Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 11 Dec 1996

Vol. 472 No. 7

Other Questions. - Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia.

Ray Burke

Question:

19 Mr. R. Burke asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs the Government's and the EU's response to a resolution adopted by the European Parliament on 15 November 1996 on the International Criminal Tribunal in the former Yugoslavia, which called on the Commission to link all aid to reconstruction in the Republica Srpska to bringing persons accused of genocide and crimes against humanity before the tribunal, to make future development of relations with Croatia contingent upon the will of Croatia to co-operate with the court and for the member states to oppose Belgrade's accession to international organisations until the provisions for application required for full co-operation with the tribunal have been implemented. [24056/96]

The European Parliament resolution of 15 November on the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia to which the Deputy refers was noted by the General Affairs Council on 6 December. It will be duly taken into account by the Council in its deliberations.

The importance the Government and the EU attaches to full co-operation by all parties with the tribunal's activities has been reflected in a number of Government statements and EU Council Conclusions during Ireland's EU Presidency.

In a comprehensive EU policy paper drafted by the Irish Presidency and adopted by the Council of Ministers on 28 October, improved co-operation by all sides with the tribunal is identified as a key priority during the period ahead. Summing up the position of the Government and the EU at the meeting of the Peace Implementation Council in London on 4 and 5 December, I said:

full co-operation by all parties with the International Criminal Tribunal in the efforts to bring war criminals to justice is a fundamental obligation which must be honoured if genuine stability and lasting peace is to be consolidated. All parties must abide by the commitment they have made to hand over indicted suspects without delay. It is also important that the international organisations and agencies active on the ground should examine how they can make a more effective contribution to the efforts of the Tribunal in this regard.

The conclusions of the London conference, endorsed by the EU and all of its member states and the European Commission, state that the provision of economic reconstruction assistance is clearly linked to co-operation in this area. The authorities in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including the Republica Srpska leadership, have been reminded that their obligations under international law take precedence over any provisions in their national or local legislation.

Similarly, in the case of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, the Union has made clear that the development of relations between the Union and those countries will be influenced by their attitude towards co-operation with the Tribunal.

The Government fully shares the view expressed in the European Parliament Resolution on the importance of the role of the International Police Task Force. Ireland has demonstrated its commitment in this area in a number of ways, notably through our contribution of a contingent of 31 members of the Garda Síochána to the IPTF, including its Commissioner, Peter Fitzgerald, and also through hosting in September an International Conference on Law Enforcement Assistance to Bosnia and Herzegovina, attended by representatives of some 40 countries, which resulted in significant pledges of training, financial and personnel support for that force.

The Government will continue to be a strong and unequivocal supporter of the International Criminal Tribunal and the effort to bring war criminals to justice. This support is demonstrated not only in political and diplomatic terms but also in very practical ways. In addition to previous voluntary contributions, and to payment of our annual assessed UN contribution for the running costs of the tribunal, the Government has in the past few weeks contributed a further $100,000 to assist the work of the tribunal.

While the reply is worthy in its intentions, one must ask what Europe has been doing in light of the painfully slow progress made by the International Criminal Tribunal in former Yugoslavia to bring to justice those guilty of genocide, crimes against humanity and human rights abuses. Does the Government recognise the urgent need to establish a permanent international criminal court under the auspices of the UN to expedite that process? Will the Tánaiste inform the House what steps, if any, have been taken by the Government in its capacity as EU Presidency to ensure the establishment of such a court without further delay? There is not much point in having the International Criminal Tribunal if Karadzic and Mladic are still at large and are being ignored by the IFOR troops and others on the ground in former Yugoslavia. All that has happened so far is that we have had a number of appalling cases involving relatively minor players compared to the major players who are still at large. What is being done to move the process forward? It is a question of the international community apparently making the appropriate noises but not taking any action when action is possible.

The Deputy will appreciate that Ireland is not participating in IFOR and we have no input into operational matters for that force or the force that will be deployed to follow it unless there is a change of policy on participation. We are not on the ground in the former Yugoslavia. IFOR has stated clearly that there is an agreement between the commander of IFOR and chief prosecutor for the tribunal that within the limit of its mandate and resources IFOR will provide assistance to the tribunal by protecting sites of interest to investigators and providing a secure environment for their work. It has also stated that in the event that troops encounter suspects they will detain them and hand them over to The Hague tribunal.

