Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
07SARAJEVO677
2007-03-27 17:39:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Sarajevo
Cable title:  

BOSNIA - THE CHALLENGE OF WAR CRIMES PROSECUTIONS

Tags:  PHUM KCRM KJUS PGOV PINR PREL BK 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXRO6810
PP RUEHDBU RUEHFL RUEHKW RUEHLA RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHVJ #0677/01 0861739
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 271739Z MAR 07
FM AMEMBASSY SARAJEVO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5774
INFO RUEHZL/EUROPEAN POLITICAL COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/JCS WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHDC PRIORITY
RUFOAOA/USNIC SARAJEVO PRIORITY
C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 SARAJEVO 000677 

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR(DICARLO),EUR/SCE(STINCHCOMB/HOH),
S/WCI(WILLIAMSON/LAVINE); NSC FOR BRAUN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/26/2017
TAGS: PHUM KCRM KJUS PGOV PINR PREL BK
SUBJECT: BOSNIA - THE CHALLENGE OF WAR CRIMES PROSECUTIONS
IN SREBRENICA

REF: A. SARAJEVO 579


B. 06 SARAJEVO 3069

C. 06 SARAJEVO 1674

D. 05 SARAJEVO 939

E. 05 SARAJEVO 246

Classified By: Political Counselor Michael J. Murphy, Reason 1.4 (B) an
d (D).

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 SARAJEVO 000677

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

DEPARTMENT FOR EUR(DICARLO),EUR/SCE(STINCHCOMB/HOH),
S/WCI(WILLIAMSON/LAVINE); NSC FOR BRAUN

E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/26/2017
TAGS: PHUM KCRM KJUS PGOV PINR PREL BK
SUBJECT: BOSNIA - THE CHALLENGE OF WAR CRIMES PROSECUTIONS
IN SREBRENICA

REF: A. SARAJEVO 579


B. 06 SARAJEVO 3069

C. 06 SARAJEVO 1674

D. 05 SARAJEVO 939

E. 05 SARAJEVO 246

Classified By: Political Counselor Michael J. Murphy, Reason 1.4 (B) an
d (D).


1. (C) SUMMARY: Prior to the International Court of Justice
(ICJ) verdict, Srebrenica victims associations had often
appealed for U.S. help in bringing to justice local police or
other officials they "knew" to be war criminals. Last week
the Srebrenica Municipal Council identified the Republika
Srpska (RS) government's failure to suspend or dismiss people
on the Srebrenica Commission Working Group's (SCWG) list of
alleged war criminals as one of their justifications for
wanting to secede from the RS. The BiH State Prosecutor's
Office contends that the list of 810 people does not contain
actionable information, and the prosecution team lacks
sufficient man-power to develop cases from scratch. At the
same time, a political solution that would remove this issue
from the dialogue over the future status of Srebrenica
Municipality in BiH appears unlikely. END SUMMARY.

THE SREBRENICA COMMISSION LIST: WHAT IS IT AND WHO'S ON IT
-------------- --------------


2. (C) In December 2004, then-High Representative Paddy
Ashdown issued a decision requiring the Republika Srpska
National Assembly (RSNA) to appoint a working group for the
"Realization of the Conclusions From The Final Report of the
Srebrenica Commission," which chronicled events in and around
Srebrenica on 10-19 July 1995. The RSNA created the
Srebrenica Commission's Working Group (SCWG) in January 2005
(REF. E). It was tasked to analyze the information contained
in the confidential annexes of the final Srebrenica
Commission Report, and identify persons mentioned in those
annexes who allegedly committed war crimes but were still

employed in entity and state-level institutions.


3. (C) In late-March and early-April 2005 the multi-ethnic
SCWG, supervised by the European Police Mission (EUPM),
released a list to the RSNA, OHR and the BiH State
Prosecutor's Office of over 800 people that the SCWG believed
to have some connection to the July 1995 events in
Srebrenica. The confidential list, which the Office of the
High Representative (OHR) shared with the Embassy at the
time, was comprised of over 500 RS Interior Ministry
officials, primarily police officers, and 300 other
individuals employed in local and state-level public
institutions, including OSA, SIPA, the State Border Service,
and others. (NOTE: The list indiscriminately names
individuals serving in or near Srebrenica and Bratunac in
military and non-military capacities between July 10-19,

1995. Even victims associations agree that, because of its
breadth, the list may include people who are innocent of any
connection to war crimes. END NOTE.)

