Interview: monitoring war crimes trials and building the justice system

Kristijan Turkalj, Head of the Croatian Justice Ministry's Department for the EU and Human Rights, is an important discussion partner for the OSCE Office in Zagreb in its regular meetings with the Ministry, particularly concerning the monitoring of war crimes proceedings. In this interview with Dorijan Klasnic, the Office's Public Affairs Assistant, Turkalj speaks about his work.

OSCE: You are a career diplomat. Please tell us something about your work history and how your current job is similar to or different from what you have been doing professionally so far? What were the most interesting moments of your career so far?

Kristijan Turkalj: My professional career began in 1995 in the Department of International Legal Affairs in the Croatian Ministry for Foreign Affairs. I dare say the fact that I was dealing with international law played a great part in channeling my further professional development. The most interesting moment of this part of my career was the preparation of Croatia's Memorial in the procedure against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) before the International Court of Justice regarding the FRY's alleged violation of the Convention on Genocide.

After that experience, my professional orientation shifted entirely towards the EU. Working for the Croatian Mission to the European Community, I spent four years knocking at the doors of major EU institutions. That was a priceless experience for me as it enabled me to fully grasp the modes of decision-making in the EU.

Upon my return to Zagreb, I took over the department responsible for following all EU policies and institutional activities and was appointed Secretary of the Committee for Stabilization and Accession. I would probably assess that period of my career as the most demanding one, since I had to be knowledgeable about practically everything of significance concerning any of Croatia's open issues with the EU, be it shipbuilding, cigarettes, steel, wool production, etc.

At the same time, when I returned to Zagreb, I took part in the negotiating process for EU accession. As head of the working group on negotiation of Chapter 24 "Justice, Freedom and Security", I achieved results which I believe were crucial for the Government's decision to appoint me as a negotiator for this Chapter and Chapter 23, "Judiciary and Fundamental Rights". After that appointment, it was somehow a logical step for me to transfer to the Ministry of Justice, since the legislation in Chapter 23 concerning the judiciary is the area in which the EU's expectations are the highest.

OSCE: How do you assess co-operation in Croatia with the OSCE and the international community in general? What, in your opinion, distinguishes the OSCE from other international organizations?

Kristijan Turkalj: Overall, I have to emphasize that in the past years, ever since I have been co-operating with the OSCE personally, the results achieved have been remarkable. In this respect, it was a great pleasure for me to co-operate with the Head of the OSCE Office in Zagreb as well as with other representatives of the Organization. I personally believe that co-operation with representatives of the international community is excellent. However, that does not mean that those relations are always simple. By extension, this also goes for the OSCE: its mandate encompasses topics that are essentially very complex, so that even to talk about them is anything but simple.

OSCE: Croatia declared its independence in 1991. How were justice and diplomacy created from the old apparatus of the federative Croatia?

Kristijan Turkalj: Croatian diplomacy took over members of the former Yugoslav diplomatic corps who put themselves at its disposal. Croatian diplomatic staff were not numerous in the former Yugoslav diplomatic service. Many of them are still active today. They represent a singular asset and significantly influenced the emerging of a new generation to which I, myself, also belong. During the past 17 years, Croatia has made great efforts to recruit and train diplomatic staff and this has contributed to the fact that today we most probably have one of the youngest diplomatic services capable of dealing with the most complex issues.

Things in the judiciary developed similarly yet differently. The process differed insofar as the sizable corps of judges that existed at the time was suddenly reduced. Vacant positions were filled with young people. Until just recently, the inexperience of these judges was the subject of major objections. But the inexperienced judges became experienced and have become the greatest asset of the Croatian judiciary, still young and motivated enough to carry the burden of the ongoing judicial reform.

OSCE: What has been the biggest achievement in the Croatian justice system over the last ten years? And where do you see need for improvement?

Kristijan Turkalj: What I consider to be the greatest achievement in the judiciary is the reduction of the backlog of cases. At the beginning of 2005, Croatian courts registered 1.6 million cases; at the beginning of 2009, we were down to 900,000 cases. The main challenges are the old cases which have been pending in the courts for more than three years.

OSCE: Since 2006, the OSCE, in co-operation with the Delegation of the European Commission (EC) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Liaison Office, has been holding regular plenary meetings with the Ministry of Justice, amongst others with the Chief State Attorney, Representatives of the Supreme Court, the Judicial Academy and the Interior Ministry. Do you deem these meetings successful? What has been the most important achievement of these meetings?

