DOCSLIB.ORG

Bosnia V. Serbia and the Status of Rape As Genocide Under International Law

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Bosnia V. Serbia and the Status of Rape As Genocide Under International Law \\server05\productn\B\BIN\27-1\BIN105.txt unknown Seq: 1 23-APR-09 14:51 BOSNIA V. SERBIA AND THE STATUS OF RAPE AS GENOCIDE UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW ANTHONY MARINO* ABSTRACT The women and children were separated into four groups at the police station and taken to separate houses confiscated from Muslim owners. The witness was placed with a group of 28 women. One of the soldiers told her that women, children, and old people were being taken to these homes because they were “not worth a bullet.” They were kept in this house for 27 days. Day and night, soldiers came to the house taking two to three women at a time. There were four to five guards at all times, all local Foca Serbs. The women knew the rapes would begin when “Mars Na Drinu” was played over the loudspeaker of the main mosque. (“Mars Na Drinu”, or “March on the Drina,” is reportedly a former “Chetnik” fighting song that was banned during the Tito years.) While “Mars Na Drinu” was playing, the women were ordered to strip and soldiers entered the homes, taking away the ones they wanted. The ages of women taken ranged from 12 to 60. Frequently the soldiers would seek out mother and daughter combinations. Many of the women were severely beaten during the rapes. The witness was selected twice. The first time, soldiers had entered and grabbed an 18-year-old girl, asking her if she were a virgin. She said she was. Licking his knife, one of the soldiers said that if they found she was not, he would butcher her. The witness pleaded with them not [to] take the girl but to take her instead. “We’ll take you, too,” they said. While the witness was being raped, her rapist told her, “You should have already left this town. We’ll make you have Serbian babies who * J.D. and M.A. (International Relations) Candidate, Boston University School of Law, 2009; B.A. International Relations, Northern Arizona University, 2005. I wish to thank the Boston University International Law Journal board and staff for all their work. I also thank Professor Robert D. Sloane, who was integral in providing guidance throughout the research and drafting process. Most importantly, thanks are due to my parents, whose constant support, encouragement, and patience made this possible. Any errors are mine. 205 \\server05\productn\B\BIN\27-1\BIN105.txt unknown Seq: 2 23-APR-09 14:51 206 BOSTON UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 27:205 will be Christians.” Two soldiers raped her at that time; five soldiers raped the 18-year-old girl in full view of the witness.1 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................ 206 R II. THE GENOCIDE CONVENTION ............................. 209 R A. The Specific Intent Requirement ....................... 210 R B. Rape as an Act of Genocide Under the Convention .... 211 R III. ARTICLE II(B): CAUSING SERIOUS BODILY OR MENTAL HARM TO MEMBERS OF THE GROUP ...................... 211 R IV. ARTICLE II(D): IMPOSING MEASURES (INTENDED) TO PREVENT BIRTHS IN THE PROTECTED GROUP ............. 214 R A. Forced Separation ..................................... 215 R B. Sexual Violence Against Men .......................... 218 R C. Physical and Psychological Trauma .................... 220 R D. Forced Impregnation .................................. 221 R V. ARTICLE II(E): FORCIBLY TRANSFERRING CHILDREN OF THE GROUP TO ANOTHER GROUP ......................... 222 R A. Can Forced Impregnation Constitute Forced Transfer? . 222 R B. Evidence of Forced Impregnation ...................... 223 R VI. WHAT DIFFERENCE WOULD IT MAKE? A POLICY OF RAPE EVINCING THE SPECIFIC INTENT OF GENOCIDE ...... 226 R VII. CONCLUSION .............................................. 228 R I. INTRODUCTION On March 20, 1993, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnia) filed suit in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against what was then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY),2 alleging the latter’s participation in a 1 Permanent Representative of the U.S. to the U.N., Supplemental United States Submission of Information to the United Nations Security Council In Accordance with Paragraph 5 of Resolution 771 (1992) and Paragraph 1 of Resolution 780 (1992), Annex, submitted to the Security Council, U.N. Doc. S/25586 (Apr. 13, 1993), available at http://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N93/215/15/img/N932 1515.pdf?OpenElement [hereinafter Submission]. 