DOCSLIB.ORG

Appeal Judgement, Para

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MICT-16-99-A 912 A912-A821 11 April 2018 AJ UNITED NATIONS Case No . MICT-16-99-A ., Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals Date: 11 April 2018 Original: English IN THE APPEALS CHAMBER Before: Judge Theodor Meron, Presiding Judge "Lee G. Muthoga Judge Florence Rita Arrey Judge Ben Emmerson Judge Ivo Nelson de Caires Batista Rosa Registrar: Mr. Olufemi Elias Judgement of: 11 April 2018 PROSECUTOR v. VOJISLAV SESELJ PUBLIC JUDGEMENT The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Serge Brammertz Mr. Mathias Marcussen Ms. Barbara Goy The Respondent: Mr. Vojislav Seselj, pro se 911 CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1 A. BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................................. 1 B. THE APPEAL ................................................................................................................................. 2 II. STANDARDS OF APPELLATE REVIEW ............................................................................... 4 III. COMPLIANCE OF THE APPEAL BRIEF WITH THE PRACTICE DIRECTION ......... 8 IV. PROCEDURAL F AIRNESS .................................................................................................... 10 A. INDICTMENT AND POLITICAL BIAS ............................................................................................. 10 B. SELF-REpRESENTATION .............................................................................................................. 12 C. DETENTION CONDITIONS AND PREPARATION OF DEFENCE ......................................................... 13 D. ADMISSION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS AND ALLEGEDLY FALSE EVIDENCE ............................... 14 E. UNDUE DELAY .................................................................................................................... ; ....... 15 F . CONCLUSION ......................................................................................................... ~ ..................... 18 V. VIOLATIONS OF THE LAWS OR CUSTOMS OF WAR ................................................... 19 VI. CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY .......................................................................................... 21 A. APPLICABLE LAW FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITy ................................................................. 22 B. EXISTENCE OF A WIDESPREAD OR SYSTEMATIC ATTACK AGAINST THE CIVILIAN POPULATION 24 1. Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina ..................................................................................... 24 2. Vojvodina (Serbia) ................................................................................................................. 30 C'. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 32 VII. JOINT CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE....................................................................................... 33 A. NATURE OF THE COMMON PURPOSE ........................................................................................... 34 B. RELIANCE ON TRANSCRIPTS FROM THE S. MILOSEVlc CASE ........................................................ 37 C. WHETHER A PLURALITY OF PERSONS SHARED THE COMMON CRIMINAL PURPOSE .................... 38 D. EVIDENCE ON PATTERN OF CRIMES ............................................................................................ 46 E. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................... 53 VIII. PHYSICAL PERPETRATION AND INSTIGATION THROUGH SPEECHES ........... 54 A. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A REASONED OPINION ............................................................................. 54 B. SPEECHES IN MALI ZVORNIK, BEFORE THE SERBIAN PARLIAMENT, AND OTHER STATEMENTS .. 56 C. SPEECHES IN VUKOVAR .............................................................................................................. 60 D. I-IR.TKOVCI, VONODINA ............................................................................................................. 61 1. Commission and Instigation of Deportation, Persecution (Forcible Displacement), and Other Inhumane Acts (Forcible Transfer) ........................................................................... 63 2. Commission of Persecution (Right to Security) .................................................................... 69 E. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................................. 72 IX. AIDING AND ABETTING ...................................................................................................... 