Kristijan Turkalj: The so-called Platform has enabled a dialogue among all stakeholders within the judicial system. That is its most significant accomplishment. Every institution has been given the opportunity to present its own expert opinion and proposals for the resolution of the problems raised. This has allowed good quality dialogue to develop and has made possible the progress we have achieved in the past years.

OSCE: The OSCE's goal is to prepare NGOs to replace and continue its monitoring work in Croatia once the Office is gone. At what point will the time have come, in your opinion, when the Croatian judiciary will require no monitoring at all?

Kristijan Turkalj: As far as the OSCE's monitoring of the Croatian judiciary is concerned, I believe that time has already come, when Croatia began its accession negotiations with the EU. With regard to the NGOs, their monitoring role should never cease. Civil society is the corrective tool of the authorities - this is its role and in my opinion NGOs are absolutely crucial for its performance.

OSCE: How would you assess the Minstry of Justice's co-operation with NGOs on issues related to war crimes proceedings?

Kristijan Turkalj: The Ministry of Justice has a very open policy with regard to cooperation with NGOs, including those who monitor war crimes trials. It is our standpoint that NGOs have the right to know what the Ministry of Justice is doing in regard to war crimes. Of course, we would like to see more recognition for our activities from the NGOs. The only way to achieve this is through continued dialogue.

OSCE: The review of in absentia war crimes verdicts is the latest agenda item being addressed by the Ministry of Justice. What can you tell us about the review and the related action plans of the State Attorney and the Interior Ministry, the status of their implementation and future steps?

Kristijan Turkalj: When talking about the in absentia judgments, one should not disregard the circumstances under which they were passed. It is difficult to remain impartial, to determine responsibility and utter a sentence, when you are being shelled. Also, I think that with these judgments the judges of the time were sending the message that war crimes are punishable. Now that 17 years have elapsed, it is easy to spot mistakes committed in individual cases. However, Croatia, like many other states, possesses a legal instrument for the renewal of judgments rendered in absentia, which renders possible the correction of such mistakes.

To this end, the Croatian State Attorney's Office (SAO) produced an action plan in 2008 for reviewing war crimes cases. As foreseen by that plan, a review of all cases in which final judgments were passed in absentia due to the inaccessibility of defendants was completed in January 2009.

Croatia has been very attentive to war crimes trials and judgments since the early 1990s. The review of war crimes judgments is on the agenda of the so-called Platform that has been in place for the last two years. The discussion on this issue was intensified at the end of last year, and we are extremely pleased that the OSCE recognized the progress achieved. All of this indicates that there is rule of law in the Republic of Croatia and that all people are equal before the law.

OSCE: The Zagreb, Osijek, Rijeka and Split County Courts have been given the status of special war crimes tribunals. However, monitoring indicates that most war crimes continue to be tried in the communities where the crimes took place. Why, in your opinion, are these special tribunals not used more often? Moreover, how do the new Office for the Prevention of Corruption and Organized Crime (USKOK) departments established as a result of the latest judicial reform efforts affect the special war crimes courts' caseload and the work of criminal judges, who must now deal with new corruption cases in addition to pending or old cases. Will this affect which cases have priority over others?

Kristijan Turkalj: The SAO and courts at the local level are currently capable of performing the demanding task of trying war crimes in compliance with the best standards.

The four special war crimes courts have now been given the additional responsibility of dealing with cases that fall under the competence of the USKOK, cases which are very complex and demanding. If these courts had to deal with more war crimes trials, they would be overloaded.

The SAO and the Supreme Court are extremely attentive to war crimes trials. Were any flaw to be detected in the handling of a case, it would immediately be referred to one of the four aforementioned courts.

OSCE: What are the latest statistics on the number of pending war crimes cases, including investigations and international arrest warrants?

Kristijan Turkalj: One should keep in mind that the data on identified and unidentified perpetrators are kept separately. According to the data of the SAO, there are currently 1,051 unprocessed cases against persons suspected of war crimes acts. In addition, 597 cases have been instituted against unidentified perpetrators.

Regarding international arrest warrants: according to the SAO and the Ministry of the Interior, a total of 670 international arrest warrants (so-called "red warrants") have been issued against perpetrators of war crimes, 304 of which pertain to people who were convicted of war crimes in absentia.