Search results

During the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Nenad Tanasković was a reserve police officer in Višegrad, where Serbs were conducting a widespread and systematic attack against the Muslim citizens of this municipality. He was charged for having participated in this attack and having committed crimes against humanity, for example by committing murder, torture and rape; by imprisoning people; and by detaining them in inhumane conditions. The Panel at the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found him guilty of six of the seven charges made against him, although it did not consider proven that Tanasković had committed murder or detained people in inhumane conditions. He was acquitted of one charge due to lack of evidence. His sentence, 12 years imprisonment instead of the 25 years requested by the Prosecutor, gave rise to outrage on the side of the victims.

In the second instance verdict in the Zoran Janković case, the Appellate Division found the appeal to be unfounded and upheld the first instance verdict, acquitting the accused of the charges entered against him. This decision was based on the lack of valid evidence that the accused participated in the incident or that he held any position which would have enabled him to issue orders with respect to the incident.

During the Second Liberian Civil War (1999-2003), Dutch businessman Guus Kouwenhoven owned the Royal Timber Corporation and had an important position in the Oriental Timber Cooperation. Corporations like Kouwenhoven’s were an important source of income for the regime of Charles Taylor, and a close financial relationship developed between Taylor and Kouwenhoven.

On 7 June 2006, the Dutch Public Prosecutor charged Kouwenhoven with war crimes and with violation of the national regulation which implemented international prohibitions of supplying weapons to Liberia. Although the Court of First Instance found him guilty of arms smuggling (but quashed the war crimes charges), the Court of Appeal later found that he could not be convicted for any of the charges due to lack of evidence.

During the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Nenand Tanasković was a reserve police officer in Višegrad, where Serbs were conducting a widespread and systematic attack against the Muslim citizens of this municipality. The Trial Panel at the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina sentenced him to twelve years of imprisonment for his role in this attack. Tanasković brought forward several grounds for appeal, for example stating that his sentence was solely based on testimonies of (unreliable) witnesses. Also, he argued that the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina should not be applied to him, as this Code did not exist in 1992, when the attack took place. The Appellate Panel stated that the Trial Panel had been accurate in assessing the evidence and establishing the facts. Also, it stated that the Criminal Code could be applied, as international law, which was applicable in 1992, also prohibits crimes against humanity.

The Trial Panel had blamed Tanasković for not showing remorse during the trial. The Appellate Panel considered this to be unfair. Showing remorse could be seen as a plea of guilt, the Appellate Panel reasoned, and nobody is obliged to plead guilty. The sentence was modified to eight years of imprisonment.