Extensive New Evidence Threatens Verdict in Blaskic Case: Croatia opens archives to ICTY
Extensive New Evidence Threatens Verdict in Blaskic Case: Croatia opens archives to ICTY
In light of extensive new evidence in the Blaskic case, a panel of the Appeals Chamber has ordered the parties to address the Chamber on whether a new trial should be granted. Oral argument has been set for November 21, 2002.
Tihomir Blaskic, a former colonel of the Croatian Defense Council in Bosnia (HVO), was convicted on March 3, 2000, of 19 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his command role in ethnic cleansing in central Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Court sentenced him to 45 years in prison.
Following his conviction, Blaskic filed three separate motions to admit additional evidence on appeal. The Tribunal's rules allow for this procedure when the evidence was not available to the accused at trial, but leave it to the Appeals Chamber to determine if the interests of justice require hearing that evidence. (Rule 115) In issuing its order for oral arguments in the Blaskic case, the Appeals Chamber noted that, according to prior court rulings, the evidence must also be 'relevant, credible, and such that it could show that the conviction was unsafe.' The Appeals Chamber listed 44 exhibits submitted by Blaskic that 'clearly satisfy' these criteria.
The Appeals Chamber also stated that it maintains 'an inherent power to admit such evidence even if it was available at trial, in cases in which its exclusion would lead to a miscarriage of justice.' The Court then found that five of the exhibits are admissible under this rule. With regard to substantial additional exhibits proffered by Blaskic, the Appeals Chamber declined to rule at this time.
The Chamber went on to state that it was not prepared to enter an acquittal at this stage and that, in any event, it would be more appropriate for a Trial Chamber to undertake any redetermination of facts. The parties were ordered to limit their oral arguments 'to the issue of whether the above-mentioned clearly admissible evidence justifies a new trial by a Trial Chamber, on some or all of the counts.' Thus, the issue of whether the exhibits are admissible is not up for debate. The Appeals Chamber has concluded that they are.
Tihomir Blaskic voluntarily surrendered to the ICTY on April 1, 1996. His trial began June 24, 1997 and concluded July 30, 1999, over two years later. It took another six months before the Trial Chamber reached its decision and handed down its sentence. That was twenty months ago. The lengthy trial included 158 live witnesses and 1500 exhibits. The possibility of repeating this trial is daunting to all concerned. However, even at the time of rendering its verdict, the Trial Chamber noted 'its regret that it did not obtain all the available information' which was stored in the Archives of the Republic of Croatia. When Croatia's cooperation with the Tribunal improved after political changes in its leadership, those Archives were opened to the ICTY, and to those it had accused. This massive amount of information could have a serious impact on the work of the Tribunal to date. It will certainly have an impact on the Blaskic case. Between the two options of setting him free or ordering a new trial, the prosecutor might conduct a thorough review of the additional evidence to determine if it warrants withdrawing some or all of the charges, or a reduction in sentence. Discussions should then proceed with Blaskic and, ultimately, the Appeals Chamber. Regardless, the November 21st hearing, and whatever order follows, deserves careful attention.
Tihomir Blaskic, a former colonel of the Croatian Defense Council in Bosnia (HVO), was convicted on March 3, 2000, of 19 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his command role in ethnic cleansing in central Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Court sentenced him to 45 years in prison.
Following his conviction, Blaskic filed three separate motions to admit additional evidence on appeal. The Tribunal's rules allow for this procedure when the evidence was not available to the accused at trial, but leave it to the Appeals Chamber to determine if the interests of justice require hearing that evidence. (Rule 115) In issuing its order for oral arguments in the Blaskic case, the Appeals Chamber noted that, according to prior court rulings, the evidence must also be 'relevant, credible, and such that it could show that the conviction was unsafe.' The Appeals Chamber listed 44 exhibits submitted by Blaskic that 'clearly satisfy' these criteria.
The Appeals Chamber also stated that it maintains 'an inherent power to admit such evidence even if it was available at trial, in cases in which its exclusion would lead to a miscarriage of justice.' The Court then found that five of the exhibits are admissible under this rule. With regard to substantial additional exhibits proffered by Blaskic, the Appeals Chamber declined to rule at this time.
The Chamber went on to state that it was not prepared to enter an acquittal at this stage and that, in any event, it would be more appropriate for a Trial Chamber to undertake any redetermination of facts. The parties were ordered to limit their oral arguments 'to the issue of whether the above-mentioned clearly admissible evidence justifies a new trial by a Trial Chamber, on some or all of the counts.' Thus, the issue of whether the exhibits are admissible is not up for debate. The Appeals Chamber has concluded that they are.
Tihomir Blaskic voluntarily surrendered to the ICTY on April 1, 1996. His trial began June 24, 1997 and concluded July 30, 1999, over two years later. It took another six months before the Trial Chamber reached its decision and handed down its sentence. That was twenty months ago. The lengthy trial included 158 live witnesses and 1500 exhibits. The possibility of repeating this trial is daunting to all concerned. However, even at the time of rendering its verdict, the Trial Chamber noted 'its regret that it did not obtain all the available information' which was stored in the Archives of the Republic of Croatia. When Croatia's cooperation with the Tribunal improved after political changes in its leadership, those Archives were opened to the ICTY, and to those it had accused. This massive amount of information could have a serious impact on the work of the Tribunal to date. It will certainly have an impact on the Blaskic case. Between the two options of setting him free or ordering a new trial, the prosecutor might conduct a thorough review of the additional evidence to determine if it warrants withdrawing some or all of the charges, or a reduction in sentence. Discussions should then proceed with Blaskic and, ultimately, the Appeals Chamber. Regardless, the November 21st hearing, and whatever order follows, deserves careful attention.
