DOCSLIB.ORG

Case No. IT-02-54-T in the TRIAL CHAMBER Before

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Case No. IT-02-54-T in the TRIAL CHAMBER Before file://///cs/WWork/Ictysite/milosevic/trialc/judgement/040616.htm Case No. IT-02-54-T IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge Patrick Robinson, Presiding Judge O-Gon Kwon Judge Iain Bonomy Registrar: Mr. Hans Holthuis Decision: 16 June 2004 PROSECUTOR v. SLOBODAN MILOSEVIC __________________________________ DECISION ON MOTION FOR JUDGEMENT OF ACQUITTAL __________________________________ The Office of the Prosecutor Ms. Carla Del Ponte Mr. Geoffrey Nice Mr. Dermot Groome Ms. Hildegard Uertz-Retzlaff The Accused Mr. Slobodan Milosevic Amici Curiae Mr. Steven Kay, QC Prof. Timothy L.H. McCormack I. GLOSSARY A. Abbreviations and Acronyms B/C/S Abbreviation B/C/S English English Abbreviation BHS Bosnanski/Hrvatski Bosnian/Croatian B/C/S; BCS /Srpski /Serbian BiH Bosna i Hercegovina Bosnia and BH Herzegovina DB drzavna bezbednost state security DB 1 of 102 20/03/2009 11:54 AM file://///cs/WWork/Ictysite/milosevic/trialc/judgement/040616.htm EU Evropska unija European Union EU EZ Evropska zajednica European EC Community FBiH Federacija Bosne i Federation of Bosnia FBiH Hercegovine and Herzegovina JATD Jedinica za Anti-Terrorist JATD antiteroristicko Operations Unit dejstvo/delovanje JNA Jugoslovenska Yugoslav People’s JNA narodna armija Army JSO Jedinica za specijalne Special Operations JSO operacije Unit KMP; ILC Komisija za International Law ILC medjunarodno pravo Commission LDK; DSK Demokratski savez Democratic Alliance/ LDK Kosova Democratic League of Kosovo MKCK Medjunarodni International ICRC komitet crvenog Committee of the krsta Red Cross MKS, ICC Medjunarodni International ICC krivicni sud Criminal Court MKSR Medjunarodni International ICTR krivicni sud za Criminal Tribunal for Ruandu Rwanda MUP Ministarstvo Ministry of the MUP unutrasnjih poslova Interior MVS Medjunarodni vojni International Military IMT sud Tribunal NATO Organizacija North Atlantic Treaty NATO sjevernoatlantskog Organisation ugovora OEBS; OESS; Organizacija za Organization for OSCE OSSE evropsku bezbednost Security and i saradnju - S; Co-operation in Organizacija za Europe europsku sigurnost i suradnju - C; Organizacija za sigurnost i suradnju u Europi - C 2 of 102 20/03/2009 11:54 AM file://///cs/WWork/Ictysite/milosevic/trialc/judgement/040616.htm OUN Organizacija United Nations UN; UNO ujedinjenih Organization nacija/naroda OVK; UCK; UÇK; Oslobodilacka vojska Kosovo Liberation KLA; UCK; UCK UCK Kosova Army RS Republika Srpska Republika Srpska RS RSK (SRK) Republika Srpska Republic of Serbian RSK Krajina Krajina SAO Srpska autonomna Serbian Autonomous SAO oblast District/Region SBZS Slavonija, Baranja i Slavonia, Baranja SBWS zapadni Srem and Western Srem SDA Stranka demokratske Party for Democratic SDA akcije Action SDK Sluzba drustvenog Public Auditing SDK knjigovodstva Service SDS Srpska demokratska Serbian Democratic SDS stranka Party SFRJ Socijalisticka Socialist Federal SFRY Federativna Republic of Republika Yugoslavia Jugoslavija SMB sivo-maslinasta boja olive drab (uniform) SMB SPGS Specijalni Special SRSG predstavnik Representative of the generalnog sekretara Secretary-General SPS Socijalisticka partija Socialist Party of SPS Srbije Serbia SRJ Savezna Republika Federal Republic of FRY Jugoslavija Yugoslavia SUP Sekretarijat Secretariat of the SUP unutrasnjih poslova Interior TO teritorijalna odbrana Territorial Defence TO UNPROFOR Zastitne snage United Nations UNPROFOR Ujedinjenih Protection Force nacija/naroda UNTS Sporazumi United Nations UNTS Ujedinjenih naroda Treaty Series 3 of 102 20/03/2009 11:54 AM file://///cs/WWork/Ictysite/milosevic/trialc/judgement/040616.htm VJ Vojska Jugoslavije; Yugoslav Army; JA Vojska Savezne Army of the FRY; Republike Army of the Federal Jugoslavije Republic of Yugoslavia VRS Vojska Republike Army of Republika VRS; BSA Srpske; Vojska Srpska; Bosnian Serb bosanskih Srba Army VSO Vrhovni savet Supreme Defence SDC odbrane Council II. INTRODUCTION A. Procedural Background 1. On 7 April 2003, the Amici Curiae filed a motion seeking directions on their future role, including the question as to whether they should file a motion pursuant to Rule 98bis of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (“Rules”) at the close of the Prosecution case.1 On 27 June 2003, the Trial Chamber issued an order stating, inter alia, that “the amici curiae may submit a Motion pursuant to Rule 98 bis within seven days of the close of the Prosecution case”.2 2. Considerably later, on 4 February 2004, the Prosecution filed an objection to the