73 , X. IMPACT OF THE APPEALS CHAMBER'S FINDINGS ON THE VERDICT ................. 76 XI. DISPOSITION ........................................................................................................................... 78 XII. ANNEX A - PROCEDURAL HISTORy................................................................................ 1 A. COMPOSITION OF THE ApPEALS CHAMBER ................................................................................... 1 B. NOTICE OF ApPEAL AND BRIEFS ................................................................................................... 1 Case No. MICT-16-99-A 11 April 2018 910 C. ApPEAL HEARING ......................................................................................................................... 1 XIII. ANNEX B - CITED MATERIALS AND DEFINED TERMS ......................... ~ .................. 3 A. JURISFRUDENCE ........................................................................................................................... 3 1. Mechanism ................................................................................ ~ .............................................. 3 2. ICTR ........................................................................................................................................ 3 3. ICTY ........................................................................................................................................ 4 B. DEFINED TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................................................... 8 ii Case No. MICT-16-99-A 11 April 2018 909 1. The Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals ("Appeals Chamber" and "Mechanism", respectively) is seised of the appeal of the Office of the Prosecutor ("Prosecution") against the "Jugement" in the case of The Prosecutor v. Vojislav Seselj, Case No. IT-03-67-T, rendered on 31 March 2016 ("Trial Judgement") by Trial Chamber ill 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 ("Trial Chamber" and "ICTY", respectively).1 I. INTRODUCTION A. Background 2. Vojislav Seselj was born on 11 October 1954 in Sarajevo, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina.2 On 23 February 1991, he was appointed President of the Serbian Radical Party, and in June 1991, he was elected as a member of the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia.3 3. The Prosecution charged Seselj with persecution, deportation, and other inhumane acts (forcible transfer) as crimes against humanity (Counts 1, 10, and 11, respectively), as well as murder, torture, cruel treatment, wanton destruction of villages, destruction or wilful damage to institutions dedicated to religion or education, and .plunder of public and private property as violations of the laws or customs of war (Counts 4, 8, 9, 12, 13, and 14, respectively).4 c The Prosecution alleged that Seselj planned, ordered, instigated, committed, or otherwise aided and abetted these crimes.5 It further alleged that he participated in these crimes between August 1991 and September 1993 by way of a joint criminal enterprise, the common' purpose of which was the permanent and forcible removal, through the commission of crimes, of a majority of the Cro~tian, Bosnian Muslim, and other non-Serbian populations from approximat~ly one-third of the territory of Croatia and large parts of Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to make these areas part of a new Serbian-dominated state.6 1 See also Trial Judgement, Individual Statement of Judge Mandiaye Niang, 14 June 2016 (original French version filed on 31 March 2016); Concurring Opinion of Presiding Judge Jean-Claude Antonetti Attached to the Judgement, 16 September 2016 (original French version filed on 31 March 2016); Partially Dissenting Opinion of Judge Flavia Lattanzi - Amended Version, 1 July 2016 (original French version filed on 12 April 2016). 2 Indictment, para. 1. 3 Trial Judgement, paras. 2,55; Indictment, para. 4. 4 Indictment, paras. 15:..34. See also Trial Judgement, para. 8. 5 Indictment, paras. 5, 11, 15, 18,28,31,34. See also Trial Judgement, paras. 2,4,7,221. 6 Indictment, paras. 5-11, 15, 18, 28, 31, 34. See also Trial Judgement, paras. 2, 5, 222. The Indictment also charged Seselj with responsibility, through participation in a joint criminal enterprise, for the crimes committed in Vojvodina, Serbia. See Indictment, paras. 15, 31. However, at the conclusion of its case, the Prosecution no longer sought Seselj's conviction for the crimes committed in Vojvodina on that basis. See Prosecution Final Trial Brief, paras. 1, 9. See also Appeal Brief, nn.
Recommended publications
  • Sb ¡20)0 Conseil De L’Europe ^ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ COE273160 ★ ★ ★★ ★

