Croatian Journalist Josip Jovic Guilty!
The UN judges decided to protect the tribunal rather than dispense justice.
There is no mention of the ICTY having revealed
Mesic's identity on its website since 1997, no mention
of Del Ponte naming him in Jutarnji List months prior
to Jovic doing so.
No one can get a fair trial at the ICTY.
"A 20,000-euro fine is not a small thing for me ... so I would even maybe prefer to exchange it for a prison term, because I cannot pay it without going into debt," he said.
Read also AFP Article below AP Article.
See this article, written prior to the trial, which demonstrates how the ICTY itself published the identity of President Mesic and allowed others to do so prior to Josip Jovic having done so. http://members.madasafish.com/~opus/Croatia/Brian.Gallagher.260606.html
Copyright 2006 Associated Press
Yugoslavia tribunal convicts Croatian journalist of contempt of court, fines him
August 30, 2006
By MIKE CORDER, Associated Press Writer
The Yugoslav war crimes tribunal convicted a Croatian journalist of contempt of court Wednesday and fined him euro20,000 (US$25,650) for publishing the name and testimony of a protected witness.
Josip Jovic's trial last month was seen as a test of the limits of journalistic freedom at the international court that often relies on testimony from witnesses whose identity is shielded from the media and public to prosecute war criminals.
Jovic, 56, who had faced up to seven years in prison and a euro100,000 (US$128,000) fine, was not in the Hague-based court for the judgment, but from Croatia, he vowed to appeal.
"It is a legal absurdity, from the very indictment to the verdict," he told state news agency HINA.
Jovic added that he would rather settle for a prison sentence because he would have to take out a loan to pay the fine.
"The penalty of euro20,000 is not negligible for me even though it may seem that way for the panel of judges, for whom it is only a monthly wage," he said.
At trial, he acknowledged publishing the name of a witness Croatia's President Stipe Mesic whose identity had been protected by the U.N. tribunal, but pleaded not guilty to contempt, arguing that it already was common knowledge that Mesic had testified.
As editor of one of Croatia's largest newspapers, Slobodna Dalmacija, in November and December 2000, Jovic published both a court protection order and Mesic's testimony.
Mesic, the last president of Yugoslavia in 1991-1992 before it was torn apart by civil war, testified in 1998 in the trial of former Col. Tihomir Blaskic, a Bosnian Croat who was later convicted of war crimes and sentenced to eight years. Mesic testified only on condition his identity be withheld from press and public.
Jovic's defense lawyer, Kresimir Krsnik, argued that the veil of secrecy should not have been granted to such a public figure.
"As a prominent politician, person, everything he does is bound to arouse interest from Croatia's citizens," Krsnik said.
But presiding judge Patrick Robinson said Jovic's actions treated the tribunal "with utter disregard."
"His actions not only were contemptuous," Robinson said, "but also stymied the tribunal's ability to safeguard the evidence of a protected witness and risked undermining confidence in the tribunal's ability to grant effective protective measures."
Robinson accepted Mesic's public acknowledgment that he had testified in the Blaskic case as a mitigating factor, but said that "Nevertheless, the contemptuous behavior here was particularly egregious."
The three-judge panel also rejected freedom of the press as a defense, saying that the court has the power to impose nondisclosure orders to protect witnesses and the court's authority.
"It is not for individuals, including journalists, to choose to publish information in defiance of such an order on the basis of their own assessment of the public interest in that information," Robinson said.
War crimes court fines Croatian journalist for contempt
Agence France Presse
August 30, 2006
The war crimes court for the former Yugoslsavia fined a Croatian journalist Wednesday for publishing the name and part of the testimony of a protected witness.
Josip Jovic, editor-in-chief of the daily Slobodna Dalmacija, was fined 20,000 euros (25,660 dollars) for revealing the identity of the witness, Croatian President Stipe Mesic.
He was not in The Hague, where the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) sits, to hear the judgement.
He was prosecuted for revealing that Mesic had testified at the 1997 trial of General Tihomir Blaskic, a Bosnian Croat.
He ignored court warnings not to publish extracts of his oral and written evidence.
Jovic "treated the orders of the Court ... with utter disregard", said the president of the chamber, Patrick Robinson.
"Potential witnesses need to have confidence in the tribunal's ability to protect them."
Robinson rejected arguments invoking the freedom of the press.
"It is not for individuals, including for journalists, to choose to publish information in defiance of such an order," he said, referring to the court's instruction that Mesic's evidence should be confidential.
He had "hampered the tribunals ability to safeguard the evidence of a protected witness and risked undermining confidence in the tribunals ability to grant effective protective measures," he said.
"Protective measures for witnesses continue after the conclusion of the trial."
Jovic had acknowledged at his trial in July that he had disregarded the court's order.
"But it was not clear to me if, as an inhabitant of the Croatian Republic, I was obliged to obey it," he said.
His defence argued that Mesic had not demanded any special protection measures and had no objection to his evidence being made public.
The confidentiality requirements have since been lifted by the court.
Jovic could have been given a seven year jail term and/or a 100,000 euro fine.
Jovic told Croatian national radio he would appeal the verdict, describing it as "absurd" and an "attack on media freedom".
"A 20,000-euro fine is not a small thing for me ... so I would even maybe prefer to exchange it for a prison term, because I cannot pay it without going into debt," he said.
The court has handed down 18 other convictions for contempt since it came into being, relating to refusal to answer, publication of confidential information or witness intimidation.
Only one has been confirmed on appeal.