Amici Curiae filing a Rule 98 bis Motion on behalf of the Accused, relying on a Separate Opinion of Judge Shahabuddeen concerning the right of the Amici Curiae to file applications on behalf of the Accused.3 The Trial Chamber disposed of the Prosecution Motion on 5 February 2004, stating that the Appeals Chamber itself had decided to consider an appeal brought by the Amici Curiae, and in so doing proceeded on the basis they had locus standi, that the filing by the Amici Curiae of a Motion pursuant to Rule 98 bis did not in any way prejudice the Prosecution, nor infringe the interests of the Accused, and that it was in the interests of justice as a whole for such a Motion to be brought.4 3. On 25 February 2004, the Prosecution closed its case and the Trial Chamber ordered, inter alia, that any motion under Rule 98 bis should be filed by the Accused or Amici Curiae by 8 March 2004, and that any Response by the Prosecution was to be filed by 22 March 2004.5 The Accused has not filed a motion under Rule 98 bis. B. The Rule 98 bis Motion 4. On 3 March 2004, the Amici Curiae filed their “Amici Curiae Motion for Judgement of Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98bis”, along with two confidential Annexes and a public Annex (“Motion”). On 23 March 2004, the Prosecution filed its confidential “Prosecution Response to Amici Curiae Motion for Judgement of Acquittal Pursuant to Rule 98 bis” (“Response”). 5. The Motion may be summarised as follows: (1) The Prosecution has failed to establish the existence of an “armed conflict” in Kosovo prior to 24 March 1999, requiring parts of the Kosovo Indictment dependent on this legal precondition to be excised from that Indictment;6 (2) The failure to establish that Croatia was a state before some time between 15 January and 22 May 1992. Consequently the conflict in Croatia was not international before that time and therefore all grave breaches counts in the Croatia Indictment 4 of 102 20/03/2009 11:54 AM file://///cs/WWork/Ictysite/milosevic/trialc/judgement/040616.htm which go to alleged crimes committed before these dates must be dismissed;7 (3) There is no evidence that the Accused planned, instigated, ordered, committed, or otherwise aided and abetted in the planning, preparation, or execution of a genocide, any genocidal acts, or that he was complicit in such, and that the mens rea requirement for establishing the crime of genocide is incompatible with the mens rea requirement for the third category of a joint criminal enterprise and command responsibility, as alleged in the Bosnia Indictment;8 and (4) In relation to 185 separate allegations contained in the three Indictments, there is no or insufficient evidence.9 6. The Response may be summarised as follows: (1) In respect of the argument that the Prosecution has failed to establish there was an “armed conflict” in Kosovo prior to 24 March 1999, the evidence adduced by the Prosecution during the trial is sufficient (if accepted) to satisfy a trier of fact beyond reasonable doubt that an armed conflict existed in Kosovo at all times relevant to the Kosovo Indictment;10 (2) In respect of the argument concerning the internationality of the conflict and the date on which Croatia became a state, as of 8 October 1991, the conflict in Croatia can be said to be international in character in so far as Croatia can be said to have satisfied the criteria of statehood under general international law by this date;11 (3) In respect of the argument concerning the lack of evidence that the Accused planned, instigated, ordered, committed, or otherwise aided and abetted, or was complicit in, the planning, preparation, or execution of a genocide, there is evidence if accepted such that a trier of fact could convict. The Prosecution submits that the mens rea requirement for establishing the crime of genocide is compatible with the mens rea requirement for the third category of a joint criminal enterprise and with command responsibility, and relies on a recent Appeals Chamber Decision in support of this submission;12 and (4) In respect of some of the challenged allegations in the three Indictments, it is conceded that there is no or insufficient evidence led to meet the legal standard required under Rule 98 bis and the Prosecution does not object to a judgment of acquittal being entered in respect of these allegations. However, many of the challenges to the Indictments are not conceded by the Prosecution.13 7. The Trial Chamber will now consider the Motion by the Amici Curiae and the Prosecution Response. III. APPLICATION OF RULE 98 BIS – THE LAW 8. Rule 98bis provides as follows: Motion for Judgement of Acquittal (A) An accused may file a motion for the entry of judgement of acquittal on one or more offences charged in the indictment within seven days after the close of the Prosecutor’s case and, in any event, prior to the presentation of evidence by the defence pursuant to Rule 85 (A)(ii). (B) The Trial Chamber shall order the entry of judgement of acquittal on motion of an accused or proprio motu if it finds that the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction on that or those charges. 