We were shocked with the Naser Orić verdict

We were shocked with the Naser Orić verdict

Anton Nikiforov, spokesperson of the War Crimes Tribunal, does not have a very popular job, not in the Balkans in any case. He was born in 1963 and graduated with a history degree from the Lomonosov University and worked as a Russian diplomat from 1985 to 1997.He then worked for one year with the UN mission in Bosnia. In June 1998, he became Carla Del Ponte’s special advisor and the official Hague spokesperson in April of this year after Florence Hartman was relieved of the position. He is married and has one son. He is someone who is very well-informed on the situation in the Balkans, speaks Serbian very well, and gives statements which are usually very reserved in nature.

B92: How soon would the Tribunal be able to file an appeal on the Naser Orić verdict?

Nikiforov: The verdict was handed on June 30 and we have an entire month to study it and file an appeal. We are in the process of studying the verdict and before we decide we do not want to show prejudice against anything, but everything seems to be moving towards this result. In a period of 30 days we must announce to the trial chamber that we will be making an appeal. Only in the case of appealing a verdict, we are not obligated to receive permission first. In all other cases, before and after the trial, we have to submit a request to the trial chamber for appealing. Such is the procedure.

B92: How are they commenting the reactions in the region to this verdict?

Nikiforov: We have been doing this for a long time and we could have expected such reactions from various sides. Of course, there was great dissatisfaction shown on the side of the victims of the war crimes committed at the police station in Srebrenica, because the verdict stated that crimes were committed. The direct culprits were clearly pointed out as well, but the verdict is what it is. A two-year sentence surprised us a great deal as well.

B92: How are they commenting the fact that the experts and non-governmental organisations stated during the trial that “the prosecution was losing the case” and that Orić will be getting a lenient sentence?

Nikiforov: There was much criticism of what the prosecution was doing, but we cannot and we will not criticise ourselves. Let our work be looked at by the trial chamber and the public. The public has the right to its opinion as does the court, but they are not always well-informed, because they only see the results. Concretely, it is a sentence to two years in prison. The fact is also that the verdct has confirmed that war crimes were committed and that the culprits were identified, and there is no great reaction. In the Orić sentence, it was stated who the direct culprits of the crimes were and it is easy to find them if they are still alive and try them in Bosnia-Herzegovina. We have information and we can help them in this sense. It is important that war crimes are punished and we will make sure that everything is done to put matter straight.

The media is most interested in new things, whether they are new verdicts or new indictments. But trials last for months or years and there are few media companies who follow them regularly. But I cannot say what kind of effect this has on the public…I do not think that these reports are being followed regularly, and unfortunately, this causes such explosive reactions on certain events. We shall see what will happen after our decision to appeal.

B92: Did you appeal the aquital of Fatmir Ljimaj as well?

Nikiforov: We appealed in March. After that, both the defence and the prosecution had several reports. My previous explanation of this appeal was not very clear. Firstly, I would like to say that this verdict also surprised the prosecution. As in the Orić case, we first studied the verdict carefully and then filed an appeal. I would now like to explain more precisely that we are convinced that we led this case very well and that we believe that we had very good reasons for filing the appeal. Unfortunately, on the basis of my previous explanation, it was assumed that the prosecution had problems in finding a basis for filing the appeal. This was not the case.

B92: After such verdicts how can you explain that this is not what the Serbian nationalistic parties say it is; a court that only puts Serbs on trial?

Nikiforov: It is a fact that we do not only try Serbs. Look at the cases.

B92: Yes, but a verdict such as the one in Orić's trial can perhaps be used for daily political purposes. Does it not then reach an absurd situation; on one side the Tribunal was founded so that the trials could be held in The Hague and this would solve the problems in the region, but on the other hand, such verdicts can lead to new destabilisation in the region.

Nikiforov: I would not like to see that happen, to have new destabilisation occur because of us. And I do not think that our verdicts will lead to destabilisation. But if people say that we are not fair towards a certain side, the matter ulimately always has to be taken to the trial chamber. The chambers are made up of judges who come from various countries and different legal systems. They are changing so that it cannot be said that one judge is always giving verdicts to someone in one way and to others in another. This does not hold water. Maybe it is difficult to explain to the public, but there is a different level and number of crimes which were committed by all sides. A balance cannot be created. There cannot be an equal number of indictees from every side and the culprits cannot receive the same punishments. Vukovar happened where it happened, and there is no such case on the other side. Such is the case with Srebrenica and the siege of Sarajevo. There are no such cases on the other side.

B92: Are you saying that there are no equivalent war crimes on the other side?