    Sb ¡20)0 Conseil De L’Europe ^ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ COE273160 ★ ★ ★★ ★

    io') Council of Europe Sb ¡20)0 Conseil de l’Europe ^ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ COE273160 ★ ★ ★★ ★ Strasbourg, 21 June 1996 Restricted Ì <s:\cdISdoc496)NcdI\54.pdg> CDL (96) 54 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT COUNTRY REPORTS ON HUMAN RIGHTS PRACTICES FOR 1995 l "Sii :- ''ferfai 'ACCORDANCE' WITH "sEC,n6NS^lI6C(ìi';AND 5023(b)\OF THE * -.' -0 'Ä. FOREIGN' ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961. AS AMENDED ;•;■ > -V -'•■'ir'-• ; • Î.V.Î-. -:-Ад '•-A.- *.V4 '; : * . * * • *Л • \ »...ísV . .... -V? »V...... > r ' i-m ••. - / •* к .. Iя»»- • •- 'c' *•* ■ •' .4..• * •**,: •*» «' - *.< • •• - • *. • ‘,:1. *.i . _ _ ____ . 2. ............ •.»» i• A.* .d-«kis »M4* . •* ,'•» Y^. T-Vr.Î-Æ4/0Âîi^:UvVi?;»^^4"£:^>«^^ -№'i- ' j: • ’^"Rrintea'f for".tiie:.’use ;of fheixCönïmitfcees; òn *Inter2atio¿ál';,'.Re.Iatíona ¿?r »«£:• ‘i^Eouse. of. Reàresèntànves. 'ani:- Foreign ^Relations •• of. the .U.S.; Senaiijire-J^ ,-. BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA The Republic of Bosnia ana Herzegovina was formed from one of six constituent republics of the^ former Yugoslavia. Citizens endorsed independence in a 1992 ref­ erendum. President Alija Izetbegovic heads the multiethnic collective presidency of a parliamentary democratic government elected in 1990. Within days'of independ­ ence, Serbian nationalist militias, supported by elements of the former Yugoslav na­ tional army (JNA), launched attacks throughout northern and eastern Bosnia, and Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) leader Radovan Karadzic declared the establish ­ ment of the “Republika Sroska ” or “Serb Republic.” Seventy percent of the Bosnian Republic remained under Serbian occupation until the Bosnian government and Croatian offensives in August. During 4 years of war an estimated 263,000 people were killed, and two-thirds of the country's prewar pop­ ulation of 4 Vi million was uprooted and dispersed as either refugees or displaced persons.
  • Heroic Medievalism in from the Ancient Books by Stevan Sremac

    Heroic Medievalism in from the Ancient Books by Stevan Sremac

    DOI 10.6094/helden.heroes.heros./2020/02/02 Stefan Trajković Filipović 15 Heroic Medievalism in From the Ancient Books by Stevan Sremac In 1909, Jovan Skerlić (1877–1914), an influen- reacting against the idea of abandoning and tial Serbian literary critic, imagined a hypothetic- condemning the pre-modern times (Emery and al scenario in which people were given an op- Utz 2). In more general terms, medievalism can portunity to express their literary preferences in be observed as the (ab)use of the medieval past a public vote. “If our readership could vote to de- for modern and contemporary purposes. cide who is the greatest Serbian storyteller,” Starting from the point of view of studies in wrote Skerlić, “and whose books they like read- medievalism – a scholarly investigation into the ing the most, the most votes would without doubt presence of medieval topics in post-medieval go to Stevan Sremac” (Skerlić 23).1 A teach er by times (Müller 850; Matthews 1-10) – this paper profession, Stevan Sremac (1855–1906) wrote aims to research Sremac’s practice of medi- humorous stories and novels, for which he quick- evalism. Sremac’s medieval heroes are national ly gained popularity and fame. He could make the heroes, complementing the popular visions of whole nation laugh, argued Skerlić (ibid.). After the Middle Ages as the golden age of national his death, his fame endured and his humorous histories (Geary 15-40). Especially in the context works have been recognized as an import- of the multi-national European empires of the ant chapter in the history of Serbian literature nineteenth century, such a glorifying perspective (Deretić 1983: 397-403).
  • Preparing Tomorrow's Lawyers to Tackle Twenty-First Century Health and Social Justice Issues

    Preparing Tomorrow's Lawyers to Tackle Twenty-First Century Health and Social Justice Issues