2 Regarding the identity of the Respondent State, see Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Serb. & Mont.), Judgment, 2007 I.C.J. 91, ¶¶ 67-139 (Feb. 26), available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/91/13685.pdf [hereinafter Genocide Case]. The parties accepted that Serbia and Montenegro was the successor of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (“FRY”), and that the Republic of Serbia was continuator of Serbia and Montenegro. However, one of the most contentious issues in the case was the jurisdictional question of whether the FRY was the continuator in legal personality of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (“SFRY”), which would determine whether it was a member of the United Nations (U.N.) and a party to the Genocide Convention, and so subject to ICJ jurisdiction for the period 1992-2000. A decision of the Court in 1996 rejected the Respondent’s jurisdictional objections and held it did have jurisdiction under the Genocide Convention. See Application of the \\server05\productn\B\BIN\27-1\BIN105.txt unknown Seq: 3 23-APR-09 14:51 2009] THE STATUS OF RAPE AS GENOCIDE 207 campaign of genocide against the non-Serb population of Bosnia and Herzegovina and seeking provisional measures to halt the continued atrocities (“the Genocide Case”). On April 8, 1993, the Court handed down provisional measures ordering the FRY to “ensure that any mili- tary, paramilitary or irregular armed units which may be directed or sup- ported by it, as well as any organizations and persons which may be subject to its control, direction or influence” not commit, conspire to commit, incite, or be complicit in genocide.3 It would take almost four- teen more years for the court to rule on whether the atrocities committed against non-Serbs in Bosnia amounted to genocide, and if so, whether such acts or complicity in them could be attributed to the FRY and its successor.4 Among the issues the Court had to decide was whether sys- tematic rape and sexual violence, as alleged by Bosnia, was carried out as a part of the genocidal campaign. As Alexandra Stiglmayer pointed out in her piece, The Rapes in Bos- nia-Herzegovina, “[w]omen have always been raped in wartime, of course. There were mass rapes even in wars that were not wars of expul- sion. Rapes seem to be part and parcel of a soldier’s life, a ‘normal’ accompaniment to war.”5 But Stiglmayer tacitly acknowledges that there was something different about the rapes carried out by Serbian forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina, because, as she put it, “dispersion [was] precisely the goal.”6 The widespread and systematic rape of women in Bosnia-Herzegovina led to a divide in feminist scholarship on whether rape by one side in the conflict could, or should, be classified as “genocidal,” thereby signaling a matter of heightened international concern. Karen Engle summarizes the competing views in this debate: Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Yugo.), Preliminary Objections, Judgment, 1996 I.C.J. 595 (July 11). The Respondent later objected to the Court’s assertion of jurisdiction in light of FRY’s admission to the U.N. in 2000, suggesting it had not prior to that time been a member, as well as seemingly inconsistent holdings in the Use of Force cases filed by Serbia and Montenegro against various NATO countries. See Genocide Case, 2007 I.C.J. at ¶ 132. Ultimately, the Court held that the 1996 decision was res judicata and so affirmed its jurisdiction. Id. at 53. This matter is far beyond the scope of this Note, which will simply refer to the states interchangeably, assuming each successive state as a continuator in legal personality of the former. 3 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Serb. & Mont.), Provisional Measures, 1993 I.C.J 3, 24 (Apr. 8), available at http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/91/7305.pdf. 4 The Court issued its ruling in the Genocide Case on February 26, 2007. See Genocide Case, 2007 I.C.J. at ¶ 140. 5 Alexandra Stiglmayer, The Rapes in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in MASS RAPE: THE WAR AGAINST WOMEN IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA 82, 84 (1994). 