Under the terms of the Dayton-Paris Agreement the ICRC was assigned two specific tasks in Bosnia and Herzegovina. First, under Article IX of Annex 1A, it was entrusted with monitoring the release of all persons detained by the parties in connection with the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Secondly, Article V of Annex 7 stipulated that the parties must provide information through the tracing mechanisms of the ICRC on all persons unaccounted for and cooperate fully with the ICRC to determine their identities, whereabouts and fate.

Release of detainees under ICRC auspices

Despite the commitment of the parties, within the framework of the Dayton-Paris Agreement, to implement the comprehensive and unilateral release of all prisoners, the process lasted well beyond the agreed timeframe. The process was made all the more arduous because the parties were reluctant to abandon their practice of exchanging detainees and continued to negotiate at local level.

On the basis of lists of detainees submitted by the parties, the ICRC drew up a plan for the release and transfer of all detainees. The ICRC also requested unimpeded access to all places of detention and to all detainees.

The Bosnian government representative, however, objected to a global release on the grounds that no light had yet been shed on the fate of thousands of people who had disappeared after the fall of Srebrenica in August 1995. While the ICRC shared the Bosnian government's concern over this issue, it was anxious that detainees who had the right to an early release should not pay the price for the inability to find a rapid solution to it.

Throughout the process ICRC delegates visited and registered new detainees held by all the parties, building up a comprehensive view of the detention situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, establishing lists of their own and carrying out private interviews to ascertain the desired destination of each detainee after release.

In January, some 900 prisoners notified to the ICRC by the parties were released by the stated deadline. However, the ICRC had thereafter to initiate a phase of intensive diplomatic pressure in order to obtain the release of the remainder, informing the political and military authorities concerned of the failure of the parties to fulfil their obligations.

Detainees still behind bars were declared by the detaining parties to be held on suspicion of war crimes, although in most of the cases the ICRC was not aware of any proceedings against them either at the national level or through ICTFY.* The ICRC President made this point abundantly clearly in his letter of 13 March to the Presidents of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Prime Minister of Republika Srpska, which was also addressed to the Presidents of Croatia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

A breakthrough was finally achieved at the Moscow ministerial meeting of 23 March, at which the ICRC President and the High Representative put the issue of release of detainees clearly on the table. The results were almost immediate. On 5 April, the parties finally agreed that the remaining detainees against whom there were no substantiated allegations of war crimes would be released within a day.

In all, some 1,100 detainees had been released since the beginning of the year and the remaining 13 transferred to two jails in Sarajevo --- one on the territory of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the other on Republika Srpska territory --- and their legal files submitted to a representative of ICTFY.

At no point during this process could the ICRC be absolutely sure that some detainees had not been "hidden" from it, and numerous rumours to this effect continued to hamper efforts to convin ce families that their missing loved ones were neither alive nor being held in some unknown place of detention. Once the formal deadline had passed for all the parties to make known the detainees in their hands, the ICRC deemed it extremely unlikely that any more remained in concealed custody. This was confirmed by the fact that, from the time it had finalized its lists, the ICRC did not find a single prisoner in 1996 of whom it had not had prior knowledge.

At the end of the year, the ICRC continued to monitor the conditions of detention of 18 people detained on suspicion of war crimes. In addition, the ICRC visited some 130 detainees held for whatever reason by an authority other than that of their ethnic origin, including common-law criminals.

Efforts to determine the fate of missing persons

Another major concern for the ICRC in the wake of the Dayton-Paris Agreement was to find clear and tangible answers to the fate of people unaccounted for during the four-year conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Despite the hopes raised by the peace agreement, many families remained in agonizing uncertainty about the fate of their missing relatives.

The ICRC identified three main sources from which information on the fate of the missing people could be obtained: from the parties themselves; from members of the public, i.e. neighbours or acquaintances who might have witnessed certain events; and by the exhumation of mass and individual graves and the identification of bodies.

In order to tap these sources effectively, the ICRC set up two different coordinating bodies, a Working Group on Missing Persons and an Expert Group on Exhumations and Missing. The Working Group met under the ICRC's chairmanship at the office of the High Representative in Sarajevo. It brought together the three former warring parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina to officially process all tracing requests and substantiate documentary information on the missing.

