Security Council meeting 6134

The President

As this is the first meeting of the Security Council for the month of June 2009, I should like to take this opportunity to thank and pay tribute, on behalf of the Council, to His Excellency Mr. Vitaly Churkin, Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation, and to the Russian presidency for the successful manner in which they presided over the Security Council in the month of May 2009.

I also wish to recognize the presence of His Excellency Mr. Ivo Sanader, Prime Minister of Croatia. I extend a warm welcome to the Prime Minister.

The President

Before we move on to the item on our agenda, allow me to say a few words in my national capacity.

As members of the Security Council know, this is the first public meeting of the Council under Turkey's presidency. I am delighted to be here with you today. When Turkey decided to run for a seat on the Council, some five years ago, we did so with a clear vision of the United Nations and of our possible role in the Council. Indeed, we see the United Nations as the principal embodiment of international legitimacy, and the Security Council as the primary organ responsible for maintaining global peace and security.

Turkey has been a responsible member of the international community, deeply committed to upholding the ideals and principles enshrined in the United Nations Charter. Indeed, as a founding Member of the United Nations, active involvement in the policies and programmes of the Organization constitutes one of the main pillars of our foreign policy. This is why we thought our membership in the Council could help amplify the constructive role we try to play in our region and beyond. We also hoped that our insight into the rather complex issues that the Council is grappling with, especially those of our region, might bring added value to the work of this body.

In retrospect, the five months since we assumed Council membership have vindicated our vision. We have benefited greatly from our deliberations on a wide area of issues and have tried to translate them into positive inputs for our policies and initiatives. Now, looking ahead, we are even more hopeful that our active engagement with the members of the Council and the entire United Nations membership will continue to contribute to peace and stability in the world.

I am confident that the busy programme of work for June, which reflects almost the entire agenda of the Council, will be a step in this direction. As the President of the Council for this month, we will certainly do our share.

In this vein, I am particularly pleased to start our presidency with this meeting on the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda. The contribution of those two Tribunals to international criminal justice and, consequently, to reconciliation, stability and peace in the affected countries is most commendable. As a country that is deeply committed to the rule of law and as a firm believer in the mutually reinforcing relationship between peace and justice, Turkey greatly values the important work carried out by those Tribunals. Combating impunity and providing justice to the victims of violations of international humanitarian law are a priority for us.

However, the fulfilment of those objectives is not and cannot be limited to the lifespan of the Tribunals in the case of the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Thus, as we near the closure of the two Tribunals, we have to ensure that the culture of impunity will never resurface and that the necessary mechanisms to that end are firmly in place.

Since we will be dealing with this issue shortly in more depth, let me stop here. Without further ado, allow me to proceed with our formal agenda.

The President

I should like to inform the Council that I have received letters from the representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kenya, Rwanda and Serbia, in which they request to be invited to participate in the consideration of the item on the Council's agenda. In conformity with the usual practice, I propose, with the consent of the Council, to invite those representatives to participate in the consideration of the item without the right to vote, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Charter and rule 37 of the Council's provisional rules of procedure.

There being no objection, it is so decided.

The President

In accordance with the understanding reached in the Council's prior consultations, I shall take it that the Security Council agrees to extend an invitation under rule 39 of its provisional rules of procedure to Judge Patrick Robinson, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia; Judge Dennis Byron, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda; Mr. Serge Brammertz, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia; and Mr. Hassan Jallow, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

It is so decided.

The Security Council will now begin its consideration of the item on its agenda. The Council is meeting in accordance with the understanding reached in its prior consultations.

Members of the Council have before them the following documents: S/2009/252, which contains the text of a letter dated 14 May 2009 from the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia addressed to the President of the Security Council; and S/2009/247, which contains the text of a letter dated 14 May 2009 from the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda addressed to the President of the Security Council.

At this meeting, the Security Council will hear briefings by the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the Prosecutors of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda.

