02/12/2009
by DPA
Phnom Penh - Cambodia's war crimes tribunal on Wednesday announced the much-delayed appointment of its new international co-prosecutor following the resignation of Canada's Robert Petit earlier this year. In a press statement, the tribunal said British national Andrew T Cayley would take up the post. A tribunal spokesman said Cayley would likely arrive in Cambodia and begin work "within a few weeks."
The statement noted that Cayley has spent the past two years defending Charles Taylor at the Special Court for Sierra Leone, and has t10 years' experience on the prosecution at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.
"[And] from 2005-2007 he served as senior prosecuting counsel at the International Criminal Court and in that capacity was responsible for the Darfur investigation and subsequently for the first Darfur case against Ahmed Harun and Ali Kushayb," it stated.
In the same announcement, the tribunal stated that Nicholas Koumjian from the United States has been appointed reserve co-prosecutor.
The international side of the prosecution at the joint UN-Cambodian tribunal has had well-publicized problems retaining key international staff, with several quitting in the past year.
There have also been significant disagreements with the court's Cambodian co-prosecutor on key issues such as whether or not to pursue more Khmer Rouge war crimes suspects. The Cambodian co-prosecutor recently followed the line espoused by Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen that prosecuting further suspects could destabilize the nation.
Tribunal monitor Heather Ryan, from the Soros-funded Open Society Justice Initiative, said news of the appointment was encouraging.
"It's an important development for the court to get its permanent [international] co-prosecutor on board as soon as possible," Ryan said.
"There are a lot of important decisions to be made in the next couple of months about the [next] case, and it's important that the person who has the responsibility to carry out those decisions is the one who makes them."
The Khmer Rouge tribunal, known as the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), last week completed hearing the case against Comrade Duch, the former head of the Khmer Rouge torture and execution centre in Phnom Penh known as S-21.
Acting international co-prosecutor William Smith was widely seen as having done a good job, particularly in the trial's final week when Duch's defence imploded and fielded two opposing arguments before the court.
Duch's trial wrapped up on Friday after 77 days of hearings. He was tried for crimes against humanity and war crimes, as well as crimes under Cambodian law, and will be sentenced early next year. At least 15,000 people were tortured and executed at S-21.
Four senior surviving ex-Khmer Rouge are in custody awaiting trial, including former Brother Number Two Nuon Chea.
The Khmer Rouge ruled Cambodia between 1975 and 1979. Up to 2 million people are thought to have died during that time from execution, starvation and overwork. The movement's leader, Pol Pot, died in 1998.
Irrefutable Proof ICTY Is Corrupt Court/Irrefutable Proof the Hague Court Cannot
ReplyDeleteLegitimately Prosecute Karadzic Case
This legal technicality indicates the Hague must dismiss charges against Dr karadzic
and others awaiting trials in the Hague jail; like it or not.
Unfortunately for the Signatures Of the Rome Statute United Nations member states
instituting the ICC & ICTY housed at the Hague, insofar as the, Radovan Karadzic, as
with the other Hague cases awaiting trial there, I personally witnessed these United
Nations member states openly speaking about trading judicial appointments and
verdicts for financial funding when I attended the 2001 ICC Preparatory Meetings at
the UN in Manhattan making the iCTY and ICC morally incapable trying Radovan
Karazdic and others.
I witnessed with my own eyes and ears when attending the 2001 Preparatory Meetings
to establish an newly emergent International Criminal Court, the exact caliber of
criminal corruption running so very deeply at the Hague, that it was a perfectly viable
topic of legitimate conversation in those meetings I attended to debate trading verdicts
AND judicial appointments, for monetary funding.
Jilly wrote:*The rep from Spain became distraught and when her country’s proposal
was not taken to well by the chair of the meeting , then Spain argued in a particularly
loud and noticably strongly vocal manner, “Spain (my country) strongly believes if we
contribute most financial support to the Hague’s highest court, that ought to give us and
other countries feeding it financially MORE direct power over its
decisions.”
((((((((((((((((((((((((( ((((((((((((((((((((((((( Instead of censoring the country representative
from Spain for even bringing up this unjust, illegal and unfair judicial idea of bribery for
international judicial verdicts and judicial appointments, all country representatives
present in the meeting that day all treated the Spain proposition as a ”totally legitimate
topic” discussed and debated it between each other for some time. I was quite shocked!
The idea was "let's discuss it." "It's a great topic to discuss."
Some countries agreed with Spain’s propositions while others did not. The point here is,
bribery for judicial verdicts and judicial appointments was treated as a totally legitimate
topic instead of an illegitimate toic which it is in the meeting that I
attended in 2001 that day to establish the ground work for a newly emergent
international criminal court.))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
In particular., since "Spain" was so overtly unafraid in bringing up this topic of trading
financial funding the ICC for influence over its future judicial appointments and verdicts
in front of every other UN member state present that day at the UN, "Spain" must have
already known by previous experience the topic of bribery was "socially acceptable" for
conversation that day. They must have previously spoke about bribing the ICTY and
ICC
before in meetings; this is my take an international sociological honor student.
SPAIN's diplomatic gesture of international justice insofar as, Serbia, in all of this is,
disgusting morally!
SPAIN HAS TAUGHT THE WORLD THE TRUE DEFINITION OF AN
"INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT."
I remind everyone, when I attended those ICC Preparatory Meetings in 2001,
ReplyDeletewitnessing
first hand the country plenipotentiary representatives present with me discussing so
openly, trading judicial funding of a new international criminal court, for its direct
judicial appointments and judicial verdicts, those same state powers were
concurrently,
those same countries and people were already simultaneously, funding the already
established ICTY which was issuing at that time, arrest warrants for Bosnian Serbs
under false primary diplomatic pretenses.
The ICTY and ICC is just where it should be for once.
Cornered and backed into and an international wall, scared like a corned animal (and I
bet it reacts in the same way a rabid cornered animal does too in such circumstances).
(ICTY associates)
Doctor Radovan Karadzic’s life in direct danger as well as Ratko Mladic’s life in
danger should he be brought there.
The ICTY has no other choice than to halt all further court proceedings against, Doctor
Radovan Karadzic, and others there both serving sentences and awaiting trials.
Miss JIll Louise Starr (The UN Security Council has no choice but to act on this now).
I accuse the Hague ICTY war crimes tribunal of attempted assassination on my life and
others, contempt of court and obstruction of international justice and "international
witness tampering" in complicity with Richard Holbrook and Bill Clinton (Former US
President of the USA) as well as political playersin Spain and the Netherlands .
I represented the state interests' of the Former Yugoslavia, in Darko Trifunovic’s
absence in those meetings and I am proud to undertake this effort on Serbia’s behalf.
=================================================================
=================
United States :
We’ve all become closely acquainted with the concepts of impunity, international law,
social justice, and both licit and illicit equity within the framework of judiciary
constructs.
1) Many news media presenters argue certain leaders of political parties and organized
crime syndicates are “arrogant,” for believing they themselves are above the rule of law.
However, the award for winning the Olympic Gold Metal of being ‘Mother of All
Arrogance’ has just be captured by Hague’s Highest Legal Entity, the newly constructed
International Criminal Court.
2) This entity shamelessly and explicitly proclaims its own impunity from international
justice while increasing its push moving forward in prosecuting others for identical
crimes itself commits. It flaunts its diplomatic immunity as if it were the President of the
most powerful country on earth. Claiming to rival the powers of the Queen of England
and the Holy See.