Vladimir Lazarevic's Final Trial Brief
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
IT-05-87-T 29160 D29160 - D28929 25 May 2010 PC THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Case 3 : IT-05-87-T IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER BEFORE: Judge Iain Bonomy, Presiding Judge Ali Nawaz Chowhan Judge Tsvetana Kamenova Judge Janet Nosworthy, Reserve Judge REGISTRAR: Mr. Hans Holthuis th DATE FILED: 29 of July 2008 THE PROSECUTOR V. MILAN MILUTINOVI3 NIKOLA ŠAINOVI3 DRAGOLJUB OJDANI3 NEBOJŠA PAVKOVI3 VLADIMIR LAZAREVI3 SRETEN LUKI3 - PUBLIC - REDACTED VLADIMIR LAZAREVIC’S FINAL TRIAL BRIEF THE OFFICE OF THE PROSECUTOR: COUNSEL FOR GEN. DRAGOLJUB OJDANI3: Mr. Thomas Hannis Mr. Tomislav Višnji4 Mr. Chester Stamp Mr. Norman Sepenuk Ms. Patricia Neema COUNSEL FOR GEN. NEBOJŠA PAVKOVI3: Mr. John Ackerman Mr. Aleksandar Alekši4 COUNSEL FOR MR. MILAN MILUTINOVI3: Mr. Eugene O’Sullivan COUNSEL FOR GEN. VLADIMIR LAZAREVI3: Mr. Slobodan Ze6evi4 Mr. Mihajlo Bakra6 Mr. @uro 5epi4 COUNSEL FOR MR. NIKOLA ŠAINOVI3: COUNSEL FOR GEN. SRETEN LUKI3 Mr. Toma Fila Mr. Branko Luki4 Mr. Vladimir Petrovi4 Mr. Dragan Iveti4 29159 TABLE OF CONTENTS I INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................5 II THE CRIMES ALLEGED IN THE INDICTMENT.................................................................7 III STANDARD OF PROOF..............................................................................................................9 IV PRESENTED EVIDENCE.........................................................................................................11 V CRIME BASE.............................................................................................................................12 . VI THE PROSECUTION HAS FAILED TO PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THE VJ, OR ANY UNITS, UNDER THE COMMAND OR CONTROL OF GENERAL LAZAREVIC WERE INVOLVED IN ANY OF THE INCIDENT ALLEGED IN THE INDICTMENT………………………………………………………………………129 (i) deportation…………………………………………………………………………..129 (ii) forcible transfer……………………………………………………………………..130 (iii) murder……………………………………………………………………………...130 (iv) persecution…………………………………………………………………………130 VII JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE........................................................................................134 1. alleged objective of the enterprise...........................................................................................134 2. alleged commencement of the enterprise.................................................................................139 a. alleged statements that the Serbs were ready to commit crimes..................................139 b. arming ethnic Serbs......................................................................................................141 c. alleged creation of ZK (Joint Command) in 1998......................................................142 d. operations of VJ and MUP, and alleged indiscriminate and excessive use of force....147 e. alleged violation of agreement signed in 1998.............................................................153 f. replacement and reassignment of higher-ranked officers ...........................................157 3. alleged implementation and carrying out of JCE in 1999.....................................................159 a. who is preparing for spring offensive?.........................................................................159 b. alleged general plan of deportations, killings, and destruction across KiM...............164 c. alleged continuation of tactics of excessive use of force and engagement of persons with criminal records………………………………………………………………..165 d. alleged omission to take measures to punish perpetrators of criminal offences.........168 e. alleged obstruction of investigation and concealing of crime ....................................175 CASE 3: IT-05-87-T 2 DATE: 29 July 2008 29158 f. alleged rewards for those who supported JCE...........................................................179 VIII RELATIONS OF VJ WITH OTHER STRUCTURES IN KiM..........................................182 a. VTJ..............................................................................................................................182 b. paramilitary and volunteers ........................................................................................183 c. CO and CZ...................................................................................................................187 d. local defense (RPO).....................................................................................................190 e. civil authorities (PIV)..................................................................................................192 