its decisions.
The Dayton accords were given the UN's backing in Security Council resolution 1031.
 The international press watches the
tribunal
proceedings |
So Mr Milosevic's performance in court on Tuesday seems to go against his earlier attitude towards the Security Council and against his written undertakings at Dayton.
In the face of his defiance, the tribunal judges entered a plea on his behalf as the rules of the court stipulate.
Serb hero?
Mr Milosevic's performance in court may be part of an attempt to cast himself in the image of a defeated Serb hero or martyr.
Some of the propaganda Belgrade put out during the Kosovo conflict described the fighting as yet another struggle by the much-persecuted Serbian nation against overwhelming odds.
Milosevic could challenge the presiding judge, Richard
May, on the grounds that he is from Britain - one of the leading
participants in Nato's air campaign against Yugoslavia |
Mr Milosevic may decide to persist in his refusal to recognise the tribunal in the hope of writing a new chapter of Serb history in which he plays the chief victim in yet another noble defeat.
Mounting a defence
Alternatively, he may change his mind and mount some kind of defence.
In this case, he could begin with several procedural matters.
He could challenge the presiding judge, Richard May, on the grounds that he is from Britain - one of the leading participants in Nato's air campaign against Yugoslavia.
Under the European Convention on Human Rights, one of the key tests is not just the impartiality of a judge but the perception that he or she is impartial.
In other words, Judge May's nationality itself could be used in questioning the perception of his impartiality.
International lawyers say there is as yet no precedent in European law for nationality being used as a possible cause of partiality.
Challenge to extradition
On the other hand, one of the main points about setting up The Hague tribunal was precisely to provide a neutral, international setting - rather than allow the former Yugoslav republics to try either their own or each other's nationals in a climate of ethnic hatred.
Mr Milosevic could also challenge the manner of his transfer to the tribunal which was carried out by the Serbian authorities in defiance of a ruling by the Yugoslav Constitutional Court.
However, it is unlikely the tribunal would want to intervene in Yugoslavia's internal legislation.
Besides, it has dismissed earlier challenges by other defendants who were in some cases forcibly arrested or abducted before being handed over to the tribunal.
Whichever option the former strongman of the Balkans chooses, he does not have to decide for some time.
According to the tribunal, Mr Milosevic and his team of lawyers - if he decides to employ them - will probably have between eight and 12 months to prepare his case.
That gives Mr Milosevic plenty of time to weigh up his options, and possibly to find out which of his co-accused might be joining him in prison and decide to testify against his former leader.
Miroslav Antic,
http://www.antic.org/
