TRUTH vs. CRIME: THE 4th ANNIVERSARY -- Act MMMCCCLXIX of *M*@*T*H* -- by Slobodan Milosevic and the whole ICe House Gang
[Here's the latest act in the on-going, seldom visible spectacle at The Hague. Like a thousand 'Mahabaratas', the World Combine v Milosevic (now up to 50,000 pages of transcript, and a million, two, in archival material) is playing now to an ever-shrinking audience of Balkan wonks and a few of Belgrade's local history buffs.
It has SO lived up to its pretrial billing as the 'Greatest Show Since Nuremberg' that no effort has been spared by its NATO promoters to keep people from following it. After President Milosevic's opening week debunking of the 'skinny-guy-behind-the-barded-wire Death Camp' shuck with his showing of the 'Judgment' video, Christine Amampour and CNN disappeared off the grass in front of the ICTY building like a couple lawn jockeys on Halloween. The New York Times and Le Monde consistently trivialize the process as 'bad theatre' in an attempt to hide its very real, hardcore illegality, irrationality and indecency; and the mass media in general can't stop ridiculing the defense and exhalting the feckless, ahistorical mendacity of the prosecution--in the performance of their by-now almost perfectly seamless--and absolutely shameless--criminalization of the victims and victimation of the real perpetrators and beneficiaries of military aggression--what seems to us a geopolitical expression of the Victims' Rights movement and Victims' Justice, initiated in Rwanda, transposed onto the Balkans, and, most recently, imposed on all that is left of the unaligned and/or secular world with the Endless War on Terror--and have hereby created what has become a flourishing off-shoot of Finklestein's 'Holocaust Industry': we here at CM/P call it 'The Haute Couture Genocide Game'.
But, here, experience what a day in the life of President Slobodan Milosevic is like. As hard as we might try here, I doubt this show will be coming to a theatre near you any time soon. --mc]
[PS: ONLY AFTER YOU'VE HELPED OUT THE MILOSEVIC DEFENSE (see below the transcript)--Please consider giving the ol' Cirque a hand--not a standing ovation, necessarily--just a small helping hand. Addresses for cash and checks are in the right column of this page. And NOW you can send you help thru PAYPAL by emailing it to cirqueminime@club-internet.fr
Thanks a lot. --mc]
**************************************************************
INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE TO DEFEND SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC
ICDSM Sofia-New York-Moscow www.icdsm.org
**************************************************************
Velko Valkanov, Ramsey Clark, Alexander Zinoviev (Co-Chairmen),
Klaus Hartmann (Chairman of the Board), Vladimir Krsljanin (Secretary),
Christopher Black (Chair, Legal Committee), Tiphaine Dickson (Legal
Spokesperson)
**************************************************************
12 February 2006 Special Circular
**************************************************************
TRUTH vs. CRIME: THE 4th ANNIVERSARY
On 12 December 2005, President Milosevic requested to be provisionally
released in order to obtain medical treatment in Bakulev Scientific
Institute in Moscow, headed by Professor Leo Bockeria, Main Cardiosurgeon of
the Russian Federation. On the basis of President Milosevic's request and
opinions of leading international medical specialists, including Professor
Bockeria himself, the Government of the Russian Federation issued
appropriate state guarantees to the Hague Tribunal on 17 January 2006.
Decision of the Trial Chamber is still pending.
What preceded was a dramatic warning about the state of President Milosevic'
s health, made by an international doctor's consilium on 4 November 2005,
recommending urgent break in the proceedings, six weeks of total rest and
additional examinations and treatment in a specialized medical institution.
That warning was echoed by the ICDSM in its special session in Belgrade on
12 November, when an urgent public appeal was signed by ICDSM co-chairs
Ramsey Clark and Velko Valkanov and Vice-President of the Russian State Duma
Sergei Baburin. Subsequently, groups of medical specialists from Serbia and
Germany also went public with their own appeals. Sloboda collected in only
two days 25000 signatures to put the issue on agenda of the Serbian
Parliament (something that never happened, in spite of the Serbian
Constitution). Russian Duma unanimously adopted a resolution expressing
serious concern about the President Milosevic's health.
The tribunal is acting slowly, bureaucratically and hypocritically. Six
weeks of urgently necessary rest were granted to President Milosevic (who in
the meantime almost collapsed in the court room) only in connection to usual
court Christmas recess. And in spite of all medical arguments and state
guarantees presented, the decision on provisional release has not been made
yet. All this in confirmation of Moscow Mayor Yuri Luzhkov, who, welcoming
the possibility that President Milosevic comes to Moscow, stated on 21
January that President Milosevic's situation "is a disgrace for a European
court, which instituted legal proceedings against him without sufficient
reasons, kept him under arrest for several years and now does not know what
to do. All their accusations fell apart, and now they are trying to put a
good face on the matter . They do not want to apologize to Milosevic for
several years that have been crossed out of his life", adding that there
should be a rule in the judicial practices, under which the judges who made
a mistake should be kept in custody as much time as the person, who was
illegally arrested through their fault.
But the most precise summary of what the four years of the Hague proceedings
represent was made by President Milosevic himself in one of his most
powerful addresses in this process (of course, totally bypassed by the
Western media) - on 29 November (by chance, the National Day of Yugoslavia)
2005, when he was, ill, forced to smash (with the help of legal arguments of
ICDSM and other international lawyers) the attempt of the Tribunal to severe
three indictments against him (united before the beginning of the process).
President Milosevic (don't miss to read the full transcript of his remarks
further below) told the judges:
"The present situation is the direct result of a megalomaniac ambition by
the other side and most probably by the desire to have the quantity of
material replace any serious proof and evidence against me. Quantity over
quality. Because you cannot have evidence and valid proof for untruths. And
you have supported the other side through your tolerant relationship with
them, and asking them to be limited in their scope.
"I am the main victim of having been bombed by various documents, material
witnesses, and so on, that the opposite side has been allowed to present
with the go-ahead from you. I think that this is a form of torture and a
form of cynicism to put that burden of responsibility upon me, all the more
so if this is linked to my health situation, which has been significantly
impaired because of the torture I have been exposed to.
"And what is this phantom of a joint criminal enterprise that is being
discussed here? And what is it that is exactly being alleged? People who are
sitting here, including me, including you, on the one hand, simply cannot
know all the things that are referred to in all these documents that Mr.
Nice served - a million pages, no less - and no one knows what the
Prosecutor is prosecuting, including the Prosecutor herself. She doesn't
know it either. I think that even Franz Kafka would feel that he did not
have great imagination compared to this.
"This entire Court was envisaged as an instrument of war against my country.
It was founded illegally on the basis of an illegal decision and carried
through by the forces that waged war against my country. There is just one
thing that is true here: It is true that there is a joint criminal
enterprise, but not in Belgrade, not in Yugoslavia as its center, but those,
who, in a war that was waged in Yugoslavia from 1991 onwards, destroyed
Yugoslavia.