I now give the floor to Judge Patrick Robinson, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

Judge Robinson (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia)

It is indeed an honour for me to appear before you today in my capacity as President of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and to do so under the presidency of Turkey.

My remarks today will be brief, as the details of the measures the Tribunal has undertaken to complete its mandate are set out in my written biannual report (see S/2009/252), which has been duly submitted to the Council.

Since my most recent presentation before you, the Tribunal has continued to focus its energy on completing its work as expeditiously as possible. Three appeal judgments have been rendered, including in some of our most complex cases, and seven trials are being heard simultaneously in our three courtrooms.

Of the remaining caseload, the trial of two accused, Stanisi and Simatovi, will begin tomorrow, 5 June 2009, and that of Karadzi will commence in late August 2009. Both Tolimir and the final case of Mio Stanisi and Stojan Zupljanin will commence in September 2009.

Our current estimates suggest that all but three of our trials will conclude in 2010, two more in early 2011 and the final trial, that of Karadzi, in early 2012.

As you can see, our trial activity is entering the final stretch. However, one serious hurdle remains: the continued flight from justice of Ratko Mladi and Goran Hadzi. The failure to bring these two men to justice will leave a stain on the Security Council's historic contribution to peacebuilding in the former Yugoslavia.

Allow me to turn to the current projection of the remaining appeals, including those anticipated from the ICTY and our sister tribunal, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), it being recalled that the two Tribunals share an appellate function. Following a detailed analysis, the Tribunal estimated that, absent a redeployment of eight trial judges to the Appeals Chamber upon the completion of their trial work, the ICTY/ICTR Appeals Chamber would be occupied with appellate work into 2015. However, with the redeployment of four ICTY and four ICTR judges, most appellate work will be completed by the end of 2012, with four cases spilling into the first half of 2013.

This proposal for deployment was presented in the Tribunal's biennium budget for 2010-2011 as part of the Tribunal's downsizing programme and is a matter that is now formally before the Security Council in the form of a request for an extension of the mandates of the permanent trial and appeal judges and the Tribunal's ad litem judges. In this regard, I thank the Austrian Chair of the Security Council Working Group on the ad hoc Tribunals and the Office of the Legal Counsel for their assistance in expediting the consideration of these proposals to ensure that the work of the Tribunal is not frustrated.

I note, however, that the heavy appellate workload of the Tribunal is in part due to the failure of rule 11 bis transfers from the Rwanda Tribunal to national jurisdictions. Rwanda was found not to have sufficient capacity to try such cases, and in response the international community is taking measures to address this deficiency. But perhaps more troubling is the lack of capacity or readiness to try such cases present in European countries, where the ICTR had also sought to transfer cases pursuant to rule 11 bis. I consider this to be a critical issue that needs to be addressed by the Security Council and the international community. Surely, countries with highly developed judicial systems could make a greater effort to accept a limited number of 1l bis transfers. In so doing, they would make a real contribution to the international community's efforts to bring the work of the Tribunal to completion in full respect of due process.

It may be that the Security Council's proscription in paragraph 6 of resolution 1534 (2004), which requested the Tribunal not to try cases involving intermediate and lower rank accused, was inexorably linked to the transfer of cases to the States of the former Yugoslavia. However, with the blessing of the Security Council, we could make a renewed effort to transfer to a developed country one major case of a senior accused. That move alone would save one trial bench 14 months of court sitting, not to count the required time for consideration of an appeal.

While the Tribunal continues to make every effort to expedite its work, it has identified some factors that may cause delays to its schedule, which need to be more extensively addressed. First is the issue of translation. Observing the United Nations standard of 5.5 pages per day per translator, the need for extensive referencing and indispensable review process to ensure quality translation requires significant time. The situation is further aggravated by the extraordinary demands made on our limited language resources. Owing to the highly technical and often confidential nature of the legal translation work required, outsourcing translations has necessarily been restricted in scope.