In the first instance, the ICRC aimed to establish a file on every missing person as signalled through a request by a family member. This was done using a network of 22 ICRC offices and 527 local Red Cross branches throughout the former Yugoslavia and 30 National Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies in countries which had accepted refugees from the conflict, thus building up a reliable picture of the extent of the problem and avoiding a propaganda war on figures.

At the Working Group's regular meetings, each of the former warring parties was assigned due responsibility for enquiring into the fate of those persons reported missing from the area under their control at the time of their disappearance. After a couple of initial sessions, the representatives of the missing persons' families were invited to attend as observers.

In addition to the efforts of the Working Group, the ICRC issued a public appeal for people with any information pertaining to the fate of the missing to come forward. A catalogue containing 11,000 names was distributed throughout the Red Cross network in the former Yugoslavia and worldwide. The list was also posted on the ICRC's public server on the Internet. The accompanying public campaign was launched on 12 June with posters, TV and radio spots urging witnesses to come forward with information on individual cases. As a result of the campaign more people were added to the list and a new edition of the catalogue, this time comprising 14,000 names, was produced. A second public campaign was initiated in December, the results of which brought the total number of people reported missing by the end of the year to 18,000.

The missing people of Srebrenica

No account of the issue of the missing would be complete without special mention of Srebrenica, unquestionably the single most serious incident of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia.

By the beginning of 1996, the ICRC had still not received a reply to its request for information from the Bosnian Serb authorities on the fate of 3,000 men known to have been arrested after the fall of Srebrenica in August 1995. In addition, delegates had collected a further 5,000 names of people who fled the town before it fell and who remained unaccounted for. Only a small number (some 30 people) had reappeared during the release process.

At the end of January, the missing persons' families who had fled from Srebrenica to Tuzla staged a protest in the ICRC's offices to highlight their plight. Fully understanding the suffering they were undergoing and their urgent need for answers, the ICRC resolved to do everything possible to reassure them that their concerns were being addressed and to ease the pain of bereavement.

Also at the end of January, the ICRC Director of Operations and the Delegate General for West ern and Central Europe and the Balkans went on a mission to Pale, Belgrade and Sarajevo to deal specifically with this issue. In Pale they met the then Presidents of the Republika Srpska and the Serb Assembly and presented them with the facts collected by the ICRC and the conclusions it had reached. These conclusions were that the vast majority of the missing men had been killed after capture and that many others had been killed in so-called "battle" or in lieu of arrest. The Director of Operations handed over a note verbale requesting the Bosnian Serbs to clarify what had happened and ensure that everything was done to inform the families and allow the dead a decent burial. The ICRC representatives also met the Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs in Belgrade and the Vice-President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in Sarajevo to discuss this issue.

On 7 February, the Director of Operations made known the ICRC's conclusions for the first time in public, at a press conference in Geneva. This step was considered necessary by the ICRC to get the search process under way and to facilitate cooperation between the parties on this important issue.

Exhumation process

There had been evidence of mass graves across Bosnia since 1992. The ICRC emphasized that it was the responsibility of other international mechanisms to identify the parties and individuals legally responsible for deaths or disappearances and to gather evidence in this regard. Nor did the ICRC have the capacity or expertise to carry out exhumations itself. Its main concern was that the need to identify bodies and accord them a decent burial --- a need particularly acute for the families of the dead, who could only then begin the catharsis of mourning --- should not be obscured by the haste to establish evidence of war crimes.

The ICRC therefore proposed the creation of the aforesaid second coordinating body, the Expert Group on Exhumations and Missing, chaired by the Office of the High Representative and grouping together all the international bodies concerned with this issue. These included ICTFY, IFOR, IPTF,* the Special Rapporteur on Human Rights, the UN Expert for the Special Process Dealing with Missing Persons in the Former Yugoslavia, and Physicians for Human Rights, an NGO specializing in exhumation work.