"Do you want to tell me who pays your salary? Do you wish to claim that you
receive a salary from the United Nations? Who finances this Court, Mr.
Bonomy? Who established this Court, Mr. Bonomy? Who effected an aggression
against my country, Mr. Bonomy? Your country. And who am I asking to come in
to testify? Your presidents and Prime Ministers.
"Yugoslavia did not disintegrate or disappear in some manner, but it was
destroyed in a planned manner, forcefully, through a war, and that war is
still being waged, is still going on. And one of the instruments of this war
is your illegal Tribunal.
"Let me say straight away, as far as your judgements are concerned and
rulings in joinders or not joinders, I'm not afraid of them at all, because
if you judge according to the law and the truth, then there would never have
been this trial in the first place. But as we do have a trial, it can end
only in one way: A decision on the non-existence of culpability. And if you
don't rule based on justice and truth, then your ruling will disintegrate
and will burst like a bubble of soap, because the court of the world and the
court of justice and the truth is stronger than any other court. It is up to
each one of us, and each one of you gentlemen, to opt and choose what place
we're going to have before that court of history, and what its decision will
be. So don't harbour any illusions on that score.
"Let us hear what the truth is, and let the actual perpetrators of what
happened in Yugoslavia actually be exposed, although you said yourself, Mr.
Robinson, at one point in time, that you are not in charge of trying NATO
for what they did, although you know what they did and you know that the
basic tenet of any law in the world is that the law that does not apply to
one and all is not law at all."
************************************************************************
FULL TEXT OF PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC'S 29 NOVEMBER REMARCS
************************************************************************
Tuesday, 29 November 2005
[Motion Hearing]
[Open session]
--- Upon commencing at 9.05 a.m.
JUDGE ROBINSON: The Chamber scheduled a hearing this morning to hear
submissions from the parties on the question of severing the Kosovo
indictment and concluding that part of the trial. We'll hear first from the
Prosecutor.
MR. NICE: We filed a paper late yesterday afternoon. I don't know if the
Chamber has had an opportunity to consider it. (.)
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kay.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Kay, we'll hear from the accused before you.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I shall take up far less time than
Mr. Nice did.
I addressed you two weeks ago with a request that you respect the position
of the team of doctors from Russia, France, and Serbia to allow me a period
of rest, because that was observed on the basis of their findings that my
health had not been stabilised, that the possibility of complications
existed, and that a period of rest was indicated for at least a period of
six weeks.
You asked to hear the views of the Dutch physicians in that regard, and now
what is the state of that? What have they found? You have that in the
report. Dr. van Dijkman, who is a cardiologist, a specialist, one that you
selected here, in his report, wrote, among other things, the following: "[In
English] I strongly advise provision for sufficient rest."
[Interpretation] And he added: "[In English] And it seemed to me that the
six-week rest period is somewhat too much." [Interpretation] So the
cardiologist selected by you has confirmed the need for rest. The only
question is whether six weeks is somewhat too much. So that is one fact and
one point I wish to address.
Not a single one of the doctors who considered the report that you supplied
them with questioned the findings of the consilium of physicians from
Russia, France, and Serbia.
Otherwise, on the 15th of November -- and Mr. Nice here noted that I
strolled in, and he said that I wasn't able to work. I know exactly what I
said: I said that I wasn't feeling well, and that was the first time that I
did so in the past four years, the first time I said that in a four-year
period, the first time I asked the session to be interrupted because I
really didn't feel well. And even then this request of mine was met on your
part by keeping me in that small room on this floor an hour and a half while
your physician examined me.
Now, all the time that you have been questioning the positions taken by the
consilium, which has now been confirmed by your own doctors, the doctor at
the prison forbid me to come into court, first of all on the 12th of
November and then on a second occasion on the 21st of November. I had
prepared myself to come in here to court. I had put on my shirt and tie, and
then I was told there would be no transport and I wasn't able to come. So
when Mr. Bonomy says that I didn't come, I didn't come because it was your
own doctor who forbid me to come. I would like to make that quite clear.
Now, finally, this question that I complained about on the 15th and waited
patiently for two months, with growing problems, health problems, that
needed to be addressed, the question of my very serious symptoms, very high
pressure that I feel in my ears and oversensitivity to sound in general, at
the medical centre of the Leiden University, Dr. Dalal examined me fully and
wrote an objective finding. When I say "objective," I'm referring to the
finding that was written without the active part of the patient, so it was
only the passive participation of the patient, since the findings are based
on long-term electronic examination, and he told me that those objective
findings of his fully confirmed the symptoms that I complain of and the
problems -- health problems that I complain of.
Therefore, the physicians of my own choice who came here because my state
had not improved at all during those two months, and also the doctors you
selected yourselves, have come to the same conclusions, to all intents and
purposes. Your prison doctor told me that, over the past few days, he
supposed that I had managed to amass enough energy to deal with the pressure
that I have in my ears because he told me that Dr. Dalal, who is a very
highly placed professional in the area, is preparing some sort of solution
which will make it easier for me to deal with my health situation or do away
with the symptoms at all. So that is a very interesting standpoint from the
medical point of view, but I'm not going to comment on it now.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, we have not had the benefit of seeing Dr.
Dalal's report. You have been referring to it, so I just wanted you to know
that.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, I have not seen it
myself either, but I do know what he told me, after having examined me. I
was at the medical center of the university in Leiden, I underwent a lengthy
examination there. It was with the help of electronic instruments. It lasts
a long time. The patient has to lie down. There are no questions and answers
or anything of that kind. It is electronic sounding, using electronic
instruments. And then he told me after that examination that his objective
findings confirmed the symptoms that I complain of. That's what he told me,
and I assume he wrote that in his report.
Dr. Falke came and told me that he has good news for me, that Dr. Dalal
considers that he's going to be able to mitigate those symptoms or put them
right. I asked him a logical question: When? And he said, Well, in the next
few days. We'll do our best to hurry up. So how am I expected to work in the
meantime? Well, I -- he said, well, I assume you have accumulated enough
strength to persevere, you've lasted that long, and things along those
lines. I was in Bronovo Hospital in September for the magnetic resonance
test, and before that an ENT specialist saw me. That's been going on for
months, for three months, and the situation became worse and worse as time
progressed.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I just wanted to clarify that we did not
have the report to which you have been referring. Proceed with your
submissions on the question --
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I don't have it either. Yes, I'll get
to that, but it's all linked up. As I was saying, I assume you do have the
Dr. van Dijkman's report, do you?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, we have Dr. van Dijkman's report.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] And it says here -- very well. "[In
English] We strongly advise provision for sufficient rest." [Interpretation]
That's what it says in his report.