Efforts continue to identify ways of minimizing the impact of the need for translation on trial and appeal schedules and to identify and recruit qualified translators. However, 20 vacancies remain in the language service, and recruitment is hindered by the completion strategy. In most cases, it takes at least three to five months to recruit a suitable candidate. As the ICTY is facing increasing competition in hiring qualified language staff without retention incentives, it is likely that the number of translators will decrease rather than increase in the future.

Another matter which has had a negative impact on the expeditious progress of trials is contempt proceedings. I need only mention the Seselj trial, which has been adjourned since March 2009. In light of the impact of contempt proceedings on the completion of our trials, I established a working group to examine ways in which contempt may be dealt with without delaying proceedings. That report will be submitted to me shortly, and I am hopeful that it will contain concrete measures that Judges may adopt when faced with contempt issues during their trials. Additionally, the Rules Committee is considering the adoption of a rule to allow the admission of written statements of witnesses who are kept away from trial through intimidation.

Let me return to the issue of staff retention; it is a difficulty which cuts across all areas of the Tribunal's operations. In the past three months, we have lost 82 staff members at a rough average of 27 per month. Much has been said about the need for highly qualified personnel for the orderly completion of our work. I appeal to the Security Council to exercise foresight so that concrete measures can be implemented now to retain our staff. The only measure that has been taken so far by the General Assembly is resolution 63/256, adopted at its sixty-third session on 24 December 2008. In paragraph 5 of that resolution, the General Assembly requested the Secretary-General

"to use the existing contractual frameworks to offer contracts to staff, in line with dates of planned post reductions in accordance with the relevant prevailing trial schedules, in order to remove uncertainty with regard to future employment with the aim of ensuring that the Tribunals have the necessary capacity to complete their respective mandates effectively".

It is my intention to ensure the implementation of the resolution as soon as possible, but even so I doubt that this will be enough. I do not want to return here in six months and be berated by the Security Council for a report that indicates substantial delays in the anticipated schedule I am presenting today due to the continuing departures of our uniquely qualified and experienced staff. I have a genuine fear that we will soon find ourselves without sufficient staff, but it appears to me that Member States that are in a position to assist have adopted an attitude of uninterestedness in this matter. I am not normally given to hyperbolic comments, but if we continue to lose staff at the rate of 27 per month I fear that one day the judges may come to work and find themselves alone.

The Tribunal is doing all it can to retain its staff, but without appropriate assistance and concrete measures it will not be successful. This is a matter that I will continue to raise with the Secretary-General, the Office of Human Resources Management and the Controller, and the Security Council's active support in this matter would be very helpful.

That said, I note that all indications are that our request for extensions of our judges consonant with our remaining work load will not be granted by the Security Council and that, at most, all judges will be granted an extension until 31 December 2010. Now, this is a political decision taken by the Security Council, but I cannot impress on the Security Council enough the signal such a piecemeal approach to extensions of the mandates of our judges sends to our staff. Such an approach only operates to enhance their desire to secure other employment as soon as possible. I would ask the Council to seriously reconsider the wisdom of its approach to this issue.

I must thank the Security Council Working Group on the ad hoc international tribunals and the Austrian Chair, for their work on the residual mechanism. The Tribunal is grateful to the Office of the Legal Counsel for the extensive opportunities it gave the Tribunal to provide input for the report of the Secretary-General on the budgetary and administrative aspects of the residual mechanism.

Let me close my remarks by stating, in the words of Henry Wadsworth Longfellow: "Great is the art of beginning, but greater is the art of ending." In the very near future, our cases will be completed. Provided that the Security Council ensures that the Tribunal is given sufficient resources to complete its work expeditiously and fairly and provided that sufficient incentives are adopted immediately to retain staff, great indeed will be the art of our ending.

The President

I thank Judge Robinson for his briefing.

I now give the floor to Judge Dennis Byron, President of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Judge Byron (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda)

I would like first of all to wish the new Turkish presidency the best of success for their tour of office. I would also like to recognize the presence of the Prime Minister of Croatia.