6 Id. at 85. \\server05\productn\B\BIN\27-1\BIN105.txt unknown Seq: 4 23-APR-09 14:51 208 BOSTON UNIVERSITY INTERNATIONAL LAW JOURNAL [Vol. 27:205 If women were raped on all sides of the war and the feminist goal was to stop all rapes, then how could one choose sides in the con- flict? Some feminists did choose sides, seeing the rapes by Serbian men as genocidal and therefore calling for extraordinary attention. Others disagreed, arguing that such a position would deny the extent to which women were always harmed in war, and were specifically harmed on all sides of the Balkan conflict. The latter position did not deny that rapes were hideous; far from it, those who expressed this view often argued that rapes on all sides might be considered “genocidal,” but because of their effect on women as a group, not on Bosnian Muslim women in particular.7 The outcome of the Genocide Case then could have had profound implications for this debate and might have helped to clarify when and how a campaign of rape and sexual violence targeted at a specific popula- tion would constitute genocide.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The-Prijedor-Genocide 1
    PART 1. THE PRIJEDOR GENOCIDE The Prijedor genocide [1][2][3] , refers to numerous war crimes committed during the Bosnian war by the Serb political and military leadership mostly on Bosniak civilians in the Prijedor region of Bosnia-Herzegovina. After the Srebrenica genocide, it is the second largest massacre committed during the Bosnian war in 1992. Around 5,200 Bosniaks and Croats from Prijedor are missing or were killed during the massacre period, and around 14,000 people in the wider region of Prijedor (Pounje). [4] Contents • 1 Background • 2 Political developments before the takeover • 3 Takeover • 4 Armed attacks against the civilians o 4.1 Propaganda o 4.2 Strengthening of Serb forces o 4.3 Marking of non-Serb houses o 4.4 Attack on Hambarine o 4.5 Attack on Kozarac • 5 Camps o 5.1 Keraterm camp o 5.2 Omarska camp o 5.3 Trnopolje camp o 5.4 Other detention facilities • 6 Killings in the camps • 7 References • 8 See also • 9 External links Background Following Slovenia’s and Croatia’s declarations of independence in June 1991, the situation in the Prijedor municipality rapidly deteriorated. During the war in Croatia, the tension increased between the Serbs and the communities of Bosniaks and Croats. Bosniaks and Croats began to leave the municipality because of a growing sense of insecurity and fear amongst the population which was caused by Serb propaganda which became increasingly visible. The municipal newspaper Kozarski Vjesnik started publishing allegations against the non-Serbs. The Serb media propagandised the idea that the Serbs had to arm themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • Embodied Rape: Ethnicity and Gender in the Prosecution of Wartime Rape in the Former
    Embodied Rape: Ethnicity and Gender in the Prosecution of Wartime Rape in the Former Yugoslavia Honors Research Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for graduation with Honors Research Distinction in the undergraduate colleges of The Ohio State University by Edward M. Zitnik, Jr. The Ohio State University May 2014 Project Advisor: Professor Jennifer Suchland, Department of Slavic and East European Languages and Cultures Table of Contents Introduction 2 I. The region, the war, and the role of feminism in prosecuting war crimes 5 Former Yugoslavia and its War 5 Feminist Perspectives on Rape 10 International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia 15 II. Tetralogy of Rape: Three Cases of ICTY-Convicted Rape and the Case which laid the Groundwork 19 Duško Tadić 19 Dragoljub Kunarac 22 Anto Furundžija 24 Hazim Delić 25 Case Analysis 27 III. Ethnicity is Essentialized and Misunderstood 33 IV. Implications of War 39 V. Conclusion 51 Bibliography 53 - 1 - A child can carry both the shame and honor of a parent. They serve as heavy burdens inherited from one generation to the next and can lay the foundation of a child’s identity coming into adulthood. The Bosnian film Grbavica illustrates these burdens carried by Sara, the 12- year-old daughter of single-mother Esma living in post-war Sarajevo. Growing up, Sara was told that her father died as a war hero during the Bosnian war. She took pride in his death, and used his patriotism to hold herself to a high standard of honor. While noble, this was not her father’s true past.