JUDGE ROBINSON: But as you noted, he went on to say that he did not
consider a period of six weeks to be required.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: "Somewhat too much." [Interpretation] That's what he
said.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] And I pointed that out. I didn't want
to quote it one-sidedly, quote what he said one-sidedly. Therefore,
gentlemen, it is my right to demand of you to enable me to have the right to
protect my own health, and I think it is your duty to protect that right and
support it. And that right is over and above all the other preoccupations
for which you have convened these proceedings here this morning. So my
request is this - I hope it is sufficiently clear - and I request that you
enable me to have a pause, that is to say, a period of rest in which to
recuperate. I understand that your basic preoccupation ...
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: Proceed, Mr. Milosevic.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I was waiting for you to finish
your discussion.
Mr. Nice, among other things, mentioned the question of whether I was
taking my medicaments or not. That can only be said by somebody who doesn't
know what prison procedure is like. You have to take your pills in front of
the guards in prison. That does not only apply to me, it applies to
everyone. And then the time at which you took your medications is recorded
into a log book.
I myself requested Falke to carry out a laboratory analysis to see how my
medicines were working, within the context of all my general efforts to help
myself. And I should like to mention the doctors that I invited came more
than two months after I put in a request to Falke and from the time they
sent me for my first examination. So all this was organised without
upsetting any of your plans.
So let's make each other understood there, let's be clear on that point. I
don't want to hear any more of the nonsensical kinds of things that Mr. Nice
has been saying.
Gentlemen, your principal preoccupation is time, and you have been devoting
such great effort to the question of time that when you speak of my health
state, you are looking at it exclusively, as it says in paragraph 6 of your
guidelines, the state of factors that upset these proceedings, the time
factors upsetting these proceedings, in your order. So that I think that the
protection of health and the measure to which this megalomaniac procedure,
with your permission, has been pursued by the opposite side is upsetting my
health, that, judging by all factors, doesn't seem to be important to you.
I would like to remind you gentlemen of the following: In paragraph 4 of
your order, which we have here before us on the table, you put forward the
chronology of your efforts to ensure expediency of this trial. I'm not going
to quote those passages because you have them in front of you. However, it
is interesting to note, and also indicative, that that chronology of
events - that is to say, that enormous wish to have expediency - begins in
July 2004, and that is what your chronology shows, which is a point in time
when it is up to me to present my Defence case. And the time I was given by
you was 150 days, and you said that that was the same as the 300 days
allocated to the other side. Several weeks ago, I mentioned here that the
number of hours which I was given by the opposite side shows the sum of --
which is lacking in 72 days. You didn't allow me to continue along those
lines, so I stopped, and I'm not going to talk about that now either, but
I'd just like to say that that remains as a fact.
So your concerns over expediency and efficiency started when my half time
began, and to my detriment. And the speed at which the proceedings have been
evolving became important when it came to my presentation of facts, and took
precedence over those facts and precedence over my state of health as well.
Now, had you expressed such concern over expediency during the time of
Nice's and Del Ponte's Prosecution case, then you would not have allowed
different witnesses to appear. Mr. Robinson, Mr. Kwon, you will remember
full well that we had witnesses here such some institute established in
haste in the space of a few days, right near here in Amsterdam, and they
held a report about genocide against the Armenians in Turkey and the
genocide in Rwanda and some other third place, I can't remember which now,
and that Dutchman talked about that at length, and you would never have
allowed things like that even to be presented here at a place like this,
including many other irrelevant witnesses. So we heard about the Armenians,
but we didn't hear about examples which the Dutch institute and the only
Dutch word that everybody knows in the world, the word "apartheid," how that
came into being. They didn't deal with the question of apartheid, but they
did deal with the Armenians in Turkey and Turks. So that was part of his
procedure, let alone other witnesses who came to waste time here and talk
about minor issues.
So you showed an enormous amount of understanding for the megalomaniac
ambitions of the opposite side to -- Yes, Mr. Robinson.
JUDGE ROBINSON: You are now wasting our time. We are here to consider two
issues: The question of severance and the medical -- and your medical
condition. Confine your submissions to those two issues.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Robinson, you did not
interrupt Mr. Nice when he was making the most absurd claims here, and I
think that these absurd claims of his can be responded to --
JUDGE ROBINSON: If you're going to continue like this, I will stop.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] All right.
JUDGE ROBINSON: You told us you wish to make submissions. If I did not
interrupt Mr. Nice, it was because there was no reason to interrupt him. Let
us proceed.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Let us proceed. I'm referring to what
it says here in your own decision concerning the order that we're discussing
today. So the time lost, you say, due to my health, in the period when you
started expressing this intense interest in the expeditiousness of the
trial.
I want to draw your attention to the fact that this time that you call lost
or wasted is much shorter than time wasted due to another matter, and that
is when you unlawfully took away my right to self-representation last year.
Because of what you did, some of the deadlines that you had set yourselves
and that you mention in this chronology were simply not met at the moment
when my Defence case finally started after the decision made by that Appeals
Chamber of yours. So, gentlemen, do not blame my health - and I'm not to be
blamed for the state of my health - for time wasted, when you're the ones
who wasted the time. As for all the time that's been taken up, and in terms
of my health, the other side there is also to be blamed, because of the
torture that they have been exposing me to due to their megalomaniac
designs. And you never oppose that.
In paragraph 5 from the end of your order, your scheduling order for this
hearing, today's hearing, you deal with the positions taken by the Appeals
Chamber. I think that, due to the importance of what you note here, it is
necessary to see what it says there in paragraph 26. It says that: "[In
English] If the prosecution fails to discharge this responsibility, the
Trial Chamber has sufficient powers under the Rules of Procedure and
Evidence to order the prosecution to reduce its list of witnesses to ensure
that the trial remains as manageable as possible.
Finally, if with the benefit of hindsight it becomes apparent to the Trial
Chamber that the trial has developed in such a way as to become
unmanageable - especially if, for example, the prosecution is either
incapable or unwilling to exercise the responsibility which it bears to
exercise restraint in relation to the evidence it produces - it will still
be open to the Trial Chamber at that stage -" [Interpretation] I emphasise
that - "at that stage," just like I pointed out the Prosecution a moment
ago - "[In English] to order a severance of the charges arising out of one
or more of the three areas in the former Yugoslavia."
[Interpretation] So what is referred to here are the resources that you
have available if the other side, and that is what is emphasised, does not
act in accordance with its obligation in paragraph 25, where it says that
the Prosecution has a great responsibility to prevent the trial from being
unmanageable due to an overabundance of material, et cetera, et cetera. So
your very own Chamber here says that: "The prosecution will bear a heavy
responsibility to ensure that the single trial ..." et cetera, et cetera,
that the trial is manageable.
It's not only that example, but also the systematic interpretation of what
the Appeals Chamber said in the context where the severance of trials is
discussed. Obviously, they took into account the situation that came to pass
a long time ago because of the megalomaniac ambitions of the Prosecution in
these proceedings that you call a trial.