The Expert Group started work in February, established guidelines for the exhumations, clarified who would create and maintain the ante-mortem database (an extension of the files on missing persons compiled by the ICRC containing dental and medical information), and coordinated the exhumations carried out by ICTFY, other international mechanisms and the parties themselves.

Progress and results on missing persons

Given the magnitude of the problem and the difficulties encountered in obtaining clear information about the fate of the missing in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the results of all these combined efforts were fairly modest in 1996. Nonetheless, information provided by the parties via the Working Group or data collected as a result of exhumations or through the ICRC's own tracing efforts enabled some 1,000 families to be told what had happened to their missing relatives.

The slow progress in addressing this issue prompted the creation of an international body, the ICMP,* to act as a political partner for the ICRC's more operational approach. Its aim was to assess such progress, to examine the obstacles that remained, to mobilize funds and to intervene at a political level by approaching the relevant authorities to persuade them to do more to move the process forward. The ICMP met for the first time in Geneva in October, with the participation of the ICRC President and other people of international repute.

The ICRC remained convinced that until clear answers were forthcoming, this issue would act as a psychological obstacle to the peace process and a symbol of martyrdom with which the whole community would be forever unable to come to terms. It therefore decided to pursue intensive tracing methods for another two years -- 1997 and 1998. Its ultimate objective was that by the end of this period, it would be in a position to respond individually to each and every family, even if only to say that despite every effort to the contrary no factual information had emerged as to the fate and whereabouts of their loved ones.

Peace implementation conferences

The complexity of the peace agreement and the number of players involved in the process mea nt that conferences and meetings were being held throughout the year on every aspect, at every level and in a host of geographical locations within the former Yugoslavia and in other parts of Europe. Whenever appropriate, the ICRC attended these meetings, participating either as a fully fledged member or as an observer.

They included two major meetings of the PIC* --- a mid-term conference in Florence in June and one in London in early December, one year after the signing of the Accord --- to review progress in the implementation of the peace agreement.

Both of these conferences were attended by forty-three countries, represented by their foreign ministers, and by 13 international organizations at the topmost level, as well as by numerous NGOs and other observers. The ICRC President and the Delegate General for Western and Central Europe and the Balkans attended on both occasions.

The London conference raised a number of unresolved issues, including the obstacles still impeding the return of some two million refugees, the difficulties of bringing the perpetrators of war crimes to justice, and the fate of missing persons. The ICRC's priority was to ensure that this last issue was fully taken into account in the texts of the resolutions, a move which received the support of the conference.

Emergency assistance and rehabilitation

A survey carried out by the ICRC in December 1995 had revealed that many people both in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and in the Republika Srpska were in acute need of food assistance, particularly among those displaced during the later stages of the conflict, the new returnees and the most vulnerable social cases. The winter conditions at the beginning and end of 1996 aggravated their plight, particularly in the Republika Srpska, where few international aid organizations and NGOs were actively involved. The ICRC therefore devised winter programmes comprising food and non-food distributions for vulnerable sectors of the population. At the end of winter, in March, the ICRC reassessed the situation and, with the emergency over, concentrated mainly on social cases. Whenever possible, items for distribution were purchased on the local market in order to support the region's economy.

At a first meeting on reconstruction held in Brussels in December 1995, donors pledged 36 million dollars for agriculture for the first three months of 1996. However, as these efforts appeared unlikely to take effect in time for the sowing season, the ICRC decided, after a survey by an agronomist in mid-January, to distribute seed once again in early 1996 to complement the activities of other aid organizations in central Bosnia.

Things were not much better on the health front. The Ministry of Health had no budget and health facilities were still turning to the ICRC for assistance. The ICRC supported those mainly involved in reconstructive surgery for the war-wounded, treating the victims of landmine explosions and other patients who did not receive treatment during the conflict.

Water supplies and sanitation also remained precarious. Even though there were some improvements, the needs of people returning to their homes put even greater pressure on existing systems. The ICRC therefore continued its emergency water-treatment programme aimed at restoring a sufficient supply of safe water and acceptable hygiene conditions for the population. In addition, a major maintenance programme was carried out in cooperation with various National Societies, so as to prevent a breakdown in water-supply systems and guarantee a minimum service by providing urgently needed spare parts, equipment and expertise.

