I thank the Minister of State for taking this matter today. I also congratulate him and his Department on the write up it received in the weekend section of the Financial Times on 30 November. A commentator, Joe Rogeley, referred to the remark Douglas Hurd made when he was British Foreign Secretary that the Irish Department of Foreign Affairs punched above its weight, which I gather is a very good thing to say in boxing terms. Very kind words were said about the Department in the Financial Times. I am raising this matter in view of the fact that the Department is taken so seriously and that we hold the EU Presidency.
It was well established by the United Nations Security Council that rape and the detention of women for the purposes of rape occurred on a massive scale in the former Yugoslavia. It was organised systematically and used as an instrument of war. These violations were perpetrated in three broad categories: first, soldiers entering villages and towns as part of the war and raping the female inhabitants during the course of the conquering of that village or town — it is in this context that houses were established where women were kept as a sexual resource for soldiers, often of high rank; second, soldiers acting under orders to rape women as part of the war strategy — this particularly occurred against Muslim women; and three, the setting up of rape camps where hundreds of women were kept in inhuman conditions solely or mainly as sexual fodder for soldiers. When the conflict was in full swing limited information was available to the rest of the world about what was happening to these women. However, since then an amazing amount of information has come out.
As the Minister of State is aware, members of the Lawyers' International Forum for Women's Human Rights visited Ireland this week. It is a compliment to this country that they said they realised we took the complaints made to the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia very seriously. They were most anxious we would use the end of our Presidency of the European Union to press for justice for the women who were raped during the atrocities in that country in recent years. We showed our commitment in a practical way by training counsellors for these victims in the rape crisis centre in Dublin and by sending representatives from the centre to Bosnia to set up centres there.
The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia came into being in response to the enormity of the human rights violations in the region. Its stated aim was to put an end to such crimes and to bring to justice the persons responsible. For the first time, rape was to be prosecuted as a war crime and soldiers would not enjoy immunity. The prosecutor's office has stated its commitment to public recognition of the role of sexual violence against women during the war in Bosnia. The new chief prosecutor, Louise Arbour, has emphasised this will also apply to the Rwanda trials.
However, as the Minister of State knows, progress on prosecuting those who raped the women of the former Yugoslavia is non existent. Nobody has been arrested, never mind charged. The lack of progress is appalling. Many of the alleged rapists live side by side with the victims. Many of the men hold positions of power in local government.
I have information here on many of those men. I will not read out the names but it is horrific that those who are apparently being sought for these crimes were described in information supplied at the end of November as "frequents Express restaurant in Prijedor", "commanded an HVO brigade in Vitez in 1993 and is still there", "chief of police in Foca", "seen by a journalist at a Foca café while French soldiers from IFOR were nearby", "interviewed in his apartment in Bijeljina", "works as a labour inspector for the federation government at a desk in the town hall in Vitez", "said to have connections with special police in Ljubia", "numerous reports have him living in Zagreb" and a journalist said at an IFOR press briefing that he knew the address of such a man. I am sure the Minister of State is aware of these reports and can imagine how appalling it must be for those women to have seen those men but nothing happens.
Despite the obvious presence of these men, women would be prepared to testify against them but there is totally inadequate protection for them as witnesses. Provision exists for various forms of protection but the anonymity of witnesses is not guaranteed. The women are not just fearful for themselves but also for their families.
The tribunal has addressed this to a certain extent by adopting procedures which avoid the worse manifestations of rape trials in some national legal systems. For instance, there is no requirement for corroboration, the use of a woman's previous sexual history as evidence is prohibited and there is an assumption against the use of consent as a defence. The tribunal has recognised that rape demands special trial procedures. During the proceedings against Dusko Tadic, the court recognised that "rape and sexual assault often have particularly devastating consequences which in certain circumstances have a permanent and detrimental effect on the victim". It said this gave grounds for "limited rights of due process and more lenient rules of evidence". The tribunal should proceed accordingly in these cases.
One of the worst aspects of the lack of progress is that the women see the men they accuse of raping them leading normal lives, even though there are warrants out for their arrest. These war criminals frequent well known restaurants, sometimes with soldiers from IFOR nearby. Some of these men now have bodyguards and no attempt is being made to arrest them. They are in their original residences and places of work. I have details of many of these people.
The Presidency of the EU will now pass to the Netherlands and I feel sure that country will also promote the prosecution of these crimes. However, the lack of practical progress to date leaves one wondering whether the women involved would not be better to look for justice by another route. The Dayton Agreement has been set up in such a way that all the major UN human rights conventions apply immediately to the former Yugoslavia through the European Convention on Human Rights. Legal resource centres have been set up in Bosnia with money given by the UN High Commission on Refugees. When they are eventually re-instated, these resource centres could progress the cases of the women within Bosnia. In view of the special position of Bosnia under the Dayton agreement, should we encourage women to use the facilities there, such as the international ombudsperson office? Those who feel their human rights have been violated may complain to that office. A human rights court with European judges is due to be set up in Bosnia but this has not happened yet.
I ask the Minister of State for advice because I know he takes the tribunal seriously and any efforts we can make during our Presidency are of great importance. I will be glad to hear his views on this matter.