    [Show full text]
  • Teacher Information Sheet Genocide in Bosnia
    Teacher information sheet Genocide in Bosnia The population of Bosnia and Herzegovina (referred to as ‘Bosnia’ here) consists of: • Bosniaks – Bosnian Muslims • Bosnian Serbs – Serb Orthodox Christians who have close cultural ties with neighbouring Serbia • Bosnian Croats – Roman Catholics who have close cultural ties with neighbouring Croatia Bosnia’s history Flag of Bosnia, adopted in 1998 Between 1991-1994 Yugoslavia disintegrated into five states – Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Macedonia and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (later known as Serbia and Montenegro). Bosnia declared independence in 1992. This was resisted by the Bosnian Serb population who saw their future as part of ‘Greater Serbia’, sparking a civil war over land. The Bosnian War Bosnia became the victim of the Bosnian Serbs’ wish for political domination, which they were prepared to achieve by isolating ethnic groups and, if necessary, exterminating them. A campaign of war crimes, ‘ethnic cleansing’ and genocide was perpetrated by Bosnian Serb troops under the orders of Slobodan Milošević. Sarajevo, the capital city of Bosnia, was under siege for nearly four years - the longest siege in modern warfare. The Serb-controlled army surrounded the city, bombing it, killing more than 10,000 people and destroying cultural monuments. Persecution From 1991, in Prijedor, north-west Bosnia, non-Serbs were forced to wear white armbands and certain newspapers, radio stations and television stations began to broadcast anti-Croat and anti- Bosniak propaganda. Non-Serbs were sent to concentration camps which had been set up in mid-1992. Women were taken to Trnopolje camp where systematic rape took place on a regular basis.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Criminal Tribunal
    MICT-13-55-A 2970 A2970-A2901 15 March 2017 AJ THE MECHANISM FOR INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS No. MICT-13-55-A IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER Before: Judge Theodor Meron Judge William Hussein Sekule Judge Vagn Prusse Joensen Judge Jose Ricardo de Prada Solaesa Judge Graciela Susana Gatti Santana Registrar: Mr Olufemi Elias Date Filed: 15 March 2017 THE PROSECUTOR v. RADOVAN KARADZIC Public Redacted Version RADOVAN KARADZIC’S RESPONSE BRIEF ________________________________________________________________________ Office of the Prosecutor: Laurel Baig Barbara Goy Katrina Gustafson Counsel for Radovan Karadzic Peter Robinson Kate Gibson No. MICT-13-55-A 2969 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 4 II. THE PROSECUTION’S APPEAL .................................................................................. 5 1. The Excluded Crimes were Rightly Excluded .............................................................. 5 A. The Trial Chamber committed no legal error in identifying another reasonable inference ...................................................................................................... 7 B. The finding that the Excluded Crimes did not form part of the JCE was reasonable .................................................................................................................... 10 1. The Trial Chamber never found that President Karadzic knew the Excluded Crimes were necessary to achieve the common criminal purpose.........
    [Show full text]
  • Womens Side of War.Pdf
    Publisher Women in Black - Belgrade, December 2008 Original title Ženska strana rata, Women in Black - Belgrade, 2007 Edited by Lina Vušković and Zorica Trifunović In association with Tamara Belenzada, Helena Rill, Staša Zajović, Lino Veljak, Indira Topčagić, Sanja Cesar and Luljeta Vuniqi Translation Mirka Janković, Stanislava Lazarević, Dubravka Radanov, et al. Proof reading and editing Jennifer Michelle Williams, Janet Fiona Rabin, Tamara Belenzada Layout Marija Vidić Artistic design Bojana Ban Printing Artprint Circulation 1,000 The publication of this book was made possible by Kvinna til Kvinna, Sweden and Quaker Peace & Social Witness, London The translation and printing of the English edition was made possible by The Balkan Trust for Democracy Acknowledgements First and foremost, our thanks go to all those women, both the undersigned and those who have remained anonymous, who related and wrote accounts of their experiences during the wars in the area of the for- mer Yugoslavia and whose testimonies have been included in this compila- tion. We also thank the women who recorded these testimonies and made possible their publication. We thank the authors with whose consent we have published parts of their works free of charge: Alenka Mirković (91,6 MHZ – Voice Against Cannons), Svetlana Djordjević (Testimony on Kosovo), Miroslava Malešević (Didara – Life Story of a Woman from Prizren), Jusuf Kadrić (Brčko: Genocide and Testimonies), Radmila Sesar (radio drama: Mother Meira – In Search of the Truth) and Brendan MacQuillan (Voices of
    [Show full text]
  • Perpetrators of Violence Against Non-Combatants in the Bosnian War
