13 International Criminal Tribunal for
former Yugoslavia
| (25559)
—
—
| Draft Council Regulation concerning asset freezing against ICTY indictees
|
| Legal base | Article 15 EU; unanimity
|
| Department | Foreign and Commonwealth Office
|
| Basis of consideration | EM of 23 April 2004
|
| Previous Committee Report | None; but see (25520) —; HC 42 xvii (2003-04), para 9 (21 April 2004)
|
| Discussed in Council | 29 April 2004 JHA Council
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared
|
Background
13.1 A travel ban is already in existence against fugitive indictees
of the International Criminal Tribunal for (former) Yugoslavia
(ICTY) such as Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic and Ante Gotovina
and those who aid and abet them, through the Common Position of
30 March 2004 which renewed measures first imposed in 2003.[27]
13.2 On 28 August 2003, the United Nations Security
Council adopted Resolution 1503, which urged Member States to
consider imposing measures including asset freezing against individuals
and groups or organisations assisting indictees at large to continue
to evade justice.
Previous consideration
13.3 In his earlier letter of 5 April and Explanatory
Memorandum of 6 April, the Minister for Europe (Mr Denis MacShane)
outlined the Government's views: that Mladic, Karadzic and Gotovina
have evaded justice for many years largely due to the financial
and practical assistance they have received from relatives and
supporters, and that strengthening the measures against the indictees,
in line with UNSCR 1503, by imposing an EU-wide asset freeze would
further hamper the ability of individuals to harbour and support
these suspected war criminals, and so help to bring them before
the ICTY. The Government had accordingly pressed for the EU to
adopt measures to freeze the assets of the indictees. Political
agreement had been reached on an EU Common Position that would
impose an asset freeze on the indictees for a period of 12 months.
The Government was keen to secure agreement on this Common Position,
which was expected to be formally adopted at the 26 April General
Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC).
13.4 The Minister further explained that the proposed
measures were to be accompanied by a Council Regulation, to be
adopted under the EC Treaty, using a triple legal base of Articles
60, 301 and 308 of the EC Treaties and thereby following the
precedent of similar measures for persons not connected with
a particular third State (e.g. it was the method used to implement
UNSCR 1267 (1999) against the Taliban and Al-Qa'ida at the EC
level). We cleared the proposed Common Position on 21 April 2004.
At that time, the accompanying draft Council Regulation was
not available, but the Minister assured us he would submit it
for scrutiny as soon as it was issued.
13.5 He did
so on 23 April, explaining in his further Explanatory Memorandum
that it had now been decided to take both the Common Position
and the accompanying draft Council Regulation, not at the GAERC,
but at the Justice and Home Affairs Council
on 29 April.
Conclusion
13.6 We thank the Minister for fulfilling his
undertaking to submit the draft Council Regulation for scrutiny
as soon as it became available. We join him in hoping that the
Regulation will achieve the desired objective, and clear it from
scrutiny.
27 (24456) 8157/03; see HC 63-xix (2002-03), para 10
(30 April 2003). Back
| 
