Prosecutor v. Marko Škrobić

Court	Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Case number	X-KRZ-07/480
Decision title	First Instance Verdict
Decision date	22 October 2008
Parties	The Prosecutor Marko Škrobić
Categories	War crimes
Keywords	war crimes, evidence, witness testimonies
Links	Verdict

Summary

On 31 July 1992, in Novo Selo (Kotor Varoš Municipality), Marko Škrobić, as a member of the Kotor Varoš HVO (Croat Defence Council) unit, entered the house of Glamocak family, together with four other armed persons. He ordered Boro Glamocak and his family to leave the house immediately. He also forced Stojko Glamocak, Boro’s father, out of the adjacent building and marched the family into the direction of the village of Ravne. On the way to that village, Marko Škrobić shot Stojko with a pistol, leading to his death.

The Court relied heavily on the testimonies of Boro Glamocak and his wife and daughters. The Court discussed how it weighed the reliability and credibility of the eyewitness testimonies. Through the evidence entered into the record, Marko Škrobić was found guilty of war crimes against civilians and sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment.

Procedural history

The indictment against Marko Škrobić was raised on 14 January 2008 and confirmed on 16 January 2008. On 6 February 2008 the Court issued a decision on termination of custody upon which the Accused was immediately released from custody. Bail had been set as a measure securing the presence of Škrobić. The trial against Škrobić commenced on 9 May 2008.

Related developments

The Panel of the Appellate Division, having held a public session on 22
April 2009, rendered the second instance verdict. The Panel dismissed as unfounded an appeal filed by the Prosecutor’s Office, while it partially upheld appeals filed by defence counsels for Škrobić and revised the first instance verdict in the sentencing part, sentencing the accused Škrobić to nine years’ imprisonment for the criminal offence of war crimes against the civilian population.

Legally relevant facts

On 31 July 1992, in Novo Selo (Kotor Varoš Municipality), Marko Škrobić, as a member of the Kotor Varoš HVO (Croat Defence Council) unit, entered the house of Glamocak family, together with four other armed persons. He ordered Boro Glamocak, his wife Stana, his underage daughters Irena, Dajana and Sanela, to leave the house immediately and forced them out of the house. He also expelled Stojko Glamocak, Boro’s father, from the house and took the family into the direction of the village of Ravne. On the way to that village, Marko Škrobić fired a bullet from a pistol in Stojko
Glamocak’s chest, resulting in Stojko’s instant death.

Core legal questions

Was Bosnia and Herzegovina in a state of war at the time of the crime, in order to reach the chapeau elements of war crimes?
How is the credibility of eyewitness testimonies as evidence determined?

Specific legal rules and provisions

Article 3 of the Fourth Geneva Convention.
Article 51(1),(2),(3) of the First Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions.
Article 173(1)(c) (killings, torture, inhumane treatment), Article 180(1) (individual criminal responsibility) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Court's holding and analysis

The Defence disputed that there was a state of war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Court very shortly discussed this while discussing the chapeau elements of war crimes, stating that, as there had been an official Declaration on the State of War, there could be no doubt that there was an armed conflict in Bosnia Herzegovina and thus in the Kotor Varos area between the ARS on one side, and the ABH and CDC on the other.

Regarding the credibility of eyewitness testimonies, the court held that while there were certain inconsistencies in the witness testimonies, on the whole, none of these inconsistencies “substantively affected the credibility of the witnesses”. The Court pointed to the fact that witness statements cannot match in their entirety, as each person observes a situation differently (p. 21) While the defence cited the Kupreskic et al Appeal Judgement as a basis for not accepting eyewitness testimonies for being notoriously unreliable, the Court pointed out that the Kupreskic case differed from the case at hand. The Court also pointed out that Appeal Chamber in Kupreskic stated that ‘in appropriate circumstances a Trial Chamber can rely on the evidence of a single victim’ (p. 22).

Taking Kupreskic into consideration, the Court also looks at US Supreme Court case law, specifically to Niel v. Biggers (409 US 188, 1972) regarding standards evaluating eyewitness testimonies (p. 23). Factors that the US Supreme Court used to determine reliability of an eyewitness testimony are: 1) the opportunity of the witness to view the actor during the event; 2) the witnesses degree of attention to the actor at the time of the event; 3) the witness’s capacity to observe the event; 4) whether the witness identification was made spontaneously, and thereafter remained consistent; 5) the nature of the event being observed and the likelihood that the witness would perceive and relate it correctly (p. 23).

Taking these factors, applying these to the case and viewing the totality of the evidence and circumstances, the Court found the testimonies of the witnesses, Boro Glamocak and his wife, to be credible and decisive (p. 23-24).

Via evidence submitted and vetted through the credibility of the eyewitness testimony criteria outlined above, the Court ultimately found Marko Škrobić guilty of war crimes against civilians and sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment.