Seanad Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 5 Dec 1996

Vol. 149 No. 12

Adjournment Matters. - International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia.

Dr. Henry

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.

Minister of State at the Department of Foreign Affairs (Mr. G. Mitchell)

I thank Senator Henry for raising this important issue, which none of us must forget. We must do everything in our power as public representative and Ministers to pursue it and use every influence we can to achieve the objectives Senator Henry has so eloquently put on the record. We should be frightened by these terrible events — degradation of horrendous proportions has taken place in the countries. One ten year sentence for war crimes was handed down recently but much more needs to be done.

I reaffirm the Government's commitment to and endorsement of the work of the international tribunal in bringing to justice those responsible for war crimes, including rape, which is now classified as a war crime, in the former Yugoslavia. Not only must justice be done, minimum standards of accountability must be set if a repetition of barbarities of the kind that took place there is to be avoided. If the states which formerly made up Yugoslavia expect to join the European family of democratic nations they must put in place procedures to surrender those indicted so that they can be put on trial by the tribunal. If that does not happen, it may be necessary for the tribunal to try people in absentia, as happened to former members of the Nazi regime, so that we can continue to press for these people to serve whatever sentences the tribunal might decide to hand down.

The Government strongly supported the establishment of the international tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in 1993. The tribunal, which was established by UN Security Council Resolution No. 827 of 25 May 1993, was a direct response of the international community to the mass murder, indiscriminate slaughter and rape which took place in the former Yugoslavia in the period following 1991. To date, 74 indictments have been handed down by the tribunal and one person has already been sentenced, as I mentioned.

The Dayton Agreement clearly obliges all competent authorities in Bosnia-Herzegovina to comply and co-operate with the orders of the international criminal tribunal — it is specifically stated in the Annex on constitutional arrangements for Bosnia-Herzegovina that this should happen. Also, under the Constitution, any person who has been indicted by the tribunal is prohibited from holding public office or standing for election.

In line with its broad approach on this issue, the Government has supported efforts to ensure the effectiveness of the work of the tribunal. For example, when agreement could not be reached initially at the UN on its financing, Ireland was one of a small number of countries which made a voluntary contribution of £15,000 in 1994 to its upkeep. Following agreement at the UN General Assembly on its financing, Ireland has to date paid its assessed contributions in full and on time. Recently, Ireland made a further voluntary contribution of US$100,000 to the work of the tribunal.

Yesterday there was a meeting of the peace implementation council in London, attended by the Tánaiste and myself. As holders of the European Presidency and on behalf of Ireland, we made it clear that we strongly supported the work of the tribunal. The tribunal had an observer at the meeting where there was strong support for advancing its work in any way possible.

With regard to the implementation within Ireland of the provisions of the UN Security Council Resolution relating to the tribunal, my Department is maintaining close contact with the Department of Justice, which has the primary responsibility for any steps which may be necessary. I assure Senators that the Irish Government will do everything in its power to pursue the issue Senator Henry has so clearly illustrated. The concerns she expressed are shared by the Government and our EU partners.

One of our difficulties is that we do not have available to us either a police force or an army with the capacity to go in, arrest the people concerned, and take them to another jurisdiction for trial. We, therefore, depend on the cooperation of the former Yugoslav states. As I said, we may have to resort to trying these people in absentia, as happened to former Nazi offenders and, I think, in Nuremberg. Many of the former Yugoslav states are seeking to develop relations with the Council of Europe and the EU. If they expect to be accepted into the democratic family of European states, we expect that they will co-operate fully in making indicted persons available to stand trial. No one is guilty until they are tried and have an opportunity to defend themselves, so I do not understand why these states should have any difficulty producing indicted persons for trial. If these people are innocent, they have nothing to fear because the tribunal operates under rules of justice which are clear and in no doubt. I assure the Senator that we will raise this issue in any way we can, either through our Presidency or in the normal way through the EU.

Dr. Henry

I thank the Minister for his reply. While it is flattering it is also worrying that those involved in these cases feel that Ireland is one of the countries taking the matter seriously. The Minister said that all our European partners say they are taking this seriously but many people hope that the smaller European countries such as ourselves maintain the initiative in this matter.