|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
||
|
Human Rights Developments Defending Human Rights The Role of the International Community The Role of the International CommunityDespite hopes that local officials in Bosnia and Hercegovina would gradually take up the tasks of implementing the DPA, in 1998 hardline officials continued to resist all efforts to implement the civilian provisions of the DPA, forcing the international community, in particular the High Representative, to assume a more prominent role in the country. Due to the persistent obstruction by many local authorities, the international community was faced with the difficult task of trying to move the peace process forward while simultaneously fostering sufficient popular support within Bosnia and Hercegovina for its actions. Several positive developments during the year were due to the more aggressive implementation efforts by the international community. However, on occasion, the international community opted to use undemocratic meanssuch as the confiscation of television transmitters to obtain implementation of the DPA, thereby running the risk of undermining the legitimacy of the peace process. In other instances, the international community failed to use the means at its disposal to achieve significant human rights improvements. The Office of the High Representative
NATO/SFOR
In a dramatic departure from previous practice, British, American, German, and Dutch SFOR troops detained eight indictees since December 1997. However, SFOR failed to arrest Karadzic, whose presence and influence continued to undermine the DPA and create an atmosphere of impunity, and Mladic, who was reportedly living in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) underthe protection of Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic. United Nations/IPTF
The United Nations International Police Task Force (IPTF) has responsibility under the DPA for, among other things, monitoring the conduct of the local police, as well as restructuring the police and removing human rights abusers from the force. Unfortunately, to date, the screening and vetting of police officers by IPTF has been largely ineffective; many abusive police officers continue to hold positions of responsibility on the force. IPTF continued to be reluctant to carry out its own independent investigations, insisting that allegations of abuses by the police should be investigated by the IPTF only as a last resort. Although it is true that disciplinary measures, including prosecution, should ultimately be taken by local authorities, it is also clear that in some cases, such as in Drvar and Stolac, the local authorities are not willing to undertake serious action. In such cases, it is incumbent upon the IPTF to find another way to address these abuses and to hold those responsible acountable.During the last months of 1998, IPTF seemed to interpret its mandate more broadly, and did engage in several independent investigations. The U.N. Human Rights Office (HRO) continued to raise the profile of human rights by investigating and publicizing allegations of human rights abuses in Drvar, Stolac, Teslic, Sarajevo, and other cities. However, the HRO sometimes neglected to include legal standards and recommendations in its reports, thereby missing important opportunities to raise awareness about human rights and the obligations of the government (local and national). Importantly, the HRO has not been provided with the resources necessary for effective engagement, and was therefore not always able to adequately follow up cases involving serious allegations of human rights abuses. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
European Union
E.U. member states provided 18,000 SFOR troops and contributed significantly to the peace process by detaining personsindicted for war crimes. Throughout the year, Bosnian refugees, mostly Bosniaks, continued to return from Germany. Most returned voluntarily, but several Länder continued forcibly to deport refugees to Bosnia although it remained impossibile for them to return to their pre-war homes (as was promised by the DPA), creating an additional burden on the authorities and exacerbating internal displacement that tended to consolidate ethnic cleansing. Council of Europe
United States
The U.S. continued to try to influence the peace process through economic incentives, but failed to pay sufficient attention to vetting the recipients of its aid to ensure that those obstructing the DPA did not benefit. The U.S. government repeatedly waived restrictions in the 1998 Appropriations Act prohibiting assistance to communities that failed to apprehend resident indicted war crimes suspects. U.S. officials claimed that although they waived the general prohibition, they took care to ensure that war crimes indictees and those who have obstructed the DPA did not benefit from aid. In March, however, the U.S. provided assistance to the RS police, notwithstanding the fact that IPTF had not completed the vetting of the RS police, which remained riddled with those responsible for human rights abuses and Dayton obstruction. The U.S. failed to anticipate the resurgence of hardline nationalists in the September 1998 elections and, as of this writing, did not appear to have a strategy in place to address this challenge. Relevant Human Rights Watch reports:
A Closed, Dark Place: Past and Present Human Rights Abuses in Foca, 7/98 |
Albania Armenia Azerbaijan Republic of Belarus Bosnia and Hercegovina Bulgaria Croatia Czech Republic Georgia Greece Hungary Kazakstan Kyrgyztan Macedonia Romania The Russian Federation Slovakia Tajikistan Turkey Turkmenistan United Kingdom Uzbekistan Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Asylum Policy in Western Europe |
|
||
BACK TO TOP Copyright © 1999 Human RIghts Watch |
||
|