9. The degree of proof necessary in a Rule 98bis Motion was settled by the Appeals Chamber in Prosecutor v. Jelisic,14 where it confirmed its holding in Prosecutor v. Delalic15 that the test for 5 of 102 20/03/2009 11:54 AM file://///cs/WWork/Ictysite/milosevic/trialc/judgement/040616.htm determining whether “the evidence is insufficient to sustain a conviction” is “whether there is evidence (if accepted) upon which a tribunal of fact could be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused on the particular charge in question..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FEEFHS Journal Volume VII No. 1-2 1999
    FEEFHS Quarterly A Journal of Central & Bast European Genealogical Studies FEEFHS Quarterly Volume 7, nos. 1-2 FEEFHS Quarterly Who, What and Why is FEEFHS? Tue Federation of East European Family History Societies Editor: Thomas K. Ecllund. [email protected] (FEEFHS) was founded in June 1992 by a small dedicated group Managing Editor: Joseph B. Everett. [email protected] of American and Canadian genealogists with diverse ethnic, reli- Contributing Editors: Shon Edwards gious, and national backgrounds. By the end of that year, eleven Daniel Schlyter societies bad accepted its concept as founding members. Each year Emily Schulz since then FEEFHS has doubled in size. FEEFHS nows represents nearly two hundred organizations as members from twenty-four FEEFHS Executive Council: states, five Canadian provinces, and fourteen countries. lt contin- 1998-1999 FEEFHS officers: ues to grow. President: John D. Movius, c/o FEEFHS (address listed below). About half of these are genealogy societies, others are multi-pur- [email protected] pose societies, surname associations, book or periodical publish- 1st Vice-president: Duncan Gardiner, C.G., 12961 Lake Ave., ers, archives, libraries, family history centers, on-line services, in- Lakewood, OH 44107-1533. [email protected] stitutions, e-mail genealogy list-servers, heraldry societies, and 2nd Vice-president: Laura Hanowski, c/o Saskatchewan Genealogi- other ethnic, religious, and national groups. FEEFHS includes or- cal Society, P.0. Box 1894, Regina, SK, Canada S4P 3EI ganizations representing all East or Central European groups that [email protected] have existing genealogy societies in North America and a growing 3rd Vice-president: Blanche Krbechek, 2041 Orkla Drive, group of worldwide organizations and individual members, from Minneapolis, MN 55427-3429.
    [Show full text]
  • Siege of Sarajevo Endangered Civilians
    BALKAN January 8, 2004 Page 6 VIEW FROM THE HAGUE SIEGE OF SARAJEVO ENDANGERED CIVILIANS On 5 December this year, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia sentenced General Stanislav Gali ć to 20 years in prison for spreading terror among the civilian population during the siege of Sarajevo. The city of Sarajevo was under siege for about three and a half years. For almost two years of that time, from September 1992 to August 1994, General Gali ć was the commander of a branch of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS), called the Sarajevo Romanija Corps, or SRK, which had virtually encircled Sarajevo. Parts of the city were controlled by the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Prosecution alleged that the SRK under General Gali ć's command conducted a campaign of sniping and shelling attacks on civilians in Sarajevo. Under international humanitarian law war as such is not considered unlawful. However, certain principles of warfare apply that military commanders must respect. One such principle obliges military commanders to distinguish between military objectives, on the one hand, and civilians, on the other, and not to attack civilians under any circumstances. And yet, the SRK's campaign resulted in a large number of deaths and injuries to civilians. The Tribunal Prosecution alleged that the SRK, under General Gali ć's command deliberately killed and injured civilians in order to terrorize them. Terrorising civilians Terrorising civilians during armed conflict is specifically prohibited by Article 51 of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 1949. The former Yugoslavia ratified this protocol in 1978.
