New Problems in International Criminal Law – Life after Conviction at ICTY

As of January 2021, the ICTY has convicted and sentenced 90 perpetrators of international crimes committed during the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. 59 of them have already served their sentence. In fact, the absolute majority have been granted early release after having served 2/3 of their prison time and have since returned to the region. So far not much has been written about the factors that justify their early release and what they do afterwards (with a few notable exceptions of works by Barbora Holá, Ovilera Simić, Joris van Wijk and Jessica M. Kelder). This is particularly surprising given that many international criminal tribunals are entering the final years of their existence and rehabilitation is often presented as one of the goals of international sentencing. According to my initial calculations (this is still a research in progress) approximately 1/3 of the ICTY convicts are actively participating in politics, often spreading similar chauvinistic ideas they did during the conflict years. They are elected members of parliaments, mayors, city councilors, become published book authors, work with different political parties, are regular guest of honor in various public events and commemorations, often appear on TV or in the local media. The paper draws on the analysis of the available digital media files on each of the convicts (keyword: “name and surname of the person”) as well as interviews with local human rights activists, journalists, academics as well as former ICTY and current IRMCT staff. By providing an early overview of the troubling empirical reality of their post-conviction lives, this paper raises an important question whether the mechanism of rehabilitation at the International Criminal Tribunals actually work. And even more importantly, to what extent the current system of rehabilitation promotes or hinders the achievement of the goals the ICTY aimed to achieve (e.g., retribution, deterrence, rehabilitation or reconciliation). The answers to such questions are of particular importance as they are essential for any future evaluations of the effectiveness and legitimacy of the ICTY.