Search results

After the takeover of Srebrenica on 11 July 1995, several thousand Bosniak men fled and attempted to reach Bosnian territory. Many of them were detained and over 1000 men were brought to a warehouse and executed. Vaso Todorović, a former policeman who was involved in capturing and detaining these men and who stood guard as these men were killed, was initially charged with genocide. However, these charges were amended to a charge of crimes against humanity, and Todorović entered into a plea agreement. The Court had to assess whether there was enough evidence for a conviction and whether his plea was credible. After establishing that a widespread or systematic attack against civilians had taken place in Srebrencia, the Court established that Todorović knew about the attack and that his actions should be regarded in the context of the attack. The Court considered proven that Todorović had participated in detaining men in a warehouse, after which he prevented them from escaping their subsequent execution. He was sentenced to six years imprisonment.

On 19 February 2009, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH)’s Appellate Panel issued a second instance verdict in the case against Željko Lelek. In first instance, he was found guilty of crimes against humanity because, while performing the duties of a police officer in Višegrad, he committed unlawful imprisonment, torture and rapes, and participated in the forcible transfer of the population during a widespread and systematic attack directed by the Serb army, police and paramilitary forces against the Bosniak civilian population in the area of the Višegrad municipality in April-June 1992. The verdict was in large part upheld; the sentence, however, was increased in second instance from 13 to 16 years’ imprisonment, as the Appellate Panel attached greater weight to the aggravating circumstance of Lelek’s ruthlessness and insensitivity towards the victims.

The armed conflict in Sierra Leone, from 1991 until 2002, opposed members of the Revolutionary United Front and Armed Forces Revolutionary Council to Civil Defense Forces, loyal to the ousted President Kabbah. The hostilities were characterised by brutality as civilians and peacekeepers were targeted. In particular, young women were forced to become ‘bush wives’ for rebels, and children were recruited not only to fight in the hostilities, but also as bodyguards, cooks, cleaners, and spies.

Trial Chamber I of the Special Court for Sierra Leone convicted Sesay, Kallon and Gbao, as high-ranking members of the RUF, for multiple counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In particular, this decision was the first time that an international criminal tribunal entered convictions for forced marriage as a crime against humanity separate from sexual slavery. The Chamber also defined active participation in hostilities broadly so that the crime of using children to actively participate in the hostilities would extend to more children in different roles, for which their perpetrators could be punished. 

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.