Search results

On 12 August 2001, a group of armed individuals under the leadership of Johan Tarčulovski entered the village of Ljuboten in the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). The men targeted ethnic Albanians through shootings, setting houses on fire and mistreating the captured people. During this time, Ljube Boškoski was the Minister of Interior of FYROM.

 Trial Chamber II examined the incidents at Ljuboten and other locations. It concluded with respect to Boškoski that he knew that crimes were being committed in and around Ljuboten, and since he reported the incidents to the authorities that should have investigated these allegations, fulfilled his obligations to take steps to punish those who were responsible. Accordingly, he cannot be held guilty on any of the charges.

 Tarculovski, on the other hand, was actively participating in the events of 12 August 2001. He was the leader of the operation and participant in the events. Therefore, Trial Chamber II found him guilty for the war crimes of murder, wanton destruction and cruel treatment. He was sentenced to 12 years of imprisonment.

Mirko Pekez (son of Mile), Mirko Pekez (son of Špiro), and Milorad Savić were all born in Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which began in April 1992 and ended in November 1995, the three of them were members of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina (VRS). 

On 10 September 1992, members of the VRS took Bosnian civilians out of their homes in Ljoljići-Čerkazovići located in the municipality of Jajce (central Bosnia and Herzegovina), and subsequently brought them to the nearby village of Draganovac where they were lined up against the edge of an abyss before being shot. Mirko Pekez (son of Mile), Mirko Pekez (son of Špiro), and Milorad Savić were charged for their participation in the killing of 23 and the wounding of four of the Bosnian civilians. On 29 September 2008, the Appellate Panel of Section I for War Crimes of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Pekez (son of Mile) guilty for the crimes, and ordered a retrial.  

Marko Samardžija was the commander of the 3rd Company of the Sanica Battalion within the 17th Light Infantry Brigade. He has been accused of ordering soldiers under his command, on 10 July 1992, that the Bosniak (Muslim) population from the settlements of Brkići and Balagića Brdo (in the Ključ Municipality) leave their houses, after which the men older than 18 and younger than 60 were brought to the primary school in Biljani. From there, the men were murdered in groups of 5 to 10, which led to the deaths of at least 144 Bosniak men.  

On Appeal, the Court found the Accused guilty of Crimes against Humanity for the deprivation of liberty of these men, since they were forcefully moved from their homes and taken to the primary school. The Court did not find him guilty of aiding in the murders, since this was not a clear and obvious consequence of his acts.

Therefore on 15 October 2008, the Appellate Division of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Marko Samardžija guilty of crimes against humanity (depriving of liberty) and sentenced him to seven years imprisonment. 

The claimant’s father was a French Jew who was interned in France and deported to a concentration camp by the Vichy regime during World War II. The claimant brought proceedings for reparations before the Administrative Tribunal of Paris alleging that the French State and the French railway company that facilitated the transfer and deportation, the Société Nationale des Chemins de Fer Francais (SNCF) was at fault.

The case was transferred to the Conseil d’Etat, the highest administrative body in France, for advice. The Conseil d’Etat ruled that the acts of the French State, which contributed to the deportation of persons considered as Jews by the Vichy regime, constituted faults for which its responsibility was engaged. The Advice was the first time that the Conseil had ruled that reparation of such exceptional suffering could not be restricted to financial measures: they implied a solemn acknowledgement of the collective prejudice suffered by those persons, because of the role the French State played in their deportation, quoting the 1964 law suppressing time limitation on crimes against humanity, or the 1995 Presidential statement acknowledging the responsibility of the French State.

The Advice is to be eminently helpful for the 400 similar cases currently pending before French administrative courts. 

Zijad Kurtović, a commander of a military police platoon of the Bosnian army, was accused of involvement in war crimes committed during the war between Croatia and Bosnia (1992-1995). More specifically, he was charged with torturing and otherwise inflicting serious mental and physical harm to Croatian civilians and prisoners of war in a Roman Catholic church in October 1993, by beating them, forcing them to eat pages from the Bible, using and ordering others to use Croatian civilians and prisoners of war as human shields on the frontlines, and with forcing two detained HVO soldiers to perform an oral sexual intercourse. In first instance, Kurtović was found guilty on all charges and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment.

Kurtović appealed on several grounds, arguing that the first instance Panel had erred in law (using the wrong law) and in fact (wrongly established certain facts). The prosecution also appealed against the sentence, which was, in its view, too lenient. The Appellate Panel partly agreed with Kurtović where it concerned the classification of the crimes. It could not be established with certainty which victims had been combatants; however, as it was evident that all detained persons were entitled to protection under common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and that they were to be qualified (as is usual under the law of war in case of doubt) as civilians. However, the findings on the facts remained further unchanged. Therefore, the Appellate Panel amended the conviction to only include war crimes against civilians and the wanton destruction of religious monuments. The prosecutor’s appeal was dismissed; the 11-year prison sentence was upheld.