    Denver Law Review Volume 95 Issue 3 Article 2 November 2020 Preparing Tomorrow's Lawyers to Tackle Twenty-First Century Health and Social Justice Issues Jennifer Rosen Valverde Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Jennifer Rosen Valverde, Preparing Tomorrow's Lawyers to Tackle Twenty-First Century Health and Social Justice Issues, 95 Denv. L. Rev. 539 (2018). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. PREPARING TOMORROW'S LAWYERS TO TACKLE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY HEALTH AND SOCIAL JUSTICE ISSUES JENNIFER ROSEN VALVERDEt ABSTRACT Changing times require changes to the ways in which lawyers, define, approach, and address complex problems. Legal education reform is needed to properly equip tomorrow's lawyers with the knowledge and skills necessary to address twenty-first century issues. This Article pro- poses that the legal academy foster the development of competencies in preventive law, interdisciplinary collaboration, and community engage- ment to prepare lawyers adequately for the practice of law. The Article offers one model for so doing-a law school-based medical-legal partner- ship clinic-and discusses the benefits, challenges, and lessons learned from the author's own experience teaching in such a program. However, the Article proposes that the clinic model is merely a starting point, and that law schools should integrate instruction in preventive law, interdisci- plinary collaboration, and community engagement throughout the curric- ulum in a carefully designed progression to achieve the curricular reform needed to properly prepare tomorrow's lawyers.
  • Trial Judgement Summary for Radovan Karadžić

    Trial Judgement Summary for Radovan Karadžić

    JUDGEMENT SUMMARY TRIAL CHAMBER United Nations (Exclusively for the use of the media. Not an official document) Nations Unies The Hague, 24 March 2016 Trial Judgement Summary for Radovan Karadžić International Please find below the summary of the Judgement read out today by Judge O-Gon Criminal Tribunal for the former Kwon. Yugoslavia Tribunal Pénal The Accused was a founding member of the SDS and served as its President from July International pour 1990 to July 1996. He was the President of the National Security Council of the Serbian l’ex-Yougoslavie Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and on 12 May 1992, the Accused was elected as the President of the Presidency of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. From 17 December 1992, he was the sole President of Republika Srpska, and the Supreme Commander of the armed forces of Republika Srpska. The Accused stood trial for 11 Counts; two Counts of genocide, five Counts of crimes against humanity, (namely persecution, murder, extermination, deportation, and forcible transfer), and four Counts of violations of the laws or customs of war (namely murder, acts of violence the primary purpose of which was to spread terror among the civilian population, unlawful attacks on civilians, and the taking of hostages. In the Indictment, the Prosecution alleged that the Accused participated in four joint criminal enterprises (―JCEs‖). The Prosecution alleged the following: From at least October 1991 to 30 November 1995, the Accused participated in a JCE, the objective of which was to permanently
  • Common Purpose and Conspiracy Liability in New Zealand: Criminality by Association?

    Common Purpose and Conspiracy Liability in New Zealand: Criminality by Association?

    Common Purpose and Conspiracy Liability in New Zealand: Criminality by Association? Julia Tolmie and Kris Gledhill* Case law interpreting the common purpose aspect of party liability and the law on conspiracy in New Zealand (as set out in ss 66(2) and 310 of the Crimes Act 1961 (NZ)) has created a situation of over-reach. Individuals who have a limited relationship to criminality carried out by another or in a group context are potentially caught by extended liability rules that can lead to a poor association between the moral culpability of a defendant and serious criminal liability. Indeed, it is suggested that these forms of liability risk guilt by association rather than on the basis of individual positive fault: we suggest that New Zealand’s judges, following and sometimes expanding upon interpreta- tions from other common law jurisdictions, have lost sight of the core concept of individual fault. I INTRODUCTION A fundamental premise of the criminal law is that an individual’s liability (and resulting punishment) is based on their own individual action and personal fault: association with criminals is not itself criminal unless specified circumstances are met.1 This substantive rule is reinforced by rules of procedure and evidence that protect against guilt by association. A prime example is the caution in using hearsay evidence, things said outside the presence of the defendant. Having said this, there are offences based on joint liability and liability for participation in another’s offending. These recognise that group dynamics or support may elevate the risk and seriousness of the principal’s offending.
  • A Sketch of Southern Slav History

