DOCSLIB.ORG

D711 11 July 2016 MB

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

MICT-15-96-PT 738 D738 - D711 11 July 2016 MB UNITED NATIONS ________________________________________________________________________ Case No.: MICT-15-96-PT Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals Date: 11 July 2016 Original: English ________________________________________________________________________ IN THE TRIAL CHAMBER Before: Judge Burton Hall, Presiding Judge Seon Ki Park Judge Solomy Balungi Bossa Registrar: Mr. John Hocking Date: 11 July 2016 PROSECUTOR v. JOVICA STANIŠIĆ FRANKO SIMATOVIĆ PUBLIC _______________________________________________________________________ STANIŠIĆ DEFENCE MOTION FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE OF ADJUDICATED FACTS _______________________________________________________________________ The Office of the Prosecutor Defence Counsel for Mr. Stanišić Mr. Douglas Stringer Mr. Wayne Jordash QC Mr. Scott Martin Defence Counsel for Mr. Simatović Mr. Mihajlo Bakrač Mr. Vladimir Petrović 737 I. Introduction 1. Pursuant to Rule 115(B) of the MICT Rules of Procedure and Evidence (“Rules”),1 the Defence respectfully requests the Trial Chamber to take judicial notice of certain facts which relate to the alleged crimes in the current proceedings and have been previously adjudicated by the ICTY Trial and Appeals Chambers in the cases of Prosecutor v. Gotovina et al.,2 Prosecutor v. Krajišnik,3 Prosecutor v. Lukić and Lukić,4 Prosecutor v. Martić,5 Prosecutor v. Mrkšić,6 Prosecutor v. Simić et al.,7 and Prosecutor v. Tolimir.8 2. Annex A provides the 92 proposed adjudicated facts (“Proposed Facts”) that the Stanišić Defence requests the Trial Chamber to consider. II. Applicable Law 3. Rule 115(B) of the Rules states: At the request of a Party or proprio motu, a Trial Chamber, after hearing the Parties, may decide to take judicial notice of adjudicated facts or of the authenticity of documentary evidence from other proceedings of the ICTY, the ICTR, or the Mechanism relating to matters at issue in the current proceedings. 4. In assessing whether to take judicial notice of a fact, the Trial Chamber follows a two-step process.9 Firstly, all Proposed Facts must satisfy the following factors: i. The fact must have some relevance to an issue in the current proceedings;10 1 MICT/1/Rev.1, 18 April 2016. 2 Prosecutor v. Gotovina et al., Case No. IT-06-90-A, Appeal Judgement, 16 November 2012; Prosecutor v. Gotovina et al., Case No. IT-06-90-T, Trial Judgement, 15 April 2011. 3 Prosecutor v. Krajišnik, Case No. IT-00-39-A, Appeal Judgement, 17 March 2009; Prosecutor v. Krajišnik, Case No. IT-00-39-T, Trial Judgement, 27 September 2006. 4 Prosecutor v. Lukić and Lukić, Case No. IT-98-32/1-A, Appeal Judgement, 4 December 2012; Prosecutor v. Lukić & Lukić, Case No. IT-98-32/1-T, Judgement, 20 July 2009. 5 Prosecutor v. Martić, Case No. IT-95-11-A, Appeal Judgement, 8 October 2008; Prosecutor v. Martić, Case No. IT-95-11-T, Trial Judgement, 12 June 2007. 6 Prosecutor v. Mrkšić, Case No. IT-95-13/1-A, Appeal Judgement, 5 May 2009; Prosecutor v. Mrkšić, Case No. IT-95-13/1-T, Trial Judgement, 27 September 2007. 7 Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić et al., Case No. IT-95-9-A, Appeal Judgement, 28 November 2006; Prosecutor v. Blagoje Simić et al., Case No. IT-95-9-T, Trial Judgement, 17 October 2003. 8 Prosecutor v. Tolimir, Case No. IT-05-88/2-A, Appeal Judgement, 8 April 2015; Prosecutor v. Tolimir, Case No. IT-05-88/2-T, Trial Judgement, 12 December 2012. 9 Prosecutor v. Popović et al., Case No. IT-05-88-T, Decision on Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts with Annex, 26 September 2006 (“Popović Trial Decision”), para. 4. 10 Prosecutor v. Hadžić, Case No. IT-04-75-T, Decision on Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts and Documents, 23 May 2013 (“Hadžić Decision”), para. 1; Prosecutor v. Karadžić, MICT-15-96-PT 1 11 July 2016 736 ii. The fact must be distinct, concrete and identifiable;11 iii. The fact, as formulated by the moving party, must not differ in any way from the formulation of the original judgement;12 iv. The fact must not be unclear or misleading in the context in which it is placed in the moving party’s motion;13 v. The fact must be identified with adequate precision by the moving party;14 vi. The fact must not contain characterisations or findings of an essentially legal nature;15 vii. The fact must not be based on an agreement between the parties to the original proceedings;16 viii. The fact must not relate to the acts, conduct, or mental state of the accused.17 However, the exclusion of Proposed Facts relating to the acts, conduct, or mental state of the accused does not apply to the conduct of other persons for whose criminal acts and omissions the accused is allegedly responsible Case No. IT-95-5/18-T, Decision on Fourth Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts, 14 June 2010 (“Karadžić Decision”), para. 16; Prosecutor v. Nikolić, Case No. IT-02-60/1-A, Decision on Appellant’s Motion for Judicial Notice, 1 April 2005 (“Nikolić Appeal Decision”), paras 11, 48, 56. 