used without permission, for "fair use" only

Only Monster Saves SFOR

How Stevan Todorovic saved American General Shinseki from giving uncomfortable testimony in The Hague and in exchange received a reduced sentence

Ljiljana SMAJLOVIC

NIN, Belgrade, FR Yugoslavia, August 2, 2001

The man nicknamed "the Monster" received this week in the Hague tribunal one of the lightest sentences this court has ever issued since its inception. Forty-three-year-old Stevan Todorovic was sentenced to 10 years in prison for participating, as the wartime police chief in Bosanski Samac, in the expulsion of the non-Serbs from this municipality, an act The Hague has deemed a crime against humanity. Judge Patrick Robinson justified the light sentence by the fact that, in the case of the Monster, as Todorovic was called by his Muslim and Croatian victims in the war camps, extenuating circumstances were taken into consideration: Todorovic admitted his guilt and expressed remorse, and he agreed to testify against other Serbs indicted by the Hague tribunal.

It was a small demonstration exercise in cooperation with the Hague tribunal and the benefits that result from such cooperation. The tribunal rewards cooperation, just like government in Washington, only the currency of exchange in The Hague is different. Leading world newspapers recorded that Todorovic received a lighter sentence than indictees who did not admit their guilt and who were accused by the prosecution of lesser crimes than those to which Todorovic actually confessed.

Confession

The lightest sentence issued so far by The Hague was in 1996 to Drazen Erdemovic: following an appeal, he was sentenced to five years in prison and is already a free man. Erdemovic is a Bosnian Croat from a mixed marriage who in 1996, at his own request, was sent to The Hague; there, he confessed to the murder of almost one hundred Muslims from Srebrenica in the summer of 1995. Erdemovic, too, promised to testify against bigger "fish" than himself; the extenuating circumstances in his case were his youth (he was 26), the fact that he was from a mixed marriage, his low rank in the army, as well as the fact that he alternately fought in two armies, the Bosnian Serb army and the Croatian army, thus allegedly proving his lack of "commitment" to any ethnic group in Bosnia, as well as his "honest disposition". Todorovic is the third indictee to confess to committing crimes: besides Erdemovic, this was also done by Bosnian Serb Goran Jelisic, nicknamed Hitler, who was sentenced to 40 years in prison (the highest sentence of the Hague tribunal is life imprisonment).

What no world newspaper has explained to its readers following the sentencing of the Monster is the role of NATO in the fate of Stevan Todorovic. This role is inversely proportional to his sentence, i.e., it's role was significant but the sentence in comparison with the crime, is negligible. Namely, NATO got mixed up in Todorovic's arrest illegally. When the judge decided to get to the bottom of what happened, the prosecutor rushed to offer Todorovic a deal and a reduced sentence.

The Hague indictment against Todorovic was not sealed and this pre-war furniture factory clerk from the Samac area withdrew from Bosnia to Serbia promptly after Dayton. However, this did not help him. The night of September 27, 1998, he was kidnapped from his cottage on Mt. Zlatibor and taken to the Republic of Srpska, where his kidnappers turned him over to SFOR. Todorovic is not the only Bosnian Serb who met with this fate: Dragan Nikolic, a Bosnian Serb lying low in Smederevo, was captured in the same manner and turned over or, more accurately, sold to SFOR, and before either of these two, the pre-war mayor of Vukovar, Slavko Dokmanovic, was tricked into turning himself over to Hague investigators when American General Jacques Paul Klein invited him as a guest into a protected zone in Croatia supposedly to give him a photograph of a previous meeting as a token of friendship. (Dokmanovic later hanged himself in The Hague.)

Unlike the other two men, Stevan Todorovic was fortunate in that his case was assigned to Hague Judge Patrick Robinson, who, at the request of Todorovic's American lawyers, demanded an explanation from SFOR regarding the circumstances under which Todorovic was arrested. SFOR first claimed what was an obvious lie: that the role of NATO troops was limited to the arrest of Todorovic on the territory of the Republic of Srpska. Todorovic's lawyers requested that American General Shinseki, the commander of the SFOR airforce base in Tuzla, personally testify before the Hague court, as well as all SFOR personnel involved in the capture of Stevan Todorovic, and that they turn over all documents in SFOR's possession related to the case of their client (all written reports, all records of related vehicle movements and personnel, audio and video tapes of the arrest itself, orders, names and addresses of SFOR in any way connected with the arrest). The defense, of course, was able to call witnesses who could testify that, at the moment of his kidnapping, Todorovic was sleeping in his cottage on Mt. Zlatibor (in Serbia).