I also want to note here that the Appeals Chamber did not look at my health
at all, and I don't think that they needed to look at it at all, at that
time, that is. But not even bearing that in mind, they emphasised need to
rest. Please, in paragraph 27, it says: "[In English] As has been shown to
be necessary in all long trials before this Tribunal, the Trial Chamber will
from time to time have to take a break in the hearing of evidence to enable
the parties to marshal their forces and, if need be, for the unrepresented
accused to rest from the work involved."
[Interpretation] So, gentlemen, the only effect that my health can have on
these proceedings is the fact that breaks are taken if my health gets worse,
or, with any luck, to have proper short rest periods so that any worsening
of my health is prevented. However, I am quoting your own decision when you
say that these are factors that constantly impede the trial. And I have read
out paragraph 26 to you, and you say -- you quote paragraph 26 when you say
that the trial becomes unmanageable, but it is the other way around. I have
quoted paragraph 26 to you, and the Appeals Chamber has instructed you how
to make the trial more manageable: To give breaks from time to time, and so
on and so forth.
Now, gentlemen, do you really think that somebody would be crazy enough to
believe that the Appeals Chamber would, in paragraph 26, instruct measures
to be taken that would be in contravention of paragraph 26 of their own
decision? Do you think that your colleagues are that unreasonable that they
call for pauses in the trial, breaks in the trial, and that that is
counter-productive? That's the way it should be, according to what Mr. Nice
said here too. Of course, that's wrong. The right way of interpreting it is
that by severing the trial, you are actually acting against the decision of
the Appeals Chamber and you are incorrectly interpreting their words. So
that would be an abuse of a document in order to violate that same document,
which is quite unbelievable. It is illogical and unlawful acrobatics. Also,
for years, you have been violating --
JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Milosevic, what you ignore entirely in that submission is
that these words of the Appeal Chamber were pronounced when this trial could
sit five days a week, and elaborate arrangements have been made to give you
rest throughout the period since 2003.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] When was it that you gave me a break,
a rest? Just remind me, please.
JUDGE BONOMY: Every week you get a rest, because you can only do three days
a week.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] No one works five days a week here,
especially for such a long period of time, so please don't count on me --
please, in Dr. Van Dijkman's report, in a part that I did not quote, in the
paragraph that precedes the one that I quoted, it says: "In view of the
current work schedule [In English] it is understandable -- In view of the
current work schedule, it is understandable that the patient feels fatigued.
He has three court sessions per week and spends the rest of the time
preparing for them, including interviewing witnesses."
[Interpretation] So how is it that you think that I can interview witnesses
during these remaining days if I'm supposed to get some rest then?
JUDGE ROBINSON: You can get the rest -- you could get the rest if you
utilised the services that are available to you. You do not have to
interview witnesses. That could be done by assigned counsel. You have chosen
to do that.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I have seen how the assigned counsel
work with witnesses when you made it possible for them to question
witnesses, by force, and I concluded that it was absolutely inadequate.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, what comes to mind -- what comes to my mind
are the words of Marc Antony in his funeral oration for Julius Caesar:
"Ingratitude, more strong than traitors' arms ..." You are an ingrate in
relation to the work of the assigned counsel and the help they have given
you. It does you no credit for taking that approach to assigned counsel.
Continue.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I do not wish to insult Ms. Higgins
or Mr. Kay, not in the least bit. But they know full well that they know
very little about the situation in the territory of the former Yugoslavia,
especially regarding issues that I am being indicted for here by Mr. Nice
and this entire side that he represents. Mr. Nice made absurd assertions
here, allegations regarding my alleged participation in various things in
Bosnia, and during the presentation of his case, he did not give a shred of
evidence about my alleged crimes in Bosnia-Herzegovina. He talked about
events that occurred in Bosnia-Herzegovina. But, on the other hand, there is
ample evidence that my greatest efforts over all those years was to attain
peace, and I was given credit for that by all sorts of Western leaders as
the person who gave the greatest contribution to that and --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I have stopped you. I want submissions on
the two issues before us: Severance and, to the extent relevant, your
health. We'll take an adjournment for 20 minutes.
--- Recess taken at 10.39 a.m.
--- On resuming at 11.07 a.m.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Just to make sure that the transcript is correct in
relation to my reference to Marc Antony, it's: "Ingratitude, more strong
than traitors' arms ..." You can at least get it correct in the English.
Mr. Milosevic, there's a matter in which I think you can help us. You have
37 or 45 witnesses outstanding for Kosovo. How, in the light of the
remaining days left for your case, do you plan to manage your case so as to
complete Kosovo as well as Bosnia and Croatia? And, please, I don't want to
hear the refrain that this merely shows how little time or how inadequate is
the time that has been allocated to you.
THE INTERPRETER: Microphone, please.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] The microphone wasn't switched on.
What I was saying was this: Mr. Robinson, the question of time you seem to
be placing in first place, so I assume you won't have anything against me
having comments to make with respect to that issue.
I should like to remind you, Mr. Robinson, that a certain amount of time
ago, I did indicate the need to give me adequate time. Had you personally --
and that you personally said at the time that it was too early to discuss
the matter, that is to say, to give me adequate time. Now, to carry on from
where you interrupted with your comment that I should use imposed counsel,
let me present my position and you do with it what you will and make your
own conclusions as you desire. But I don't think you'll be able to topple
that position.
It is my right to represent myself, and that right emanates from
international law and is contained in your Statute as well. Therefore, you
are duty-bound to enable me to make effective use of that right. That right
cannot be made up for by some sort of assigned or imposed counsel.
It is my right to be able to present my own Defence, and it is grounded in
the documents that are well known to you all. So it is your duty to enable
me to use that right effectively and not some fictitious right which is
accorded me in formal terms whereas it is withheld in realistic terms. If I
have that right, then you must enable me to use it effectively and to avail
myself of that right.
And the comment that I don't have to proof witnesses myself is the same as
saying that I don't have to avail myself of the right accorded me and that I
have chosen to use my right to my own detriment. So the substance of the
matter is that I should be allowed to use that right effectively.
Now, with regard to the question of time, once again, Mr. Nice quoted
different documents and so you'll allow me to do the same, to quote from
various documents. And I have sufficient examples for you, although in
Serbian because it is a Serbian translation, it is a statement by a group of
members of the Russian Association of International Law for Monitoring the
Process of the Prosecutor versus Slobodan Milosevic in the International
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, which a few days ago was published by
the Moscow Journal of International Law and it was translated from that
Moscow Journal. It is the largest and most important forum of that nature in
Russia, and the most important journal for international law in Russia as
well.
Among others, in point 1, which they discuss, it is the right of the
accused to have sufficient time. Now, this term "sufficient time" means for
the preparation of his Defence. That has been extracted from "international
documents," and this is what it says:
"After the signing of the first indictment raised against S. Milosevic by
the Prosecutor up until the start of the Prosecution case, two years elapsed
and eight months. Throughout that time, time was used to prepare the
indictment. Preparations of the indictment went on eight months after the
accused was in prison. Now, for the preparation of the Defence case,
Slobodan Milosevic was given three months."