    A Sketch of Southern Slav History

    THE SOUTHERN SLAV LIBRARY-III A SKETCH OF · SOUTHERN SLAV HISTORY LONDON NISBET & CO. LTD~ SERBO-CROAT ORTHOGRAPHY. s = sh in "ship." c = ts in "cats." c = ch in " church." z = j in French "jour." c = ditto (softer). j = y in "your." A SKETCH OF SOUTHERN SLAV HISTORY SOUTHERN Slav, or Jugoslav,* history from the earliest times up to the present day, presents the record of a people who, though stubborn in resistance, are by no means aggressive, and who, notwithstanding the great and exceptional misfortunes that have befallen them, have succeeded in preserving their nation~! individuality, and in asserting themselves as a homogeneous nation full of youth and vitality. In virtue of their geographical position, which makes the Jugoslav lands the most direct link between the East and West-that is to say, between Western, Central, and Southern Europe on the one hand, and the Balkans, the Adriatic, and Asia Minor on the other-these territories have always been the arena of great political rivalries and fierce racial conflicts. Many powerful states, ambitious of conquest, and aspiring towards aggrandizement-Byzantium, Hungary, Turkey, and Venice-have for centuries in turn made countless efforts to break the Jugoslav resistance, which thwarted· their ambitions and desires. Despite apparent temporary success, these efforts have proved virtually fruitless, and have so far failed to bring about the desired result. It is * The Southern Slavs, or Jugoslavs (jug, in Slav, means the south), who include Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes, are one and the same people, known under three different names. The territories inhabited by Jugoslavs are the following: the kingdoms of Serbia and Monte­ negro, Bosnia and Hercegovina, Dalmatia with the Dalmatian Archi­ pelago, Croatia and Slavonia with Rieka (Fiume) and Medjumurje, the Drave country in Southern Hungary (Baranja) with Ba~ka and the Banat, Istria with its islands and Trieste, the Slovene lands, i.e.
  • 10 Years of Impunity for Enforced Disappearances and Abductions in Kosovo

    10 Years of Impunity for Enforced Disappearances and Abductions in Kosovo

    BURYING THE PAST 10 YEARS OF IMPUNITY FOR ENFORCED DISAPPEARANCES AND ABDUCTIONS IN KOSOVO Amnesty International is a global movement of 2.2 million people in more than 150 countries and territories who campaign to end grave abuses of human rights. Our vision is for every person to enjoy all the rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other international human rights standards. We are independent of any government, political ideology, economic interest or religion – funded mainly by our membership and public donations. Amnesty International Publications First published in 2009 by Amnesty International Publications International Secretariat Peter Benenson House 1 Easton Street London WC1X 0DW United Kingdom www.amnesty.org © Amnesty International Publications 2009 Index: EUR 70/007/2009 Original language: English Printed by Amnesty International, International Secretariat, United Kingdom All rights reserved. This publication is copyright, but may be reproduced by any method without fee for advocacy, campaigning and teaching purposes, but not for resale. The copyright holders request that all such use be registered with them for impact assessment purposes. For copying in any other circumstances, or for re-use in other publications, or for translation or adaptation, prior written permission must be obtained from the publishers, and a fee may be payable. cover photo : Kosovo Albanian relatives of the disappeared demonstrate with photographs of their missing relatives, Pristina, Kosovo. © Courtesy of the Kosovo Government Commission on Missing Persons and Mr Shkelzen Rexha. back cover top : Petrija Piljević, a Serbian woman, abducted in June 1999, with her son. © Private back cover bottom : Daka Asani, a Romani man, abducted in August 1999.
  • The Vietnam Syndrome and the Conflict in Former Yugoslavia