11 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Prosecutor v. Perišić, Case No. IT-04-81-PT, Decision on Prosecution’s Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts Concerning Sarajevo, 26 June 2008, para. 18; Prosecutor v. Mico Stanišić, Case No. IT-04-79-PT, Decision on Judicial Notice, 14 December 2007 (“Stanišić Trial Decision”), para. 37; Prosecutor v. Prlić et al., Case No. IT-04-74-PT, Decision on Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts Pursuant to Rule 94(B), 14 March 2006 (“Prlić Trial Decision”), para. 18. 12 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Prosecutor v. Tolimir, Case No. IT-05-88/2-PT, Decision on Prosecution Motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts Pursuant to Rule 94(B), 17 December 2009 (“Tolimir Trial Decision”), para. 8; Prosecutor v. Krajišnik, Case No. IT-00-39-T, Decision on Third and Fourth Prosecution Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts, 24 March 2005 (“Krajišnik Trial Decision”), para. 14. 13 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Karemera et al. v. The Prosecutor, Case No. ITCR-98-44-AR73(C), Decision on Prosecution’s Interlocutory Appeal of Decision on Judicial Notice, 16 June 2006 (“Karemera Appeal Decision”), para. 55; Popović Trial Decision, para. 8. 14 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Prosecutor v. Kupreškić et al., Case No. IT-95-16-A, Decision on the Motions of Drago Josipović, Zoran Kurpreškić and Vlatko Kurpreškić to Admit Additional Evidence Pursuant to Rule 115 and for Judicial Notice to be Taken Pursuant to Rule 94(b), 8 May 2001 (“Kupreškić Appeal Decision”), para. 12; Prlić Trial Decision, para. 9. 15 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Popović Trial Decision, para. 10; Prlić Trial Decision, paras 12, 19; Krajišnik Trial Decision, para. 15. 16 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Popović Trial Decision, para. 11; Stanišić Trial Decision, para. 43; Krajišnik Trial Decision, para. 14. 17 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Karemera Appeal Decision, paras 49, 50-52. MICT-15-96-PT 2 11 July 2016 735 through one or more of the forms of responsibility enumerated in the Statute;18 and ix. The fact must clearly not be subject to pending appeal or review.19 5. If these factors are satisfied in relation to a Proposed Fact, the Trial Chamber determines whether it should, in the exercise of its discretion, withhold judicial notice on the ground that taking judicial notice of the fact in question would not serve the interests of justice.20 6. In making the decision to withhold judicial notice, even when the proposed adjudicated fact fulfils the requirements laid out above, the Trial Chamber may take several factors into account.21 Facts that are ineligible for judicial notice include those that: (i) go to issues at the “core” of the Prosecution’s case; (ii) contain subjective inferences; (iii) are “unduly broad, vague, tendentious or conclusory”; or (iv) “due to lack of specificity in the original judgement, the Chamber has been unable to readily discern that the fact in question does not refer to the acts, conduct, or mental state of the accused”.22 7. By taking judicial notice of an adjudicated fact pursuant to Rule 115(B) of the Rules, the Trial Chamber will achieve greater judicial economy by not revisiting adjudicated details contained in other final judgements at the Tribunal arising from the same or similar factual premises or scenarios. The Defence submits that by taking judicial notice of the Proposed Facts listed in Annex A, the Trial Chamber will be able to devote a greater proportion of trial time to the core issues in the case. 18 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Prosecutor v. Mladić, Case No. IT-09-92-PT, First Decision on Prosecution Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts, 28 February 2012, para. 8; Karemera Appeal Decision, para. 52. 19 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 11; Karadžić Trial Decision, para. 16; Krajišnik Trial Decision, para. 14; Kupreškić Appeal Decision, para. 12. 20 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 12; Popović Trial Decision, paras 15-19. 21 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 13. 22 Hadžić Trial Decision, para. 13; Popović Trial Decision, paras 15-19; Prosecutor v. Stanišić and Župljanin, Case No. IT-08-91-T, Decision Granting in Part Prosecution’s Motions for Judicial Notice of Adjudicated Facts Pursuant to Rule 94(B), 1 April 2010, paras 46-47. MICT-15-96-PT 3 11 July 2016 734 III.
Recommended publications
  • Additional Pleading of the Republic of Croatia