The Deputy mentioned Karadzic and Mladic. Our position is clear and unambiguous and has been repeated on a number of occasions. The Government believes all indicted war crime suspects should appear before the International Criminal Tribunal in The Hague to face the charges against them. Along with our EU partners we believe that full co-operation by all parties with the tribunal in an effort to bring war criminals to justice is a fundamental obligation which must be honoured if genuine stability and lasting peace is to be consolidated. We, with our international partners, will continue to pressure the governments of the region to honour their commitments, in particular the Serbian President, Slobodan Milosevic, who signed the Dayton Agreement on behalf of the Bosnian Serbs. It has been made clear in the conclusions of the Paris meeting, the steering board of the Peace Implementation Council and the London meeting that the provision of international economic reconstruction assistance to the parties is closely linked to their co-operation with us in these areas.

In the context of Serbia, will the Tánaiste indicate what exactly the European Union is doing about the fact that Serbia will not recognise the democratic choice of its people as expressed in the recent ballot in the local elections? What sanctions and other measures does the European Union under our Presidency intend to take to ensure that Milosevic recognises the choice of his people in the ballot box and respects human rights, such as the right to an uncensored media, which he has so patently failed to do during the past three weeks when demonstrations have been held by the public?

In relation to Serbia and the appalling situation regarding the refusal of Milosevic to recognise the results of the election, the European Union was about to give trade preferences to Serbia, but on the basis of what we witnessed and what we are still seeing happening on the streets of Serbia, the clampdown on the media, free press and radio, we have refused to advance the decision on that. That is a message that will go home very strongly because the trade implications of that are quite serious for that country. We have also made contact with the government. I had a meeting with the Foreign Minister in Brussels last week and I made it plain to him that the European Union wanted the elections to be reinstituted and the results to be accepted. Since then the Deputy will be aware that the supreme court refused to recognise the results of those elections. It is very important that the elections be re-run in the near future in agreement with government and opposition parties. There has been some progress since then on the reinstatement of free radio which is back on the air. That has happened in the past number of days. That is of importance as access to a free and fair media is very important.

From the European Union's point of view we will maintain pressure on the government there. We have done so in our declaration from our meeting in Brussels last Friday which sent a very strong message to the government there that we want respect for human rights, the establishment of democracy and the acceptance of the election results which gave significant victories to the opposition party.

I was struck by what the Minister said that, as a result of the suppression of the local election results in Serbia, the EU Presidency stated there was to be a moratorium on proceeding with the trade preferences which otherwise were to be given to Serbia. If we are serious about the human rights commission and the war crimes tribunal, should we be in negotiation with Serbia on trade preferences? Are we saying it is more important that the local election results in Serbia are reinstated and observed than it is for the Serbian Government to exert all the pressure it can on Republica Srpska to yield up prisoners, especially when Slobodan Milosevic is a signatory of the Dayton Agreement? Why is it that we can exert extra leverage to have the local election results reinstated and not do so to have the jurisdiction of the war crimes tribunal and the international courts enforced?

Enormous pressure has been exerted worldwide on Milosevic and his Government to yield up those suspected of war crimes. This will continue. The position of the European Union is that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia will eventually have to take its place among the international community of nations for the sake of stability and prosperity in the region but it has been made very clear that it cannot do so unless it observes basic standards of democracy and human rights and that it will continue to be isolated until conditions improve. There are enormous difficulties and strains both within the Government and politics in Serbia on which the United States is exerting enormous pressure. The question of whether sanctions will be necessary has been mentioned. As I said to Deputy Burke, there have been some improvements, particularly in relation to the radio station, but much more needs to be done as quickly as possible.

It would send a positive message to the people of Serbia if the leaders of the parties which were successful in the local elections were met at EU level as an attempt is being made by Milosovic to isolate them. As the European Union has been unsuccessful in reaching a common foreign policy position on the Yugoslav issue, this would send the right signals for once.

Given the Deputy's party's position on the question of a common foreign and security policy, that is hard to take.

It would help if the European Union had a common foreign policy.

I can, however, take up his suggestion.

This is not directly related but following the murder of Adinael Toscano, the Colombian peasant leader, and his two brothers on their return to Colombia from Europe which they toured to highlight human rights abuses in the Bellacruzian Ranch, will the Government issue a strong statement demanding that the Colombian Government guarantee the safety of Belen Tores and Raul Ramos, Colombian peasant leaders——

The Deputy is anticipating Question No. 49 which we may not reach.

——who are completing the final leg of their European tour by addressing the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs today?

I will meet those representatives after Question Time and I will send a strong message.

It is important that this Chamber should send that important message to the Colombians.

We are progressing slowly. I wish to accommodate as many Deputies as possible but time is short.

Top
Share