Addendum to 'Krajisnik Trial Fiasco . . . '
Addendum to 'Krajisnik Trial Fiasco . . . '
In my May 13, 2003 report, I noted that Momcilo Krajisnik showed some hesitancy to accept co-counsel Nikola Kostich as lead counsel, following the withdrawal of Deyan Brashich who was suspended from the practice of law by the New York State Supreme Court. Though Krajisnik has not indicated publicly why he does not wish to have Mr. Kostich assume the lead, I have been reminded of Mr. Kostich's history at the ICTY which may have something to do with Krajisnik's reluctance.
Two years ago in the Galic case, the Trial Chamber issued Mr. Kostich, one of Galic's defense counsel, a formal warning. According to a report published in IWPR at the time, Judge Almiro Rodrigues read a lengthy list of 'serious failures by a defence counsel to fulfill his obligations.' (IWPR Tribunal Update 18WPR Tribunal Update 184, July 10-15, 2000) They included coming to hearings unprepared and late filings of preliminary objections. The Trial Chamber found it was a case of 'flagrant neglect' and 'poor use or ignorance of the rules applied before the Tribunal.'
While this makes Krajisnik's reluctance to have Kostich replace Brashich understandable, it leaves unanswered why Kostich continued as co-counsel in such an important case. Perhaps there was no way to avoid the turn of events which leaves Krajisnik without adequate representation on the eve of trial, after such substantial investment of time and money. But it certainly raises questions that the Registrar and the rest of the ICTY will want to have answered.
It should also be noted that in a recent IWPR report by Zeljko Cvijanovic, Momcilo Mandic claims to be paying for the defence of Momcilo Krajisnik in The Hague. (IWPR's Balkan Crisis Report, No. 423, May 8, 2003). According to the article, Mandic, who is being held by the Serbian police, is believed to have provided much of the money that has enabled Radovan Karadzic to avoid arrest and transfer to the ICTY. While investigators and police must have plenty to question Mandic about, one hopes someone will inquire about his support for Krajisnik.
Two years ago in the Galic case, the Trial Chamber issued Mr. Kostich, one of Galic's defense counsel, a formal warning. According to a report published in IWPR at the time, Judge Almiro Rodrigues read a lengthy list of 'serious failures by a defence counsel to fulfill his obligations.' (IWPR Tribunal Update 18WPR Tribunal Update 184, July 10-15, 2000) They included coming to hearings unprepared and late filings of preliminary objections. The Trial Chamber found it was a case of 'flagrant neglect' and 'poor use or ignorance of the rules applied before the Tribunal.'
While this makes Krajisnik's reluctance to have Kostich replace Brashich understandable, it leaves unanswered why Kostich continued as co-counsel in such an important case. Perhaps there was no way to avoid the turn of events which leaves Krajisnik without adequate representation on the eve of trial, after such substantial investment of time and money. But it certainly raises questions that the Registrar and the rest of the ICTY will want to have answered.
It should also be noted that in a recent IWPR report by Zeljko Cvijanovic, Momcilo Mandic claims to be paying for the defence of Momcilo Krajisnik in The Hague. (IWPR's Balkan Crisis Report, No. 423, May 8, 2003). According to the article, Mandic, who is being held by the Serbian police, is believed to have provided much of the money that has enabled Radovan Karadzic to avoid arrest and transfer to the ICTY. While investigators and police must have plenty to question Mandic about, one hopes someone will inquire about his support for Krajisnik.
