The Prosecutor v. Idhan Sipic

Court	Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Appellate Panel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Case number	X-KR/07/457
Decision title	Verdict in First Instance
Decision date	22 February 2008
Parties	Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina Idhan Sipic
Categories	War crimes
Links	Verdict in First Instance

Summary

During the war in the Former Yugoslavia, Idhan Sipic was a member of the Reconnaissance and Sabotage Commando Company, which was part of the 5th Corps of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. On an unspecified day in mid-September 2005, in the territory of the Kljuc Municipality, Sipic entered the house of an elderly woman of Serb ethnicity, Anja Banjac and killed her with a bayonet by stabbing her in the neck.

Sipic was charged with war crimes against civilians, specifically murder. The Court found him guilty of this crime. The Court reasoned that Anja Banjac was without a doubt a civilian, killing civilians is a violation of international humanitarian law; the crime was perpetrated during the war and had a clear connection to the war. Sipic was sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment, which was a significantly mild sentence. The Court took as an extenuating circumstance that Sipic admitted to the crime.

Procedural history

Idhan Sipic was indicted on 23 November 2007. The indictment was confirmed on 10 December 2007.

A hearing for consideration of a plea agreement in the Idhan Sipic case took place on 17 December 2007. The Court refused the plea agreement between the Prosecutor's Office of BiH and Idhan Sipic. Thereafter, Sipic entered a not-guilty plea.

The trial of Idhan Sipic commenced on 8 February 2008.

Related developments

On 11 December 2012, deciding upon the motion for a quasi-renewal of the proceedings, the Court rendered the decision in the case imposing on Idhan Sipic a sentence in the duration of eight years and two months’ imprisonment.

Legally relevant facts

During the armed conflict in the Former Yugoslavia, Idhan Sipic was a member of the Reconnaissance and Sabotage Company within the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the so-called ‘Sana’ Operation, on an unspecified date in mid-September 2005 in the territory of the Kljuc Municipality, Sipic, together with Almir Harbas, entered the house of Anda Banjac, an elderly woman of Serb ethnicity, whom he attacked with a bayonet. Knowing that Anja Banjac was a civilian, he stabbed her in the neck, causing her death (Verdict, p. 1-2).

Core legal questions

What elements constitute a war crime against civilians?

Specific legal rules and provisions

Articles 3(1)(a), 4(1) and 32 of the Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
Articles 72 and 75(2) of the First Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions.
Articles 173(1)(c) and 180(1) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Court's holding and analysis

The Court examines all elements of the criminal offense of war crimes against civilians, as laid down in Article 173(1)(c) of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina. (Verdict p. 6)

These elements are:

The offence shall be committed in a manner that contravenes the provisions of international law.
The violations shall be perpetrated at the time of war, armed conflict or occupation.
The offence shall be associated with war, armed conflict or occupation.
The perpetrator shall commit or order the offence.

Analysing the relevant provisions of international humanitarian law, the Court finds that there was no doubt that Anja Banjac was a civilian and that killing her was a violation of international humanitarian law (pp. 7-8). Next, the Court concludes that the act was committed in the time of war, and that the perpetrator acted ‘in the service of war and under the cover of war’ (pp. 8-9). Thirdly, the Court examines whether there is a sufficient nexus between the crime and the state of war/conflict. Citing the Tadic decision of the ICTY, the Court concludes that this nexus exists in the case at hand (pp. 9-10). Finally, the Court concludes that the crime was directly perpetrated by Sipic, and thus that all requirements of the crime are satisfied (p. 10).

Considering the sentence, the Court considered it an extremely extenuating circumstance that Sipic incriminated himself, as without his statement the crime could have gone undiscovered (p. 12). The Court holds that his confession will have a strong impact on society, especially on victims of war crimes. This admission of guilt resulted in a significantly milder sentence, namely 8 years (p. 12).