We have recently been asked by a correspondent to explain why we believe the war in Bosnia has been greatly misrepresented to the world.  We have sent some brief replies in Notifications, but feel that much more is needed – this is a huge question which deserves a significant answer.

For many, the alleged massacre of many thousands of Bosnian Muslims at Srebrenica in July 1995 remains the defining proof of Serbian wrongdoing.  To start the process of explaining our view of the truth about the Bosnian war, we are re-posting our 2020 video “Srebrenica: The Truth Behind the Headlines”, together with some additional footnotes on the ICTY.  We hope this will provide a basis for further discussion.

Our X site (@ResearchTeam) is another source of information.  Many of our Tweets are of international media coverage relating to the Bosnian war in general and Srebrenica in particular and are taken from a wide range of sources.

 

 

WHY THE VERDICTS DECLARING SREBRENICA A GENOCIDE ARE FUNDAMENTALLY FLAWED.

The International Criminal Tribunal  for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was the ultimate anomaly – an illegal court. The United Nations Security Council is not a law making body and had no powers to establish such a tribunal. That’s why Milosevic declared it ‘a false tribunal.’  A fundamental requirement for due process is that a defendant be tried by a body ‘established by law.’ The ICTY was not.

Set up under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter it was  ‘a measure to maintain or restore international peace and security’ even though a civil war within Yugoslavia posed no such threat. Richard Goldstone, ICTY’s first Chief Prosecutor admitted  ‘it came as a huge surprise to international humanitarian lawyers that a first ever international criminal court would come from the Security Council and not from a treaty.’

The tribunal was literally a law unto itself, even ruling on its own legality. It ignored strict instructions from the UN  to only use existing law and was constantly inventing new offences such as ‘joint criminal enterprise’  It was a purely political court created for the sole purpose of justifying US and NATO actions by demonising the Serbs.       

Funded and largely staffed by the US, it adjudicated crimes in an ongoing conflict in which it was an active participant. The bias could not have been more blatant. 90% of its evidence was uncorroborated hearsay, often from anonymous witnesses heard in closed session. If, by any remote chance, a defendant were acquitted, the judges could appeal the verdict and keep them in prison for retrial.   

The ICTY redefined the crime of genocide. No numerical threshold was necessary. There was no need to prove specific intent. Genocide could simply be ‘inferred’ from the circumstances of death, including military combat.

The excavation of grave sites and gathering of primary DNA evidence was conducted by the Muslim run International Commission for Missing Persons – another flagrant conflict of interest.  Neither the prosecution nor defence were allowed access to the primary evidence –  blood and tissue samples – for independent analysis – they were simply given computer print outs. Special laws have since been passed to protect this material from all future scrutiny. Why?    Such secrecy can only breed suspicion.

First conceived by the CIA to ‘publicise Serb brutality’, the ICTY was a total travesty of justice.