    Additional Pleading 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. serBia) ADDITIONAL PLEADING OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA anneXes volume 2 30 august 2012 international court of Justice case concerning the application of the convention on the prevention and punishment of the crime of genocide (croatia v. serBia) ADDITIONAL PLEADING OF THE REPUBLIC OF CROATIA anneXes volume 2 30 august 2012 ii iii CONTENTS annex 1: supreme martial court, ii K no. 111/92, 7 may 1992, decision 1 annex 2: photo of victims of vukovar, 18 november 1991, in the article by savo ©trbac, ZloËini nad Srbima na prostoru Hrvatske u periodu 1990-1999 [crimes against serbs on the territory of croatia in the period 1990-1999] 5 annex 3: official record of the statement made by a.a., 10 July 2012 6 annex 4: statement of 7 annex 5: statement of 9 annex 6: criminal complaint lodged by the independent associa- tion of Journalists in serbia with the office of the War crimes prosecutor, 1 July 2009 12 annex 7: programme statement of the management Board of radio television serbia, 23 may 2011 14 annex 8: peace initiative of the president of the republic of croatia, dr. franjo tuman, Zagreb, 1 november 1993 16 annex 9: record of the statement of i.B., 20 april 2012 19 annex 10: rsK, ministry of the interior, state security department, doc. no. 08/2-0-1224/95, Knin, 8 June 1995, with excerpt from the Weekly civilian affairs report 30 annex 11: un, coded cable from akashi to Kofi annan, meeting in Knin, 1 august 1995 32 annex 12: request for return to the republic of croatia filed by J.K., october 1995 39 annex 13: request for return to the republic of croatia filed by m.m., January 1996 40 annex 14: request for return to the republic of croatia filed by s.p., January 1996 42 annex 15: request for return to the republic of croatia filed by s.g., february 1996 43 annex 16: request for return to the republic of croatia filed by Æ.J., october 1995 44 annex 17: official note of the statement by d.–.
  • Deterring Wartime Atrocities Deterring Wartime Jacqueline R

