DOCSLIB.ORG

Decision on Second Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Ir--qlj- 5" /4fJ-P r }) .2,5'.33 ~]) .25"I.fIB UNITED Oq OG ro8~ R.. LOO" NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No.: IT -95-51l8-PT Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law Date: 9 October 2009 Committed in the Territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991 Original: English IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge O-Gon Kwon, Presiding Judge Howard Morrison Judge Melville Baird Judge Flavia Lattanzi, Reserve Judge Registrar: Mr. John Hocking Decision of: 9 October 2009 PROSECUTOR v. RADOVAN KARADZIC PUBLIC DECISION ON SECOND PROSECUTION MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ADJUDICATED FACTS Office of the Prosecutor Mr. Alan Tieger Ms. Hildegard Vertz-Retzlaff The Accused Mr. Radovan Karadzi6 THIS TRIAL CHAMBER 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 ("Tribunal") is seised of the "Second Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts and Corrigendum to First Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts", filed on 17 March 2009 ("Motion"), and the "Corrigendum to Second Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts", filed on 27 July 2009 ("Corrigendum"), and hereby renders its decision thereon. I. Background and Submissions I. The Motion was preceded by the "First Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts", filed on 27 October 2008 ("First Motion"), and followed by the "Third Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts", filed on 7 April 2009 ("Third Motion"). On 5 June 2009, the Chamber rendered its "Decision on First Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts" ("First Decision on Adjudicated Facts"), granting the First Motion in part, and taking judicial notice of 302 out of 337 facts proposed by the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") in its First Motion. l Similarly, on 9 July 2009, the Chamber issued its "Decision on Third Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts" ("Third Decision on Adjudicated Facts"), accepting 466 out of 497 facts proposed by the Prosecution in its Third Motion.2 2. In the Motion, the Prosecution requests that the Chamber exercise its power under Rule 94(B) of the Tribunal's Rules of Procedure and Evidence ("Rules") to take judicial notice of facts set out in Appendix A, which is divided into three sections. The first section relates to the historical background to the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina ("BiH"). The second section deals with the Yugoslav National Army ("JNA"), covering its structure, organisation, and engagement in the conflicts in Slovenia, Croatia, and BiH; the Bosnian Serb Army ("VRS") and the Bosnian Serb Ministry ofthe Interior ("MOP"), addressing their formation and structure; and the Serbian MUP, covering the assistance provided by this institution to local Serb forces in Croatia. The third section relates to events in the municipalities of Banja Luka, Bosanska Krupa, Bosanski Novi, Bosanski Petrovac, Donji Vakuf, Foca, Kljuc, Kotor Varos, Prijedor, Sanski Most, and Visegrad during the time relevant to the Indictment, and further deals with institutions of the Autonomous Region of Krajina ("ARK"), and with events that occurred across the ARK in the aforementioned period of time. I First Decision on Adjudicated Facts, S June 2009, para. 39. 2 Third Decision on Adjudicated Facts, 9 July 2009, para. 63. Case No. IT-95-5118-PT 2 9 October 2009 3. The facts proposed in the Motion have been adjudicated by Trial and Appeals Chambers in several cases, such as Blagojevie and Jokie, Braanin, Krnojelac, Kunarac et at., Kvocka et ai., Martie, MrkSie, Tadie, and Vasiljevie et al. 3 The Prosecution incorporates by reference its submissions in the First Motion concerning the legal requirements to be met before judicial notice can be taken of an adjudicated fact.4 It then submits that the adjudicated facts listed in Appendix A to the Motion meet the requirements set out in relevant Tribunal jurisprudence, and that taking judicial notice of those facts would achieve judicial economy while preserving the Accused's right to a fair, public, and expeditious trial.5 4. Specifically, the Prosecution argues that certain proposed facts in the second section of Appendix A, although pertaining to events in Croatia, are nevertheless relevant to the current case, and stresses that the facts in question: (1) show the continued pattern of participation of troops and individuals of the Serbian MUP and the JNA in the take-over of targeted areas in Croatia and BiH; (2) provide evidence of the continued participation of officials of these institutions in a Joint Criminal Enterprise ("JCE") to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb claimed territory in BiH; and (3) show the integration of "paramilitary/volunteer groups", such as those associated with Zeljko Rainatovic or