INTERVIEW Serge Brammertz: War crimes finally a priority for Montenegro

Chief Prosecutor of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals Serge Brammertz, He assessed that in Montenegro, for the first time in many years, "justice for war crimes" is being treated as a priority.

"One case is in the trial phase (Slobanod Peković case, ed.), and the other is awaiting confirmation of the indictment (Zoran Gašović case, ed.). My Office is cooperating with the Montenegrin authorities on additional investigations. I can say that real work is being done and real progress is being made," he said in an interview with Vijesti.

Brammertz stated that he will work with his Montenegrin colleagues to ensure protection for witnesses who need it, so that they can participate in trials, while at the same time ensuring that their evidence can be fully utilized.

"We will continue discussions on other possible reforms that would strengthen justice for war crimes," he said.

Brammertz was the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) from 2008 to 2016, and then became the Chief Prosecutor of its legal successor - the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IMCR) based in The Hague.

The mechanism replaced the ICTY in its work, and was established by the Security Council in 2010. It took over all unfinished proceedings related to war crimes committed in the territories of Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia.

How do you assess Montenegro's efforts so far in prosecuting war crimes committed during the 1990s?

Objectively speaking, in the last thirty years, very little has been done in Montenegro to prosecute crimes committed during the conflicts of the 1990s. Very few trials have been initiated, and most of them have yielded poor results. But when we look at the current situation, it is quite different. For the first time in many years, justice for war crimes is being treated as a priority. One case is in the trial phase, while another is awaiting confirmation of the indictment.

My Office is working with the Montenegrin authorities on additional investigations. I can say that real work is being done and real progress is being made. I also had the pleasure of meeting with many senior Government officials during my visit to Podgorica last fall. They emphasized to me that there is a genuine commitment by the Government to finally ensure greater accountability. They were clear that this is a problem from the past that needs to be addressed if Montenegro is to move forward in the future. So, this is still at an early stage, but I certainly think we can be optimistic that in the coming years Montenegro will achieve more justice for war crimes than it has done in the past.

In early February, the Special State Prosecutor's Office (SDT), on the orders of the Chief Special Prosecutor Vladimir Novović, re-established criminal cases regarding war crimes in Morinje, Bukovica, Kaluđerski laz and the deportation of refugees from Herceg Novi. Special investigative teams have also been formed, tasked with, among other things, searching the database of the Mechanism in The Hague. How do you assess this step by Montenegro? Is it a sign of a more serious political and institutional will to finally prosecute these crimes?

My Office works closely with the SDT on specific cases and investigations. I can say that I am very satisfied with our joint work. Moreover, we have a lot of respect for the Montenegrin prosecutors and investigators who work on war crimes cases. They do their job professionally and objectively, and it is clear that they want to achieve justice. The main challenge for the SDT will be capacity and resources. War crimes cases are more demanding than ordinary crimes, and yet there are only a few investigators and prosecutors working on these cases, which is understandable given that this is a small country and that there are other serious crimes that need to be processed. That is why my Office is trying to provide all the support we can. But I think it will be important to have realistic expectations about what can be achieved. This work will not be done overnight. Achieving effective justice will be a work for years to come.

In the progress report you presented to the UN Security Council in December, in the section on Montenegro, you stated that important reforms are needed to support war crimes justice in domestic law, in order to ensure successful prosecution of war crimes cases in Montenegro. What important reforms are you referring to?

One of the reforms has already been successfully implemented, namely an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code that allows the introduction of ICTY and IRMCT evidence in war crimes cases. This reform is in line with the laws of other countries in the region that have been using our evidence for years.

We will also work with our Montenegrin colleagues to ensure that witnesses who need protection are protected in order to participate in trials, while ensuring that their evidence can be fully used. We will continue to discuss other possible reforms to strengthen war crimes justice.

In Montenegro, in Nikšić, the remains of three people were exhumed in early June, and there is a reasonable suspicion that these are the remains of the three-member Klapuh family from Foča, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), who were killed by members of the Army of Republika Srpska in 1992 on the territory of Montenegro, in the municipality of Plužine. How important is it that such cases are clarified and processed, regardless of how much time has passed, and what message does justice in such cases send to the families of the victims?

It is absolutely essential that prosecutions continue, regardless of the passage of time. This is not a case of justice delayed is justice denied. Justice for war crimes takes time. Of course, prosecutors and judges should work as quickly as possible, but it would be wrong to deny justice to victims simply because much time has passed. It is also crucial to continue the search for missing persons. Three decades later, thousands of families still do not know the fate of their loved ones. They need answers, if only to know what happened. This is important for humanitarian reasons. And that is why my Office is working with the International Committee of the Red Cross and other partners to continue to support the search for all missing persons.

Montenegro is aspiring to membership in the European Union (EU). How much will progress in dealing with the war past and punishing those responsible affect the assessment of European institutions?

I cannot, of course, speak for the EU, but it is clear that effective justice for war crimes is a fundamental value of the European community. It should not be a question of how many cases need to be processed or how much progress has been made. Instead, it should be an indicator that the rule of law is fundamental in Montenegro and that victims will receive the justice they deserve while perpetrators of crimes will be appropriately punished.

Many are far from accepting the truth and being open to reconciliation

In countries of the region, including Montenegro, cases of glorification of finally convicted war criminals continue to be recorded, whether through public appearances, murals, rallies or political rhetoric. To what extent do such phenomena undermine efforts for justice and reconciliation, and how should the international community respond when local authorities remain passive?

Denial is the final stage of genocide and war crimes. Victims rightly expect recognition of what they suffered, not denial. Denial of what happened in the past prevents progress into the future.

I still cannot understand, even after so many years, how denial can be so widespread today. Generations who survived the conflict know what happened. And certainly government officials and other civic leaders know better. It shows how far many parts of society across the region are still from accepting the truth and being open to reconciliation. Of course, the international community must react, but that will not solve the problem. The only solution is a local solution. So what I would say is that when anyone in the region sees or hears denial, speak up. Reject it. Tell the truth. The end of denial and the acceptance of the truth can only come from society itself, not from the international community.