By Mel O’Brien

Lately there seems to be an increase in the number of stories surfacing concerning the names and whereabouts of wanted war criminals from all corners of the globe. While Serge Brammertz declares the continued belief of the ICTY that Ratko Mladi? is in Serbia, other less ‘famous’ war criminals are also still being hunted. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre (SWC), known worldwide for its efforts in hunting Nazis and having them brought to justice, has stepped up its efforts to find surviving Nazi war criminals that it believes are living in various locations around the world. The Centre has noted a dramatic increase in investigations in the past year, and has published a list of the ten most wanted Nazi war criminals– the whereabouts of all but one are known. They are located in countries as diverse as Croatia, Germany, the USA, Venezuela and Australia. The SWC has also launched a campaign called Operation Last Chance, which offers rewards for information leading to the capture and arrest of any Nazi war criminals. A UK-based NGO, African Rights, reports that Oswald Rurangwa, convicted and sentenced in absentia for genocide crimes by the Gacaca courts in Rwanda, has been living in the United States since 1996. The group has revealed that he has changed his name to Oswald Rukemuye and lives in the town of Dayton, Ohio. Does such publicity assist in the capture of wanted war criminals? Or does it hinder the chance to take such people into custody, by giving them the chance to flee? Such criminals cannot be arrested without an arrest warrant, which requires action by criminal law enforcement authorities of the respective countries in which those wanted are living. Should a criminal flee a country, border police or immigration officials will not detain them unless they have reason to- which requires knowledge that the person is wanted for criminal conduct. Thus the role of mutual assistance in criminal matters between states is significant in the drive to ensure the end for impunity for war criminals and génocidaires. Interpol works in conjunction with the ICC, the ICTY and the ICTR in the issuance of Red Notices against criminals wanted by the international institutions. A search on the Interpol database reveals 193 fugitives wanted for war crimes; 89 for genocide; and 25 for crimes against humanity- covering crimes committed in countries such as East Timor, Democratic Republic of Congo, Iraq, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Sudan, Uganda and the former Yugoslavia. The majority are relating to arrest warrants issued by the ICTY and the ICTR. Notably, the convicted Rurangwa is not on Interpol’s list- or at least, the public list. With the huge number of war criminals/genocidaires before national courts such as the Gacaca, despite the issuance of Red Notices on persons wanted by the Prosecutor General of Rwanda, it is clear that there will be difficulties ensuring adequate knowledge of other states as to suspects when the number of wanted persons is at such a high number. In Rwanda tens of thousands of people are in jail awaiting trial or serving sentences for genocide crimes, although the Prosecutor General lists only 93 wanted persons outside of Rwandan territory- Rurangwa is not on this list either. While Interpol does not issue arrest warrants per se, the Red Notices serve as a notification throughout member states that a person does have an arrest warrant issued against them by a state or international tribunal or court. Mere publication of the name and whereabouts of a wanted criminal does not provide national authorities with the authority to detain someone. It also provides the wanted criminal with notice that people are aware of his whereabouts, which may result in the person fleeing to another location under another identity- as so many war criminals have inevitably done. On the other hand, publicising the existence of a war criminal living amongst the community may be the catalyst to spur national authorities to action. The High Court of Australia recently upheld the validity of the Extradition Act 1988, in the case of Zentai v Republic of Hungary. The decision means that Charles Zentai, one of the SWC’s top ten wanted Nazi war criminals, is most likely (health reasons aside) to be extradited to Hungary to stand trial for the 1944 killing of a Jewish teenager. Likewise, Canada has extradited Michael Seifert, a former Nazi prison guard, to Italy for crimes committed there in 1943. Germany has just issued murder charges against a former Nazi who served with the Waffen SS. Such action is proof that states are still willing to take action against war criminals, no matter how many years have passed since the crimes. Hence, while the publicity and pressure from NGOs and the community may enable the suspect to flee, it can also help to ensure that war criminals do not remain living comfortably and are brought to justice.