Jovica Stanisic’s Dutch defense counsel asked the Trial Chamber to reject the prosecution motion seeking that the former chief of Serbian State Security Service continues his medical treatment in Holland. The prosecution’s proposal is “unrealistic and likely to endanger the life of the accused’, the defense contends


The prosecution motion seeking that the former chief of the Serbian State Security Service Jovica Stanisic continues his medical treatment in the Dutch Institute for Forensic Psychiatry and Psychology Pieter Baan in Utrecht, the defense argues, is “unrealistic and likely to endanger the life of the accused’. Stanisic was provisionally released in June 2008 when the Appeals Chamber suspended the trial due to Stanisic’s ill physical and mental health.

In the motion made public in early April 2009, the prosecution maintained that the accused deserved to stand trial ‘regardless of his chronic condition’. However, according to the defense, the criminal prosecution should not turn into ‘persecution’.

Stanisic’s Dutch defense counsel Geert-Jan Alexander Knoops believes it is ‘not necessary’ for Stanisic to return to Holland, where he would have to spend ‘at least five weeks’ in the UN Detention Unit waiting to be admitted to the Pieter Baan Institute; in the UNDU he would not be able to receive proper therapy. The Institute in Utrecht cannot offer specialist and long-term treatment the accused has been given in Belgrade, the defense counsel noted, adding that the diagnosis the institute will make ‘already exists in current medical reports’.

The prosecution motion, the defense believes, is ‘unnecessary, expensive and time-consuming’ in a situation when experts retained by the ICTY Registry could conduct the same exams. According to the defense, the prosecution motion ‘is not in interest of the accused, the victims of the crimes and with the interests of justice and the reputation of the Tribunal’.

Former chief of the Serbian State Security Service, the defense counsel say, has been examined by psychiatrist De Man and gastroenterologist Siersma, two independent experts hired by the Tribunal. De Man and Siersma concluded that ‘while Stanisic is physically stable his mental health has deteriorated’. In the opinion of the experts, Stanisic ‘suffers from severe depression’ and is currently ‘unfit to stand trial’.

Reports drafted by Dr. De Man and Dr. Siersma do not allow for a conclusion that Stanisic’s medical treatment was ‘inadequate’ as the prosecution argued; according to the defense the treatment just ‘has not been successful’. Stanisic’s depression is the result of his ‘chronic health conditions, mental problems, psychological profile, serious difficulties in the family and social environment’ and not from ‘inadequate treatment’, the defense concludes.

The fact that Stanisic’s is currently taking 16 different medications proves that the accused is ‘chronically ill’, the defense contends. The defense believes that there are ‘less radical and dangerous’ steps that should be taken – rather than those proposed by the prosecution; the court should follow the advice of Dr. De Man who has recommended a different therapy.

Sharing