And then they go on to quote your order concerning the preparation and
presentation of the Defence case of September 17th, 2003. "After an
extension of the time limit with respect to the accused's health, the
Defence case, as a whole, amounted to six months, but that extended time was
not used to prepare the Defence because the Registry of the Tribunal denied
Milosevic the right to meet with witnesses in connection with his health. It
is quite clear that the time for the preparation of the Defence case in the
most complex international crimes contained in 66 charges and 1.000 events
in prison conditions is inadequate. In keeping with the principle of fair
play and equality of arms, the accused must be accorded at least as much
time for his Defence case as the Prosecution had for the Prosecution case
from the time the indictment was signed until the case went to trial. In
conformity with giving the accused sufficient time for preparation of his
Defence case, and taking into consideration the complexity of the case
itself, S. Milosevic must be given adequate time, and six months cannot be
termed adequate time. The request by the accused to be granted more time was
turned down by the Appeals Chamber as well, who said that, 'choosing to
represent himself, the accused has given up the right of enjoying the
benefits of the Defence team set up for him,' and that he himself, 'will
bear the brunt of not accepting the services of assigned counsel.'"
That is the decision of January 2004. In this connection, the Appeals
Chamber referred to four decisions made by national courts, but it forgot to
refer to the norms of international law which are in force, and the most
senior Chamber of the Tribunal, which was duty-bound to protect the rights
of the accused, confirmed the unlawful decision by the Trial Chamber to the
detriment of the accused for having opted to represent himself without
providing legal arguments in sufficient scope.
"Apart from that, this right is part of the rights that do not have a time
limit," and it says, "see Article 3 of international -- covenant of
international laws where everybody has the right, as a minimum, to the
following guarantees and conditions." And the conclusion is, of this group,
that is to say, the group of the Russian International Law Association, is
that: "The Tribunal has violated the rights of the accused to be given
sufficient time to prepare his defence case."
I won't continue quoting. I will ask you to take up this decision, and I'm
sure your translators will be able to translate it into English for you.
They contain many other points, but I think it would be beneficial for you
to read it.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Did I understand you correctly to read from the Journal of
International Lawyers that this right is part of the rights that do not have
a time limit? Is that what you read?
THE INTERPRETER: Statute of limitations, interpreter's note.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I read what it says exactly in that
statement. I'll go back to that. Let me just see.
JUDGE ROBINSON: What right are they referring to? Is it the right to a
defence? Is it the right of an accused to put up his defence?
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] The right of the accused, and then
they quote "to have sufficient time and possibility for preparation of his
defence." That is point 1, which I quoted.
JUDGE ROBINSON: And is that the right which they say is without a time
limit? I'm trying to understand what you just read.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Well, Mr. Robinson, they don't say
that it has a time limit. What they say is, the amount of time that was
necessary and accorded to the opposite side for writing the indictment, and
claim that I must be given that same amount of time. And they quoted exactly
when the indictment was signed and how long it took them to prepare for the
Prosecution case to go ahead with the trial. So it's no fluid category that
we're dealing with here, without boundaries. They are talking and comparing
the time that the other side had at its disposal and the time accorded to me
by you. And those six months, or barely six months, cannot be compared to a
period of three years, let alone compared to the fact that I am managing my
Defence myself, whereas Del Ponte and Nice have an enormous machinery at
their disposal, including all their services and experts and so on and so
forth.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] And when I mentioned -- Mr. Robinson,
when I mentioned the NATO pact officers, let me remind you, since Mr. Nice
is talking about proof and evidence, I would like to remind you that their
military expert, Mr. Theunens, said here on behalf of the whole group
working on the subject matter, that they studied thousands of documents, and
I asked him here, "Do you have any document of mine?" if you remember, Mr.
Robinson, and he said, "Yes, I do." And I asked him to place it on the
overhead projector.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic --
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Do you remember that?
JUDGE ROBINSON: -- I can understand the submission that an accused person
is entitled to sufficient time, but I do not accept a submission that there
is no time limit for putting a defence. You're entitled to a reasonable
time. If your Russian association of lawyers said that there is no time
limit in putting a defence, and if by that they meant that an accused person
would be entitled to put a defence ad infinitum, I utterly reject that.
You're entitled to a reasonable time to put your Defence. Continue.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, in responding to your
question, I precisely said that that is not what they claim, that the
accused has limitless rights. All they claim is that the accused must be
given the same amount of time as given to the Prosecution for preparing the
indictment. And they were able to establish that time in quite exact terms
by comparing the date in which the indictment was raised and the date when
the trial started here, and that was a period of time that was exactly
established, let alone the fact that before they actually wrote the
indictment, they had to have done some preparatory work as well.
So you did not understand the explanation and quotation that I read out to
you properly, so I suggest that you take this report and read it for
yourself, because I think that they are leading international lawyers who
took part in writing it, and I wish to add to this that we are not only
speaking -- although this is a statement by the International Russian
Federation legal minds, but of course there is a series of broad circles of
experts for international law from other countries, including those
countries who wrote the petition to Kofi Annan with respect to your conduct
towards me from some 30-odd countries that signed it and went to visit the
Secretary-General of the Security Council. So this is a position that is
widespread in the world, and it would suffice, if I were in your place, if I
were to read this position elaborated by the experts from the Russian
Federation that rank among the top professionals in the world in their
field. As I was saying - let me continue - the present situation is the
direct result of a megalomaniac ambition by the other side and most probably
by the desire to have the quantity of material replace any serious proof and
evidence against me. Quantity over quality. Because you cannot have evidence
and valid proof for untruths. And you have supported the other side through
your tolerant relationship with them, and asking them to be limited in their
scope.
I am the main victim of having been bombed by various documents, material
witnesses, and so on, that the opposite side has been allowed to present
with the go-ahead from you. I think that this is a form of torture and a
form of cynicism to put that burden of responsibility upon me, all the more
so if this is linked to my health situation, which has been significantly
impaired because of the torture I have been exposed to.
And I would like to remind you that when General Stevanovic testified here,
in some context or other - it's not important now; we can look at the
transcript if we want to see the exact context - I said that the opposite
side served over a million pages of material on me. Mr. Nice intervened at
that point and said it was only 600.000, and with respect to the others it
was copies supplied twice.
Now, without entering into whether I was served double copies, and would
have to read through all the material to see whether that was true, and
there's no justification for that either, but nonetheless it's an enormous
amount of material. And that every participant in this trial had to read 500
to 1.000 pages per day every day over the space of three and a half years,
without exception and without all their other obligations. And a normal
human being is quite certainly not able to read even a small portion of
that. And as I believe that nobody could claim to be a superpowerful human
in any sense here, then we come to the conclusion that the situation is
quite unrealistic and in this hall for three and a half years we have had a
group of people taking part in something that we can call or is called a
trial, whereas none of the participants in the proceedings knows what it
says in the files on the basis of which the discussions are being held here.
