By Emma Thomasson
Amsterdam - The death in detention of Slobodan Milosevic before judges reached a verdict in his war crimes trial is a major blow to the UN tribunal and international justice, but not a fatal one, legal experts say.
The main lessons of the abrupt end to Europe's most important war crimes case since Nuremberg are that judges must be stricter and prosecutors must focus on securing a conviction rather than trying to create a full historical record.
The trial of the former Yugoslav president - entering its fifth year - had been expected to end within months. Victims and international lawyers said the tribunal in The Hague should have moved much faster, but has still done valuable work.
"There are lessons for the prosecution to learn and lessons for the judges to learn," said Richard Dicker, a lawyer with the New York-based Human Rights Watch. "The length of the trial underscores the importance of focusing on the key charges."
Milosevic was charged with 66 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes in complex indictments covering a decade of conflict in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo in the 1990s. His was the first war crimes trial of a former head of state.
The court belatedly tried to simplify and speed proceedings late last year when it considered coming to a verdict first on the Kosovo indictment - on which Milosevic had spent much of his defence case. But it dropped the idea after fierce opposition from both Milosevic and the prosecution.
Former Balkans envoy David Owen said the tribunal should have focused on limited crimes like the court in Baghdad trying former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. Saddam is charged with a massacre in Dujail in 1982 after an attempt on his life there.
"We need to have a post mortem discovery of why the trial went on for such a long time, why the prosecution was not more selective," Owen told the BBC, adding a verdict would have set precedent for the new International Criminal Court (ICC).
Established in The Hague in 2002 as the first permanent global war crimes court, the ICC has studied the example of the Yugoslavia tribunal, set up in 1993 and due to close in 2010.
The ICC - opposed by the United States but backed by 100 other states - is investigating crimes in Uganda, Sudan's Darfur region and the Democratic Republic of Congo and hopes to launch its first trials this year if suspects can be arrested.
The Yugoslavia tribunal said the main reason Milosevic's trial had taken so long was because the court had allowed him to defend himself, despite the risk to his health, and had only worked three days a week to give him more time to rest.
With only about 50 hours left to present his case, judges adjourned proceedings on March 1 to give Milosevic time to prepare one of his last witnesses - former Montenegro President Momir Bulatovic. The trial had been due to resume on Tuesday.
"Milosevic abused his right to represent himself and that should not be allowed in future," Dicker said.
"Milosevic was not interested in presenting a legal defence. He was interested in conducting a political offensive to secure himself in the hearts and minds of the people of Serbia."
A master tactician, Milosevic often seemed to outsmart the three judges trying him, portraying himself as a victim of victor's justice whose rights were not respected. Prosecutors said he wanted to string out the trial to stay in the spotlight.
On one of his last days in court, Judge Patrick Robinson - who replaced Richard May who died after presiding over the first two years of the trial - cut him off when he complained about not being allowed to travel to Russia for medical treatment.
"The judges learned the lesson about self representation too late," said Edgar Chen, from the Washington-based Coalition for International Justice. "They bent over backwards for him."
Milosevic's family and supporters have accused the court of mistreatment and analysts say his death could make Belgrade hesitate over delivering top fugitive General Ratko Mladic.
Hopes had risen that Mladic might be transferred to The Hague soon as the European Union has threatened to suspend association talks if he is not arrested by early April.
Despite some teething problems, Judge Theodor Meron, president of the tribunal until last year, said the court had handed down dozens of judgments and done a valuable job on procedure and evidence that will set precedent for the ICC.
"Nuremberg left us some jurisprudence on the basic crimes, crimes against humanity and war crimes ... but Nuremberg left us a very thin legacy on international criminal procedure and evidence. This is something that we created," he said last year.
Legal experts said the Milosevic trial had amassed a huge body of evidence that will be used in other trials of individuals and in the landmark genocide case brought by Bosnia against the state of Serbia and Montenegro last month.
"The trial did lay bare evidence of crimes he was alleged to have committed. I don't feel the four years were a waste in this sense. Something of a record has been set out, though short of the finality of a verdict," said Dicker of Human Rights Watch.
Richard Holbrooke, the US envoy who brokered the peace accord which ended the 1992-95 Bosnia war, said Milosevic had at least paid something for his crimes.
"Justice was served," he told Reuters Television. "He started four wars, he wrecked southeastern Europe. Over 300 000 people died, over two and a half million homeless because of Milosevic, and he paid the price by ending his life in jail."