Vojislav Seselj, into the regular Serb forces' war effort.6 5. Similarly, the Prosecution acknowledges that the third section of Appendix A contains proposed facts which do not relate to events specifically charged in the Indictment, but submits that these facts are nevertheless relevant to the current proceedings, as they demonstrate a pattern of conduct proving the implementation of a JCE to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb claimed territory in BiB. 6. On 14 April 2009, the Accused filed his "Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to 2nd and 3rd Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts" ("Motion for Extension of Time"), requesting an extension oftime until 21 January 2010 to respond to the Motion and to the Third Motion, and arguing that the sheer volume of both motions made it impossible for him to 3 See Prosecutor v. Blagojevie and Jokie, Case No. IT-02-60-T, Judgement, 17 January 2005 ("Blagojevie Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. Braanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement, 1 September 2004 ("Brdanin Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. Krnojelac, Case No. IT-97-25-T, Judgement, 15 March 2002 ("Krnojelac Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. Kunarac et al., Case No. IT-96-23-T&IT-96-23/1-T, Judgement, 22 February 2001 ("Kunarac Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. Kvocka et aI., Case No. IT-98-301l-T, Judgement, 2 November 2001 ("Kvocka Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. Martie, Case No. IT-95-11-T, Judgement, 12 June 2007 ("Martie Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. MrkSie, Case No. IT-95-13I1-T, Judgement, 27 September 2007 ("MrkSie Trial Judgement"); Prosecutor v. Tadie, Case No. IT-94-1-T, Judgement, 7 May 1997 ("Tadie Trial Judgement"); and Prosecutor v. Vasiljevie et aI. , Case No. IT-98-32-T, Judgement, 29 November 2002 ("Vasiljevie Trial Judgement"). 4 Motion, para. 4; see also First Motion, paras. 3-4, 6, 8. 5 Motion, para. 3. Case No. IT-9S-SIl8-PT 3 9 October 2009 .2,5"530 respond adequately within the normal fourteen day limit.7 On 16 April 2009, the Prosecution filed its "Prosecution Response to Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to 2nd and 3rd Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts", opposing the Motion for Extension of Time, and arguing that the Accused had "failed to show good cause for his request in accordance with Rule 127(A)(i) of the Rules" by failing to provide specific justification for the alleged time extension.8 On 17 April 2009, the pre-trial Judge issued a "Decision on Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Second and Third Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts" ("Decision on Motion for Extension of Time"), considering it to be in the interests of justice and sound pre-trial management to grant an extension of time, but finding that a much shorter period of time than that requested by the Accused would suffice. He then ordered the Accused to submit his response to the Motion no later than 30 June 2009.9 7. At the Status Conference held on 3 June 2009, the Accused indicated that, although the B/c/S translation of the Motion should have been provided to him on or before 6 May 2009, he had not received it yet. 10 Noting that the deadline fixed in the Decision on Motion for Extension of Time was based on the expectation that the BICIS translation would be ready by 6 May 2009, the pre-trial Judge granted the Accused an additional extension of time to respond to the Motion up until 14 July 2009. 11 However, on 1 July 2009, the pre-trial Judge filed an "Order for Response to Second Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts and Corrigendum to First Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts" noting that, even though the Accused had received the B/c/S translation to the Motion in the meantime, he had not yet begun to prepare his response thereto, and that it was in the interests of good case management to give the Accused another extension of time to respond to the Motion. He therefore ordered the Accused to file his response to the Motion no later than 27 July 2009. 8. On 22 July 2009, the Accused filed his "Response to Second Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts" ("Response") opposing the Motion, and incorporating by reference the arguments raised in his responses to the First Motion12 and to the Third Motion. 13 6 Motion, para. 2. 7 Motion for Extension of Time, paras. 3-4. nd 8 Prosecution Response to Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to 2 and 3'd Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts, 16 April 2009, paras. 1-2. 9 Decision on Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Second and Third Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts, 17 April 2009, paras.
Recommended publications
  • A Comprehensive Survey on Various Biometric Systems