Please, to a certain extent, it is not only that that people don't know
about; they don't know what the other side is prosecuting me for. I would
particularly like to highlight the issue of a Greater Serbia in that
context. This was represented by the other side four years ago when they
asked for a joinder of trials, that that was the red thread bringing all
parts of the case together, and the Trial Chamber agreed to that. So then
you cannot talk about severing the case without dealing with the destiny of
that particular issue.
On the 25th of August this year, Mr. Nice, after three and a half years of
trial, said that he was not prosecuting me on account of a Greater Serbia,
and he ascribed that idea to me from the very outset, from his introductory
remarks and then through the testimony of almost half or even more than half
of his witnesses who -- his witnesses, who spoke of a Greater Serbia as my
objective and answered questions put by him to them in that context.
So how can you talk about severance, then, before giving answers to certain
questions? What is the fate of these proceedings that have been going on for
over three years where you and I, and probably the other side, thought that
I was being tried for a Greater Serbia, which was the objective of some kind
of alleged joint criminal enterprise. So that was what we tried to deal with
when putting questions to the witnesses and in dealing with all the
evidence, because that is what Mr. Nice was alleging through his witnesses.
So, then, what is the legal validity of that part of the proceedings, when
we were all being deluded into believing that this was the main objective of
the Prosecution? So what's the point of all these witnesses who talked about
a Greater Serbia as my primary goal here? Are you going to take that out of
the evidence, the body of evidence, or are you going to let me examine them
further?
Also, what about this joint criminal enterprise? And what would its
objective be after this change? And what is this phantom of a joint criminal
enterprise that is being discussed here? And what is it that is exactly
being alleged? People who are sitting here, including me, including you, on
the one hand, simply cannot know all the things that are referred to in all
these documents that Mr. Nice served - a million pages, no less - and no one
knows what the Prosecutor is prosecuting, including the Prosecutor herself.
She doesn't know it either. I think that even Franz Kafka would feel that he
did not have great imagination compared to this.
So now, gentlemen, after almost four years of a joined trial, after
omitting to exercise your own responsibilities and duties and to bridle the
other side, as instructed by the Appeals Chamber, so perhaps you could have
even severed the trial at some point earlier on, but now you want to do it
four years later. Four years later. And during those four years, this was a
whole, an entity, not only from the point of view of process, but also from
the material point of view, where the other side presented its own body of
evidence as a whole and then I based my Defence case on that single entity.
And since there is this time pressure that you've been insisting upon all
the time, the crossover that you say, witnesses that testify about Kosovo
and Bosnia and Croatia, now I have to make a selection, it appears, with a
great deal of effort, I must say.
Immediately, there is another question that comes to mind: As for these
witnesses that, for the most part, pertain to Kosovo, but some of them also
have to do with Bosnia and Croatia, include witnesses that I asked you to
call: Clinton, Clark. And during his testimony here, you did not allow me to
put questions in relation to the war that he commanded and the book that he
wrote about it. And these are key witnesses. For over a year, you've been in
correspondence with them. It is high time for you to understand that they
will not come here without your order.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, that, again, is a matter in relation to
which you owe a great debt of gratitude to assigned counsel. Through their
action, through their professionalism, we are considering now a motion to
subpoena certain witnesses, and without their intervention, without their
help, we would not have been considering this.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Yes, I know about that. I know about
that, Mr. Robinson.
So severance would create the following situation: That they prosecute me
for one thing, and halfway, I start defending myself from other things that
I'm being accused of. I have to defend myself a bit from one and a bit from
the other, and then what I do here, when presenting the truth, is being
sabotaged in practical terms; it is being truncated. And the effect of the
fact that Mr. Nice changes his position with regard to a Greater Serbia
halfway multiplies the effort involved.
What he said is true, that, as regards Kosovo, then, you would be in a
position to decide, under the impression of many years of having heard
senseless and totally baseless accusations related to Bosnia and Croatia. He
talks about victims here. Let me see one single victim of mine here. He
never established any link whatsoever between what he presented and the
charges that he's bringing against me. These victims do not deserve this.
They do not deserve having the wrong people being accused of things done
against them.
Mr. Nice mentioned Annex B. I don't have time to read it, but let's have a
look at it. The first witness here, Stjepan Mesic, the current president of
Croatia, who testified here, the first person mentioned in Annex B, the
famous Stjepan Mesic, who did his very best to break up Yugoslavia, who
stated himself that he carried out his job, that Yugoslavia was no more. And
he says here "[In English] ... where he said ..." [Interpretation] and so on
and so forth, and so on and so forth.
Nonsense, sheer nonsense. And this Mesic got that from this distorted and
forged BBC TV show which seems to be Mr. Nice's lodestar.
Indictments should be based on facts, not on comic books, TV shows, what
have you not. So this is kitsch, really, the entire Prosecution case, both
in terms of the vehicles used and the witnesses called. Kitsch.
So now, if you wanted to check this, it would be as if somebody were
playing a game of football for 50 minutes, and then in the second half he
starts playing basketball. It's even worse, because the adverse effects are
only on my side. It is only the Defence that has to deal with the negative
effects. So it becomes even more senseless because the change of the terms
and conditions is only to my detriment.
And I wish to say --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Just a minute, Mr. Milosevic.
[Trial Chamber confers]
JUDGE ROBINSON: Yes, Mr. Milosevic.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] So the proposal to sever the trial is
so pointless, but I think that you yourselves show the senselessness through
your own words: "[In English] ... for the Trial Chamber to sever the Kosovo
Indictment, conclude that part of the trial and render its Judgement thereon
..."
Gentlemen, "part of the trial" are the words that you clearly use here, so
the objective should be to conclude part of the trial. But parts of the
trial cannot be concluded. Parts cannot be concluded. Parts of the trial
cannot be concluded. Trials have a Prosecution case and a Defence case and
then they can be concluded, but to conclude part of a trial is basically an
abuse of trial. Or what would that mean, to conclude part of a trial? [In
English] A mistrial.
[Interpretation] I think that this Kafkaesque situation that I just
described, if there were to be a severance, would make the entire situation
even more absurd and more incredible. Of course, again, you're going to
decide as you wish, and then you won't understand why, throughout the world,
this trial of yours is being treated as an ordinary farce.
So, gentlemen, I'm opposed to your order, and the first thing I ask you to
do is to return to me my right to health, to make it possible for me to have
a break to recuperate.
And in relation to what Mr. Bonomy said when he expressed his astonishment
when Mr. Nice was referring to what the public was talking about, I wish to
remind you of the following: In all the paragraphs of the Kosovo indictment
where alleged crimes are referred to over the allegedly unarmed Albanians,
it says: "The forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and the Republic
of Serbia" did such and such a thing. In all paragraphs, without exception.
All of Serbia, and everyone in the international public knows that the
forces of the FRY of Serbia were protecting, defending the country from
terrorism and foreign aggression.
That is what is perfectly clear.
