Journalist spared war crimes testimony

Randal quoted Radoslav Brdjanin in an article

An American journalist has set a legal precedent by winning an appeal to not have to testify at the war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

Jonathan Randal: sources would be jeopardised by testimony

The former Washington Post reporter, Jonathan Randal, brought the case after he refused a call to take the witness stand in the war crimes case against ex-Bosnian Serb Deputy Prime Minister Radoslav Brdjanin.

Mr Brdjanin is on trial for the persecution and expulsion of more than 100,000 non-Serbs during the Bosnian war.

Mr Randal argued that war correspondents and their sources would be in jeopardy if they were considered as potential witnesses.

Divisive issue

A panel of five judges ruled that war correspondents should have a limited exemption from the usual compulsion to testify.

The judges said the court must be convinced that the "evidence has a direct and important value in determining a core issue in the case".

They also had to ensure there was no other way to get hold of the evidence.

More than 30 global news organisations had supported Mr Randal's appeal.

This is the first case before the court dealing with the issue of journalistic privilege and the ruling may have consequences for the new International Criminal Court.

Journalists are divided on the issue.

Some consider it their duty to testify.

The BBC's former Belgrade correspondent, Jacky Rowland, appeared at the war crimes tribunal in The Hague in August, to give evidence at the trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic.

Other journalists say testifying before an international court compromises their objectivity.