    The Vietnam Syndrome and the Conflict in Former Yugoslavia

    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 1996-12 The Vietnam Syndrome and the conflict in former Yugoslavia. Burdelez, Mislav. Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/31956 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS THE VIETNAM SYNDROME AND THE CONFLICT IN FORMER YUGOSLAVIA • by Mislav Burdelez December 1996 Thesis Advisor: Roman Laba Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. ' REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved O:tv!B No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average I hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washingon headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0 188) Washington DC 20503. I. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES blank) December, 1996 COVERED Master's Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS THE VIETNAM SYNDROME AND THE CONFLICT IN FORlv:IER YUGOSLAVIA 6. AUTHOR Mislav Burdelez 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION Monterey CA 93943-5000 REPORT NUMBER 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITOR lNG AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLBAENTAR Y NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S.
  • The Doctrine of Common Purpose: a Brief Historical Perspective; the Common Purpose Doctrine Defined and a Focus on Withdrawal from the Common Purpose

    The Doctrine of Common Purpose: a Brief Historical Perspective; the Common Purpose Doctrine Defined and a Focus on Withdrawal from the Common Purpose

    1 THE DOCTRINE OF COMMON PURPOSE: A BRIEF HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE; THE COMMON PURPOSE DOCTRINE DEFINED AND A FOCUS ON WITHDRAWAL FROM THE COMMON PURPOSE BY NESIRA SINGH STUDENT NUMBER 209527200 ‘THIS RESEARCH PROJECT IS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE OF THE REGULATIONS FOR THE LLM DEGREE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF KWAZULU- NATAL PIETERMARITZBURG’ SUPERVISOR : PROFESSOR SHANNON HOCTOR DECEMBER 2016 2 CONTENTS CHAPTER 1 : INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Purpose and objectives of the dissertation 6 1.3 Research Methodology 6 CHAPTER 2: A BRIEF HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND THE DEFINITION OF COMMON PURPOSE DOCTRINE 2.1 Introduction 8 2.2 The Transkeian Penal Code 8 2.3 The early application of the doctrine through the cases 8 2.4. Definition of the common purpose 11 2.5 The Safasta decision 14 2.6 The Mgedezi decision 16 2.7 Conclusions 19 CHAPTER 3: THE CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE DOCTRINE OF COMMON PURPOSE. 3.1 Introduction 20 3.2 Facts of the Thebus case 21 3.3 Criticism of the Thebus case 24 3.4 Justification for the doctrine of common purpose 25 3.5 Conclusion 26 3 CHAPTER 4: DISSOCIATION FROM THE COMMON PURPOSE 4.1 Introduction 27 4.2 What constitutes withdrawal from common purpose 27 4.2.1 The intention to withdraw 28 4.2.2. A positive act 33 4.2.3 Voluntariness to withdraw 34 4.2.4 Stage of withdrawal 36 4.2.5 Type of act required 36 4.2.6 Role of the accused 37 4.3. Conclusion 43 CHAPTER 5: FOREIGN JURISDICTIONS 44 5.1 Introduction 44 5.2 The English position 44 5.3 Circumstances where foreign courts consider withdrawal 48 5.3.1 Venda decisions 48 5.3.2 Zimbabwean decisions 50 5.4.
  • Concerns in Europe

    Concerns in Europe

    CONCERNS IN EUROPE January - June 1999 FOREWORD This bulletin contains information about Amnesty International’s main concerns in Europe between January and June 1999. Not every country in Europe is reported on: only those where there were significant developments in the period covered by the bulletin. The five Central Asian republics of Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan are included in the Europe Region because of their membership of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) and the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). Reflecting the priority Amnesty International is giving to investigating and campaigning against human rights violations against women and children, the bulletin contains special sections on Women in Europe (p.76) and Children in Europe (p.79). A number of individual country reports have been issued on the concerns featured in this bulletin. References to these are made under the relevant country entry. In addition, more detailed information about particular incidents or concerns may be found in Urgent Actions and News Service Items issued by Amnesty International. This bulletin is published by Amnesty International every six months. References to previous bulletins in the text are: AI Index: EUR 01/01/99 Concerns in Europe: July - December 1998 AI Index: EUR 01/02/98 Concerns in Europe: January - June 1998 AI Index: EUR 01/01/98 Concerns in Europe: July - December 1997 AI Index: EUR 01/06/97 Concerns in Europe: January - June 1997 AI Index: EUR 01/01/97 Concerns in Europe: July - December 1996 AI Index: EUR 01/02/96 Concerns in Europe: January - June 1996 Amnesty International August 1999 AI Index: EUR 01/02/99 2 Concerns in Europe: January - June 1999 ARMENIA Prisoners of conscience (update to information in AI Index: EUR 01/01/99) At the end of the period under review at least nine young men remained imprisoned because their conscience led them into conflict with the law that makes military service compulsory for young males, and offers them no civilian alternative.
  • Prosecution of Crimes of Appropriation of Private Property Before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

