INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW AND HISTORY – INTRODUCTION TO A RESEARCH PROJECT

Abstract

Kakvu povijest ispisuje Međunarodni kazneni sud za bivšu Jugoslaviju (MKSJ), predmet je obimnoga istraživačkog projekta autora, koji u ovom članku izlaže tek uvodnu skicu o tome. Kako bi istražio spregu međunarodnog krivičnog prava i povijesti, autor se suočio s pitanjem: kako bi povijest raspada Jugoslavije i sukoba na području bivše Jugoslavije izgledala ako bismo raspolagali samo presudama Haškog tribunala? U odgovoru na to pitanje autor analizira prvostupanjske presude Pretresnog vijeća, izdvajajući iz njih “povijesne činjenice”, a odbacujući razmišljanja Vijeća o pravnim i postupovnim pitanjima. Kao probni slučaj koristi prvu presudu MKSJ-a, presudu Dušku Tadiću (suđenje Tadiću počelo je 7. svibnja 1996. godine, a presuda je donesena točno godinu dana kasnije). Premda ocjenjuje da je ta prva presuda napisana na neoptimalan način, autor smatra da je većina preliminarno utvrđenih povijesnih činjenica historiografski relevantna, da presuda napose pruža općeprihvatljivu sliku povijesti Kraljevine Jugoslavije i socijalističke Jugoslavije. Autor utvrđuje da će obimna dokumentacija MKSJ-a (Haškog tribunala) imati ogroman utjecaj na rad budućih generacija povjesničara. Taj jedinstveni, bogati arhiv povijesne građe javnosti i znanstvenicima sve je dostupniji preko online-baze podataka MKSJ-a. Najnoviji znanstveni radovi koji se bave bivšom Jugoslavijom koriste i presude i dokumentaciju Suda. Znanstvenici će se morati pozabaviti narativima koji se nalaze u presudama.The author’s comprehensive research project, of which this article is but an introductory outline, inquires into the kind of history written out by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). In order to investigate the interrelation between criminal law and history, the author faced the following question: what would the history of the disintegration of Yugoslavia and of conflicts in its territory look like if all we had were the judgements of the Hague Tribunal? The author bases his reply on an analysis of first-instance judgements of the Trial Chamber, from which he singles out “historical facts”, and rejects the reflections of the Chamber on legal and procedural issues. As a model case he uses the first ICTY judgement pronounced against Duško Tadić (the trial started on May 7, 1996, and the judgement was pronounced a year later). Although he estimates that the first judgement was not written in an optimal way, the author deems that most preliminarily established historical facts were relevant to historiography, and that, in particular, the judgement offers a universally acceptable notion of the history of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia and of socialist Yugoslavia. He is of the opinion that the extensive documentation of ICTY (the “Hague Tribunal”) will have a major influence on the work of future generations of historians. Such a unique and replete archive of historical material is increasingly available to the public and to scientists through ICTY’s online database. The most recent scientific works dealing with the former Yugoslavia also make use of the Tribunal’s judgements and documentation. Scientists will have to pay due attention to the narratives included therein