MACEDONIA: S/WCI GROUP FINDS ICTY CASES HIGHLY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SKOPJE 000035 SIPDIS C O R R E C T E D COPY FOR TEXT SECSTATE ALSO FOR S/WCI E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/12/2013 TAGS: PREL PGOV PHUM MK SUBJECT: MACEDONIA: S/WCI GROUP FINDS ICTY CASES HIGHLY POLITICIZED, ETHNICALLY CHARGED Classified By: AMBASSADOR PHILIP REEKER FOR REASONS 1.5 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary: Members of the State Department,s S/WCI team discovered an ethnically divided, highly politicized environment surrounding the four war crimes cases returned to Macedonia by the ICTY. GOM officials admitted that political pressure was guiding these cases. The e-Albanian leadership was resolute in the belief that the 2002 amnesty law must be applied. ¶2. (SBU) Dec. 2-3, S/WCI Deputy Milbert Shin led a small team to Skopje to discuss the four war crimes cases returned to Macedonia in February 2008. They met Justice Minister Manevski, Chief Prosecutor Shrgovski, a team led by GoM Ombudsman Memeti (e-Albanian party DUI's legal "experts" group on the cases),DUI President Ahmeti, DPA President Thaci, New Democracy MP Rushiti, a NATO official and OSCE representatives (who are official observers of the cases). Despite repeated requests, PM Gruevski and his Chief of Staff declined to meet the team, though the Chief of Staff did ensure the Manevski and Shrgovski meetings took place when their offices attempted to stall us. ¶3. (C) Background: Following the 2001 interethnic conflict in Macedonia, responding to a request by the international community to temporarily take the cases out of Macedonia the ICTY agreed to review five cases of alleged war crimes. Four of these cases involved alleged offenses perpetrated by e-Albanians: the "NLA Leadership" case (a broad indictment of e-Albanian insurgents for a wide variety of crimes),the "Lipkovo Dam" case (in which e-Albanians allegedly turned off the water source for the city of Kumanovo),the "Mavrovo Road Workers" case (in which e-Albanians allegedly kidnapped and tortured a team of road workers, including carving the letter "M" into their backs, photos of which have been widely shown on television),and the "Neprosteno" case (in which former DPA MP Daut Rexhepi, aka "Commander Leka", and others are accused of kidnapping and killing 12 e-Macedonians). The fifth case, involving the killing of e-Albanians in the town of Ljuboten, is the only case ultimately tried before the ICTY. In July, the tribunal found former Interior Ministry official Johan Tarculovski guilty of war crimes for his conduct at Ljuboten, but acquitted former Interior Minister Ljube Boskovski. The tribunal performed minimal investigative action on the other four cases, returning the files to Macedonian jurisdiction in February 2008. ¶4. (C) The e-Albanian leadership here has consistently argued that the remaining four cases cannot be tried in Macedonia, but instead must be dismissed under the 2002 amnesty law. Under significant international pressure, the Macedonian leadership agreed in 2002 to an ambiguous (likely intentionally so) amnesty law, which amnesties any crimes related to the conflict of the year 2001, except those for which the "ICTY will initiate proceedings." Since the return of these four cases to Macedonia, the Chief Prosecutor has asserted that these cases cannot be amnestied because -- by assuming temporary jurisdiction of the cases -- the ICTY did in fact "initiate" proceedings. Some legal experts here have also argued that international humanitarian law does not contemplate amnesty for war crimes. The e-Albanian leadership argues that the ICTY did not initiate proceedings. Furthermore, e-Albanian legal experts seek to bolster their position by arguing that the international community clearly intended that the amnesty law would ensure that no war crimes cases could proceed in Macedonian courts, understanding that e-Albanians had no faith in the ability of national courts to dispense justice. -------------- -- E-Albanians: Amnesty Law Applies -------------- -- ¶5. (C) Meetings with the leaders from the three primary e-Albanian parties and a group of e-Albanian legal experts lead by Macedonia,s Ombudsman Memeti reconfirmed their conviction that the amnesty law must apply to these cases. All our e-Albanian interlocutors argued that the selection of these cases was biased, and the cases were originally transferred to the ICTY because e-Albanians did not trust the Macedonian judicial system. As proof of this bias, both DPA leader Thaci and DUI leader Ahmeti pointed to the fact that there has not been an investigation into six missing e-Albanians from the conflict; however, when asked if they would support these crimes being investigated, both officials acknowledged that would only increase problems and open &Pandora,s box8. Our e-Albanian interlocutors also argued that that same fundamental distrust in the national courts was the core motivation behind the 2002 amnesty law. Thaci noted that the amnesty law was intended to be a &gentlemen,s agreement8 