    A Comprehensive Survey on Various Biometric Systems

    International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 13, Number 5 (2018) pp. 2276-2297 © Research India Publications. http://www.ripublication.com A Comprehensive Survey on Various Biometric Systems T.Sabhanayagam 1, Dr. V. Prasanna Venkatesan2 and Dr. K. Senthamaraikannan3 1 Research Scholar, Center for Computer and Information Technology Engineering, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu, India. 1And Assistant Professor, School of Computing, SRMIST, Chennai 1Orcid: 0000-0002-9782-7068 2 Dr.V.Prasanna Venkatesan, Proof & Head, Dept. of Banking Technology, Pondicherry University, Puducherry, India. 3 Dr. K.Senthamaraikannan, Prof & Head, Dept. of Statistics, Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, Tirunelveli, Tamilnadu, India. Abstract Biometrics gains significant importance in this technical world and it means analysis of biological data. It is defined as the technology of analyzing individual person based on physiological, behavioural or morphological traits such as face, fingerprint, iris, retina, voice, and signature etc,. It is possible to establish one’s identity with the help of biometric techniques. Today biometric have been successfully deployed in various fields like forensic science, security, identification and authorization system. For the last three decades, lot of research work has to be carried out for the growth of biometric system based on fingerprint, voice, iris, face, etc, but recently new biometrics has been come up. To provide a comprehensive survey, this paper presents an
  • Supplemental Pre-Trial Brief of the Defence of Mićo Stanišić ______

    Supplemental Pre-Trial Brief of the Defence of Mićo Stanišić ______

    IT-08-91-PT 3153 D3153 - D3107 31 July 2009 SF THEU INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FORU THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA CaseU No. IT-08-91-PT INU THE TRIAL CHAMBERU Before: Judge Iain Bonomy, Presiding Judge Ole Bjørn Støle Judge Frederik Harhoff Registrar: Mr. John Hocking Date Filed: 31 July 2009 THE PROSECUTOR v. MIĆO STANIŠIĆ STOJAN ŽUPLJANIN PUBLIC CONFIDENTIAL ANNEXES A, B, and C ________________________________________________________________________ SUPPLEMENTAL PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF THE DEFENCE OF MIĆO STANIŠIĆ ________________________________________________________________________ TheU Office of the ProsecutorU Mr. Thomas Hannis Ms. Joanna Korner QC CounselU for the AccusedU Mr. Slobodan Zečević and Mr. Slobodan Cvijetić for Mr. Mićo Stanišić Mr. Igor Pantelić for Mr. Stojan Župljanin 3152 SUPPLEMENTAL PRE-TRIAL BRIEF OF THE DEFENCE OF MIĆO STANIŠIĆ 1. At all times relevant to the indictment, Mr. Stanišić was the Minister of the Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs in Bosnia and Herzegovina (“RS MUP”). He is charged under Article 7(1) of the Statute with committing – as a participant in a joint criminal enterprise (“JCE”) – instigating and aiding and abetting the crimes alleged in the indictment and under Article 7(3) of the Statute as a superior authority who failed to prevent or punish the crimes alleged in indictment. 2. Pursuant to Rule 65ter(F)(i) the Defence Pre-Trial Brief makes the following written statement setting out, in general terms, the nature of his defence: a. Mr. Stanišić never acted criminally nor did ever harbour or manifest any criminal intent. b. Legally and factually, there was no JCE as alleged by the Prosecution and Mr. Stanišić was never a part of any JCE or common plan to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats, and other non-Serb from the territory of the planned Serbian state by means which included the commission of the crimes alleged in the indictment.
  • The War in Bosnia and Herzegovina Or the Unacceptable Lightness of “Historicism”

    The War in Bosnia and Herzegovina Or the Unacceptable Lightness of “Historicism”

    The War in Bosnia and Herzegovina Or the Unacceptable Lightness of “Historicism” Davor Marijan War Museum, Zagreb, Republic of Croatia Abstract The author in this study does not intend to provide a comprehensive account of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in part because the cur- rent level of research does not enable this. The only way to understand this conflict is through facts, not prejudices. However, such prejudices are particularly acute amongst Muslim-Bosniac authors. They base their claims on the notion that Serbs and Croats are the destroyers of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that both are equally culpable in its destruction. Relying on mainly unpublished and uncited documents from the three constitutive nations of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the author factually chal- lenges basic and generally accepted claims. The author offers alternative responses to certain claims and draws attention to the complexity of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which has been mainly viewed in terms of black or white. The author does, however, suggest that in considering the character of the war it is necessary to examine first the war in Croatia and the inter-relationship between the two. The main focus is on 1992 and the Muslim and Croat differences that developed into open conflict at the beginning of 1993. The role of the international community in the war and the partition of Bosnia and Herzegovina are also discussed. At the end of the 20th century in Europe and the eclipse of Communism from the world political scene, it is not easy to trace the indelible marks left behind after the collapse of Yugoslavia and the wars that ensued.
  • National Reviews 1998 Bosnia and Herzegovina Executive

