Saturday, November 21, 2009

Karadzic represented by KLA counsel

The ICTY has assigned a counsel to Karadzic. It is the British lawyer Richard Harvey.
Allthough a few newspapers reported it many leave out to mention that he previously served at the ICTY to defend two KLA suspects (Haradin Bala and Lahi Brahimaj: Brahimaj is still appealing his verdict). Doing this he made some remarks that were highly critical of Serbia and the way it conducted war. In addition he doesn't know a thing about Bosnia. The main way he can help Karadzic is with his knowledge of the rules of the court.

Of course a professional lawyer is supposed to be able to represent anyone. But that is the theory. Reality is that people tend to start to believe what they say. Psychologists call this effect cognitive dissonance and it can proved with psychological experiments where people are paid to defend a certain position. Add to this the effect that first impression count most and you have to conclude that Harvey will find it very difficult to talk about the Serb cause with the same sympathy that he once talked about the Albanian cause.

The ICTY defends itself by pointing out that Harvey is only a counsel and Karadzic will still be able to represent himself. But this is hard to maintain when one considers that the ICTY was not prepared to finance the lawyers that Karadzic had employed to help him. Harvey looks like an excuse lawyer whose mere presence harms his customer.

1 comment:

lpcyusa said...

Irrefutable Proof ICTY Is Corrupt Court/Irrefutable Proof the Hague Court Cannot

Legitimately Prosecute Karadzic Case
(The Documentary Secret United Nations ICC Meeting Papers Scanned Images)

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


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!


absence in those meetings and I am proud to undertake this effort on Serbia’s behalf.