Meddzida Kreso: New Law Undermines States Court Powers

Medzida Kreso, President of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, says the draft Law on Courts proposed in August weakens the capacity and responsibilities of the institution that she leads.

At the same time, she underlines that she is not opposed to the planned establishment of the Supreme Court.

In an interview with BIRN – Justice Report, Judge Kreso says the new law proposed by the Ministry of Justice will reduce the capacity and competence of the State Court and thus negatively affect implementation of Bosnia’s national War Crimes Strategy, which was adopted in 2008.

“Adoption of the law will have a negative impact, not only on implementation of the Strategy, but on the work of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a whole, as it envisages not only the weakening of human resources but also taking over its jurisdiction,” she says.

“The draft did not take into account the specific, strong capacity that the Court has built up during past eight years.”

The law, she notes, does not foresee any jurisdiction for the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, even on giving guidance on the application of the criminal code in matters of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes.

The Court’s jurisdiction is also not envisaged for crimes defined by the laws of Bosnia’s two entities concerning matters of sovereignty, territorial integrity, political independence, national security and international subjectivity of the state, as well as when serious economic damage can be inflicted.

Kreso notes that by the end of 2012, the mandate will expire for Bosnia’s remaining international judges, after which all capacities of the Registry, which the international community funded, will be transferred to the State Court.

Because of this, she adds, it is important that the new law recognizes the State Court’s importance and role, particularly in relation to war crimes.

Appeal court welcome in principle:

Kreso says she is not opposed to the establishment of the Appellate Court, which she says should eliminate complaints about the lack of independence of the Appellate Division within the State Court.

“I hope this will strengthen public confidence in the work of the state judiciary [but] the new law’s goal was to establish the Appellate Court, not redefine the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina,” she says.

“Something like that would be a misuse of the structured dialogue in which it was obvious from the beginning that state judicial institutions should not be weakened, but strengthened,” Kreso says.

Kreso sees the only objection to the Appellate Court as relating to its future location, saying that it is important for it to operate in the vicinity of the State Court.

“In general, I do not see why the establishment of the Appellate Court could have a negative impact on the work of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, but the problem could occur if its location would be too far from the Court,” she says.

“This could not only slow down criminal proceedings, but in cases where urgent action is required, could even threaten compliance with deadlines set by the law, and so undermine the human rights that are guaranteed to indictees,” she says.

War crimes strategy at risk:

Kreso admits that work on the National Strategy for War Crimes has been marked by difficulties since its adoption.

“But when it comes to responsibilities for which the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina is in charge, the past four years have seen significant results,” she says.

“Based on data submitted by all courts, the [State] Court established a sort of record in terms of the number of confirmed indictments and first-instance and second-instance verdicts in war-crime cases,” Kreso says.

The President of the State Court also points out that during this year one key objective of the Strategy was finally met – distribution of war crimes cases between the State and the two entities and Brcko District.

This way, only the most complex cases will now be prosecuted at state level while other cases devolve to the entities and Brcko District.

Kreso admits that delays by the prosecutors’ offices in providing information on cases slowed down the process of allocation of cases, but says it was almost completely finalized this year.

“The best indicator of that is the fact that since the adoption of the Strategy [in 2008], 282 cases were ceded to courts in the entities and Brcko District, of which 210 were in the last year.”

Kreso adds that “the hard work related to work on these cases”, is now impending.

According to the President of the State Court, to speed up work on war crimes cases, the capacity of judicial institutions at both state and entity levels needs enhancing.

“Any increase in the number of cases and intensification of prosecution of war crimes will also require strengthening of the resources of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina,” she maintains.

“In terms of capacity, the greater problem lies with the Prosecutors’ Offices, where there are not enough staff to work on investigations, such as investigators and expert associates,” she says.

Witness protection improving:

Kreso says that improving of the system of protection of witnesses in courts across Bosnia was one of the State Court’s key successes in 2012.

According to her, the Witnesses Support Unit of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina has significantly helped in establishing the Witnesses Support Departments in Banja Luka, East Sarajevo, and in the Cantonal Court and Prosecutor’s Office in Sarajevo.

“The role of the Court was essential, from establishing the departments to preparing regulations about their work to the recruitment of personnel and their initial training,” she says.

“Even today it serves as an advisory body in the work of the newly formed departments, with whom we share experiences from the practice,” she adds.

The President reveals that the Court has begun work on establishing a network of support for witnesses, by defining relevant non-governmental organizations that can provide support to them across the country.