    National Reviews 1998 Bosnia and Herzegovina Executive

    DANUBE POLLUTION REDUCTION PROGRAMME NATIONAL REVIEWS 1998 BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ministry of Agriculture, Water Management and Forestry in cooperation with the Programme Coordination Unit UNDP/GEF Assistance DANUBE POLLUTION REDUCTION PROGRAMME NATIONAL REVIEWS 1998 BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ministry of Agriculture, Water Management and Forestry in cooperation with the Programme Coordination Unit UNDP/GEF Assistance Preface The National Reviews were designed to produce basic data and information for the elaboration of the Pollution Reduction Programme (PRP), the Transboundary Analysis and the revision of the Strategic Action Plan of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River (ICPDR). Particular attention was also given to collect data and information for specific purposes concerning the development of the Danube Water Quality Model, the identification and evaluation of hot spots, the analysis of social and economic factors, the preparation of an investment portfolio and the development of financing mechanisms for the implementation of the ICPDR Action Plan. For the elaboration of the National Reviews, a team of national experts was recruited in each of the participating countries for a period of one to four months covering the following positions: Socio-economist with knowledge in population studies, Financial expert (preferably from the Ministry of Finance), Water Quality Data expert/information specialist, Water Engineering expert with knowledge in project development. Each of the experts had to organize his or her work under the supervision of the respective Country Programme Coordinator and with the guidance of a team of International Consultants. The tasks were laid out in specific Terms of Reference. At a Regional Workshop in Budapest from 27 to 29 January 1998, the national teams and the group of international consultants discussed in detail the methodological approach and the content of the National Reviews to assure coherence of results.
  • Forced Labour in Serbia Producers, Consumers and Consequences of Forced Labour 1941 - 1944

    Forced Labour in Serbia Producers, Consumers and Consequences of Forced Labour 1941 - 1944

    Forced Labour in Serbia Producers, Consumers and Consequences of Forced Labour 1941 - 1944 edited by: Sanela Schmid Milovan Pisarri Tomislav Dulić Zoran Janjetović Milan Koljanin Milovan Pisarri Thomas Porena Sabine Rutar Sanela Schmid 1 Project partners: Project supported by: Forced Labour in Serbia 2 Producers, Consumers and Consequences . of Forced Labour 1941 - 1944 This collection of scientific papers on forced labour during the Second World War is part of a wider research within the project "Producers, Consumers and Consequences of Forced Labour - Serbia 1941-1944", which was implemented by the Center for Holocaust Research and Education from Belgrade in partnership with Humboldt University, Berlin and supported by the Foundation "Remembrance, Responsibility and Future" in Germany. ("Stiftung Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft" - EVZ). 3 Impressum Forced Labour in Serbia Producers, Consumers and Consequences of Forced Labour 1941-1944 Published by: Center for Holocaust Research and Education Publisher: Nikola Radić Editors: Sanela Schmid and Milovan Pisarri Authors: Tomislav Dulić Zoran Janjetović Milan Koljanin Milovan Pisarri Thomas Porena Sabine Rutar Sanela Schmid Proofreading: Marija Šapić, Marc Brogan English translation: Irena Žnidaršić-Trbojević German translation: Jovana Ivanović Graphic design: Nikola Radić Belgrade, 2018. Project partners: Center for Holocaust Research and Education Humboldt University Berlin Project is supported by: „Remembrance, Responsibility And Future“ Foundation „Stiftung Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft“ - EVZ Forced Labour in Serbia 4 Producers, Consumers and Consequences . of Forced Labour 1941 - 1944 Contents 6 Introduction - Sanela Schmid and Milovan Pisarri 12 Milovan Pisarri “I Saw Jews Carrying Dead Bodies On Stretchers”: Forced Labour and The Holocaust in Occupied Serbia 30 Zoran Janjetović Forced Labour in Banat Under Occupation 1941 - 1944 44 Milan Koljanin Camps as a Source of Forced Labour in Serbia 1941 - 1944 54 Photographs 1 62 Sabine Rutar Physical Labour and Survival.
  • Outreach Response DRC Rapid Needs Assessment

    Outreach Response DRC Rapid Needs Assessment

    RAPID NEEDS ASSESMENT REPORT Out-of-site locations in Una Sana, Tuzla and Sarajevo Canton Bosnia and Herzegovina September, 2020 | 1 This assessment has been carried out in order to update the Danish Refugee Council’s mapping of needs of migrants and asylum seekers’ (people of concern) staying outside of formal reception capacities in Una Sana Canton, Tuzla Canton and Sarajevo Canton, with a focus on access to food, WASH and protection issues. Besides the assessment, available secondary sources were also consulted for capturing as accurate a picture as possible. This assessment report has been supported by the European Commission Directorate General for Civil Protection and Humanitarian Aid (DG ECHO). This document covers humanitarian aid activities implemented with the financial assistance of the European Union. The views expressed herein should not be taken, in any way, to reflect the official opinion of the European Union, and the European Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains. 30-September-2020 | 2 Contents Contents ............................................................................................................................................................ 3 List of abbreviations and acronyms .................................................................................................................... 4 1. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................................... 5 1.1
  • UNDER ORDERS: War Crimes in Kosovo Order Online

