<article>The decision for the first-instance verdict to be pronounced to Vojislav Šešelj in absentia is unprecedented in the tribunal’s history.“That is a precedent, but there have already been too many precedents in the Šešelj case,“ Ljajić said, adding that “in the end, the tribunal decided to try to save face.”To the question of Insajder.net about whether the tribunal’s decision actually represented consent to political appeals from Belgrade, Deputy Prime Minister Ljajić said that the tribunal had brought the decision autonomously.“The government has presented the facts in this case about everything that was going on in the past period. Obviously, in an attempt to pull itself out of this situation, the tribunal also accepted the facts which we have presented,” Ljajić said.Ljajić explained that, if Šešelj is convicted, Serbia would have to extradite him to a location where the tribunal orders.Šešelj is accused for crimes against the Croats and Muslims in Croatia, Vojvodina and Bosnia and Herzegovina, from 1991 to 1993. The prosecution seeks a 28-year prison sentence.<h2>Why has the legal procedure not been followed?</h2>The Law on cooperation with the tribunal is clear. According to procedure, the Higher Court in Belgrade should have questioned Šešelj and decided about whether the conditions for extradition had been fulfilled. The state of one’s health is one of the reasons for the postponement of extradition. However, the problem is that the procedure had not been followed. To recollect - the Higher Court has postponed the questioning of Šešelj because of procedural reasons, as it has stated.„The procedure has started. I do not know, to this day, why the court had postponed the questioning, but that is their decision which we cannot interfere with,“ Ljajić stated.He explained that the government had given an opinion about Šešelj’s health.The Serbian government had until March 15th, i.e. yesterday, to inform the Court about what it had done regarding the arrest of Šešelj.The tribunal received an answer from the government which included the argument that it was not possible to stop, or continue in The Hague, Šešelj’s treatment for liver tumor.The trial chamber of the Hague tribunal has decided to pronounce the verdict of Vojislav Šešelj in absentia. The chamber accepted the Serbian government’s argument that it was not possible to stop, or continue in The Hague, Šešelj’s treatment for liver tumor, which he was diagnosed with earlier.According to the contents of the tribunal’s decision of March 16th, official Belgrade presented this argument in its March 15th confidential communication to the tribunal about the problems that would arise from Šešelj’s returning to The Hague, after his temporary release in November 2014.The tribunal left the possibility for Šešelj to follow the sentencing hearing via a video-link from Belgrade. According to today’s decision, Šešelj is to inform the tribunal by March 22nd about whether he wanted to follow the hearing or not.The trial chamber reached the decision by a majority vote of presiding judge Antonetti and judge Flavia Latanzzi, with a separate opinion of the third judge, Mandiaye Niang, who maintained that the stated reasons did not justify the pronunciation of the sentence in the absence of the accused.<h2>Judge Niang: Serbian authorities have not done enough to return Šešelj to The Hague</h2>The judges were not unanimous in their decision. One of the three judges, Mandiaye Niang, did not agree with the stand that the stated reasons justified the pronunciation of the verdict in absentia.In a separate opinion, judge Niang estimated that there was no sufficient reason for the Hague tribunal to decide to pronounce the verdict to Šešelj in absentia, stressing that the Serbian authorities had not done enough to return the accused to The Hague.He said that the Serbian authorities, who were obliged to arrest Šešelj and send him back to The Hague, had not taken the appropriate steps after the first order for his return. After the second order of the court, they began postponing the deadlines, thus making Šešelj’s return look like an illusion.“It is ironic that the tribunal justifies the accused at the moment when he appears without delay before the court in Belgrade,” Niang reiterated.</article>

The decision for the first-instance verdict to be pronounced to Vojislav Šešelj in absentia is unprecedented in the tribunal’s history.“That is a precedent, but there have already been too many precedents in the Šešelj case,“ Ljajić said, adding that “in the end, the tribunal decided to try to save face.”To the question of Insajder.net about whether the tribunal’s decision actually represented consent to political appeals from Belgrade, Deputy Prime Minister Ljajić said that the tribunal had brought the decision autonomously.“The government has presented the facts in this case about everything that was going on in the past period. Obviously, in an attempt to pull itself out of this situation, the tribunal also accepted the facts which we have presented,” Ljajić said.Ljajić explained that, if Šešelj is convicted, Serbia would have to extradite him to a location where the tribunal orders.<iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Yc3i1Se8uKM" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe><pre class="brush:c-sharp">&nbsp;</pre>Šešelj is accused for crimes against the Croats and Muslims in Croatia, Vojvodina and Bosnia and Herzegovina, from 1991 to 1993. The prosecution seeks a 28-year prison sentence.<h2>Why has the legal procedure not been followed?</h2>The Law on cooperation with the tribunal is clear. According to procedure, the Higher Court in Belgrade should have questioned Šešelj and decided about whether the conditions for extradition had been fulfilled. The state of one’s health is one of the reasons for the postponement of extradition. However, the problem is that the procedure had not been followed. To recollect - the Higher Court has postponed the questioning of Šešelj because of procedural reasons, as it has stated.„The procedure has started. I do not know, to this day, why the court had postponed the questioning, but that is their decision which we cannot interfere with,“ Ljajić stated.He explained that the government had given an opinion about Šešelj’s health.The Serbian government had until March 15th, i.e. yesterday, to inform the Court about what it had done regarding the arrest of Šešelj.The tribunal received an answer from the government which included the argument that it was not possible to stop, or continue in The Hague, Šešelj’s treatment for liver tumor.The trial chamber of the Hague tribunal has decided to pronounce the verdict of Vojislav Šešelj in absentia. The chamber accepted the Serbian government’s argument that it was not possible to stop, or continue in The Hague, Šešelj’s treatment for liver tumor, which he was diagnosed with earlier.According to the contents of the tribunal’s decision of March 16th, official Belgrade presented this argument in its March 15th confidential communication to the tribunal about the problems that would arise from Šešelj’s returning to The Hague, after his temporary release in November 2014.The tribunal left the possibility for Šešelj to follow the sentencing hearing via a video-link from Belgrade. According to today’s decision, Šešelj is to inform the tribunal by March 22nd about whether he wanted to follow the hearing or not.The trial chamber reached the decision by a majority vote of presiding judge Antonetti and judge Flavia Latanzzi, with a separate opinion of the third judge, Mandiaye Niang, who maintained that the stated reasons did not justify the pronunciation of the sentence in the absence of the accused.<h2>Judge Niang: Serbian authorities have not done enough to return Šešelj to The Hague</h2>The judges were not unanimous in their decision. One of the three judges, Mandiaye Niang, did not agree with the stand that the stated reasons justified the pronunciation of the verdict in absentia.In a separate opinion, judge Niang estimated that there was no sufficient reason for the Hague tribunal to decide to pronounce the verdict to Šešelj in absentia, stressing that the Serbian authorities had not done enough to return the accused to The Hague.He said that the Serbian authorities, who were obliged to arrest Šešelj and send him back to The Hague, had not taken the appropriate steps after the first order for his return. After the second order of the court, they began postponing the deadlines, thus making Šešelj’s return look like an illusion.“It is ironic that the tribunal justifies the accused at the moment when he appears without delay before the court in Belgrade,” Niang reiterated.

News

original

220x391

1250x600

1800x750

325x200

336x450

410x251

600x803

820x503

900x375

In focus

Ljajić: Tribunal trying to save face

DEACTIVATED-EmisijeTags

Info

englishNavigation

Footer

FooterEnglish

Arhiva

mainNavigation