Now, this phrase which is used in every paragraph pertaining to the alleged
crimes, "the forces of the FRY and Serbia," you are supposed to make a
judgement, when lo and behold, the negotiations on the final status of
Kosovo and Metohija are about to start, not to mention the fact that as a
precondition for bringing the war to an end, we got the firmest possible
international guarantees for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of
the country. So what a coincidence. Is there anyone that you can dissuade
that that is not the aim of those that you receive orders from, that it is
the forces of the FRY and Serbia that have to be found guilty for defending
their own territory so that those who really did this would not stand
accused but rather achieve their geopolitical objectives.
So that is quite clearly present in the public opinion. And this is a
coincidence that everybody noticed immediately. It was not necessary for
anyone to explain it to them.
JUDGE BONOMY: Mr. Milosevic, I wonder if you can help me and tell me how
these instructions are conveyed to me, because I'm obviously missing some
part of the information that you seem to consider as essential to my
judgement of this matter. How is it I get my orders? Where do they come
from? You who so proudly denies the allegations against you about conveying
orders to others on the basis of no information, on no evidence, what is the
evidence you suggest indicates that I receive orders from somewhere?
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Bonomy, this entire Court was
envisaged as an instrument of war against my country. It was founded
illegally on the basis of an illegal decision and carried through by the
forces that waged war against my country. There is just one thing that is
true here: It is true that there is a joint criminal enterprise, but not in
Belgrade, not in Yugoslavia as its center, but those, who, in a war that was
waged in Yugoslavia from 1991 onwards, destroyed Yugoslavia.
Yugoslavia did not disintegrate by --
JUDGE BONOMY: You fail to answer my question. Please answer the question
rather than embark on a political diatribe.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson -- or, rather, Mr.
Bonomy, I'm not making political speeches here at all. I think that you are
in the service of those who committed crimes against my country and against
my people, and you're receiving a salary from them.
JUDGE BONOMY: You're refusing to answer the question, are you?
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] No, no, I'm not refusing. Do you want
to tell me who pays your salary? Do you wish to claim that you receive a
salary from the United Nations? Who finances this Court, Mr. Bonomy? Who
established this Court, Mr. Bonomy? Who effected an aggression against my
country, Mr. Bonomy? Your country. And who am I asking to come in to
testify? Your presidents and Prime Ministers.
JUDGE BONOMY: Are you suggesting I am not paid by the United Nations?
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I claim that, Mr. Bonomy, because the
United Nations are -- finance this illegal Tribunal of yours. It's financed
from all manner of sources. I have enumerated some of them.
Now, whether you, in formal terms, whether you, in formal terms, receive a
salary via this institution which calls itself a United Nations Tribunal is
quite immaterial as far as I'm concerned.
JUDGE BONOMY: Well, now you move on to another issue when you're proved to
be wrong. So let's concentrate on the issue that you're addressing; the
question of severance.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Therefore, gentlemen, as I've already
told you, I am opposed to severance because I would say that was -- that was
a war, it was one war. I said Yugoslavia did not disintegrate or disappear
in some manner, but it was destroyed in a planned manner, forcefully,
through a war, and that war is still being waged, is still going on. And one
of the instruments of this war is your illegal Tribunal.
Let me say straight away, as far as your judgements are concerned and
rulings in joinders or not joinders, I'm not afraid of them at all, because
if you judge according to the law and the truth, then there would never have
been this trial in the first place. But as we do have a trial, it can end
only in one way: A decision on the non-existence of culpability. And if you
don't rule based on justice and truth, then your ruling will disintegrate
and will burst like a bubble of soap, because the court of the world and the
court of justice and the truth is stronger than any other court. It is up to
each one of us, and each one of you gentlemen, to opt and choose what place
we're going to have before that court of history, and what its decision will
be. So don't harbour any illusions on that score.
Therefore, as I said, I am opposed to severance. I demand that I be given a
rest period to recuperate. I stress that today, too, I came in in a very
poor state of health, extremely poor, but I did come in so that we can
continue the proceedings. Therefore, I demand that you consider my request
to give me a break, a period of rest. And as for severance or non-severance,
I've stated my views on that matter, too.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic. (.)
JUDGE ROBINSON: There are several issues arising from the matters that we
have considered today. I wish to note -- Mr. Milosevic.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Will I get an opportunity to say a
few words with regard to these questions that Mr. Nice raised?
JUDGE ROBINSON: Well, you've already spoken, and we have heard you. Do you
have something that could be said very briefly?
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] We heard him before me and now he
spoke, well, for a considerable amount of time yet again.
JUDGE ROBINSON: That was a response to you. That's traditional in these
matters. If you have something to say, I'll hear it, briefly.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Before I speak in connection with
what Mr. Nice said, and he repeated lots of nonsense that we have occasion
to hear from him here, I just wish to provide a piece of information to Mr.
Bonomy because he asked me about this.
So, Mr. Bonomy, in relation to the financing of this illegal Tribunal of
yours, according to your own Article 32 of your own Statute, the expenses
are covered from the regular budget of the UN. However, they arrive from
very murky sources; the Soros Foundation, various foundations from the
Islamic countries, with NATO being the major financier.
On the 17th of May, 1999, Jamie Shea, the spokesperson of NATO, said: "NATO
countries are those [In English] ... the finest to set up Tribunal. We are
amongst the majority financiers. We want to see war criminals brought to
justice. I'm certain that when Justice Arbour goes to Kosovo and looks at
the facts, she will be indicting people of Yugoslavian nationality, and I
don't anticipate any others at this stage."
[Interpretation] So the main financier is NATO, and the others are the
Soros Foundation and foundations from Islamic countries, and so on and so
forth. So that is perfectly clear.
And on page 35550 from these proceedings here, I'm just going to quote Mr.
Nice, who talks about a witness, and says: "[In English] If we go to page 2
of 11, halfway down the page we can see that this is by no means written by
people who are friends of the ICTY or any Western conspiracy, because the
author describes NATO's intervention as the recent 'brutal, illegal, and
illegitimate intervention of the NATO forces against the country.'
"So you would accept that this is a Serb without any particular leaning
towards the forces and powers that established this Tribunal ..." et cetera.
[Interpretation] So, Mr. Bonomy, for Mr. Nice, obviously there is no
dilemma, the kind of dilemma you have. So you can clarify it with him, what
he meant to say then. Since you say that you don't know about this, I hereby
inform you of this. And I believe that, as an honourable man, once you've
found out, and I can give you further evidence, you can leave this story
that you got into without realising what you got yourself into. And now as
for Mr. Nice and what he said, he said the most senseless thing possible
about a Greater Serbia --
JUDGE BONOMY: I have to say I haven't the remotest idea what you're talking
about now in relation to this. In fact, the more I read it, the less
comprehensible it becomes.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, I have to say to you that you are not at
large here. I am giving you a chance to comment on some issues if you
consider them to be issues of importance. Although the Prosecutor did not
file a motion, I asked the Prosecutor to begin. So in accordance with the
tradition in adversarial systems, I allowed him to reply. In these
circumstances, I don't see you as having any right to reply, but you
obviously have an interest, a fundamental interest, in the outcome of these
matters, and it is for that reason that I'm allowing you to say something at
this stage. But please don't abuse it.