    [Show full text]
  • Syrian Arab Republic
    Syrian Arab Republic News Focus: Syria https://news.un.org/en/focus/syria Office of the Special Envoy of the Secretary-General for Syria (OSES) https://specialenvoysyria.unmissions.org/ Syrian Civil Society Voices: A Critical Part of the Political Process (In: Politically Speaking, 29 June 2021): https://bit.ly/3dYGqko Syria: a 10-year crisis in 10 figures (OCHA, 12 March 2021): https://www.unocha.org/story/syria-10-year-crisis-10-figures Secretary-General announces appointments to Independent Senior Advisory Panel on Syria Humanitarian Deconfliction System (SG/SM/20548, 21 January 2021): https://www.un.org/press/en/2021/sgsm20548.doc.htm Secretary-General establishes board to investigate events in North-West Syria since signing of Russian Federation-Turkey Memorandum on Idlib (SG/SM/19685, 1 August 2019): https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/sgsm19685.doc.htm Supporting the future of Syria and the region - Brussels V Conference, 29-30 March 2021 https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/international-ministerial-meetings/2021/03/29-30/ Supporting the future of Syria and the region - Brussels IV Conference, 30 June 2020: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/international-ministerial-meetings/2020/06/30/ Third Brussels conference “Supporting the future of Syria and the region”, 12-14 March 2019: https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/international-ministerial-meetings/2019/03/12-14/ Second Brussels Conference "Supporting the future of Syria and the region", 24-25 April 2018: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/international-ministerial-meetings/2018/04/24-25/
    [Show full text]
  • Jadar Lithium Mine,Serbia
    2021 Jadar Lithium Mine, Serbia A Raw Deal ICT metal mining case study Author Zvezdan Kalmar, CEKOR Editing Emily Gray Design Milan Trivic Cover SN040288, Depositphotos Acknowledgements Association Protect Jadar and Rađevina Center for Ecology and Sustainable Development (Centar za ekologiju i održivi razvoj – CEKOR) is an environmental and development organisation. Apart from monitoring international financial institutions’ activities in Serbia, CEKOR is working on issues in the areas of transport, waste, biodiversity, genetically modified organisms (GMO) and making the city of Subotica sustainable. CEKOR is a member of CEE Bankwatch Network. Coalition for Sustainable Mining, Serbia (Koalicija za održivo rudarstvo u Srbiji – KORS) is an organisation that promotes the application of the strictest social and environmental standards for mining and mineral use in Serbia. CEE Bankwatch Network is the largest network of grassroots, environmental and human rights groups in central and eastern Europe. It monitors public finance institutions that are responsible for hundreds of billions of investments across the globe. Together with local communities and other NGOs Bankwatch works to expose their influence and provide a counterbalance to their unchecked power. About ICT and the mining-related work of CEE Bankwatch Network CEE Bankwatch Network has been monitoring mining projects in Europe and abroad for years. Bankwatch cooperates with the Make ICT Fair consortium, which seeks to reform the information and communication technology (ICT) manufacture and minerals supply chains and to improve the lives of workers and those impacted along different stages of the ICT supply chain. Our long-term cooperation with groups monitoring the impact of mining on people and environment as well as with communities directly affected by mines or smelters strengthens our conviction that the many negative impacts of mining must finally come under the proper scrutiny.
