Karadžić és Šešelj hónapokkal ezelőtt eljárást kezdeményezését kérte (Criminal report against the former UN Detention Unit Commanding Officer Timothy McFadden, 27 January 2011) az ICTY volt börtönparancsnoka ellen a nemzetközi igazságszolgáltatás elleni bűncselekmény elkövetése miatt. Szerintük a Wikileaks által kiszivárogtatott egyik diplomáciai irat alapján (lásd itt) McFadden bizalmas információkat árult el az amerikai követség munkatársainak Slobodan Milošević egészségi állapotáról, a tanácsadóival való viszonyáról és a feleségével folytatott beszélgetéseiről.
Az ICTY különleges tanácsa két nappal ezelőtt meghozott döntésében kifejtette (Decision on the initiation of contempt investigation), hogy míg a súlyosabb bűncselekmény nem forog fenn, addig az indiszkréciónak munkajogi következményei lehetnek:
9. The information allegedly revealed to government officials of the United States of America by Mr McFadden concerns Slobodan Milosevi6's personal preferences, private communications with his wife, views about his advisors, and information about his health. Having consulted the relevant Rules and Regulations, the Chamber is of the view that such information is to be treated confidentially by those persons having access to it. Furthermore, as a staff member of the Tribunal, Mr McFadden was under a duty not to share confidential information with any Government, entity, person or any other source. Accordingly, the Chamber finds that the information tends to show that Mr McFadden may have breached his duty not to disclose confidential information.
12. In the present case, the information allegedly revealed concerns three main categories: personal matters, information on Milosevi6's health, and Milosevic’s alleged views about his advisors. The specific information allegedly revealed to the United States Government in relation to personal matters, for example what type of books Milosevi6 liked to read or how often he spoke to his wife, is irrelevant to the judicial proceedings of the Tribunal. The category of health-related matters or that of an accused’s views about his advisors could have an impact on the judicial proceedings. The specific information allegedly revealed to the United States Government related to these categories, for example that despite Milosevic's public disdain for the amici curiae, his legal associates often liaised with them or that Milosevi6' s medical problems worsened under stress or that he refused certain recommendations by doctors, is of such general nature however that its disclosure is not of a kind that interferes with the Tribunal's administration of justice.
13. The Chamber stresses however that even though the alleged conduct does not fall within the ambit of Rule 77 of the Rules, it has carefully considered the matter and is cognizant that the alleged conduct may bring the institution of the International Tribunal into disrepute. Considering that Mr McFadden may have breached a duty, the Chamber clarifies that the mere fact that the alleged conduct does not fall within the ambit of Rule 77 does not exclude other remedies to address the matter. The matter can be dealt with pursuant to the UN Staff Rules and Regulations, by any internal measures to prevent repetition of such conduct, and/or by any external judicial or non-judicial measures. (emphases added)