    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.
  • Case: Branko Grujić Et Al – 'Zvornik' War Crimes Chamber Belgrade District Court, Republic of Serbia Case Number: KV.5/05

    Case: Branko Grujić Et Al – 'Zvornik' War Crimes Chamber Belgrade District Court, Republic of Serbia Case Number: KV.5/05

    Case: Branko Grujić et al – ‘Zvornik’ War Crimes Chamber Belgrade District Court, Republic of Serbia Case number: KV.5/05 Trial Chamber: Tatjana Vuković, Trial Chamber President, Vesko Krstajić, Judge, Trial Chamber Member, Olivera Anđelković, Judge, Trial Chamber Member War Crimes Prosecutor: Milan Petrović Accused: Branko Grujić, Branko Popović, Dragan Slavković a.k.a. Toro, Ivan Korać a.k.a. Zoks, Siniša Filipović a.k.a. Lopov, and Dragutin Dragićević a.k.a. Bosanac Report: Nataša Kandić, Executive Director of the Humanitarian Law Centre (HLC), and Dragoljub Todorović, Attorney, victims representatives 30 November 2005 Branko Popović’s defence Branko Popović, who used the alias of Marko Pavlović, was in charge of the Zvornik TO Staff. He was born and lived in Sombor in Serbia. Besides working for the socially-owned company Sunce, he had a firm of his own and helped Serb refugees from Croatia through the „Krajina‟ association. The first person from Zvornik he met, through Rade Kostić, the deputy minister of Internal Affairs of the Republic of Serb Krajina, was witness K. The meetings in Mali Zvornik in Serbia Shortly before the war, that is, at the end of March 1992, the SDS president in Zvornik invited Popović to a meeting at the Hotel Jezero in Mali Zvornik with volunteers from Serbia who wanted to help and to give an „inspiration to the Serb people should it come to war.‟ The accused said that it was there that he met Vojin Vučković a.k.a. Žuća, a man named Rankić, a man named Bogdanović, and Žuća‟s brother Dušan Vučković a.k.a.
  • Décision Relative À La Requête De L'accusation Aux Fins De Dresser Le Constat Judiciaire De Faits Relatifs À L'affaire Krajisnik

    Décision Relative À La Requête De L'accusation Aux Fins De Dresser Le Constat Judiciaire De Faits Relatifs À L'affaire Krajisnik

    IT-03-67-T p.48378 NATIONS o ~ ~ 31 g -.D ~s 3b 1 UNIES J ~ JUL-j ~D)D Tribunal international chargé de Affaire n° : IT-03-67-T poursuivre les personnes présumées responsables de violations graves du Date: 23 juillet 2010 droit international humanitaire commises sur le territoire de l'ex­ Original: FRANÇAIS Yougoslavie depuis 1991 LA CHAMBRE DE PREMIÈRE INSTANCE III Composée comme suit: M.le Juge Jean-Claude Antonetti, Président M.le Juge Frederik Harhoff Mme. le Juge Flavia Lattanzi Assisté de: M. John Hocking, greffier Décision rendue le: 23 juillet 2010 LE PROCUREUR cl VOJISLAV SESELJ DOCUMENT PUBLIC A VEC ANNEXE DÉCISION RELATIVE À LA REQUÊTE DE L'ACCUSATION AUX FINS DE DRESSER LE CONSTAT JUDICIAIRE DE FAITS RELATIFS À L'AFFAIRE KRAJISNIK Le Bureau du Procureur M. Mathias Marcussen L'Accusé Vojislav Seselj IT-03-67-T p.48377 1. INTRODUCTION 1. La Chambre de première instance III (<< Chamb re ») du Tribunal international chargé de poursuivre les personnes présumées responsables de violations graves du droit international humanitaire commises sur le territoire de l'ex-Yougoslavie depuis 1991 (<< Tribunal ») est saisie d'une requête aux fins de dresser le constat judiciaire de faits admis dans l'affaire Le Procureur cl Momcilo Krajisnik, en application de l'article 94(B) du Règlement de procédure et de preuve (<< Règl ement »), enregistrée par le Bureau du Procureur (<< Ac cusation ») le 29 avril 2010 (<< Requête») 1. H. RAPPEL DE LA PROCÉDURE 2. Le 29 avril 2010, l'Accusation déposait sa Requête par laquelle elle demandait que soit dressé le constat judiciaire de 194 faits tirés du jugement rendu dans l'affaire Krajisnik (<< Jugement ») 2.
  • 20130524 Theunens Motion Amalg. Report FINAL