    [Show full text]
  • Prosecutor V Milorad Krnojelac to Trial Chamber II, 17 June 1998
    UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No.: IT-97-25-T Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Date: 15 March 2002 Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the Former Yugoslavia Original: English Since 1991 IN TRIAL CHAMBER II Before: Judge David Hunt, Presiding Judge Florence Ndepele Mwachande Mumba Judge Liu Daqun Registrar: Mr Hans Holthuis Judgment of: 15 March 2002 PROSECUTOR v. MILORAD KRNOJELAC JUDGMENT Counsel for the Prosecutor: Ms Hildegard Uertz-Retzlaff Ms Peggy Kuo Mr William Smith Counsel for the Accused: Mr Mihajlo Bakrac Mr Miroslav Vasi} 1 Case No: IT-97-25-T 15 March 2002 I. SUMMARY OF THE CHARGES............................................................................. 4 II. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS OF ARTICLE 3 AND ARTICLE 5 OF THE STATUTE........................................................................................................... 7 A. Facts relevant to the general requirements of Article 3 and Article 5 of the Statute 7 B. General requirements under Article 3 of the Statute .............................................. 20 C. General requirements under Article 5 of the Statute .............................................. 21 D. Findings in respect of the general requirements of Articles 3 and 5 of the Statute 24 III. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING THE EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE......................................................................................................... 27 IV. INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY AND SUPERIOR RESPONSIBILITY..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Memorial of the Republic of Croatia
    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE CASE CONCERNING THE APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE (CROATIA v. YUGOSLAVIA) MEMORIAL OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA ANNEXES REGIONAL FILES VOLUME 2 PART I EASTERN SLAVONIA 1 MARCH 2001 II CONTENTS ETHNIC STRUCTURES 1 Eastern Slavonia 3 Tenja 4 Antin 5 Dalj 6 Berak 7 Bogdanovci 8 Šarengrad 9 Ilok 10 Tompojevci 11 Bapska 12 Tovarnik 13 Sotin 14 Lovas 15 Tordinci 16 Vukovar 17 WITNESS STATEMENTS TENJA 19 Annex 1: Witness Statement of M.K. 21 Annex 2: Witness Statement of R.J. 22 Annex 3: Witness Statement of I.K. (1) 24 Annex 4: Witness Statement of J.P. 29 Annex 5: Witness Statement of L.B. 34 Annex 6: Witness Statement of P.Š. 35 Annex 7: Witness Statement of D.M. 37 Annex 8: Witness Statement of M.R. 39 Annex 9: Witness Statement of M.M. 39 Annex 10: Witness Statement of M.K. 41 Annex 11: Witness Statement of I.I.* 42 Annex 12: Witness Statement of Z.B. 52 Annex 13: Witness Statement of A.M. 54 Annex 14: Witness Statement of J.S. 56 Annex 15: Witness Statement of Z.M. 58 Annex 16: Witness Statement of J.K. 60 IV Annex 17: Witness Statement of L.R. 63 Annex 18: Witness Statement of Đ.B. 64 WITNESS STATEMENTS DALJ 67 Annex 19: Witness Statement of J.P. 69 Annex 20: Witness Statement of I.K. (2) 71 Annex 21: Witness Statement of A.K. 77 Annex 22: Witness Statement of H.S.
    [Show full text]
  • THE SENATOR GEORGE J MITCHELL INSTITUTE for GLOBAL PEACE, SECURITY and JUSTICE WORKING PAPER SERIES ISSN 2399-5130 (Online)
    THE SENATOR GEORGE J MITCHELL INSTITUTE FOR GLOBAL PEACE, SECURITY AND JUSTICE WORKING PAPER SERIES ISSN 2399-5130 (Online) Navigating Research on Conflict-Related Sexual Violence in the Post-Yugoslav Space Emily Mitchell-Bajic [email protected] 1 NAVIGATING RESEARCH ON CONFLICT-RELATED SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN THE POST- YUGOSLAV SPACE By Emily Mitchell-Bajic ABSTRACT This paper examines two focal conceptual elements of understanding how survivors of sexual violence are interpreted in the post-Yugoslav nation states of Bosnia & Herzegovina, Croatia, and Kosovo. By offering an explanation of social identity theory in practice, prevalent perceptions of gender within the region highlight dominant perceptions of survivors. Furthermore, this paper critically examines and justifies the use of a feminist standpoint epistemology as a foundation on which to navigate the heavily gendered research topic of conflict-related sexual violence. Keywords: Conflict-related sexual violence, post-Yugoslavia, gender, social identity theory, feminist standpoint epistemology. 2 NAVIGATING RESEARCH ON CONFLICT-RELATED SEXUAL VIOLENCE IN THE POST- YUGOSLAV SPACE INTRODUCTION Following the initial breakup of Yugoslavia into six Republics in 1991, while Slovenia and Macedonia enjoyed relatively peaceful secession, violent conflict erupted in Croatia (1991- 1995) and Bosnia (1992-1995). Additionally, violent conflict arose from the declared independence of Kosovo (1998-1999). These three countries were also subject to mass campaigns of conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) during their respective eras of violent conflict. While numbers of women subjected to CRSV during the Croatian War of Independence lack formal statistical recording, an estimated 20,000 women experienced CRSV during the Bosnian conflict (Engle, 2005: 784-785), with a further 20,000 experiencing CRSV in wartime Kosovo (Gray, 2019).