Proceed, bearing in mind that we are now almost seven minutes to two.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] As for what Mr. Nice said that
pertains to one of the key issues, as for Greater Serbia, he explained just
now that I did not utter that word, but I assume that he's trying to say
that there is something that was done. I also think that deeds have to be
looked into first and foremost, and the deed is the following, Mr. Robinson
and gentlemen: In this entire period, from 1991 onwards, no one was expelled
from Serbia on account of ethnic affiliation. There was no discrimination
whatsoever. No one from Serbia and no one from the Federal Republic of
Yugoslavia was discriminated against on account of his religion, race, or
beliefs. That is a fact, gentlemen. And at that time that you are interested
in, I was president of Serbia and president of Yugoslavia, and no one was
ever expelled from there. That is a fact.
Now, what Mr. Nice is trying to ascribe to me --
JUDGE ROBINSON: [B/C/S spoken on English channel] I want to make it clear
I'm not interested in this. I'm interested in the question of severance. I
am not clear. We are back to English now. Did you hear what I said? I said
I'm not interested in a general discussion on Greater Serbia. If you have
something to say about Greater Serbia because it impacts on the question of
severance, then I'll allow you to say it. But don't regurgitate the
arguments which we've heard ad nauseam about this issue.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Robinson, the question of time is
being raised here, and Mr. Nice devoted due attention to that in the speech
he just made. According to Mr. Nice, the best thing would be not to have
anyone testify in public but to do all of it in writing, and Mr. Nice is
explaining to you how they abided by that, that they were very economical,
very expeditious. And in spite of all these heaps of paper and all these 92
bis and 89(F) testimonies, he used up 300 days. So please do not take into
account these things that are in contravention of pure mathematics.
I was not saying that no one worked for five days. I was just trying to say
that no one sat for five days. Of course I work for more than five days,
although we sit here only for three days. And after all, Dr. van Dijkman
wrote that three days is what I do here, and as for the rest of my time, I
have to prepare myself for here, including the proofing of witnesses. And
that is what he knows full well and that is what you know full well, so that
is an argument that cannot be used at all.
Mr. Nice's advice is that I collect written statements from witnesses. The
basic aim of public testimony is to hear the truth, because if we were to
stop at what Mr. Nice wrote, together with his associates, that would be a
monstrous lie. So in order to have the truth heard, there is a great
interest involved, a historical interest, I should say, of my people, of my
country. But not only of my people and of my country, of mankind in general
and of the times in general. Let us hear what the truth is, and let the
actual perpetrators of what happened in Yugoslavia actually be exposed,
although you said yourself, Mr. Robinson, at one point in time, that you are
not in charge of trying NATO for what they did, although you know what they
did and you know that the basic tenet of any law in the world is that the
law that does not apply to one and all is not law at all.
Therefore, I ask for adequate time to be given to me.
JUDGE BONOMY: I, again, have to say I don't understand this submission.
Because something is in writing does not mean it is not in public.
Everything in writing here, submitted in writing that's not confidential,
becomes public. And at this stage, it's not, as you would see it, lies that
we're suggesting ought to be presented in writing, it's what you claim to be
the truth, because it is you that would be presenting the written material,
and you turn the argument on its head and undermine your whole case. It is
the way forward if you want to submit material in addition to the period
that's been allocated to you to complete the case.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I think, Mr. Bonomy, that you're the
one who's turned things upside down.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Are you finished now, Mr. Milosevic?
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] Mr. Nice presented a great many other
things here too, that this will show how I systematically did not observe
any laws, which is a lie. He has not presented a shred of evidence to that
effect. That my role with the paramilitaries will be shown. My only role
with the paramilitaries was to have them arrested.
There was no other evidence to that effect. So he is manipulating here --
JUDGE ROBINSON: Mr. Milosevic, all of this -- this is irrelevant to the
issue. If you do not have anything more to say on the question of severance,
we'll stop now. We are 15 minutes beyond --
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I'm talking about what he talked
about.
JUDGE ROBINSON: And you don't have a right to do that. I explained to you
the circumstances in which I have allowed you to speak, and I explained why
Mr. Nice had a right to reply, because he started. Do you have anything that
is pertinent to say, anything more? I'm not interested in general issues. If
you don't, I'm going to adjourn.
PRESIDENT MILOSEVIC: [Interpretation] I have presented what I consider to
be relevant.
JUDGE ROBINSON: Thank you, Mr. Milosevic.
I want to say that many issues arise for consideration and decision by the
Trial Chamber in relation to this matter. We still have outstanding a report
which we expect today from Dr. Dalal, and also there is to be an examination
and a report by a neuroradiologist. The Chamber would like to have all these
reports before it before it makes a decision on these matters. So we'll give
a decision once we have all the reports before us.
***********************************************************************
URGENT FUNDRAISING APPEAL
******************************
President Milosevic has the truth and law on his side. In order to use that
advantage to achieve his freedom, we must fight this totally discredited
tribunal and its patrons through professionally conducted actions.
The funds secured in Serbia are still enough only
to cover the expenses of the stay and work of President Milosevic's legal
associates at The Hague (one at the time).
After the unlawful attack of the German financial authorities on the ICDSM
fundraisning in Germany, that lead to freezing of the ICDSM account in
Germany, the simmilar thing took place recently in Austria, where the
account of the Yugoslav-Austrian Solidarity was frozen. These unlawful acts,
aiming to undermine the President Milosevic's defence, will be fought back
legally.
***********************************************************
To carry on the normal defence work -
3000-5000 EUR per month is our imminent need.
Please send your donations to the following account:
Committee Intersol
Bank: 'Postbank', Amsterdam, Netherlands
Accountnumber 4766774
IBAN NL07 PSTB 0004766774
BIC PSTBNL21
***************************************************************
For truth and human rights against aggression!
Freedom for Slobodan Milosevic!
Freedom and equality for people!
On behalf of Sloboda and ICDSM,
Vladimir Krsljanin,
Foreign Relations Assistant to President Milosevic
*************************************************************
SLOBODA urgently needs your donation.
Please find the detailed instructions at:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/pomoc.htm
To join or help this struggle, visit:
http://www.sloboda.org.yu/ (Sloboda/Freedom association)
http://www.icdsm.org/ (the international committee to defend Slobodan
Milosevic)
http://www.free-slobo.de/ (German section of ICDSM)
http://www.free-slobo-uk.org/ (CDSM UK)
http://www.icdsm-us.org/ (US section of ICDSM)
http://www.icdsmireland.org/ (ICDSM Ireland)
http://www.pasti.org/milodif.htm (ICDSM Italy)
http://www.wpc-in.org/ (world peace council)
http://www.geocities.com/b_antinato/ (Balkan antiNATO center)