    20130524 Theunens Motion Amalg. Report FINAL

    IT-04-75-T 11690 D11690 - D11494 24 May 2013 SF UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No. IT-04-75-T Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Date: 24 May 2013 International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991 IN TRIAL CHAMBER II Before: Judge Guy Delvoie, Presiding Judge Burton Hall Judge Antoine Kesia-Mbe Mindua Registrar: Mr. John Hocking Date: 24 May 2013 THE PROSECUTOR v. GORAN HAD@I] PUBLIC PROSECUTION MOTION FOR THE ADMISSION OF EXHIBITS CITED IN THE AMALGAMATED EXPERT REPORT OF REYNAUD THEUNENS AND REQUEST FOR VARIATION OF THE WORD LIMIT The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Douglas Stringer Counsel for Goran Had`i}: Mr. Zoran @ivanovi} Mr. Christopher Gosnell Case No. IT-04-75-T 1 24 May 2013 11689 THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA Case No. IT-04-75-T THE PROSECUTOR v. GORAN HAD@I] PUBLIC PROSECUTION MOTION FOR THE ADMISSION OF EXHIBITS CITED IN THE AMALGAMATED EXPERT REPORT OF REYNAUD THEUNENS AND REQUEST FOR VARIATION OF THE WORD LIMIT I. Request for variation of the word limit 1. The Prosecution seeks a variation of the word limit in conformity with section 7 of the Practice Direction on the Length of Briefs and Motions. The Prosecution requests an additional 291 words to fully present the Trial Chamber and the Defence with its arguments in favour of the admission of documents cited in the expert’s report as well as documents not cited in the report. The parties will benefit from a clearly stated position with respect to the tendered material.
  • PUBLLISHED by Radovan Karadzic: Wartime Leader’S Years on Trial

    PUBLLISHED by Radovan Karadzic: Wartime Leader’S Years on Trial

    PUBLLISHED BY Radovan Karadzic: Wartime Leader’s Years on Trial A collection of all the articles published by BIRN about Radovan Karadzic’s trial before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the UN’s International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals. This e-book contains news stories, analysis pieces, interviews and other articles on the trial of the former Bosnian Serb leader for crimes including genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity during the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Produced by the Balkan Investigative Reporting Network. Introduction Radovan Karadzic was the president of Bosnia’s Serb-dominated Repub- lika Srpska during wartime, when some of the most horrific crimes were committed on European soil since World War II. On March 20, 2019, the 73-year-old Karadzic faces his final verdict after being initially convicted in the court’s first-instance judgment in March 2016, and then appealing. The first-instance verdict found him guilty of the Srebrenica genocide, the persecution and extermination of Croats and Bosniaks from 20 municipal- ities across Bosnia and Herzegovina, and being a part of a joint criminal enterprise to terrorise the civilian population of Sarajevo during the siege of the city. He was also found guilty of taking UN peacekeepers hostage. Karadzic was initially indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in 1995. He then spent 12 years on the run, and was finally arrested in Belgrade in 2008 and extradited to the UN tribunal. As the former president of the Republika Srpska and the supreme com- mander of the Bosnian Serb Army, he was one of the highest political fig- ures indicted by the Hague court.
  • Remembering Wartime Rape in Post-Conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Remembering Wartime Rape in Post-Conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina

