YEARENDER: International courts struggle to establish authority

(WARNING): Article contains propaganda!

* * * * *

The Hague - It was the moment that symbolized both the power, and the powerlessness, of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Radovan Karadzic, the fugitive former Bosnian Serb leader, finally in the dock this year in The Hague, after more than a decade on the run.

Yet Karadzic, defending himself, then refused to appear, claiming he was ill-prepared and requesting a postponement, in a convoluted legal cat-and-mouse game.

That struggle to establish and maintain authority, which characterized the ICTY in 2009, was echoed across the various international courts which have a home in The Hague.

There are, in fact, a total of six courts in the small Dutch city.

They are: the International Criminal Court (ICC), the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) (which is also located in the ICC building), the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), which is housed in a former Dutch secret service building, and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) which has its own building.

The Peace Palace, finally, is home to both the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA).

What links this array of courts was that all tried to demonstrate that international law and justice would not back down under pressure - political or otherwise.

At the ICTY, the case against Karadzic naturally took centre- stage, after his dramatic, long-delayed, arrest in Belgrade in 2008.

But despite the high drama of finally seeing Karadzic in the dock, the case evolved a power game between the accused and the court

Karadzic is charged with 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity - including two counts of genocide relating to acts allegedly committed during the 1992-1995 Bosnian War.

Always addressing his judges with utmost politeness, Karadzic made a conscious effort to first block, then postpone and finally to boycott the proceedings.

First, Karadzic claimed immunity, claiming there was an alleged agreement between the US and himself to that affect.

Next - claiming he was not yet ready for trial - he filed for postponement and subsequently (and unsuccessfully) appealed the decision denying his motion.

Four days before the trial was due to start in October, the former psychiatrist played his joker, announcing he would not attend proceedings since he was not sufficiently prepared.

A week later the court effectively met Karadzic halfway, postponing proceedings until March 2010 - but also appointing a compulsory defence counsel to represent Karadzic if he continues to refuse to attend his own trial.

Meanwhile, at the ICC, Chief Prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo was also attempting to demonstrate that international justice is immune to political pressure.

Seven years after its inauguration in 2002, the court's first cases finally began - both concerning the Democratic Republic of Congo.

In January the former Congolese militia leader Thomas Lubanga Dyilo was the first in the dock, to face six charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity - including recruiting child soldiers in the DR Congo's bloody civil war between 1998 and 2003.

Ten months later, on November 24, the ICC opened its first mass- murder trial, with Congolese rebel leaders Germaine Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui in the dock.

Both were accused of having orchestrated the 2003 killing of several hundred civilians from the Bogoro village in the north-east district of Ituri in the DR Congo.

But with doubt the biggest story of the year came with the arrest warrant the ICC issued for acting Sudanese President Omar al- Bashir - despite massive pressure by African and Arab leaders.

Al-Bashir was charged with seven counts - five of crimes against humanity and two of war crimes (but not, however, genocide) - over his alleged role in masterminding atrocities in Sudan's western Darfur region.

Most African and Arab countries condemned the warrant and vowed not to arrest Al-Bashir if he travelled to their countries. Al- Bashir himself reacted by banning many international charities and non-governmental organisations based in the West from Sudan.

It was not until July - after Chief Prosecutor Moreno Ocampo travelled through Africa to boost support for the ICC - that Uganda became the first African country to promise to arrest the Sudanese president if he should set foot on its territory.

Meanwhile, the US changed its long-standing position towards the ICC. Following the election of President Barack Obama, the US for the first time joined the annual meeting of the Assembly of States - essentially the legislative body of the international court - in November, albeit only with observer status.

In the same building the United Nations-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), lawyers defending former Liberian president and war crimes suspect Charles Taylor began arguing their case in May.

Taylor, the first African head of state to stand trial, for 11 counts ranging from the murder and torture to rape, mutilation and the use of child soldiers in the decade-long war in neighbouring Sierra Leone that began in 1991, had initially boycotted the trial (which first opened in 2007.)

Finally, in March, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) got up and running.

The STL is mandated to investigate and prosecute those behind February 2005 murder of Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri.

Three weeks later, the Italian judge Antonio Cassese, the first president of the ICTY, was appointed its president.

But whilst the wheels of justice grind slow, there is plenty more on the horizon for 2010.

The power game between Karadzic and the ICTY is far from over. The chances of Sudanese president Omar al-Bashir being arrested and transferred to The Hague, are slim.

Finally, no one has so far requested the International Criminal Court to investigate alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by Afghanistan's Taliban, Al-Qaeda or its leader, Osama bin Laden.