Nikiforov: It is impossible to have an equivalent. For example, on the other side there were no concentration camps like there were in Prijedor, nor was there ethnic cleansing like there was in East Bosnia. These are facts and nothing can be done about them.

We issued indictments against members of both sides, but they are different in weight, because the crimes were different, they are different in the number of killed and the number of victims, as well as in the way in which the crimes were committed. All of this is taken into account by the trial chamber. Of course, it is hard to explain, because for every family that has lost anyone, that person is seen as the greatest victim and they do not really care who was killed on the other side.

But the international court cannot punish them, nor can it investigate all crimes. We are now helping the domestic courts in the region to do the job on a national level. And I think that this is one of our most important roles.

B92: How is the cooperation with the Belgrade War Crimes Prosecution going?

Nikiforov: We are cooperating very well in all of the cases that are ongoing in front of the Belgrade Special Court. War Crimes Prosecutor Mr. Vukčević and his advisors are coming here on July 17 to sign an agreement on gaining access to our archives. Now everything is done in a modern way, our archives are in electronic form. We will see whether this will go by internet or not. Essentially, they will have access to the documents that they will need for their cases.

There is one group of cases with unfinished investigations, which we have transferred to the Belgrade prosecution. They were our cases, which we investigated; we finished them but did not issue indictments. We handed over the case of Zvornik and it is now being lead well by the Special Court. There are three such cases. But the point of leading the cases is only met if the culprits can be found. If they are in another country or if they are hard to find, there is no point in transferring cases. It is important of course for the judicial system to cooperate within the region when we are talking about punishing people who have committed war crimes.

B92: Is there any new information on when Karadžić and Mladić might be able to be arrested?

Nikiforov: Unfortunately, we do not have any new information, nor any signs that point to when it may happen.

B92: How about the information appearing in Bosnian and Serbian print media that Mladić has had a stroke and is hiding in Bosnia?

Nikiforov: As far as the medical statements about Mladić are concerned, we do not have any confirmation for any serious sources about that, so that I think that it is untrue. Regarding Karadžić we do not have any new information, and as far as Mladić is concerned, we are absolutely convinced that he is hiding in Serbia and we will now get guarantees from the Serbian Government that they will do everything to make sure that he is extradited to the Hague Tribunal.

B92: Does the prosecution have any new information about the Serbian Government’s action plan for cooperation with the Tribunal? Earlier, you said that it has not informed you about what is being done.

Nikiforov: We have received new information regarding the action plan directly from the Serbian Government. We hope that we will be able to finish this plan together.

B92: Will the public be notified of this, or is it an operative cooperation that will not be spoken about in public?

Nikiforov: This is the Serbian Government’s plan, not ours. Of course, the nature of operative jobs demands that they not be public. But I think that the Serbian Government will decide whether or not it will inform the public.

B92: Are you still having problems with getting documentation from the Serbian state bodies?

Nikiforov: We made a positive agreement on access for archives this year, about a principal level of access to the archives. Our first mission at the end of May and the beginning of June of this year gave a report that was positive and encouraging. Our people have been given access to archives in a professional and very friendly manner. They had the full cooperation of the presiding institutions.

B92: Sreten Lukić’s defence also complained about the transfer of documents. The Judge joked, saying that he cannot believe that people are trying to avoid cooperation with the Tribunal in this case as well. Does that mean that you are not the only ones who are sending people documents?

Nikiforov: I saw this as well. This was strange for us. I did not get into the nature of Sreten Lukić’s complaints, but he did have access to the documents while he was in the police.

B92: Does he know that he did not get everything?

Nikiforov: I would not comment on this any further…

B92: How will the prosecution react to the court’s decision to shorten the indictment for Kosovo war crimes that Milutinović and others are up against? There will be no presentation of evidence for Račak, Padalište and Dubrava.

Nikiforov: We have not received that decision yet. We will see what was written and what we will do next. We are against it for now because we think that the prosecution needs to decide on what evidence it will present and what needs to be proven and what does not. It is important to include Račak and the Dubrava prison in the case because we never got a decision from the court on the Milosevic case, and we think that it is important or the court to decide on whether or not people wee massacred in Račak.

B92:  You did not have any problems doing this interview in Serbian. I must ask you how come you understand our language so well; or rather BHS (Bosnian-Croatian-Serbian) as it is officially called by the Tribunal.

Nikiforov: I lived in Belgrade for six years while I was in middle school. I went to a Russian school in Belgrade from fourth to tenth grade according to our system. I learned the language on the streets and at Kalemegdan. My father worked in the embassy.

B92: So you remember Belgrade from the better days and not just by the topics that are currently active here?

Nikiforov: Compared to the Soviet Union, Yugoslavia was like heaven for us.