    Remembering Wartime Rape in Post-Conflict Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarah Quillinan ORCHID ID: 0000-0002-5786-9829 A dissertation submitted in total fulfilment of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy July 2019 School of Social and Political Sciences University of Melbourne THIS DISSERTATION IS DEDICATED TO THE WOMEN SURVIVORS OF WAR RAPE IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA WHOSE STRENGTH, FORTITUDE, AND SPIRIT ARE TRULY HUMBLING. i Contents Dedication / i Declaration / iv Acknowledgments / v Abstract / vii Note on Language and Pronunciation / viii Abbreviations / ix List of Illustrations / xi I PROLOGUE Unclaimed History: Memoro-Politics and Survivor Silence in Places of Trauma / 1 II INTRODUCTION After Silence: War Rape, Trauma, and the Aesthetics of Social Remembrance / 10 Where Memory and Politics Meet: Remembering Rape in Post-War Bosnia / 11 Situating the Study: Fieldwork Locations / 22 Bosnia and Herzegovina: An Ethnographic Sketch / 22 The Village of Selo: Republika Srpska / 26 The Town of Gradić: Republika Srpska / 28 Silence and the Making of Ethnography: Methodological Framework / 30 Ethical Considerations: Principles and Practices of Research on Rape Trauma / 36 Organisation of Dissertation / 41 III CHAPTER I The Social Inheritance of War Trauma: Collective Memory, Gender, and War Rape / 45 On Collective Memory and Social Identity / 46 On Collective Memory and Gender / 53 On Collective Memory and the History of Wartime Rape / 58 Conclusion: The Living Legacy of Collective Memory in Bosnia and Herzegovina / 64 ii IV CHAPTER II The Unmaking
  • Low Resolu on Pictures

    Low Resolu on Pictures

    Low resoluon pictures From Blog to Book. xyzcontagion.wordpress.com BlogBook 2 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com Contents 1 2015 5 1.1 May ................................................. 6 Srebrenica - Η 5η μεγάλη έρευνα για τη Σρεμπρένιτσα και την ελληνική εμπλοκή (2015-05-22 10:14) 7 Η ανθρωποσφαγή στη Σρεμπρένιτσα, η Ελληνική Εθελοντική Φρουρά και η εμπλοκή της Χρυσής Αυγής - Νέα στοιχεία και αποκαλύψεις, για πρώτη φορά (2015-05-22 11:31) . 80 Η ανθρωποσφαγή στη Σρεμπρένιτσα, η Ελληνική Εθελοντική Φρουρά και η εμπλοκή της Χρυσής Αυγής - Νέα στοιχεία και αποκαλύψεις, για πρώτη φορά (2015-05-22 11:33) . 285 1.2 June ................................................ 461 Δικαστικές εξελίξεις στην υπόθεση της συμμετοχής Ελλήνων υπηκόων στη Σρεμπρένιτσα (2015-06-22 22:11) .................................... 462 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 3 BlogBook CONTENTS 4 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 1. 2015 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 5 BlogBook 1.1. MAY 1.1 May 6 ©2015 xyzcontagion.wordpress.com 1.1. MAY BlogBook Srebrenica - Η 5η μεγάλη έρευνα για τη Σρεμπρένιτσα και την ελληνική εμπλοκή (2015-05-22 10:14) Η ανθρωποσφαγή στη Σρεμπρένιτσα, η Ελληνική Εθελοντική Φρουρά και η εμπλοκή της Χρυσής Αυγής - Νέα στοιχεία και αποκαλύψεις, για πρώτη φορά στην Ελλάδα - Το πλήρες κείμενο [1] Ανοιξη του 1995: Η κλασική φωτογραφία στην περιοχή Βλασένιτσα, με τη χρυσαυγίτικη αφρόκρεμα της Ελληνικής Εθελοντικής Φρουράς ΕΕΦ. Εικονίζονται σε αρχαιοελληνικό (και καθόλου ναζιστικό) χαιρετισμό πρώην και νυν μέλη της Χρυσής Αυγής: Μπέλμπας Απόστολος, Μαυρογιαννάκης Μιχάλης, Σωκράτης Κουσουμβρής (με τις πατερίτσες), ο Κώστας και άλλοι δύο. hp://youtu.be/SOajNwAMKX0 ΣΤΟ ΒΙΝΤΕΟ του XYZ Contagion: Το φορετό σήμα της ΕΕΦ με τον δικέφαλο αετό και τον ήλιο της Βεργίνας, που φοράνε στα μανίκια τους, δεν αφήνει καμία αμφιβολία.
  • CR 2006/39 International Court Cour Internationale of Justice De Justice