Judge

SFOR used all means to resist this demand and also came up with the following "argument": "even if the allegations were to be proved" regarding Todorovic's kidnapping, this would be irrelevant because even in this case the accused "should not be returned to a country which is not fulfilling its obligations towards the tribunal" (meaning Yugoslavia). The defense devoted special attention to this SFOR argument, using it to posit the claim that "the former, present and future conduct of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia" cannot be relevant to the tribunal because this would reflect the politicization of the court, whereas the court must act in accordance with legal principles disregarding their political consequences. The political conduct of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia can only be discussed in a political forum, claimed the defense. The prosecutor's office interceded heavily on the side of SFOR, disputing the judge's right to demand that generals and NATO personnel be subpoenaed by the Hague tribunal. However, it was useless: In the case of Todorovic, the prosecutor's office found itself up against a judge with greater sympathies for the arguments of the defense than of the prosecution. The judge ordered that SFOR appear in the courtroom no later than November 17,2000. Thus, after two years of Hague imprisonment, an opportunity appeared for Stevan Todorovic to prove that he was illegally arrested in which case he would be returned to Yugoslavia.

Turn of Events

That is when events in the case against Stevan Todorovic took a sudden turn. Before the deadline for NATO to appear before the court, prosecutor Nancy Patterson (who previously made a name for herself in The Hague because of the speed with which she put together the indictment against Slobodan Milosevic during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia) offered Todorovic a deal. She would drop 26 of the total of 27 charges in the indictment against Stevan Todorovic if he withdrew his challenge of the legality of his arrest. If Todorovic would confess to his guilt before the court on that one count of the indictment, the prosecutor would in exchange guarantee that she would not request from the judge a sentence greater than ten years in prison. Also included in this package deal was that Todorovic would provide testimony against other Bosnian Serbs indicted by the Hague tribunal.

From this sequence of events, it is easy to determine that NATO's reluctance to appear before the court because it was mixed up in illegal dealings had something to do with the prosecutor's wish to save General Shinseki from giving uncomfortable testimony by making a deal with Todorovic. In this case, it is quite possible to draw the conclusion that Stevan Todorovic was treated in the same manner by the Hague tribunal as he would have been by any court of any liberal Western country. With two exceptions: had he been in the United States, Todorovic would not have languished in prison for two years before getting an opportunity to prove that he was illegally arrested. And in the United States, he would most likely have stuck to his demand that the exact circumstances of his arrest be determined which would most probably have resulted in his release. In retrospect, Todorovic probably made the rational decision: if he was in Yugoslavia right now, the Serbian government would most likely arrest him itself and the prosecutor's office would not offer him a deal to dismiss most of the charges for which Todorovic was initially accused in the remaining 26 counts of his indictment; his sentence would be far harsher.

As a reminder, Stevan Todorovic is the police chief who is accused of forcing prisoners, in the police station in Bosanski Samac, to "perform fellatio" on each other. Apparently this was a regular form of entertainment because the indictment listed exactly six witnesses prepared to testify that they were forced to lick each other's sexual organs in front of other prisoners and prison guards. Todorovic was also accused of killing a prisoner and of crippling several others, including a Catholic priest, by beatings.

In any case, apparently Todorovic rushed to accept the prosecutor's offer of a prison sentence "not less than five years nor greater than 12". In December of 2000 he pleaded guilty to one count from his indictment. Coincidentally, at about the same time, a court in Belgrade sentenced nine local tough guys to prison sentences ranging from six months to eight and a half years in prison for kidnapping Stevan Todorovic as NATO mercenaries for 50,000 German marks. In the meanwhile, a comic element was added to the story when British SAS bragged in the London "Times" last year how their members "who speak perfect Serbian" entered Yugoslav territory undetected and kidnapped Stevan Todorovic in the dead of night.

Milutinovic against Milosevic?

The Todorovic case should be viewed in a broader context than the ethnic cleansing of Bosanski Samac. It fits in well with the standard method of work of prosecutors in Anglo-Saxon judicial system. First, an indictment for the same crimes is issued against several people. The prosecutor, of course, has a list of priorities: he is especially interested in proving that crimes were committed by the primary offender. The indictment, as a rule, is long, with a list of crimes the prosecutor can use to strike a deal ("plea bargaining" in English) with secondary, tertiary and other, less significant offenders, "dropping" lesser counts from the indictment in exchange for testimony against the primary offender. This does not exist in our judicial system but we have seen it in many American movies, and we will probably also see it in the Bosanski Samac process against indictee Blagoje Simic, who surrendered to the Hague tribunal in March this year.

We cannot rule out a rerun in the case against Slobodan Milosevic. His indictment, too, names a group accused of the same crimes and including people like Milan Milutinovic, who can hardly be held to the same level of accountability as Milosevic, having nowhere near the same amount of power as him. It is clear what the prosecutor is trying to achieve: a plea bargain in which the secondary offender will testify against the primary offender so that some of the charges on the indictment will be dropped...


Translated by Kosovo Daily News
NIN