    [Show full text]
  • Deterring Wartime Atrocities Deterring Wartime Jacqueline R
    Deterring Wartime Atrocities Deterring Wartime Jacqueline R. Atrocities McAllister Hard Lessons from the Yugoslav Tribunal How can the interna- tional community deter government and rebel forces from committing atroc- ities against civilians? Long after liberated Nazi concentration camp survivors held up the ªrst sign declaring, “Never Again!” civilians have faced genocide during civil wars around the world, from Bangladesh to the former Yugoslavia, and more recently in northern Iraq. Sexual violence, torture, and forced dis- appearances are among the other horrors that civilians continue to endure in wartime. In the 1990s, international ofªcials sought to respond to such suffering by es- tablishing a new generation of wartime international criminal tribunals (ICTs), starting with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 1993. The ICTY paved the way for the establishment of the perma- nent International Criminal Court (ICC) ªve years later. Unlike earlier ICTs in Nuremberg and Tokyo, as well as more recent war crimes tribunals in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Cambodia, East Timor, Lebanon, Bosnia, and Kosovo, the ICTY and the ICC are mandated to prosecute international criminal law violations committed in the context of active armed conºicts. In granting the ICTY and the ICC such authority, their founders hoped that the tribu- nals would deter combatants in those conºicts from perpetrating violence against civilians.1 Nevertheless, more than twenty-ªve years after the ICTY opened its doors, international justice scholars continue to debate the role of wartime tribunals in deterring atrocities against civilians, particularly in ongoing conºicts. Skep- tics contend that, in the heat of battle, combatants are unlikely to perceive a Jacqueline R.
    [Show full text]
  • Health Insurance Zagreb
    Health Insurance for LES Embassy of the United States of America Zagreb, Croatia Combined Synopsis and Solicitation 19GE5021R0013 Questions and Answers Q1: Please provide five years of loss data(table 1) by year of account including annual net premium (for the same period), incurred claims and membership history. For membership history (Table 2) please provide the number of Employees with single coverage and with family coverage at the end of each year. Please do not include any confidential information, just the overall statistics for the group. Claims information is critical to our pricing and the relationship of claims to employee growth or shrinkage is part of the claims analysis. Table 1 Contractual year Total claims Retention Total Net gain Net gain paid (local amount premium (local USD or EUR currency) (local paid to currency) currency) Insurer (local currency) dd/mm/2016 – dd/mm/2017 dd/mm/2017 – dd/mm/2018 dd/mm/2018 – dd/mm/2019 dd/mm/2019 – dd/mm/2020 dd/mm/2020 – dd/mm/2021 Table 2 Contractual year Single Self plus ONE Family plans dd/mm/2016 – dd/mm/2017 dd/mm/2017 – dd/mm/2018 dd/mm/2018 – dd/mm/2019 dd/mm/2019 – dd/mm/2020 dd/mm/2020 – dd/mm/2021 A1: This is a first-time post is contracting this service, historical data is not available. Q2 : We would like to know if you have been informed of Catastrophic cases, such as: Hemodynamics, Open Heart Surgery, Orthopedic Mayor Surgeries, Organ Transplant, Traumatic Accident, Cancer and Oncology Cases (Radio and Chemotherapy), and hospitalizations with more than 10 days A2: The U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • SVILAJ Dionica Osijek - Đakovo LEGENDA
    A5 BELI MANASTIR - OSIJEK - SVILAJ Dionica Osijek - Đakovo LEGENDA u prometu 2007. u prometu 2009. u planu ostale autoceste MOST DRAVA ODMOR. STROSSMAYEROVAC MOST HRASTINKA MOST SAVA LINIJSKI PRIKAZ AUTOCESTE A5 BUDAPEST LEGENDA R. HRVATSKA Beli Manastir PUO Baranja Most Most Drava, L = 2485 m PUO Mursa Osijek PUO Beketinci u prometu 2007. u prometu 2009. A5 PUO Strossmayerovac u planu Most Topolina, L = 131 m ostale autoceste Most Hrastinka, L = 176 m PUO Ivandvor Most preko zapadnog lateralnog kanala, L = 133 m PUO Andrijevci Sredanci ZAGREB LIPOVAC A3 A3 Svilaj R. HRVATSKA BiH Most Sava, L = 756 m SARAJEVO AUTOCESTA A5 // BELI MANASTIR - OSIJEK - SVILAJ Autocesta A5 Beli Manastir - Osijek - Svilaj Autocesta A5 Beli Manastir - Osijek - Svilaj, dio je međunarodnog Paneuropskog cestovnog koridora Vc i jedan od najvažnijih ogranaka TEM/TER Projekta. Predmetna autocesta je dio europske mreže prome- tnica s oznakom E73, koja sjever Europe povezuje s Jadranom. Prometni koridor Vc, koji se pruža od Budimpešte preko Sarajeva do Ploča složena je poveznica sjeverne – srednje i južne Europe te predstavlja izuzetnu vri- jednost za privrednu i prometnu integraciju srednjo- europskog prostora. Izgradnjom prometnog koridora Vc povezanost i transparentnost prometnih pravaca cestovnog, željezničkog, riječnog i zračnog prometa direktno će utjecati na razvoj šireg i snažnijeg prome- tnog povezivanja Europe i Azije. 3 AUTOCESTA A5 // BELI MANASTIR - OSIJEK - SVILAJ Na dijelu Vc koridora, koji prolazi kroz teritorij Repu- Autocesta A5 Beli Manastir Osijek – Svilaj, dužine 88,6 blike Hrvatske, nalazi se autocesta A5 Beli Manastir km, podijeljena je na sljedeće dionice: – Osijek – Svilaj, koja se proteže od granice s Repu- blikom Mađarskom do granice s Republikom Bosnom Granica Rep.
    [Show full text]
  • The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
    THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Case No. IT-99-37-PT THE PROSECUTOR OF THE TRIBUNAL AGAINST MILAN MILUTINOVI] NIKOLA [AINOVI] DRAGOLJUB OJDANI] The Second Amended Indictment has been amended to the extent of removing the names "Slobodan MILO[EVI]" and "Vlajko STOJILJKOVI]" from the title page, from the end of paragraph 63, from paragraph 64, from the end of paragraph 66, and from the end of paragraph 68. In addition, the word "ACCUSED" before paragraph 1 and the words "the accused" in paragraph 17 have been removed, the words “and others known and unknown” have been inserted into paragraph 18, the word “five” in paragraph 27 has been replaced with “three”, and the words “and others known and unknown” have been inserted in paragraph 27. Slobodan MILO[EVI] is being tried separately and Vlajko STOJILJKOVI] is reportedly dead. THIRD 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: MILAN MILUTINOVI] 1 PURL: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/fca716/IT-99-37-PT NIKOLA [AINOVI] DRAGOLJUB OJDANI] with CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY and VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR as set forth below: 1. Slobodan MILO[EVI] was born on 20 August 1941 in the town of Po`arevac in present-day Republic of Serbia (hereinafter "Serbia"). In 1964, he received a law degree from the University of Belgrade and began a career in management and banking.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Europe Abolished Capital Punishment
    Why Europe Abolished Capital Punishment John Quigley* and S. Adele Shank** “Whatever may be the conclusion of this night of this House, no doubt arises that the punishment must pass away from our land, and that at no distant date capital punishment will no longer exist. It belongs to a much earlier day than ours, and it is no longer needed for the civilization of the age in which we live.”1 J.W. Pease, a member of the House of Commons, made this declaration in London in 1877.2 Pease, an industrialist and a Quaker, was speaking in support of a bill he proposed to abolish capital punishment in the United Kingdom. Pease’s bill was voted down.3 Consequently, capital punishment would remain in British law into the twentieth century.4 Pease’s sentiment, however, reflected what would be the consensus position in Europe a century later. Capital punishment would come to be seen as antithetical to the values of a civilized society. Europe’s path to that position, however, would be far from uniform. In the early nineteenth century, capital punishment was universal in Europe.5 Later in the century, a few countries in Western Europe abolished it.6 The issue was part of a larger discussion about criminal law. A reaction against severity in the administration of justice had taken hold in Europe. Influential in European thinking was the work of an Italian lawyer who included capital * John Quigley is a President’s Club Professor Emeritus of Law at the Michael E. Moritz College of Law.
    [Show full text]