    CR 2006/39 International Court Cour Internationale of Justice De Justice

    CR 2006/39 International Court Cour internationale of Justice de Justice THE HAGUE LA HAYE YEAR 2006 Public sitting held on Tuesday 2 May 2006, at 3 p.m., at the Peace Palace, President Higgins presiding, in the case concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) ________________ VERBATIM RECORD ________________ ANNÉE 2006 Audience publique tenue le mardi 2 mai 2006, à 15 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de Mme Higgins, président, en l’affaire relative à l’Application de la convention pour la prévention et la répression du crime de génocide (Bosnie-Herzégovine c. Serbie-et-Monténégro) ____________________ COMPTE RENDU ____________________ - 2 - Present: President Higgins Vice-President Al-Khasawneh Judges Ranjeva Shi Koroma Owada Simma Tomka Abraham Keith Sepúlveda Bennouna Skotnikov Judges ad hoc Mahiou Kreća Registrar Couvreur ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 3 - Présents : Mme Higgins, président M. Al-Khasawneh, vice-président MM. Ranjeva Shi Koroma Owada Simma Tomka Abraham Keith Sepúlveda Bennouna Skotnikov, juges MM. Mahiou, Kreća, juges ad hoc M. Couvreur, greffier ⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯⎯ - 4 - The Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina is represented by: Mr. Sakib Softić, as Agent; Mr. Phon van den Biesen, Attorney at Law, Amsterdam, as Deputy Agent; Mr. Alain Pellet, Professor at the University of Paris X-Nanterre, Member and former Chairman of the International Law Commission of the United Nations, Mr. Thomas M. Franck, Professor of Law Emeritus, New York University School of Law, Ms Brigitte Stern, Professor at the University of Paris I, Mr. Luigi Condorelli, Professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Florence, Ms Magda Karagiannakis, B.Ec, LL.B, LL.M., Barrister at Law, Melbourne, Australia, Ms Joanna Korner, Q.C., Barrister at Law, London, Ms Laura Dauban, LL.B (Hons), Mr.
  • Prosecution Pre-Trial Brief

    Prosecution Pre-Trial Brief

    IT-09-92-PT 37476 D37476 - D37262 24 February 2012 SMS UNITED NATIONS International Tribunal for the Case No.: IT-09-92-PT Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious Violations of Date: 24 February 2012 International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1991 IN TRIAL CHAMBER I Before: Judge Alphons Orie, Presiding Judge Bakone Justice Moloto Judge Christoph Flügge Registrar: Mr. John Hocking THE PROSECUTOR v. RATKO MLADI] Public with Public Annexes A-F P ROSECUTION P RE -T R I A L B RIEF The Office of the Prosecutor: Mr. Dermot Groome Mr. Peter Mc Closkey Counsel for Ratko Mladi}: Mr. Branko Luki} Mr. Miodrag Stojanovi} 37475 THE INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE FORMER YUGOSLAVIA IT-09-92-PT THE PROSECUTOR v. Ratko MLADI] Public with Public Annexes A-F P ROSECUTION P RE -T R I A L B RIEF Pursuant to Rule 65ter(E)(i) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence the Prosecution submits its Pre- trial Brief with the following Annexes: 1. Public Annex A: Narrative of Crimes in the Municipalities1 2. Public Annex B: Summary of Evidence to be Adduced in Support of the Crimes Enumerated in Schedules A through G of the Indictment2 3. Public Annex C: Maps Relevant to the Indictment 4. Public Annex D: Organigrams of Military and Police Units3 5. Public Annex E: Charts and Tables Relevant to Political Structures 6. Public Annex F: Glossary 1. The submission of this Pre-Trial Brief in conjunction with the Prosecution Witness List and Exhibit List filed on 10 February 2012 completes the requirements of Rule 65 ter (E).4 1 For the purposes of clarity, the Prosecution summarises its case with respect to the municipalities charged in the Indictment in this single separate narrative.
  • S/1994/674/Annex VIII Page 311 Operated by Military Police Units from Drvar. It Is Unclear If Guards from Camp Kozile Were Also

