Thought I'd add this in here since the question of journalistic ethics has been testing people all weekend:
BBC NEWS | Europe | Hague official guilty of contempt

This is an archive link to an interview with Ms Hartmann (2007) : The European Courier | Interview with Florence Hartmann


Book Discussion on Wordpress: Florence Hartmann’s ‘Peace and Punishment’ Greater Surbiton
Whistleblower blog : Florence Hartmann indicted; Hague Tribunal tries to silence a whistleblower Greater Surbiton

Ms Hartmann got off lightly in terms of sentence which looks like a fine of a few thousand euros and a job loss (post indictment)

I have not yet read the book; but its on the list. Hartmann's response to the indictment :
Hague Tribunal Charges Former Spokeswoman With Contempt

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Its a tricky case. The Hague is not responsible for decerning which country was responsible for the war in Bosnia and hence laible to pay reparitions. Any attempt to do so or disclose documents that could bias such a case in another jurisdiction would undermine the neutrality (and hence integrity) of the Tribunals. Bitter pill to swallow but in strictly legal terms her prosecution was the correct thing to do.

Anyone got any ideas why they are so anxious to keep these papers secret ?

She published priveleged information from what I can gather. Lawyers should not do that.
The other side of it is that she is considered a whistleblower. As stated in the OP , I
have not read the book (yet) so cannot myself decide on the issue. She was Carla
del Ponte's spokesperson and had access to sensitive information. She quit her job
and sold a book. She disclosed decisions by the appeals chamber after she left.

Hague Tribunal Charges Former Spokeswoman With Contempt

Her support group is at this blog addie: http://www.caseflorencehartmann.org/

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Because it is all the fault of the yankee pig-dog capitalist imperialists and their zionist and big business allies?

__________________
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Winston Churchill

No but, really ?

I really don't think Hartmanns defence is up to much:

... its not as if this information about Serbia was disclosed for free. To get it you had to buy her book from which we can safely assume she profitted.

The Hague court is enforcing Serbias request that its state documents be kept secret. The fact Serbia allowed these documents into the Hague judicial process is to be applauded. But what is the chance of any further such gesture from any government given the Hague cannot guarentee enforcement of its own rules in how it deals with issues of sovereign interest?

Hartmanns got her book deal , that all that matters to her. The Hague, tribunal justice and the cause of the public interests in these matters has been damaged as a result. So her flimsey defence amounts to nothing. She was not a private citizen who stumbled accross this information. As long as she was being paid by the Tribunal she seemed to have no interest in putting the "public interest" in proceedings there above her renumeration.

If she had quit to make the information public then she might have a case based on the fact she would have demonstrated her integrity. As it is, she seems to have none.

Because Serbia submitted the documents, their documents, to help proceeding in the Hague, based on the guarentee of confidentiality. Without that guarentee no government is going to submit anything to the Tribunal that could potentially damage them in a differant and legally unrelated court process.