Milosevic trial


David Scheffer's self-serving suggestion for the War Crimes Tribunal at The Hague to strip Slobodan Milosevic of his right to self-defense ("Enough of Milosevic's antics," Views, July 13) should not be taken seriously. Naturally, as Madeleine Albright's former point man for war crimes, he has a vested interest in seeing America's favorite fall guy prosecuted and sent to prison.

But taking away Milosevic's right to defend himself in court would tear away the last shred of credibility in a trial that has limped on for reasons far different than those given by Scheffer. The prosecution, it should be remembered, called about 290 witnesses without presenting evidence or testimony that Milosevic ever planned or ordered war crimes, much less crimes of genocide.

This is a far cry from the trials at Nuremberg or the Eichmann trial, to which this one is so often falsely compared, where an abundance of written evidence proved guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. In the eyes of all objective observers, Milosevic's rebuttals thus far have already justified an acquittal. Now either the judges must proceed according to the rule of law and allow the defendant his right to establish his innocence, or forfeit all pretense to legitimacy. Scheffer's logic makes for good propaganda, but bad justice.

Barry M. Lituchy, New York