    Prosecution of Crimes of Appropriation of Private Property Before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

    Awarded Theses 2018/2019 Jasenka Ferizović Prosecution of Crimes of Appropriation of Private Property before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals erma, European Regional Master’s Programme in Democracy and Human Rights in South East Europe JASENKA FERIZOVI PROSECUTION OF CRIMES OF APPROPRIATIONć OF PRIVATE PROPERTY BEFORE THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA AND THE INTERNATIONAL RESIDUAL MECHANISM FOR CRIMINAL TRIBUNALS JASENKA FERIZOVI ć FOREWORD The Global Campus of Human Rights is a unique network of more than one hundred participating universities around the world, seeking to advance human rights and democracy through regional and global cooperation for education and research. This global network is promoted through seven Regional Programmes which are based in Venice for Europe, in Sarajevo/Bologna for South East Europe, in Yerevan for the Caucasus, in Pretoria for Africa, in Bangkok for Asia- Pacific, in Buenos Aires for Latin America and the Caribbean, and in Beirut for the Arab World. Every year each regional master’s programmes select the best master thesis of the previous academic year that is published online as part of the GC publications. The selected seven GC master theses cover a range of different international human rights topics and challenges. The Global Campus Awarded Theses of the academic year 2018/2019 are: • Begalieva, Nuriza, From Democracy to Autocracy? Growing Threats to Civil Society and Media in Kyrgyzstan, Supervisor: Arusyak Aleksanyan, Yerevan State University. Master’s Programme in Human Rights and Democratisation in the Caucasus (CES), coordinated by Yerevan State University • El-Hawary, Nouran Refugees ad Migrant Access to Health in Transit Countries: Politics of Adaptability, Enactment of Slow Death and Inevitability of Pain: an Ethnography of Poor Urban Neighborhood in Rabat (Morocco), Supervisor: Jeremy Gunn, International University of Rabat (UIR).
  • In Former Yugoslavia Case Sheets

    In Former Yugoslavia Case Sheets

    @'An Unknown Destination' "Disappeared" in former Yugoslavia Case sheets Vukovar, a small town in eastern Croatia with a multi-ethnic population of Croats, Serbs, Hungarians, Ruthenes, Ukranians and others, was the scene of the earliest mass "disappearance" in the former Yugoslavia. In August 1991, after the June declaration of independence by the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ), the town came under heavy attack from Serbian irregular troops supported by the Yugoslav National Army (JNA). The siege lasted until 18 November, when Croatian forces defending the town surrendered. Following the surrender, an agreement was signed by the commander of the JNA and the Croatian Government under the supervision of the European Community Monitoring Mission (ECMM) according to which patients and medical personnel would be evacuated from the town's hospital under the supervision of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). However, on 19 November, forces of the JNA accompanied by paramilitary units entered the hospital and led patients and members of the hospital staff away. Of 444 people on the evacuation lists, only 128 eventually reached Croatia, along with a small number of medical workers. It is believed that many of those taken from the hospital were loaded into buses and driven to a collective farm at Ov_ara, about seven kilometres southeast of Vukovar. Some may have been killed on the spot. In 1992 an international team of forensic experts was able to make a preliminary excavation of an area near the farm. Here they discovered human remains, which showed strong signs that they had been unlawfully killed. They estimated that the grave contained the bodies of about 200 people, but the local Serb authorities have refused permission for a further investigation.