f. MUP.......................................................................................... ...................................193 (i) relationship with MUP..................................................................................193 (ii) unsuccessful re-subordination......................................................................196 g. alleged ZK (Joint Command) in 1999.........................................................................201 IX RESPONSIBILITY UNDER ARTICLE 7 (1) OF THE STATUTE..................................209 a. Joint Criminal Enterprise under Article 7 (1) of the Statute...................................................209 b. ordering and planning under Article 7 (1) of the Statute........................................................213 c. instigation under Article 7 (1) of the Statute..........................................................................217 d. aiding and abetting under Article 7 (1) of the Statute............................................................220 e. Conclusion ……………………………………………..........................................................223 X RESPONSIBILITY UNDER ARTICLE 7 (3) OF THE STATUTE.....................................224 a. Discussion................................................................................................................................224 b. Conclusion...............................................................................................................................226 XI SENTENCING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES..................................................227 XII CONCLUSION ………………….............................................................................................232 CASE 3: IT-05-87-T 3 DATE: 29 July 2008 29157 THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Case 3 : IT-05-87-T THE PROSECUTOR V. MILAN MILUTINOVI3 NIKOLA ŠAINOVI3 DRAGOLJUB OJDANI3 NEBOJŠA PAVKOVI3 VLADIMIR LAZAREVI3 SRETEN LUKI3 - PUBLIC - REDACTED VLADIMIR LAZAREVIC’S FINAL TRIAL BRIEF Pursuant to Rule 86(B) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (hereinafter “Rules”) of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the territory of the Former Yugoslavia since 1991, at the Hague (hereinafter “Tribunal”), the Defence of General Vladimir Lazarevic (hereinafter “Defence” and “Accused” respectively) herewith submits its PUBLIC REDACTED – Vladimir Lazarevic’s Final Trial Brief (hereinafter “Defence Final Brief”). CASE 3: IT-05-87-T 4 DATE: 29 July 2008 29156 I INTRODUCTION 1. With a view to provide certain directions for the reading of this Defence Final Brief, the defence shall, within this introductory part, point at the system to the Trial Chamber, by which the Final Brief is conceptualized. 2. The process-material context of this analysis shall find its reliance in the positions of routine practice of the Tribunal and Rules of the Statute in view of the elements, indispensable for the responsibility establishment like pursuant to article 7 (1) like pursuant to article 7 (3) of the Statute for each of the acts the Accused is charged with. 3. At the mere beginning of Defence Final Brief, the defence shall look back at the allegations of the indictment in view of responsibility aspects and acts that the Accused Lazarevi4 is charged with as well as the standard which is, according to here mentioned sources, indispensable to achieve in order to consider some thesis proved, beyond a reasonable doubt. 4. The defence shall make the comparative analysis of the most relevant admitted written statements, material evidences and oral testimonies in the objective procedure. First of all, the focus of this analysis shall be directed to relevant legal facts that process the topic of the crime base and whereby the defence shall, through discussion and coping with presented evidences, show to the Trial Chamber that the prosecution did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt any single thesis, when it comes to the Accused Lazarevi4 and the units, being under his command or control. This conclusion shall be explained in the chapter VI of this Defence Final Brief. 5. The analysis of the Joint Criminal Enterprise shall, in terms of the subject, follow the line, established by the Prosecution Pre-Trial Brief and within, the defence shall point at major number of evidences that indisputably show that the prosecution did not, beyond a reasonable doubt, prove a single thesis when it comes to the matter of the Accused Lazarevi4 and his alleged participation in JCE. 6. Further on, in the resuming form, and which does not deprive this analysis of its complete meaning at all, the defence shall look back to the responsibility pursuant to article 7 (1) and 7 (3) of the Statute. In this part, the defence shall indicate