meant to quell tensions and end the conflict, and those intentions should be respected. Ahmeti and ND party leader Selmani said international assistance could be helpful to resolving the impasse over the four cases. While recognizing to some extent that war crimes were not matters that, in general, should be amnestied, the e-Albanian interlocutors insisted that the 2002 amnesty law must be applied to these four cases because of what they asserted were the special circumstances of Macedonia - including the biased Macedonian court system and the risk of ethnic violence that the amnesty law defused. -------------- -- MOJ and Chief Prosecutor Politicized -------------- -- ¶6. (C) Justice Minister Manevski began the meeting by evading substantive questions. He explained that the Chief Prosecutor had been responsible for the cases since their return, and the MOJ,s only contact with the files was to translate them. Manevski highlighted his political motivations. He acknowledged that the cases were pursued, following the files return to Macedonia in 2008, because of public pressure stemming from the graphic photographs that appeared in the media related to the Mavrovo Road Workers case and in order to have a &balanced position8 in response to the ICTY conviction of Tarculovski. To justify this approach he pointed to unrelated recent progress on improving inter-ethnic relations in Macedonia and expressed concern for Macedonia,s neighboring countries, who he claimed needed to do more to promote human rights (presumably referring to Greece,s treatment of the Macedonian minority there). Once Manevski realized that Shin did not intend to take a position on the amnesty law and might be willing to support international assistance, Manevski became more open to questioning and admitted that charges against many of the defendants in the Mavrovo Road Workers case could be dropped. Manevski asserted that the 2002 amnesty law did not apply, arguing that ICTY would have closed the files had the amnesty law applied and would not have returned them to Macedonia for processing. However, he clarified that the Chief Prosecutor had jurisdiction over whether this law will apply. ¶7. (C) Chief Prosecutor Shrgovski admitted that these cases are heavily politicized and noted that he is obligated to report to the Prime Minister prior to taking any action on the cases in order to avoid ðnic destabilization.8 He expressed frustration that the ICTY did not provide Macedonia with more guidance as to how the cases should be handled and said that his office had recently approached the ICTY prosecutor for additional guidance, but officials from the prosecutor,s office &ran out of the room8 when asked. That said, Shrgovski felt it was too late for international assistance or an outside legal opinion on these cases because they would not be binding. When questioned about the amnesty law, Shrgovski strongly asserted that the amnesty law did not apply to these cases and they would have to proceed through the judicial process. His assessment was that these cases were specifically excluded from the amnesty law, and that ICTY,s deferral of the cases back to Macedonia meant they should be tried in Macedonia. ¶8. (C) Shrgovski,s ultimate assessment was that these cases were too politically delicate to simply disappear, but since the allegations were &emotionally8 motivated he believed most of the accused and most of the charges will ultimately be dropped due to insufficient evidence, specifically citing the Mavrovo Road Workers case as an example. Although acknowledging that the dropping of names and charges from the indictments could legally be done at any time by the prosecution, he asserted that traditional practice calls for the prosecution to take such action at the close of evidence at trial. He also admitted his office was intentionally stalling its investigation of the Neprosteno case in order to avoid ethnic tension, confirming that former DPA MP "Commander Leka" was a primary suspect. (Note- DPA recently expelled &Commander Leka8 from the party and he is now an independent MP) The other two cases (Lipkovo Dam and NLA Leadership) were in the early stages of investigation. ¶9. (C) COMMENT: Post and S/WCI recognize that ongoing interethnic tensions and lack of a truly independent judiciary preclude a simple resolution to these cases. It is unlikely that the judiciary will reform to the point at which they could manage the cases in an unbiased, transparent manner. In addition, the inherent ambiguities in the 2002 amnesty law coupled with the international trend that war crimes cannot be amnestied make it unlikely that the cases will disappear. That said, it is possible that the ruling VMRO party and its e-Albanian partner, DUI, may be able to reach a political accommodation on these cases which is also sufficiently consistent with the principles of justice. We continue to monitor these cases and we recommend that the Department be prepared to support international assistance to Macedonia should it become necessary. ¶10. (U) S/WCI has cleared on this message. REEKER