Serbisk krigshelt dømt

Flere MSMer fortæller at en af de serbisk ledere, Radovan Karadžić fra krigsårene i 1990erne er blevet idømt 40 års fængsel for sin deltagelse i forsvaret af den Serbiske nation, dens mennesker og territorie.

I det summary domstolen har skrevet af dommen til brug for MSM hedder det indledningsvist:

Please find below the summary of the Judgement read out today by Judge O-Gon Kwon
.
The Accused was a founding member of the SDS and served as its President from July
1990 to July 1996. He was the President of the National Security Council of the Serbian
Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and on 12 May 1992, the Accused was elected as the President of the Presidency of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. From 17 December 1992, he was the sole President of Republika Srpska, and the Supreme Commander of the armed forces of Republika Srpska.
The Accused stood trial for 11 Counts; two Counts of genocide, five Counts of crimes
against humanity, (namely persecution, murder, extermination, deportation, and forcible transfer), and four Counts of violations of the laws or customs of war (namely murder, acts of violence the primary purpose of which was to spread terror among the civilian population, unlawful attacks on civilians, and the taking of hostages.
In the Indictment, the Prosecution alleged that the Accused participated in four joint criminal enterprises (―JCEs‖). The Prosecution alleged the following:
From at least October 1991 to 30 November 1995, the Accused participated in a JCE, the
objective of which was to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb-claimed territory in BiH through the crimes charged therein (―Overarching JCE‖); Between April 1992 and November 1995, the Accused participated in a JCE to establish and carry out a campaign of sniping and shelling against the civilian population of Sarajevo, the primary purpose of which was to spread terror among the civilian population (―Sarajevo JCE‖); Between approximately 26 May and 19 June 1995, the Accused participated in a JCE to take hostage over 200 UN peacekeepers and military observers in order to compel NATO to abstain from conducting air strikes against Bosnian Serb military targets (―Hostages JCE‖); Between the days preceding 11 July 1995 and continuing until 1 November 1995, the Accused participated in a JCE to eliminate the Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica by killing the men and boys of Srebrenica and forcibly removing the women, young children and someelderly men (―Srebrenica JCE‖)
.
In addition, the Prosecution charged the Accused for having planned, instigated, ordered, and/or aided and abetted the crimes in the Indictment. It also charged the
Accused as a superior pursuant to Article 7(3) of the Statute.
While the Prosecution made its opening statement on 27 October and 2 November 2009, the first witness for the Prosecution was heard on 13 April 2010. Closing arguments were heard between 30 September and 7 October 2014. The Chamber sat 499 trial days, during which it heard the evidence of 434 witnesses. It further received the evidence of 152 additional witnesses in writing
.
In total, 11,469 exhibits were tendered into evidence. The complete trial record amounts to over 48,000 transcript pages, over 95,000 pages of filings and over 190,000 pages of admitted exhibits, totalling to over 330,000 pages of trial record.
The Chamber’s findings and the reasons for these findings will be summarised here.
However, it should be noted that this is only a summary and does not in any way form
part of the Judgement of the Chamber. The only authoritative account of the findings of the Chamber is in the written Judgement. Confidential copies will be made available to the Parties at the end of these proceedings, and a public redacted version will also be made available to the public.
Before addressing the four components set out above, the Chamber finds on the basis of the evidence that there was an armed conflict in BiH throughout the period relevant to the Indictment and that the other general requirements for crimes under Article 3 of the Statute are met. In relation to crimes against humanity, it finds that there existed a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian populations at all times relevant to the Indictment, that the relevant crimes formed part of that attack, and that the perpetrators knew of the attack and that the crimes were part of it.
Overarching JCE
The Chamber will first address the municipalities component of the case and the alleged Overarching JCE. It is alleged that crimes were committed in the municipalities of Bijeljina, Bratunac, Brčko, Foča, Rogatica, Sokolac, Višegrad, Vlasenica and Zvornik in Eastern BiH; in the municipalities of Banja Luka, Bosanski Novi, Ključ, Prijedor, and Sanski Most in the Autonomous Region of Krajina (―ARK‖); and in the municipalities of Hadţići, Ilidţa, Novi Grad, Novo Sarajevo, Pale, and Vogošća in the Sarajevo region. These will be referred to as the ―Municipalities‖.
The Chamber finds that beginning at the end of March 1992 and continuing through 1992, Serb Forces took control of municipalities in Bosnian Serb-claimed territory in BiH. During the course of these well-planned and co-ordinated take-overs and after, there was an organised and systematic pattern of crimes committed against Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats who residedin the Municipalities.