    UNDER ORDERS: War Crimes in Kosovo Order Online

    UNDER ORDERS: War Crimes in Kosovo Order online Table of Contents Acknowledgments Introduction Glossary 1. Executive Summary The 1999 Offensive The Chain of Command The War Crimes Tribunal Abuses by the KLA Role of the International Community 2. Background Introduction Brief History of the Kosovo Conflict Kosovo in the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Kosovo in the 1990s The 1998 Armed Conflict Conclusion 3. Forces of the Conflict Forces of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia Yugoslav Army Serbian Ministry of Internal Affairs Paramilitaries Chain of Command and Superior Responsibility Stucture and Strategy of the KLA Appendix: Post-War Promotions of Serbian Police and Yugoslav Army Members 4. march–june 1999: An Overview The Geography of Abuses The Killings Death Toll,the Missing and Body Removal Targeted Killings Rape and Sexual Assault Forced Expulsions Arbitrary Arrests and Detentions Destruction of Civilian Property and Mosques Contamination of Water Wells Robbery and Extortion Detentions and Compulsory Labor 1 Human Shields Landmines 5. Drenica Region Izbica Rezala Poklek Staro Cikatovo The April 30 Offensive Vrbovac Stutica Baks The Cirez Mosque The Shavarina Mine Detention and Interrogation in Glogovac Detention and Compusory Labor Glogovac Town Killing of Civilians Detention and Abuse Forced Expulsion 6. Djakovica Municipality Djakovica City Phase One—March 24 to April 2 Phase Two—March 7 to March 13 The Withdrawal Meja Motives: Five Policeman Killed Perpetrators Korenica 7. Istok Municipality Dubrava Prison The Prison The NATO Bombing The Massacre The Exhumations Perpetrators 8. Lipljan Municipality Slovinje Perpetrators 9. Orahovac Municipality Pusto Selo 10. Pec Municipality Pec City The “Cleansing” Looting and Burning A Final Killing Rape Cuska Background The Killings The Attacks in Pavljan and Zahac The Perpetrators Ljubenic 11.
  • The Memory of the Avant- Garde and the New Wave in the Contemporary

    The Memory of the Avant- Garde and the New Wave in the Contemporary

    The Memory of the Avant- Garde and the New Wave in the Contemporary Serbian Novel Marko Avramović Institute for Literature and Arts, 2 Kralja Milana St, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5878-5777 [email protected] This article is dealing with the topic of two past twentieth-century epochs in a few representative Serbian novels at the turn from the twentieth to the twenty-first century. These are the 1980s and the New Wave era in Yugoslavia, an epoch close to the past that can still be written about from the perspective of an immediate witness, and the avant-garde era, that is, the period between the two world wars marked in art by different movements of the historical avant-garde. The novels Milenijum u Beogradu (Millennium in Belgrade, 2000) by Vladimir Pištalo, Vrt u Veneciji (The Garden in Venice, 2002) by Mileta Prodanović, and Kiša i hartija (Rain and Paper, 2004) by Vladimir Tasić are being interpreted. In these novels, it is particularly noteworthy that the two aforementioned epochs are most commonly linked as part of the same creative and intellectual currents in the twentieth century. Keywords: Serbian literature / contemporary Serbian novel / literary avant-garde / New Wave / Zenitism / rock and roll / Pištalo, Vladimir / Prodanović, Mileta / Tasić, Vladimir In Vladimir Tasić’s Farewell Gift (2001), one of the key contemporary Serbian novels, the narrator at some points expresses a high apprecia- tion of the two epochs. One is personally experienced, while the other has long been placed in historical niches
  • The-Prijedor-Genocide 1

    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.
  • Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

