US embassy cable - 03THEHAGUE3027

C O N F I D E N T I A L THE HAGUE 003027 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR S/WCI - PROSPER/RICHARD, EUR/SCE - 
GREGORIAN/MITCHELL, L/EUR - LAHNE, INR/WCAD - 
SEIDENSTRICKER/MORIN 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 1.6 FIVE YEARS AFTER CLOSURE OF ICTY 
TAGS: PREL, PHUM, BK, HR, SR, NL, ICTY 
SUBJECT: ICTY: WITH STRUGAR BALKING AT RETURN, PRESIDENT 
MERON TO REPORT SAM NONCOMPLIANCE AT 0900 EST TOMORROW 
 
REF: A. (A) KAYE DECEMBER 4 EMAIL 
     B. (B) BELGRADE 2926 
 
Classified By: Legal Counselor Clifton M. Johnson per reasons 1.5(b)-(d 
) 
 
1. (C) Summary: The President of the International Criminal 
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), Theodor Meron, 
told embassy legal officers that he would report to the UN 
Security Council Belgrade's noncooperation by 0900 EST on 
Tuesday, December 9, if indictee Pavle Strugar fails to 
return to The Hague for his trial, scheduled to begin on 
Wednesday December 10.  Meron said that the failure of Serbia 
and Montenegro's Government (SAM) to effect Strugar's 
surrender would have grave consequences for the ICTY's 
willingness to grant provisional release to Serb indictees in 
the future.  End summary. 
 
2. (C) Meron, who alerted Embassy legal officers to his 
serious concerns about Strugar's efforts to avoid return to 
The Hague last Friday (ref A), firmly rejected any procedure 
short of Strugar complying with the ICTY trial chamber's 
order that he return to The Hague for trial immediately. 
Meron said that the SAM ambassador to The Hague had explained 
to him last Friday a process according to which a Belgrade 
court would order Strugar's transfer, but that Strugar would 
have the ability to appeal.  (The procedure was described 
similarly in ref B.)   Meron told the SAM Ambassador that any 
such process, especially the right of Strugar to appeal, was 
"completely unacceptable."  In a conversation with emboff, he 
added that it would be as if an accused out on bail in the 
United States were allowed to appeal his apprehension to the 
marshal when called to trial.  He explained that the original 
decision in 2001 to grant Strugar provisional release was 
premised on both a commitment from the accused to return 
immediately to The Hague when the trial would so require it 
and from the Government to guarantee his transfer.  Strugar's 
failure reflects poorly enough on the accused, who, Meron 
mused, may simply be hoping that he can drag out an appeal 
and see whether this month's elections give him a government 
less likely to meet its commitments to the Tribunal. 
According to Meron, it reflects even worse on Belgrade which 
guaranteed Strugar's return and whose credibility with 
respect to any future requests depends on its ability to 
deliver on such assurances. 
 
3. (C) As a result, Meron plans to send a formal letter to 
the United Nations Security Council not later than 0900 EST 
on Tuesday, December 9, detailing the noncompliance of the 
SAM with the order of the Tribunal that Strugar return for 
trial.  He conceded that if Strugar were en route to The 
Hague or if the SAM were to guarantee that Strugar's 
departure was imminent (i.e., within twenty four hours), he 
would hold off on such a letter.  He would, he said, be firm 
that SAM had to meet the commitments which formed an 
essential part of the ICTY's agreement to Strugar's 
provisional release.  Meron added that such noncooperation, 
which has caused the postponement of the trial's start date, 
undermines the ICTY's ability to do its work efficiently and 
therefore compromises its ability to meet the completion 
strategy goals. 
 
4. (C) Comment: A failure by SAM to effect Strugar's transfer 
to The Hague will have a seriously negative impact on future 
provisional release considerations, by both the Office of the 
Prosecutor and the Chambers, involving Belgrade. Meron is 
firm that that this transfer must happen imminently to avoid 
a report of noncompliance to the SC and we do not expect him 
to blink.  End comment. 
SOBEL