A Dutch
court has ruled the country is liable for the deaths of more than 300 victims
in the Srebrenica massacre. The ruling is in line with previous decisions - yet
surprising, says law professor Andreas von Arnauld.
Deutsche Welle, 16 July 2014
DW: Dutch
UN peacekeepers have been found liable for deportation of more than 300 Muslim men from the Dutchbat compound [who were then killed by a militia in the
Srebrenica massacre]. The court said on Wednesday (16.07.2014) the men would
probably still be alive, had they been allowed to stay in the compound. Was
this ruling expected?
Andreas von
Arnauld: Well, yes, and no. Since the ruling is in the line with earlier
judgments by Dutch courts concerning the Srebrenica massacre, especially in the
Mustafic and Nuhanovic cases, the Court of Appeal and the Dutch Supreme Court
had affirmed responsibility in 2011 and 2013, respectively, of Dutchbat and the
Dutch state.
But no -
that's the other answer - it didn't come expected since there is a general
reluctance of courts to assume liability in human rights cases concerning their
own military personal abroad. So the Dutch courts played and still play a
pioneering role.
The court
said that the Netherlands are not liable on all counts put forward by the
"Mothers of Srebrenica" - 8,000 men and boys were massacred at
Srebrenica in 1995. For instance, the Dutch state was not held responsible for
failing to protect refugees who fled to the woods instead of the compound. Why
did the court distinguish between protecting refugees in and outside the
compound?
It's
difficult to strike a fair balance here. Because if you look back at the fact
of that time, Dutchbat was actually faced with the situation in which it was
confronted by a militia - the militia of the Republika Srpska - that already
controlled the whole area. And there was no support from international forces
arriving, so de facto Dutchbat had no possibility on all accounts to protect
those fleeing to the woods.
According
to the court, Dutchbat was also well in reason to decide not to admit all
25,000 people seeking shelter at the compound, leaving most of them to fend for
themselves - even though the Dutch troops were in what the United Nations had
called a "safe zone." Why is the state not being held accountable for
failing to protect civilians if they failed to admit them to the compound?
That
certainly is the much harder question, because you might think about letting in
thousands more even if the living conditions there could then deteriorate
massively. Much depends here on the facts which have been established by the
court.
I think the
central problem is that those safe zones, or safe areas as they were called
then, turned out to be just some kind of shallow promise without the military
capacity to actually protect the civilians there. These were only light-armed
battalions, which were sent to protect the area of Srebrenica. So primarily it
was the United Nations and UNPROFOR - Protection Force of the United Nations -
that has to bear the blame for tragic mistakes in planning the whole operation.
Dutch peacekeepers failed to protect Muslims who fled to the UN-protected enclave of Srebrenica |
But a court
case earlier ruled that the UN is not responsible?
The UN is
not responsible, and that's one of the big problems. We have some kind of legal
accountability black holes surrounding those UN peace-keeping missions. It
concerns first of all difficult and entangled questions on attribution of
conduct - who decided what, who is responsible for what because of attribution,
or can we imagine some kind of responsibility without conduct that is
attributed to a single state or to the United Nations.
And then we
have, of course, UN immunity from national domestic courts, and we have no
legal or institutional possibility to challenge the UN or to hold them liable
on UN level. Every attempt to establish structures for liability at the UN
level have failed politically.
Will this
ruling set a precedent for similar cases where troops have failed to protect
civilians?
Well,
hopefully so, but this actually depends on willingness of national courts. And
here we have to bear in mind that of course the massacre of Srebrenica was one
of the vilest incidents we had in Europe after the end of World War II. And
it's left its marks and scars on the Dutch public, and also its stand towards
international engagement of its troops, so the Dutch are perhaps are already a
little more mature than others.
But
legally, it is a good sign that the Dutch courts showed some flexibility on the
attribution issue - they attributed conduct to the United Nations and also to
Dutchbat. And opened a window, actually, for circumventing this accountability
problem. This might be an attempt to establish some kind of shared
responsibility.
Here we
still have the biggest problem. I think that the United Nations must establish
some kind of institutional structure or boards which deal with those claims
expeditiously and with enough money to counsel UN liability. This hasn't
happened yet.
What does
this ruling mean for the victims' relatives?
Probably
after so many years of trying to get at least some kind of financial
compensation, I think it must be hard to understand the drawing of lines here.
Because if you were allowed into the compound, then the Dutch state is liable.
If you had to stay outside but wanted to get in - that is perhaps the hardest
line - then in this case the Dutch state is not liable. Legally, this can be in
some way construed, but this is probably very hard to communicate to the
victims' relatives.
And this
again shows that we need some kind of shared responsibility scheme which
includes the United Nations that in the end doesn't really [look at] where you
are - inside or outside the compound, if you fell victim to human rights
violations that in some way the international community and troop-contributing
states are responsible for.
Andreas von
Arnauld is professor of International Law and Co-Director of the
Walther-Schücking Institute for International Law at Kiel University.
Relatives
of the Srebrenica victims and members of ''Mothers of Srebrenica''
association
after the Dutch court announced the verdict. Photograph: Anadolu
Agency/Getty Images
|
Related Article:
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.