It was 15 years and two months ago, on 7 April 1994, that the Rwandan genocide started. Three months later, at least 800,000 people had been killed, not to speak of the number of victims of rape, mutilation and torture and not to mention the psychological damage done to millions. Only a few months after the end of the atrocities, the Security Council created the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) with high expectations and ambitious goals. The Council was:

"Convinced that ... the prosecution of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law would ... contribute to the process of national reconciliation and to the restoration and maintenance of peace ... ." (resolution 955 (1994), seventh preambular paragraph)

I would suggest that the Tribunal has fulfilled many of those expectations and we remain committed to ensuring that our legacy will be satisfactory to all Rwandans.

As I present the eleventh completion strategy report to the Council today, I am mindful that I am here not merely to report the achievements of the Tribunal, but to acknowledge that the credit for those achievements belongs to the Council. At no small expense Council members have supported this Tribunal, which marks a milestone in articulating and protecting fundamental human rights without regard to ethnicity, local politics or national boundaries. The Council's support of our efforts demonstrates its commitment to the proposition that man's inhumanity to man cannot be excused as an inevitable trait of human nature. It is a choice for which every perpetrator of atrocities can be and must be held responsible.

The ICTR has accomplished much since it was established in November 1994. It has rendered judgements concerning forty-four defendants in complex cases under difficult conditions. Yet, equally important, the Tribunal has established a judicially verified factual record of the events in Rwanda that will serve as a background for the remaining trials, a resource for historians and as a major contribution to the process of reconciliation.

But we are not complacent. In the six months since I last reported to you in December, the Tribunal has rendered three judgements involving six accused. Between now and the end of the year, we expect six judgements in other single-accused cases. The first months of this year have also seen the completion of the evidence phase in two of the largest multi-accused trials; the Butare trial and the Military II trial. These two and the Bizimungu case are now all in the judgement drafting phase, involving in total some 14 accused. In the fifth multi-accused case, the Karemera trial, we are currently awaiting the decision of the Appeals Chamber with respect to our order to sever one of the defendants whose continued illness has delayed the proceedings.

The maximum possible number of ten new cases projected for 2009 during my last presentation to the Security Council did become a reality. Four of these ten new cases have commenced as of today and in one of them the evidence phase has already been completed.

The Tribunal continues with its efforts to improve the management of the trials, from the pretrial stage to the drafting of judgements. Nevertheless, the commencement of several of the new trials had to be adjourned for a variety of reasons, including disclosure issues, the unanticipated resignation of counsel in three cases shortly before the scheduled start of the trial, the death of one of the defence counsels and the recusal of a presiding judge. But despite those delays, we continue to make all efforts to meet the projections and to conclude the evidence phase by the end of this year to the extent possible.

However, the delayed start of some of the trials requires contingency planning for a possible spillover of those hearings into the first months of 2010. The delays could also affect the schedule for the judgement drafting process, both in the new and the ongoing cases, as the same judges will be in trial and in deliberation for judgements. However, with a caveat for the Karemera trial, we expect judgement to be delivered in all of these cases during the course of 2010. It is in this context that we invite the Council to approve the extension of the mandates for our trial judges until 31 December 2010.

Three new ad litem judges joined the Tribunal in January and are part of the bench in several new trials. Our efforts to recruit a fourth additional judge from the roster were not successful, and the roster has been depleted. However, as evidence of our commitment to downsizing wherever possible and to prevent further delays that might be incurred by the nomination process, we have decided to try the remaining new cases with judges currently serving at the Tribunal and not to request the appointment of additional ad litem judges. At the same time, this decision undoubtedly puts an additional burden on the currently serving judges, who are all sitting in at least two and often three cases in parallel.

The inequality between permanent and ad litem judges with respect to certain entitlements remains a major source of concern. Following resolution 1855 (2008), which abandoned the requirement for a permanent judge to be included in each bench, the ad litem judges are now nearly identical in authority to the permanent judges and on equal terms regarding responsibility and case load. Ad litem judges will preside in several of the new cases. Addressing the inequality in status is crucial not only to ensure the motivation and commitment of those judges, but also as a matter of simple equity.

