The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (‘ICTY’) and the transfer of cases and materials to national judicial authorities: lessons in complementarity

doi:10.1017/CBO9781316134115.038

28 - The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (‘ICTY’) and the transfer of cases and materials to national judicial authorities: lessons in complementarity

from PART V - Complementarity in perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 November 2014

David Tolbert and

Aleksandar Kontić

Edited by

Carsten Stahn and

Mohamed M. El Zeidy

Show author details

Carsten Stahn: Affiliation:
Universiteit Leiden
Mohamed M. El Zeidy: Affiliation:
International Criminal Court

Book contents

Get access

Summary

While the International Criminal Court's (‘ICC’) work, like that of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (‘ICTY’), will continue to focus largely on its investigative and judicial work, it also has an historic opportunity to support transitional justice efforts in the countries in which it works. This support will no doubt vary from country to country, sometimes providing information and evidence to national prosecutors, in other cases to truth and reconciliation commissions, and perhaps to other investigations as well. Thus, some advanced work, including the establishment of internal structures and databases, would be very useful in preparation for those opportunities. Hopefully, the ICC will learn from the positive aspects of the ICTY's transfer of cases and materials while avoiding the ICTY's first decade of largely failing to engage with the region and its legal professionals in meaningful ways, thus losing opportunities to make a difference in terms of transitional justice and reconciliation.

Overview

A fruitful partnership has developed between the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (‘ICTY’ or ‘Tribunal’) and judicial institutions in the countries of the former Yugoslavia. This has taken a number of forms, including the transfer of cases and materials to courts and prosecutors in the region as well as other forms of cooperation between the ICTY and national judicial authorities. The most significant of these relationships is with judicial officials and institutions in Bosnia-Herzegovina (‘BiH’). In BiH, the most important developments have occurred between the ICTY and the BiH State Court and BiH State Prosecutor's Office (‘POBiH’), hybrid institutions established under Bosnian law but with a mixed or ‘hybrid’ character of both national and international judges, prosecutors and staff.

Type: Chapter
Information: The International Criminal Court and Complementarity
From Theory to Practice
, pp. 888 - 919

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316134115.038 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Stahn, C. and Sluiter, G. (eds.), The Emerging Practice of the ICC (2009), 135

Burke-White, William W., ‘Proactive Complementarity: The International Criminal Court and National Courts in the Rome System of International Justice,’ (2008) 49 Harv.Int'l L. J. 53Google Scholar

Stahn, C., ‘Complementarity: A Tale of Two Notions,’ (2008) 19 Crim. L.F. 87, 88Google Scholar

Naarden, G. L., ‘Non-Prosecutorial Sanctions for Grave Violations of International Humanitarian Law: Wartime Conduct of Bosnian Police Officials,’ (2003) 97 AJIL 342CrossRef Google Scholar

Latal, S., ‘Nato reports “ominous” cut in contacts with Bosnian Serbs’, Associated Press, 10 February 1996

Hedges, C., ‘Muslim Detention of Bosnian Serbs Threatens Truce’, New York Times, 7 February 1996

Holbrooke, R., To End a War (1998), 332

Bisic, M., Ratni Zlocin i Genocid (War Crimes and Genocide), (1999), 154

Rome Agreement, supra note 7, Art. 5. The Rome Statement reflects the work of the Joint Civilian Commission Sarajevo Compliance Conference (18 February 1996)

Burke-White, W. W., ‘The Domestic Influence of International Criminal Tribunals: The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the Creation of the State Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina’, (2008) 46 Colum.J.Transnat'l L. 279Google Scholar

Burke-White, W. W. goes even further and claims that more than 2,300 cases sent to the ICTY were never reviewed and were lost in administrative limbo (supra note 16). In fact, this is not accurate. First, the ICTY Prosecutor transferred all of the un-reviewed Rules of the Road files to the POBiH in October 2004 (see Eleventh Annual Report for the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia Since 1991, UN Doc. A/59/21 5-S/2004/62 7 (2004), para. 288)

Škulić, M., ‘Komandna odgovornost – istorijat, Rimski statut i jugoslovensko krivično pravo (Command Responsibility – History, Rome Statute and Yugoslav Criminal Law)’, (2002) 88 Arhiv Za Pravne i Društvene Nauke 4, 489–532Google Scholar

Baylis, E., ‘Reassessing the Role of International Criminal Law: Rebuilding National Courts Through Transnational Networks, (2009) 50 B.C.L. Rev. 1, 4