Few people on the world stage have had the fortitude to stand up and point out that the ICTY's lofty mission of bringing justice to alleged Yugoslavian war criminals is both unnecessary and a danger to national sovereignty.

Those individuals in the docks, until recently, have not been the most sympathetic individuals. There has been virtually no public outcry about how the United Nations is using the ICTY to establish its sovereignty over independent nations. The nations that are primarily affected are Croatia, Serbia, and Bosnia, which are all former republics of the once Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

Unlike the Nazi's tried for crimes against humanity, the accused who are sitting in docks at The Hague are all from nations with functioning judiciaries at home. Both Croatia and Serbia are more than capable of trying their own citizens.

Supporters of the ICTY will claim thatneither Croatia nor Serbia would fairly prosecute their own former soldiersand political leaders. This is hard to believe since these are the verynations that, under international pressure, have shipped their own citizensoff to stand trial in a foreign land.Since its inception the goal of many within the United Nations bureaucracyhas been world government. The United Nations is, even today, quietlyfloating the idea of the first world tax. Such a levy would be on oil andwould be paid directly by those who pump the crude; the cost would then bepassed onto consumer's world wide.Until now, there was absolutely zero chance of any significant opposition tothe ICTY's World Court, whose sovereignty reigned above that of selfgoverning nation states. Who is going to care about the rights of allegedwar criminals or the nations that produced them? Why not send them off to aforeign land to stand trial? Well, for the same reason the Iraqi Governmentisn't shipping off War Criminals such as Saddam Hussein; there is no needfor an independent nation to bow its head to a Non Governmental Organizationsuch as the United Nations.Few people are going to loss sleep, however, about a kangaroo court trying aman such as Croatian General Tihomir Blaskic who was convicted of crimesagainst humanity for allegedly orchestrating the massacre of Muslims inBosnia. The tribunal was able to secure its conviction, in part, because ofthe testimony of a "protected witness". In other words Blaskic was not ableto face his accuser.The tribunal issued a gag order against the media and ordered that the nameof this "protected witness" not be published. There is, of course, no basisin international law for such an order so five Croatian Journalists"violated" the decree and published the name of the witness whose motives,it turns out, were politically motivated. If General Blaskic did in factcommit the crimes for which he was convicted, I would certainly not defendhim but I will always support the right of an accused to face their accuser.Of much greater import, however, is not the fate of Blaskic it is that ofthe five Croatian journalists who have now been arrested by the UnitedNations for violating the gag order of a court in a foreign land. The WarCrime Tribunal was set up by the United Nations to try war criminals notjournalists. The rights of a free press, in all cases, supercede the desireof the United Nations to formulate world governing power. The UN may thinkthat they can get away with this type of action against Croatianjournalists, whose government does not support their right to a free press,but let's see if they have the will to try to arrest an American journalistfor violating their gag order.The name of this witness who, in reality, needs no protection is StjepanMesiæ.

The reason he does not need protection from the press or anyone elseis that he is the President of Croatia. The court's gag order does not serveto protect Mesic from physical harm but from political harm. In fact, thejournalists who have been arrested by the ICTY are political prisoners ofthe United Nations. No more, no less.