Arnaut: Indictment for Dobrovoljačka is an 'abuse of process', I expect a reaction from Brammertz

(Patria) - Member of the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, Damir Arnaut (Our Party) condemned the indictment in the "Dobrovoljačka" case by the BiH Prosecutor's Office, considering that there is no event from the period of aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina that has been so extensively and before so many different instances already received a prosecutorial and judicial epilogue. In all these situations, the findings were the same: there is no criminal responsibility of the military and political leadership of the Republic of BiH, and the JNA convoy represented a "legitimate military target".

Arnaut reminds that the Hague Tribunal conducted an extensive investigation 20 years ago, which also included Ejup Ganić, Jovan Divjak, Jusuf Pušina and others, and with its decisions of June 17, 2003, officially "took the position that the evidence was insufficient by international standards to provide a reasonable basis for believing" that the said persons had committed violations of international humanitarian law.

This position of the Hague Tribunal was also followed by the court in London, when in July 2010 it rejected the request of the Republic of Serbia for the extradition of Ejup Ganić. The court concluded at the time that although the prosecutorial decision of the Hague Tribunal as such does not violate the right not to be tried twice for the same offense (non bis in idem), "it establishes a very significant obstacle to any other indictment". Judge Workman emphasized that "therefore, it attaches considerable weight to the fact that no indictment was filed".

Furthermore, Judge Workman concluded in the same ruling that the combination of his and Noel Malcolm's testimony "leads him to believe that this proceeding was initiated and is being used for political purposes, and that as such it constitutes an abuse of process before this court", Arnaut reminds. Almost identical findings were accepted by the court in Vienna in the case of the extradition request for Jovan Divjak.

Considering all my experience from the London and Vienna processes, including thousands of pages of read documentation, I have no doubt that the goal of Serbia and Republika Srpska in initiating and conducting these proceedings was to equalize the responsibility of the military and political leadership of these two sides in the conflict – the aggressor and the defender, Arnaut emphasizes. However, after these two debacles, which also included the official admission that it participated in the aggression against Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia abandoned further prosecution of the highest officials of the Republic of BiH. Interpol red notices were withdrawn, and the international prosecutor in the BiH Prosecutor's Office, Jude Romano, officially closed the investigation against these persons.

Yesterday's decision by the BiH Prosecutor's Office is, therefore, not only wrong, but I am convinced that it represents an "abuse of process" before the BiH Court in the same way that Judge Workman characterized Serbia's request before the court in London, says Arnaut.

Arnaut adds that the prosecution's claim that Ganić knew that Alija Izetbegović "was not captured" is not only a lie, but directly denies facts unequivocally established by the Hague Tribunal, the court in London, the court in Vienna, international prosecutors in the BiH Prosecutor's Office, and numerous witnesses – that Izetbegović was kidnapped by armed formations of another country.

Given all of the above, I expect a reaction from the Chief Prosecutor of the Residual Mechanism, Serge Brammertz, especially in light of the fact that such a move by the BiH Prosecutor's Office calls into question decades of work by the Hague Tribunal and international prosecutors in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Arnaut concludes.