2005-2007: NO DISMISSALS, ATTENTION ON THE LIST WANES
-------------- --------------


4. (C) In mid-April 2005, then-RS Minister of Interior
Matijasevic told the Ambassador he would form a joint team of
RS Interior Ministry SIPA, the BiH State Prosecutor, and
international community (IC) representatives to conduct
investigations of those on the list (REF. D). This was never
done. Instead, the RS government passed responsibility for
taking action to OHR and the BiH Prosecutor's office. OHR
declined to unilaterally remove named individuals from public
office. It complained, inter alia, that to suspend or
dismiss them absent an investigation launched by a BiH
prosecutor would violate due process norms.


5. (C) Since then, little has happened, and interest in the
list had largely faded. Neither the RS nor the State
government has dismissed or suspended any individuals based
on the fact that their names appeared on the list. The
controversy flared up briefly during the fall 2006 elections,
when names were leaked to the press and some politicians,
notably then-BiH Presidency Chair Suljeman Tihic (trying to
burnish his Bosniak credentials),called for BiH Chief

SARAJEVO 00000677 002 OF 002


Prosecutor Marinko Jurcevic to release the entire list (REF.
C). Jurcevic, with backing from the IC and OHR, refused,
saying it could jeopardize ongoing investigations.

PROBLEMS WITH PROSECUTING PEOPLE ON THE LIST
--------------


6. (C) However, in the wake of the ICJ's verdict that
genocide had been committed in Srebrenica, interest in taking
action against those on the list has resurfaced among local
politicians and the press. The recently established
"Initiative Board for the Special Status of Srebrenica" cited
the failure of RS authorities to remove people on the list
from public office as one of the reasons Srebrenica should be
given special "district" status (REF. A),and called on BiH
officials to take immediate action to prosecute them as war
criminals. Last week, Tihic suggested that a special
satellite State Prosecutor's Office might be established in
Srebrenica to fast-track cases involving people on the list
who may still hold official positions in the Srebrenica
municipality, particularly in law enforcement.


7. (C) On March 26, BiH State Prosecutor Ibro Bulic, head of
the State Court's four-man Srebrenica war crimes prosecution
unit, explained the resource constraints and evidentiary
difficulties involved in implementing this initiative
effectively. Bulic said the SCWG list included a wide range
of people who worked in military and paramilitary units and
local civilian administration in the Srebrenica area at the
time of the genocide. It gave no information on what
position they held or what role, if any, they might have
played in perpetrating atrocities, and therefore was not
itself evidence that a person committed a war crime.
Building a case starting with just a name required man power,
and Bulic said his was very limited. The Srebrenica
prosecution team had only one court investigator. There were
also 10 SIPA war crimes officers for field work, but the
Srebrenica team shared those officers with the State
Prosecutor's other five war crimes units, each responsible
for a different geographic area in BiH.


8. (C) Bulic said his team had prosecuted four of the 810
names it received, and was investigating a fifth person.
However, those five cases proceeded based on independent
physical and testimonial evidence; the fact that their names
were on the SCWG list was coincidental. He said the list was
useful for war crimes prosecutions, but not in the way people
might expect. For example, 11 men are currently on trial in
State Court for the mass execution of 7-8,000 Bosniak males
at the Kravica Farming Cooperative warehouse on July 11, 1995
(REF. B). While a Srebrenica survivor might claim to "know"
that someone currently working as a police officer took part
in that massacre, fewer than 15 Bosniaks actually survived
the attack, and none of them could positively identify the
shooters, Bulic explained. However, prosecutors were able to
use the SCWG list to find five Serb eye witnesses willing to
testify against the 11 accused.

COMMENT
--------------


9. (C) The undoubted presence of war criminals in Srebrenica
and surrounding municipalities certainly fuels the emotional
discussion over the future of Srebrenica's political
relationship with the RS. Part of the problem with the
debate over this issue is the general perception that an
individual's presence on the list is prima facie evidence
that he committed a war crime. This is not the case. As a
consequence, OHR's use of Bonn Powers to dismiss anyone on
the SCWG list from RS employment -- a course rejected by OHR
in 2005 -- would almost surely raise strong human rights
objections. At the same time, the State Prosecutor faces
several resource and evidentiary obstacles with its
investigations of these individuals. Fast-tracking some
investigations in order to neutralize the political impact of
this issue would draw away important resources from other,
more fully developed war crimes cases and would not
necessarily result in convictions.
MCELHANEY