The ICTR is faced with a turnover of staff that is constantly increasing and is exacerbated by the insecurity stemming from the short-term duration of the contract currently being offered by the Tribunal. Loss of experienced staff translates into loss of institutional memory, which is not easily overcome by engaging new staff. This fact emphasizes the need to ensure that experienced staff members are retained as long as their services are required.

Although much has been achieved, important tasks remain. Fifteen years after the genocide, 13 fugitives are still at large, four of them earmarked for trial before the Tribunal as high-level accused. I reiterate strongly my call upon Member States to cooperate fully with the Prosecutor's efforts to ensure their arrest and transfer to Arusha during this last period of the Tribunal's mandate. For an international community committed to the fight against impunity, letting those indicted for the most serious crimes escape trial is not an acceptable option.

The cooperation and assistance of Member States remains a cornerstone for the successful completion of the Tribunal's mandate in many respects. Two weeks ago, I signed decisions for the transfer of a further nine convicts to a Member State for the enforcement of their sentences. The support of the international community is still urgently required for the relocation of the two acquitted persons remaining in Arusha. I would like to reiterate my call for the Council's cooperation in this matter.

As the Council is aware, the Tribunal is currently in the process of preparing budget proposals for the 2010-2011 biennium. The remaining work load is enormous, and our ability to successfully complete it is dependent on the adequacy of both financial and human resources and is relevant to this discussion even though the Security Council is not the forum for discussing budgetary matters. Kindly allow me to seize this opportunity to ask for the support of Member States in ensuring that the Tribunal is provided with the resources needed to complete its tasks. Even in these difficult times of economic crisis, I am convinced that all Member States remain committed to the goal of delivering high quality justice to the victims of the Rwandan tragedy. We can achieve these goals set for our work by the international community only if the necessary resources are provided.

While the Tribunal continues working at full speed, preparations have to be made for the future after the closing down of the Tribunal. The Secretariat has been consulting the Tribunal extensively during the preparation of the report to the Security Council on the residual mechanisms and the archives. I am confident that the report will provide a very solid and comprehensive basis for the difficult decisions the Security Council will have to make on these matters. I trust that our joint goal of effectively avoiding impunity for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Rwanda in 1994 will be the overarching principle guiding its decisions.

Let me conclude by expressing, on behalf of all the judges and staff members of the ICTR, our sincere appreciation for the continuous support of the esteemed Governments represented on the Council. I would also in particular like to thank the staff members of the United Nations Secretariat for their invaluable advice and support. I would especially like to single out the Office of Legal Affairs in this regard.

Our joint efforts to bring to justice those who committed the most atrocious crimes in Rwanda in 1994 are sending a powerful message to the world. Even if fifteen years have passed, even if it has been a burdensome process containing challenges and flaws, even if not all indictees have been arrested as yet, we must and we will continue to fight against the culture of impunity and for accountability and justice. The goal of successful reconciliation and enduring peace in the Great Lakes region will only be achieved if all those concerned can trust the power of this message.

The President

I thank Judge Byron for his briefing.

I now give the floor to Mr. Serge Brammertz, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia.

Mr. Brammertz (International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia)

I thank the Council for giving me the opportunity to present the 11th report on the completion strategy of the Office of the Prosecutor.

I will provide the Council with a brief update on our judicial work, the cooperation of States, efforts undertaken to support the work of prosecution services in the former Yugoslavia and, importantly, the organizational plans for my Office during the final phase of the Tribunal's existence.

It is expected that 2009 will be the last year of full trial activity before the downsizing of the Tribunal begins in 2010. During the last six months, the Prosecution has made significant progress in achieving the completion strategy goals. Since I submitted my written report to the Security Council in the middle of May, the Prosecution has completed its final arguments in a trial of two accused -- the Luki and Luki case -- and judgement is expected in the coming months.

