Ratko Mladic Dies as UN Tribunal Orders Death Inquiry

Ratko Mladic, the former commander of the Bosnian Serb forces, died on August 27 while hospitalized in The Hague and in the custody of the United Nations Detention Unit. The International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals ordered an inquiry into the circumstances of his death the same day and assigned Judge Iain Bonomy to conduct it.

The inquiry is the immediate new development in a case whose criminal judgment had already become final. It is an internal custody-accountability proceeding, not a new trial or an appeal of Mladic’s convictions or life sentence.

What the tribunal has ordered

IRMCT President Graciela Gatti Santana issued the order under Rule 50(3) of the Mechanism’s Rules of Detention. The order assigns Bonomy to examine the circumstances surrounding Mladic’s death while he was in United Nations detention and to report his findings directly to the president as soon as reasonably possible.

The registrar was instructed to provide assistance, including access to confidential documents needed for the inquiry. The order does not state a cause of death. The Mechanism said it would not provide information about the cause before the inquiry is completed.

The Mechanism’s initial statement said Dutch authorities had begun the standard procedures and investigations required under Dutch law. Associated Press later reported that Dutch authorities told the Mechanism they were not opening a criminal investigation into Mladic’s death and would not perform an autopsy.

Why the early-release ruling matters

Mladic died one week after the Mechanism rejected his request for humanitarian early release. In its August 20 decision, the tribunal said he had served just over 15 years of a life sentence and had not reached the usual two-thirds eligibility threshold.

The decision also recognized that Mladic’s health had sharply deteriorated. A medical report said he had entered the final phase of life, with care focused primarily on comfort and relief of suffering. The court nevertheless concluded that he was receiving comprehensive palliative care and assistance with daily activities, and that his visitation arrangements allowed meaningful contact with family.

The IRMCT president denied release but directed officials to facilitate family visits to the maximum extent possible. The decision recorded differing views among five consulted judges: three favored denial and two supported release, largely because of the imminence of Mladic’s death and the importance of family presence at the end of life.

The final legal record

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia convicted Mladic on November 22, 2017, of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war. He received a life sentence.

On June 8, 2021, the Mechanism’s Appeals Chamber affirmed both the convictions and the sentence. Those findings were final before his death. The United Nations said the judicial findings form part of the historical record and condemned denial of the Srebrenica genocide or glorification of people convicted by international courts.

Reactions in Serbia and among victims’ families

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic criticized the refusal to release Mladic, calling it “uncivilized behavior” and saying the tribunal had wanted him to die behind bars, according to AP. That was a political reaction to the ruling, not a change in the court’s legal findings.

Victims’ families emphasized the opposite significance. Fazila Efendic, who lost several relatives in the 1995 Srebrenica massacre, told AP that it mattered that Mladic died convicted and served his sentence in prison.

What happens next

Judge Bonomy’s inquiry may clarify the medical and custody circumstances surrounding Mladic’s death. It is not expected to alter the genocide, crimes against humanity and war-crimes verdict affirmed in 2021.

The next meaningful update will be the inquiry’s findings or a formal statement from the Mechanism about its progress. The case shows how international accountability institutions continue working after the original tribunals close: preserving final judgments, overseeing detention and documenting the treatment of people serving sentences for grave crimes.

Sources

Look for updates to this story

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.