Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor Brammertz: Literary works cannot be used as evidence in legal proceedings before Tribunal

Montenegro’s Ambassador to Benelux countries Vesko Garčević spoke with The Hague Tribunal Chief Prosecutor Serge Bramertz. He requested an explanation regarding the statements made by Prosecutor Katrina Gustafson at the trial of Radovan Karadžić, where she said that “The Mountain Wreath,” a work of literature by Montenegro’s XIX century Prince-Bishop Petar II Petrović Njegoš’s, served as an inspiration and an invitation to commit ethnic cleansing during the 1990s war in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Ambassador Garčević remarked that any connections between “The Mountain Wreath” with war crimes in Bosnia and Herzegovina could only be assumed from a one-sided and superficial interpretation of this work of art. At the same time, he noted that “The Mountain Wreath” is a historic poem written in the first half of the XIX century about events taking place in a different time and context – Montenegro’s and Montenegrins’ struggle for freedom from Ottoman rule in the XVII century. He emphasised that Njegoš was one of the brightest minds of his time and a founder of modern Montenegrin state, which has always cherished multi-ethnic and multi-religious harmony among its citizens, and has always been a strong advocate of reconciliation and coexistence in the Western Balkans, which has also been recognised internationally. This was best visible, he said, precisely during the tragic break-up of the former Yugoslavia, when Montenegro offered a safe haven for a great number of people from across the war-torn areas, regardless of their faith or ethnicity.

Mr Bramertz noted that media outlets deliberately took Ms Gustafson’s statement out of context. He underlined that it is not the Prosecution’s intention, or job, to interpret literary pieces or events that constitute a nation’s cultural or historic heritage. He stressed that “The Mountain Wreath” or any other literary work will not and cannot be used as evidence in a legal proceedings before the Tribunal. He agreed that one-sided interpretations may, due to the delicacy of the case, produce negative political implications and added that these matters should be treated with caution.