There are at present six cases -- and 19 accused -- in trial. One of these cases, a complex prosecution of seven accused persons charged with crimes committed in Srebrenica, is now in its final stages. The Prosecution's final brief in the Popovi et al. case is due at the end of July and final arguments are scheduled for the end of August.

The other cases in trial -- the orevi and Perisi trials -- are well advanced into the prosecution phase, while the Prli et al. and Gotovina et al. cases are now in their defence phase.

Despite the prosecution's efforts to move forward through the trial schedule, some additional delays have occurred. Most notably, in February 2009, the Seselj case had to be adjourned as a result of difficulties in securing the remaining witnesses' evidence.

Significant progress has been made in the last four cases currently at the pretrial stage. The Karadzi prosecution team has been working consistently to ensure the case is ready to start trial shortly. After a lengthy adjournment due to Jovica Stanisi's health problems, the Stanisi and Simatovi case is due to recommence soon. The prosecution is ready to begin the Stanisi and Zupljanin trial, which is expected to begin in September, and the Tolimir case should begin trial in September as well. In order to ensure the immediate commencement of new trials, we have moved quickly by reassigning staff finishing the Popovi et al. and Luki and Luki trials.

Prosecution work on appeals cases remains constant and is expected to increase significantly in future months. By the end of 2009, the Appeals Division will have a continuing inventory of 24 appeals case.

The cooperation of States with my Office remains critical to the successful completion of our trial and appeals work. We continue to request the assistance of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia in a number of areas, such as the provision of documents, access to archives, ensuring that witnesses can testify before the Tribunal, and assisting in locating and arresting fugitives. I recently travelled again to those countries, where I met with authorities at the political, judicial and operational levels to raise all those matters.

Since my last briefing to the Council, Serbia has made additional progress in its cooperation with my Office. The large majority of requests for assistance have been complied with, including those for access to documents and archives. As senior leadership trials are ongoing and others will start soon, we hope that that trend will continue.

The search for and arrest of Ratko Mladi and Goran Hadzi remain the central issue in relation to Serbia's cooperation. My Office remains in close contact with the services in charge of tracking fugitives and closely follows their activities. During my recent visits to Belgrade, I had full briefings on their work.

Developments at the political level in the past year and the new leadership at the operational level have led to an improvement in the professionalism and the efficiency of the activities to locate and arrest the remaining fugitives. I hope that the political authorities in Serbia will provide all necessary support to the professional work done at the operational level. Cooperation must continue and hopefully will lead to further concrete and positive results.

In my report, I have also expressed my concern with regard to recent negative statements by senior Government officials about the Tribunal's judicial decisions. They seem to be in contradiction with the level of cooperation on the ground.

With regard to Croatia, the remaining and only outstanding issue is the prosecution's request that Croatia provide a number of key military documents related to Operation Storm in 1995. The lack of success of efforts by my Office over a considerable period of time to obtain those documents has required the prosecution to bring the matter before the Trial Chamber.

Croatia was ordered by the Tribunal to conduct an investigation into the missing documents. In response, Croatia submitted several reports, providing, in its most recent submission, additional information on the administrative investigation and supplementary information on the chain of custody of the missing documents. A number of meetings, focusing on those outstanding matters, were held with the authorities. Unfortunately, progress in the lengthy investigation has been limited and, to date, most of the military documents have not been submitted to the Tribunal. We have raised with Croatia our concerns about the focus, manner and methodology of the investigation conducted.

That matter remains pending before the Chamber. The trial has now entered the defence phase and is nearing its completion. It is therefore crucial that Croatia continue to focus its efforts on locating and providing those key documents. I will remain in close contact with the authorities in the hope of achieving further progress in the near future, but I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the Prime Minister for his personal interest and determination to resolve this issue.