As postal services in Bosnia and Herzegovina improved, the total volume of Red Cross messages declined sharply. However, for some people Red Cross messages remained an essential means of communication across the Inter-Entity Boundary Line.

Civilian population still in need of protection

Abuses against the civilian population continued in many areas of Bosnia and Herzegovina despite the peace. On several occasions the ICRC launched public appeals to protest against violations of humanitarian law. On behalf of minority groups, it put systematic pressure on central and local authorities to induce them to ensure the physical integrity of such groups and enable them to live normal lives in their habitual environment. However, whenever this proved impossible, the ICRC sought to obtain the commitment of the authorities concerned at least to make sure that population transfers were carried out in acceptable conditions. Such conditions included enabling people to leave on a voluntary basis, together with all family members, including men of draft age, and with their belongings.

With the official announcement on 18 February that the transfer of authority over the Bosnian Serb-held suburbs of Sarajevo to the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina was imminent, the Serb inhabitants started to leave, heading for villages in eastern Bosnia under Republika Srpska authority. The early arrivals found accommodation with families or in abandoned houses, many of them partially destroyed. The latecomers, often arriving in a desperate condition, could find shelter only in collective centres set up in schools or public buildings. Very few Serbs, mostly the elderly, elected to remain in Sarajevo.

Mostar remained a divided city and virtually no progress was made in 1996 in achieving reconciliation between the two communities or in obtaining the freedom of movement between the two parts of the city that was provided for under the terms of the peace agreement. The ICRC maintained a permanent presence in the city and kept a close eye on any developments which might endanger the safety of the civilian population.
In October, the ICRC received the green light from the Bosnian Serb army to hold international humanitarian law courses for troops in Bijeljina, Zvornik and Doboj.

At the end of the year, the decision was taken to merge the ICRC delegations in Pale and Sarajevo into one based in Sarajevo.


IN 1996 THE ICRC:

- oversaw the release of 1,100 detainees;

- paid regular visits to 130 detainees held by an ethnic group other than their own, irrespective of the charges against them, and to 18 people accused or convicted of war crimes;

- paid regular visits to detainees held in The Hague under the responsibility of ICTFY.


- set up and chaired a Working Group with the participation of the three former warring parties; officially processed all tracing requests and replies through the Working Group which met nine times in Sarajevo in 1996;

- by the end of the year, through its Red Cross network in Bosnia and Herzegovina and worldwide, gathered 18,000 individual tracing requests from families of those unaccounted for;

- published two editions of a catalogue with respectively 11,000 and 14,000 names of people unaccounted for in Bosnia and Herzegovina and distributed 3,300 copies to all members of the Red Cross network involved; made the same list available on the ICRC's public server on the Internet (World Wide Web);

- exchanged 442,000 Red Cross messages (for the whole of the former Yugoslavia);

- reunited 280 families (for the whole of the former Yugoslavia);

- transferred or repatriated some 550 detainees after their release from detention (for the whole of the former Yugoslavia);

- followed the cases of a dozen unaccompanied children under 16 years of age.


- monitored the situation of minorities and intervened with the authorities when necessary.


- implemented a large-scale winter programme (95/96), targeting 150,000 displaced people, the elderly and social cases not assisted by other organizations in central, eastern and northern Bosnia, with winter clothing, blankets, stoves, candles, food parcels, wheat flour and hygiene kits;

- provided emergency assistance to up to 30,000 people in the Republika Srpska displaced from the Serb suburbs of Sarajevo in 1996 with individual parcels, stoves, plastic sheeting, jerrycans, kitchen sets, clothing, baby sets and blankets;

- from April onwards, together with National Societies, implemented assistance programmes for social cases;

- at the end of the year, carried out another large-scale winter programme for 120,000 vulnerable people in central, eastern and northern Bosnia, providing winter clothing, blankets, stoves and food parcels, wherever possible produced locally;

- distributed a total of 90,000 vegetable seed kits, 1,312 tonnes of seed potatoes, about 500,000 sq. km. of plastic sheeting for greenhouses and 109,000 preserving kits (salt, vinegar and sugar) in the Republika Srpska and some municipalities of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

- facilitated bilateral projects carried out by the National Societies of Austria, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the United States in the fields of distribution of food and baby and hygiene parcels, public kitchens and provision of school snacks.