    Graduate School of Social Sciences MSc International Relations Master Thesis Perpetrators of violence against non-combatants in the Bosnian War Seeking the logic behind the incomprehensible By Yael van Pomeren 10458743 ❖ Under the supervision of Dr. Jana Krause Second reading by Dr. Darshan Vigneswaran ❖ Word count: 21.059 Submission date: 22nd of June 2018 2 een volk dat voor tirannen zwicht zal meer dan lijf en goed verliezen dan dooft het licht… -H.M. van Randwijk 3 Acknowledgments First, I want to thank my supervisor Dr. Jana Krause, both for her encouragement during the process as for her lasting patience with me and my method of working. Additionally, I express my gratitude to Dr. Darshan Vigneswaran, as he kindly accepted taking time of his schedule to be the second reader of this thesis. Lastly, I want to express sincere appreciation, tremendous amounts of gratitude and everlasting gratefulness to whomever has helped me in these past months. Your patience, your listening ears, your time and overwhelming efforts to keep me both mentally sane, inventive and productive have been more than valuable. You know who are: Thank You. 4 Abstract What makes individuals able to perpetrate atrocities and horrible acts of violence, without preceding criminal records or systematic exposure to violence in general? This research, focusing on the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina, aims to show both the complex situations perpetrators in which perpetrators operate, to demonstrate the role malicious regimes play in creating the conditions for perpetrators to thrive in and to prove that there should be a focus on the importance of situational factors and context, for there are no personality traits that distinguish genocidal perpetrators from other human beings.
    [Show full text]
  • United Nations
    UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No.: IT-95-8-S Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Date: 13 November 2001 International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Original: ENGLISH Former Yugoslavia since 1991 IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge Patrick Robinson, Presiding Judge Richard May Judge Mohamed Fassi Fihri Registrar: Mr. Hans Holthuis Judgement of: 13 November 2001 PROSECUTOR v. DU[KO SIKIRICA DAMIR DO[EN DRAGAN KOLUNDŽIJA __________________________________________________________ SENTENCING JUDGEMENT ____________________________________________________________ The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Dirk Ryneveld Ms. Julia Baly Mr. Daryl Mundis Counsel for the Accused: Mr. Veselin Londrovi} and Mr. Michael Greaves, for Du{ko Sikirica Mr. Vladimir Petrovi} and Mr. Goran Rodi}, for Damir Do{en Mr. Ivan Lawrence and Mr. Jovan Ostoji}, for Dragan Kolundžija Case No. IT-95-8-S 13 November 2001 I. INTRODUCTION AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY .................................................. 1 A. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 B. THE PLEA AGREEMENTS ................................................................................................. 5 1. The Sikirica Plea Agreement........................................................................................ 5 2. The Do{en Plea Agreement .......................................................................................... 7 3. The Kolund`ija
    [Show full text]
  • Tadic and Borovnica
    THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA CASE NO. IT-94-1-I THE PROSECUTOR OF THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST DUSKO TADIC a/k/a "DULE" a/k/a "DUSAN" GORAN BOROVNICA INDICTMENT (AMENDED) Richard J. Goldstone, Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, pursuant to his authority under Article 18 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia ("The Statute of the Tribunal") and Rule 50 of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence of the Tribunal, charges: 1. Beginning on about 23 May 1992, Serb forces, supported by artillery and heavy weapons, attacked Bosnian Muslim and Croat population centres in opstina Prijedor, Bosnia-Herzegovina. In the following days, most of the Muslims and Croats were forced from their homes and seized by the Serb forces. The Serb forces then unlawfully confined thousands of Muslims and Croats in the Omarska, Keraterm and Trnopolje camps. The accused, Dusko TADIC a/k/a "Dule" a/k/a "Dusan", participated in the attack on, seizure, murder and maltreatment of Bosnian Muslims and Croats in opstina Prijedor both within the camps and outside the camps, between the period beginning about 23 May 1992 and ending about 31 December 1992. The accused, Goran BOROVNICA, participated with Dusko TADIC in the killing of Bosnian Muslims in the Kozarac area, as set forth below: BACKGROUND 2.1. About 23 May 1992, approximately three weeks after Serbs forcibly took control of governmental authority in opstina Prijedor, intensive shelling by Serb forces of Bosnian Muslim and Croat areas in opstina Prijedor caused Muslim and Croat residents to flee their homes.
