Croatia to Investigate 'Missing' Military Documents
If they have been removed or destroyed, those responsible will be prosecuted, said justice minister.
Croatia to Investigate 'Missing' Military Documents
If they have been removed or destroyed, those responsible will be prosecuted, said justice minister.
Croatian justice minister Ivan Simonovic pledged this week to clear up the mystery surrounding 33 military documents the Hague tribunal claims have been withheld by the Zagreb government.
The alleged documents – that the authorities in Croatia deny and knowledge of but which the tribunal insist exist – apparently relate to Operation Storm in July 1995, a military attack during which Croatian troops seized the Krajina region from Serb rebels. Three senior officers are on trial for the abuse of civilians during the operation.
Prosecutors believe the papers could help their case against three Croatian army generals – Ante Gotovina, Ivan Cermak and Mladen Markac – currently standing trial at the Hague tribunal for crimes committed against Serb civilians during the offensive. Their trial started in March last year and is still in the prosecution phase.
During meetings in Brussels this week, Serge Brammertz, the chief prosecutor of the Hague tribunal, will inform European Union officials about the extent of Croatia's cooperation with his office – a key factor in Croatia’s hopes of joining the EU.
The availability or otherwise of the documents, which are thought to detail the activities of Croatia's artillery and special police forces during Operation Storm, could be key to that assessment.
In June last year, Brammertz asked judges to issue an order against the Croatian authorities, compelling them to hand over evidence from their state archives.
In their submission, prosecutors listed an estimated 1,000 pages of documents and maps which they believed to exist, but which had not been produced by Croatia – including 311 pages of artillery documents related to Operation Storm.
Prosecutors also outlined the reasons why they thought these documents must have existed.
They explained that they had worked out from other Croatian documents in their possession, as well as from Croatian army rules, that it was necessary to produce certain documentation when conducting an artillery attack, such as Operation Storm.
They also noted that Croatia had supplied material to the tribunal revealing that “beginning in at least 1996, in a series of operations… Croatian authorities collected and concealed from the [tribunal], documents that could potentially incriminate Croatian accused or negatively affect Croatia’s national interest”.
However, at that time, Croatia’s deputy prime minister Jadranka Kosor told reporters that although the country was “sincerely and fully” cooperating with the tribunal, it couldn't surrender the documents in question because it didn't have them.
In response to the prosecutor’s submission, judges issued an order in September 2008, telling Croatia to intensify and broaden its investigation to find the documents requested by the prosecution and hand over any it found.
A prosecution document from January 19, 2009, noted that Croatia had “made several submissions and provided voluminous documentation in an effort to demonstrate its compliance with” the judges’ order.
But it said that Zagreb had provided only two of the missing artillery documents that prosecutors had requested.
“Croatia has failed to investigate key areas of inquiry, failed to obtain adequate information from key individuals, and failed to adequately analyse or account for the information it has collected,” said the submission.
“Although the evidence collected by Croatia supports the conclusion that the bulk of the missing documents were created and preserved, Croatia continues to deny that many of these documents exist.
“Croatia has made implausible claims to support their non-existence that are, for the most part, contradicted by the evidence Croatia has itself collected.”
In a piece published in Croatian daily Vecernji List on January 3, Brammertz expressed his doubts about the Croatian government’s claims not to have the documents, saying it seemed “very unlikely that key documents related to a major military operation might simply disappear”.
“We have reason to believe that some people have intentionally removed or hidden those documents,” he said.
This week, Simonovic said it was “critical to establish which documents did and which didn't exist”.
“The Hague prosecution and Croatian experts will identify each document and establish whether it was [ever] produced [by the authorities],” he said.
If a document had been produced in the past, but now can’t be found, then they will establish why it has become unavailable, he added.
“We are now checking if those 33 documents existed. Therefore, there will be no more category of ‘documents which might have existed’ after [that date],” said Simonovic.
If it is established that documents had been destroyed or removed, those responsible will be prosecuted, he said.
Goran Jungvirth is an IWPR-trained journalist in Zagreb.
The alleged documents – that the authorities in Croatia deny and knowledge of but which the tribunal insist exist – apparently relate to Operation Storm in July 1995, a military attack during which Croatian troops seized the Krajina region from Serb rebels. Three senior officers are on trial for the abuse of civilians during the operation.
Prosecutors believe the papers could help their case against three Croatian army generals – Ante Gotovina, Ivan Cermak and Mladen Markac – currently standing trial at the Hague tribunal for crimes committed against Serb civilians during the offensive. Their trial started in March last year and is still in the prosecution phase.
During meetings in Brussels this week, Serge Brammertz, the chief prosecutor of the Hague tribunal, will inform European Union officials about the extent of Croatia's cooperation with his office – a key factor in Croatia’s hopes of joining the EU.
The availability or otherwise of the documents, which are thought to detail the activities of Croatia's artillery and special police forces during Operation Storm, could be key to that assessment.
In June last year, Brammertz asked judges to issue an order against the Croatian authorities, compelling them to hand over evidence from their state archives.
In their submission, prosecutors listed an estimated 1,000 pages of documents and maps which they believed to exist, but which had not been produced by Croatia – including 311 pages of artillery documents related to Operation Storm.
Prosecutors also outlined the reasons why they thought these documents must have existed.
They explained that they had worked out from other Croatian documents in their possession, as well as from Croatian army rules, that it was necessary to produce certain documentation when conducting an artillery attack, such as Operation Storm.
They also noted that Croatia had supplied material to the tribunal revealing that “beginning in at least 1996, in a series of operations… Croatian authorities collected and concealed from the [tribunal], documents that could potentially incriminate Croatian accused or negatively affect Croatia’s national interest”.
However, at that time, Croatia’s deputy prime minister Jadranka Kosor told reporters that although the country was “sincerely and fully” cooperating with the tribunal, it couldn't surrender the documents in question because it didn't have them.
In response to the prosecutor’s submission, judges issued an order in September 2008, telling Croatia to intensify and broaden its investigation to find the documents requested by the prosecution and hand over any it found.
A prosecution document from January 19, 2009, noted that Croatia had “made several submissions and provided voluminous documentation in an effort to demonstrate its compliance with” the judges’ order.
But it said that Zagreb had provided only two of the missing artillery documents that prosecutors had requested.
“Croatia has failed to investigate key areas of inquiry, failed to obtain adequate information from key individuals, and failed to adequately analyse or account for the information it has collected,” said the submission.
“Although the evidence collected by Croatia supports the conclusion that the bulk of the missing documents were created and preserved, Croatia continues to deny that many of these documents exist.
“Croatia has made implausible claims to support their non-existence that are, for the most part, contradicted by the evidence Croatia has itself collected.”
In a piece published in Croatian daily Vecernji List on January 3, Brammertz expressed his doubts about the Croatian government’s claims not to have the documents, saying it seemed “very unlikely that key documents related to a major military operation might simply disappear”.
“We have reason to believe that some people have intentionally removed or hidden those documents,” he said.
This week, Simonovic said it was “critical to establish which documents did and which didn't exist”.
“The Hague prosecution and Croatian experts will identify each document and establish whether it was [ever] produced [by the authorities],” he said.
If a document had been produced in the past, but now can’t be found, then they will establish why it has become unavailable, he added.
“We are now checking if those 33 documents existed. Therefore, there will be no more category of ‘documents which might have existed’ after [that date],” said Simonovic.
If it is established that documents had been destroyed or removed, those responsible will be prosecuted, he said.
Goran Jungvirth is an IWPR-trained journalist in Zagreb.