- regularly supplied 62 medical structures with surgical materials, of which 33 were also provided with essential drugs for treatment of chronic diseases;

- through a project delegated to the Belgian Red Cross, rehabilitated health posts in the Bihac area;

- facilitated bilateral projects carried out by the National Societies of Austria, Belgium, Italy, Norway and Switzerland in the fields of rehabilitation of social institutions and provision of psycho-social support.


- carried out water and sanitation maintenance programmes within the majority of the municipal water boards in Bosnia and Herzegovina by providing essential spare parts, tools and chemicals and by repairing pumps and electrical equipment;

- launched a programme to provide basic equipment such as pipes, valves and small pumps to front-line villages repopulated by returnees;

- made regular deliveries of a total of over 100 tonnes of chlorine and chemical dosing equipment to water boards to ensure drinking water quality;

- launched a programme for cleaning sewage systems and emptying septic tanks in collective centres, hospitals and public buildings in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska;

- enabled regional Epidemiological Centres responsible for testing water quality to function by supplying them with laboratory equipment and chemicals;

- through delegated projects with the British, German and Swedish Red Cross Societies, undertook maintenance and repair work on water- supply systems in the areas around Bihac, Tuzla, Zenica, Banja Luka, Sarajevo and in eastern Bosnia;

- facilitated bilateral projects carried out by the National Societies of France and the Netherlands in the fields of water, sanitation and installation of gas heating.


- provided financial support for summer camps organized by the local Red Cross in the Republika Srpska for 155 children between 8 and 15, with activities centred on the Red Cross; contributed to a summer camp for 100 children organized by the local Red Cross in the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina;

- assisted local Red Cross organizations through training and material assistance in the form of stationery kits and office supplies;

- provided educational support and courses for local Red Cross tracing activities and procedures and gave financial assistance to enable local Red Cross participation in a tracing seminar organized in Sofia in September;

- supported the community-based programmes of some local Red Cross branches;

- helped the Red Cross of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina to organize its first general assembly in the summer.


- conducted 8 seminars on international humanitarian law: 4 for the armed forces of the HVO,* 3 for ARBIH,* and 1 for VRS* in Mostar West, Orasje, Posusje, Zenica, Mostar East and Banja Luka, for a total of 196 senior officers;

- conducted 1 trainers' workshop, in Caplijina, for 10 battalion commanders and staff officers from the armed forces of the HVO;

- contributed ICRC presentations to 3 law of war seminars conducted by the HVO in Vitez, Tomislavgrad and Citluk;

- sponsored 1 ARBIH officer to participate in the humanitarian law course in San Remo, Italy;

- trained 6 local dissemination officers to carry out a continuous programme to spread knowledge of humanitarian law throughout the territory;

- conducted 36 seminars for over 850 participants from the IPTF, local Red Cross branches and volunteers, IFOR, local police officers and law students.


- as part of its mine-awareness campaign had TV spots broadcast twice a day by five TV stations and nine spots five times a day by 20 radio stations throughout Bosnia and Herzegovina; distributed 150,000 leaflets in Bosnian, Croatian and Serbian script; printed 37,000 posters; initiated a training programme for 9 field officers to become "master trainers"; organized training workshops for 83 Red Cross volunteers in mine awareness from the Republika Srpska and the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina; and printed 500 T-shirts with "Think Mines!" for children taking part in landmine awareness activities.


Notes:

* ICTFY: International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

* IPTF: International Police Task Force

* ICMP: International Commission for Missing Persons

* PIC: Peace Implementation Council, comprising the five members of the Contact Group (United States, United Kingdom, Russia, Germany and France), the European Union and other interested States and international organizations

* HVO: Bosnian Croat Forces (Hrvatskog Vijeka Obrane)

* ARBIH: Bosnian Government Army (Armije Republike Bosne I Hercegovine)

* VRS: Bosnian Serb Army (Vojske Republike Srpske)