    [Show full text]
  • Special Report Calls for War Memorials Divide Bosnia by Rachel Irwin in the Hague and Velma Šarić in Sarajevo, 6 Dec 2010
    Special Report Calls for War Memorials Divide Bosnia By Rachel Irwin in The Hague and Velma Šarić in Sarajevo, 6 Dec 2010. INSTITUTE FOR WAR & PEACE REPORTING About the Institute for War & Peace Reporting IWPR-Netherlands (IWPR-NL) has media development projects in the DRC, Uganda, Sudan, Serbia and Bosnia. It offers intensive hands-on training, extensive reporting and publishing to build the capacity of local media. IWPR- NL serves as a platform to give responsible local media an opportunity to contribute to strengthening justice and the rule of law. The mission of the worldwide IWPR network is to build peace and democracy through free and fair media. IWPR was the first organisation to support independent voices and free media in the midst of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia. It initiated programming on international justice in the mid- 1990s, and is the only organisation which has reported weekly from The Hague on the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal since the court‘s establishment. IWPR monitors and reports on regional and international justice mechanisms linked to developments in the Balkans. Our reporters in The Hague and the region produce in-depth analysis and interviews with experts, and disseminate these reports to a wide audience. In November 2007, IWPR started the production of a weekly radio programme on war crimes justice issues in cooperation with Radio Free Europe called Facing Justice. Today, the programme has been broadcast by dozens of radio stations throughout the former Yugoslavia and reaches nearly one million listeners. This special report has been produced by IWPR reporters in The Hague and in Bosnia.
    [Show full text]
  • Low Resolu on Pictures
    Low resoluon pictures From Blog to Book. xyzcontagion.wordpress.com BlogBook 2 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com Contents 1 2015 5 1.1 May ................................................. 6 Srebrenica - Η 5η μεγάλη έρευνα για τη Σρεμπρένιτσα και την ελληνική εμπλοκή (2015-05-22 10:14) 7 Η ανθρωποσφαγή στη Σρεμπρένιτσα, η Ελληνική Εθελοντική Φρουρά και η εμπλοκή της Χρυσής Αυγής - Νέα στοιχεία και αποκαλύψεις, για πρώτη φορά (2015-05-22 11:31) . 80 Η ανθρωποσφαγή στη Σρεμπρένιτσα, η Ελληνική Εθελοντική Φρουρά και η εμπλοκή της Χρυσής Αυγής - Νέα στοιχεία και αποκαλύψεις, για πρώτη φορά (2015-05-22 11:33) . 285 1.2 June ................................................ 461 Δικαστικές εξελίξεις στην υπόθεση της συμμετοχής Ελλήνων υπηκόων στη Σρεμπρένιτσα (2015-06-22 22:11) .................................... 462 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 3 BlogBook CONTENTS 4 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 1. 2015 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 5 BlogBook 1.1. MAY 1.1 May 6 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 1.1. MAY BlogBook Srebrenica - Η 5η μεγάλη έρευνα για τη Σρεμπρένιτσα και την ελληνική εμπλοκή (2015-05-22 10:14) Η ανθρωποσφαγή στη Σρεμπρένιτσα, η Ελληνική Εθελοντική Φρουρά και η εμπλοκή της Χρυσής Αυγής - Νέα στοιχεία και αποκαλύψεις, για πρώτη φορά στην Ελλάδα - Το πλήρες κείμενο [1] Ανοιξη του 1995: Η κλασική φωτογραφία στην περιοχή Βλασένιτσα, με τη χρυσαυγίτικη αφρόκρεμα της Ελληνικής Εθελοντικής Φρουράς ΕΕΦ. Εικονίζονται σε αρχαιοελληνικό (και καθόλου ναζιστικό) χαιρετισμό πρώην και νυν μέλη της Χρυσής Αυγής: Μπέλμπας Απόστολος, Μαυρογιαννάκης Μιχάλης, Σωκράτης Κουσουμβρής (με τις πατερίτσες), ο Κώστας και άλλοι δύο. hp://youtu.be/SOajNwAMKX0 ΣΤΟ ΒΙΝΤΕΟ του XYZ Contagion: Το φορετό σήμα της ΕΕΦ με τον δικέφαλο αετό και τον ήλιο της Βεργίνας, που φοράνε στα μανίκια τους, δεν αφήνει καμία αμφιβολία.