    S/1994/674/Annex VIII Page 311 Operated by Military Police Units from Drvar. It Is Unclear If Guards from Camp Kozile Were Also

    S/1994/674/Annex VIII Page 311 operated by military police units from Drvar. It is unclear if guards from camp Kozile were also transferred here for duty. 4101 / 2580 . Prekaja : The existence of this detention facility has not been corroborated by multiple sources. Reportedly just near Drvar, in the village of Prekaja is an alleged Serb controlled concentration camp. 4102 / Allegedly operated by extremists, the interns were purportedly tortured and killed at this camp. 4103 / 2581 . Titov Drvar : The existence of this detention facility has been corroborated by a neutral source, namely Medecins Sans Frontieres. Medecins Sans Frontieres reportedly acquired evidence of two Serb controlled concentration camps in Titov Drvar. 4104 / The French source interviewed several Muslim refugees from the town of Kozarac who had been interned in the Serb controlled camps. 4105 / The French agency reported that more than half of the refugees had reportedly been tortured. 4106 / 2582 . Drvar Prison : (The existence of this detention facility has not been corroborated by multiple sources). Another report alleges the existence of a Bosnian Serb controlled camp at the prison. 4107 / This location was identified as of May 1993. 4108 / The source, however, did not provide additional information regarding either operation or prisoner identification. 78. Tomislavgrad 2583 . This municipality is located in central BiH, bordering Croatia to the west. According to the 1991 Yugoslav census, the county had a population of 29,261. Croats constituted 86.6 per cent of the population, Muslims 10.8 per cent, Serbs 1.5 per cent, and the remaining 1.1 per cent were classified as "other".
  • Paper Download (410996 Bytes)

    Paper Download (410996 Bytes)

    Heroes of yesterday, war criminals of today: the Serbian paramilitary units fifteen years after the armed conflict of former Yugoslavia Keywords: paramilitary, Serbia, war crimes, media, former Yugoslavia, veterans Abstract: The aim of the paper is to describe the transformation, primarily through the medias, the image of the Serbian paramilitary unit members employed during the armed conflict of the 90es in the period of the decomposition of the former Yugoslavia. At the beginning, represented as „heroes‟, „saviors‟, „protectors‟ of the „serbianhood‟ (srpstvo), ever present main figures of the public life – their public image has gone through a couple of change. Once they were the role models for the young generation, only after the fall of the regime (2000) their involvement in war crimes, mass rape, looting and genocide attained Serbia. Several landmark trials offered a glimpse into their role during the series of the conflicts. Once warlords, with a status of pop icons, the embodiment of mythical warriors and epic bandits, they are no more the living archetypes of collective remembrance, although their responsibility remain unquestionable for a part of the contemporary society. * The paper‟s aim is to describe the transformation, primarily through the medias, of the image of the Serbian paramilitary unit members employed during the armed conflict of the 90es in the period of the decomposition of the former Yugoslavia. At the beginning, represented as „heroes‟, „saviors‟, „protectors‟ of the „serbianhood‟, ever present as main figures of the public life – their public image has gone through a couple of change. Once they were the role models for the young generation, only after the fall of the Milošević regime (2000) their involvement in war crimes, mass rape, looting and genocide attained Serbia.