With regard to Bosnia and Herzegovina's cooperation, there are no specific outstanding issues in relation to our trials. However, the judicial system of Bosnia and Herzegovina continues to face serious challenges, which could have an impact on its cooperation with the Tribunal. I support all efforts undertaken to strengthen its judicial capacity to cope with the numerous unresolved war crimes cases. In that regard, a national strategy for war crimes processing was adopted last December and is a promising development. Together with representatives of the international community in Bosnia and Herzegovina, I am in favour of maintaining an international presence in judicial institutions, such as the Special Department for War Crimes of the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Another priority of my Office is the support to national jurisdictions prosecuting war crimes. Assisting our colleagues in the former Yugoslavia in successfully conducting war crimes prosecutions remains a key component of the completion strategy. It is the best way to ensure the successful continuation of our work.

In the next months, we will complete the process of transferring investigative material to national prosecution services. We are now ready to transfer three cases involving 10 suspects to the Office of the State Prosecutor in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The last four cases, involving 11 suspects, will be transferred to Bosnia and Herzegovina before the end of the year.

Responding to requests for assistance and making available documents and archives are other important aspects of that cooperation. We are providing such information to prosecution offices, both within and outside of the former Yugoslavia. In the past six months, our transition team has handled over 90 requests for assistance. Interestingly, half of those requests originated from countries outside of the former Yugoslavia.

Although cooperation between prosecution services is improving, national judiciaries continue to face significant legal obstacles and challenges with regard to the prosecution of war crimes cases. Prohibitions on extraditing one State's nationals to another State and the legal barriers to transferring war crimes cases between States threaten their successful investigation and prosecution. All authorities concerned should address those issues by establishing the necessary legal frameworks. That appears to be the only way to avoid an impunity gap.

My Office has participated in several conferences with prosecutors from the region to strengthen cooperation in judicial matters between States of the former Yugoslavia. One important recent achievement in that process are databases and inventories of war crimes cases in the region. Another important development, which I announced during my last briefing, is the establishment, with the support of the European Commission, of a concrete cooperation project that allows prosecutors from the region to be integrated into our Office in The Hague. The first liaison prosecutors are expected to start working in my Office this month. That initiative, like others, reflects the excellent interaction my Office has had with the State and War Crimes Prosecutors' Offices in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia.

I would now like to briefly address the organizational plans of my Office for the future. A serious downsizing programme has been planned to begin in 2010. In our budget proposal, which was submitted to the Secretariat this week, we envisage, over the next two years, a reduction of 60 per cent of our posts and a 42-per-cent reduction in non-post items in the Office of the Prosecutor. There will also be a gradual redeployment of posts from the Trial Division to the Appeals Division to meet their growing workload.

While we are fully committed to the downsizing process, I would like to once again stress the need to retain our experienced and specialized staff members in order to complete our work. In the present situation, a considerable number of staff members have left my Office and more could leave the institution because of other opportunities elsewhere. It is therefore crucial that their needs be taken into consideration and that ways be found to retain our staff members until the end of the trials. Together with the President and Registrar, we will continue to address those issues with relevant United Nations bodies and Secretariat offices.

Finally, I would like to thank the Council once again for the continuing support provided to my Office.

The President

I thank Mr. Brammertz for his briefing.

I now give the floor to Mr. Hassan Bubacar Jallow, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.

Mr. Jallow (International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda)

A problem occurred in a Python script. Here is the sequence of function calls leading up to the error, in the order they occurred.

<type 'exceptions.UnicodeEncodeError'>: 'ascii' codec can't encode character u'\xe9' in position 2253: ordinal not in range(128)
      args = ('ascii', u'\n\t<p id="pg011-bk02-pa01">Since our last report ...r continued support for the work of the ICTR.</p>', 2253, 2254, 'ordinal not in range(128)')
      encoding = 'ascii'
      end = 2254
      message = ''
      object = u'\n\t<p id="pg011-bk02-pa01">Since our last report ...r continued support for the work of the ICTR.</p>'
      reason = 'ordinal not in range(128)'
      start = 2253