    Case Concerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

    INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE CASE CONCERNING APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PREVENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE (BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA v. YUGOSLAVIA) PKELIMINARY OBJECTIONS JUNE 1995 I TABLE OF CONTENTS PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS .............................. 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................... 3 FACTS ........................................... 7 1.1. Relevant facts from the past of Bosnia and Herzegovina ............................. 7 1.2. The creation of the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes and the status of Muslims in that State . 11 1.3. Genocide committed against the Serbs in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the Second World War . 12 1.4. The stati~sof Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina in post-war socialist Yugoslavia ................ 20 1.5. The first cirisis in inter-ethnic relations in post-war socialist Yugoslavia ................ 23 1.6. The founding of parties in the Yugoslav Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1990 ............. 24 1.7. The first multiparty elections in Bosnia-Herzegovina . 36 1.8. Disagreement between the three leading parties over the future organization of Yugoslavia and Bosnia- Herzegovina in 1991 ...................... 38 1.9. The rebellion by members of the SDA and the HDZ in the republican government against the SFRY and pressures on the Serb people in Bosnia-Herzegovina (1 991 -1 992) ............................. 3": 1.10 . The emergence of new states in the territory of the former Yugoslav republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina . 72 1.1 1. The establishment of the Bosnian Serb Republic . 73 1.12. The establishment of the so-called Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina ....................... 77 1.13 . The establishment of Herzeg-Bosnia ........... 82 1.14 . The establishment of the Autonomous Province of Western Bosnia ......................
  • The Interface of Hope and History and the Conundrum of Post-War International Intervention

    The Interface of Hope and History and the Conundrum of Post-War International Intervention

    University of Massachusetts Amherst ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst Master's Capstone Projects Center for International Education 1998 Bosnia: The nI terface of Hope and History and the Conundrum of Post-War International Intervention Jimmy Weir Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cie_capstones Part of the Education Commons Weir, Jimmy, "Bosnia: The nI terface of Hope and History and the Conundrum of Post-War International Intervention" (1998). Master's Capstone Projects. 137. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.umass.edu/cie_capstones/137 This Open Access Capstone is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for International Education at ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Capstone Projects by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UMass Amherst. For more information, please contact [email protected]. for lnternatLmnl ;::{iucatio~: 285 r~it~::J ~-!ous~--: ~~c·uth Un~ve-r~-:~\y of '~assac:·;t.isettn Amherst, MA. 01003 Bosnia: The Interface of Hope and History and the Conundrum of Post-war International Intervention A Master's Project Presented by Jimmy Weir Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Massachusetts Amherst in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Education August, 1998 Center for International Education 2 Abstract ln 1997 I worked with the OSCE in Bosnia organizing the first post-war municipal elections. During this time I was confronted with the massive efforts of the international community in Bosnia, the limited development of the peace process two years after the war and the need for a clearer sense of history in order to understand the best direction for international community in their ongoing intervention in Bosnia.
  • THE POSAVINA BORDER REGION of CROATIA and BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA: DEVELOPMENT up to 1918 (With Special Reference to Changes in Ethnic Composition)

    THE POSAVINA BORDER REGION of CROATIA and BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA: DEVELOPMENT up to 1918 (With Special Reference to Changes in Ethnic Composition)

    THE POSAVINA BORDER REGION OF CROATIA AND BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA: DEVELOPMENT UP TO 1918 (with special reference to changes in ethnic composition) Ivan CRKVEN^I] Zagreb UDK: 94(497.5-3 Posavina)''15/19'':323.1 Izvorni znanstveni rad Primljeno: 9. 9. 2003. After dealing with the natural features and social importance of the Posavina region in the past, presented is the importance of this region as a unique Croatian ethnic territory during the Mid- dle Ages. With the appearance of the Ottomans and especially at the beginning of the 16th century, great ethnic changes oc- cured, primarily due to the expulsion of Croats and arrival of new ethnic groups, mostly Orthodox Vlachs and later Muslims and ethnic Serbs. With the withdrawal of the Ottomans from the Pannonian basin to the areas south of the Sava River and the Danube, the Sava becomes the dividing line creating in its border areas two socially and politically different environments: the Slavonian Military Frontier on the Slavonian side and the Otto- man military-frontier system of kapitanates on the Bosnian side. Both systems had a special influence on the change of ethnic composition in this region. With the withdrawal of the Ottomans further towards the southeast of Europe and the Austrian occu- pation of Bosnia and Herzegovina the Sava River remains the border along which, especially on the Bosnian side, further changes of ethnic structure occured. Ivan Crkven~i}, Ilo~ka 34, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. E-mail: [email protected] INTRODUCTION The research subject in this work is the border region Posavi- na between the Republic of Croatia and the Republic Bosnia- 293 -Herzegovina.