The Chamber finds that a vast number of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats in the
Municipalities were forcibly displaced from their homes to other locations in BiH or to third states. The Accused’s case was that the population movements in BiH were voluntary and a natural consequence of the war, and that there was no policy of expulsion. The Chamber finds, to the contrary, that in many cases the victims were forced to leave following attacks against their villages or after the take-over of towns by Serb Forces. Other victims were first arrested, detained in detention facilities, and then transported out of the Municipalities. These expulsions resulted in drastic changes to the ethnic composition in the Municipalities.
Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats were also removed from positions of authority and dismissed from their employment in multiple Municipalities. In addition to unlawful arrests and arbitrary searches, there were restrictions placed on the movement of Bosnian Muslims in some of the Municipalities. Thousands of Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat civilians were unlawfully detained in around 50 detention facilities across the Municipalities. Non-Serbs were often arrested en masse and taken to these detention facilities from their homes, following attacks on villages or towns. However, the Chamber notes that it did not enter a finding of unlawful detention with respect to the detainees who were combatants or civilians who had actively taken part in hostilities.
Bosnian Serb political and governmental organs and Serb Forces also established and
perpetuated inhumane living conditions at a number of detention facilities. The victims were subjected to deplorable living conditions. Food and water were lacking, medical care was inadequate or non-existent, sanitation and hygiene facilities were poor, as were sleeping conditions. In many of these detention facilities, detainees were also subjected to torture, beatings, and physical and psychological abuse by Serb Forces.
During their detention Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat women and men were subjected to rape and other acts of sexual violence by members of the Serb Forces. These crimes resulted in serious mental or physical suffering or injury to the victims. Non-Serb detainees were forcedto perform labour at the frontlines or were used as human shields to protect Serb Forces.
Following or during their expulsion from their homes, the property of the victims was
seized by the Bosnian Serb authorities. There was also widespread looting of non-Serb property and extensive destruction of Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat villages and property by Serb Forces in many of the Municipalities. Serb Forces destroyed multiple mosques, Catholic churches and other cultural monuments and sacred sites in Bratunac, Bosanski Novi, Foča, Ključ, Novi Grad, Prijedor, Rogatica, Sanski Most, Sokolac, and Zvornik.
The cultural monuments and sacred sites were targeted for destruction given their
significance to the Bosnian Muslim or Bosnian Croat people in those locations. However, while the Chamber also finds that cultural monuments and sacred sites were destroyed in Bijeljina, Pale and Vogošća, the evidence presented was insufficient to conclude beyond reasonable doubt who was responsible for that destruction.
Det er tilfredsstillende, at domstolen finder at destruktion af kulturel arv i sig selv er en forbrydelse. Det sætter barren for hvornår den slags tilpas lavt til, at det bliver en smal sag, når den dag kommer, at få personer såsom Zenia Stampe, Poul Nyrup osv, dømt.
Dernæst er det værd at bemærke at dommeren i sagen er O-Gon Kwon og at der dømmes for deltagelse i JCE. Da den danske dommer ved domstolen, Frederik Harhoff, tilbage i 2013 blev fyret fra domstolen i vanære var baggrunden en konflikt imellem domstolens dommere om, hvordan man skulle bedømme beviser om netop JCE. I kriminal sager handler det ofte om hvilke beviser der er for at et bestemt forsæt er tilstede. Mht JCE ville cirka 1/3 af domstolens dommere, her i blandt Harhoff og Kwon, løse det problem ved at opstille en formodningsregel om, at kommandøre altid har et ansvar for hvad der foregår nedad i rækkerne uanset om der er bevis for, at de givet specifikke ordre om at iværksætte JCE, dvs. iværksættelse af konkrete tiltag der er JCE. Dette er naturligvis en form for heksejagt, som vi for kort tid siden har lavet en post om, her. Kommandørere kan, ligesom alle mulige andre, sjældent føre bevis for, hvilke ordre og tiltag de IKKE har beordret.
Mere om Harhoff sagen hos Des-Information, her.
En tidligere postering om hvordan Birthe Weiss og Carsten Fledelius afgiver partsindlæg som vidneudsagn, her.
Artikel hos BT.dk om den e-mail Harhoff sendte til 56 venner og som endte med at koste ham en fyring.
Selve dommen over Radovan Karadžić her. På PDFens s 29 – 39 (dommens side 4 – 13) finder man de principper domstolen har anvendt til bevis bedømmelse.
Advertisements

2 comments

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s