    [Show full text]
  • PROSECUTION WITNESSES – PROSECUTOR VS. RATKO MLADIC PROSECUTION (Exclusively for the Use of the Media
    PROSECUTION WITNESSES – PROSECUTOR VS. RATKO MLADIC PROSECUTION (Exclusively for the use of the media. Not an official document) Witness Code / Witness Name and Mode and Time Information on previous testimony (if applicable) and background information Calling Order1 of Testimony Previously testified before the Tribunal: Brđanin case: 14 July 2003 Krajišnik case: 20-21 October 2004 Background information: Elvedin PAŠIĆ was born in 1978 and was 14 in 1992, at the time of the events he will speak about. He will describe the destruction and wilful damage of residential property, attacks on villages, the persecution of non-Serbs, beatings, killings and the brutal and inhumane conditions at the Grabovica school detention facility. The witness lived in the village of Hrvaćani. He describes the Army of Republika Srpska preparations especially around the village of Dabovci. His village was shelled and the villagers fled to Plitska and other surrounding villages, on the way they had to avoid the shooting from the snipers. The witness will testify that five elderly villagers remained in the village and were RM068 1. Elvedin PAŠIĆ killed. Viva Voce 2.00 hours He describes the attempts by villagers to protect themselves and the generally terrible conditions. He will testify that refugees from attacked villages were moving from one place to another. In October 1992 all refugees from Hrvaćani were instructed to move to Večići, but they had to get travel documents first from the Bosnian Serb authorities in Vrbanjci. After 4 days in Večići he left with a group of fighters together with women and children. They were ambushed and during the fighting many men were killed.
    [Show full text]
  • Amended Indictment
    Oq S[pt~~, \qqq \T-qS-'O-~ ~~\?-.C{ - D~llq THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA THE PROSECUTOR v. Dusko SIKIRICA CASE NO: IT-95-8-PT AMENDED INDICTMENT The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, pursuant to her authority under Article 18 of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia ("the Statute of the Tribunal"), charges: Dusko SIKIRICA also known as (alk/a) "Sikira" with Genocide, Complicity to Commit Genocide, Crimes Against Humanity, and Violations of the Laws or Customs of War, as set forth below BACKGROUND: 1. The municipality (opstina) of Prijedor is located in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina. According to the 1991 census, it had a total population of 112,543: 49,351 (43.9%) identified themselves as Muslims; 47,581 (42.3%) identified themselves as Serbs; 6,316 (5.6%) identified themselves as Croats; 6,459 (5.7%) identified themselves as Yugoslavs; and 2,836 (2.5%) were identified as other nationalities. The Municipality is situated along one of the main east-west travel corridors in the former Yugoslavia. It was considered a strategic location by Serbian leaders because that corridor linked the Serbian-dominated area of the Croatian Krajina in the west with the Republic of Serbia in the east. 2. In 1991, after Slovenia and Croatia declared independence from Yugoslavia and war broke out, it appeared increasingly likely that Bosnia and Herzegovina would also declare its independence. Bosnian Serb leaders, however, wanted Bosnia and Herzegovina to remain a part of Yugoslavia. As time went by, and it became clear they would not be able IT-95-8-PT to hold Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Yugoslav federation, the Bosnian Serb authorities, led by the Serbian Democratic Party (SDS), began in earnest the creation of a separate Serbian territory in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
    [Show full text]