International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) (Trial Chamber): Prosecutor v. Milošć (Decision Concerning an Amicus Curiae)

2002 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 1344-1346
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
List Type ◽  
Relevant Factor ◽  
Amicus Curiae ◽  
The Face ◽  
The Hague

The accused has complained about publications in two newspapers. The first was published on the 7th of September, 2002 in the Haagsche Courant, a Dutch newspaper in The Hague, and the second on the 13th September, 2002 in the Kultura, a Bulgarian newspaper in Sofia, Bulgaria. Both publications resulted from interviews given by Mr. Michail Wladimiroff, one of the three amici curiae in this case.The publication in the Haagsche Courant was captioned: “Wladimiroff: Already Enough Evidence Against Milosevic.” Mr. Wladimiroff is reported as saying, “If this trial were only about Kosovo and one had to draw up the balance now, Milosevic would certainly be convicted. A link has been established between the army and the police, the warring parties in Kosovo and Milosevic himself.”Mr. Wladimiroff explained that he had been misquoted, and that what he had said was that “we have seen during the Prosecution case at least on the face of it, there is a link between the offences in Kosovo and the accused. That may not be for all events, but even if it were half of it, it is a relevant factor for the Trial Chamber when reaching a verdict.”

II. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: The Erdemović Case

1998 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 461-474 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Warbrick ◽  
Dominic McGoldrick ◽  
David Turns
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Political Leader ◽  
Military Commander ◽  
The Face ◽  
International War ◽  
A Minor ◽  
War Crimes Tribunals

On 29 November 1996 Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (“the ICTY”) handed down its sentence in the case of Dražen Erdemović. This was a decision of historie significance for a variety of reasons, the most obvious being that it was the first sentence passed by an international war crimes tribunals, applying international law, since the International Military Tribunals which sat at Nuremberg and Tokyo between 1945 and 1948; it was also the first time a truly international tribunal bas concluded the trial of a minor war criminal, as opposed to a senior military commander or political leader. In addition, it was the first sentence handed down by the ICTY, which has been plagued sincc its first days of operation by problems in securing evidence and witnesses, not to mention the presence of the accused. Now the ICTY has shown, in the face of widespread criticism and accusations of impotence, that it can actually perform the task assigned to it. The doubt about such a judgment is that the Erdemović case is not perhaps the best basis on which to assess the ICTY's performance, so singular were the accused's conduct and, indeed, the circumstances in which he found himself before the Tribunal. Essentially, had it not been for the accused's voluntary surrender and his extensive co-operation with the Office of the Prosecutor, and the co-operation of the judirial authorities in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) in transferring Erdemović to The Hague, the case would probably never have happened at all.

scholarly journals Prosecutor v. Dragan Nikolić: Decision on Defence Motion on Illegal Capture

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 541-552 ◽  
Author(s):  
JAMES SLOAN
Keyword(s):  
Federal Republic ◽  
Bosnia And Herzegovina ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Defence Counsel ◽  
The Hague

In November 1994 the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), indicted its first accused, Dragan Nikolić. It was not until over five years later, however, in April 2000, that he was finally arrested and transferred to The Hague. The circumstances of his arrest – which reportedly featured his being violently abducted from his home in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) by Serbian criminals before being transferred to the NATO-led Stabilization Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina and, ultimately, to the ICTY in The Hague – were the subject of a pre-trial motion. Nikolić's defence counsel asserted that the nature of his capture was such that the appropriate remedy was to dismiss the charges against him and order his return to the FRY. They made this assertion despite an admission, for the purposes of the motion, that the captors lacked any connection with SFOR or the ICTY. The trial chamber rejected the motion. In reaching its decision, the trial chamber considered fundamental issues about what constituted an illegal capture for the purposes of the ICTY and, without explicitly doing so, appeared to reject the view of the Court in Eichmann that a person may not oppose his being tried by reason of the illegality of his capture.

Briefly Noted

2019 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 664-667
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Life Sentence

On March 20, 2019, the Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals set aside Radovan Karadžić's prior sentence of forty years and imposed a life sentence. Karadžić was convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity, and violations of the laws or customs of war in March 2016 by a Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and sentenced to forty years in prison. His crimes relate to war crimes he committed during the 1990s conflicts in the Balkans, in particular the 1995 Srebrenica massacre of 8,000 Bosnian Serbs and the three-year long siege of Sarajevo. The Appeals Chamber reversed part of Karadžić's convictions related to the Overarching JCE and dismissed the rest of his appeal, while also dismissing most of the Prosecution's appeal, aside from the sentence. The Appeals Chamber judges found that the Trial Chamber “committed a discernible error and abused its discretion in imposing a sentence of only 40 years of imprisonment,” and consequently imposed a life sentence.

Appeal may reject UN tribunal's Yugoslav acquittal

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Political Instability ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
The Hague

Significance The verdict runs counter to 20 years of jurisprudence and history at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It undermines the idea of using international criminal justice to assist in post-conflict reconstruction and reconciliation. It has caused disbelief, disappointment and anger in Croatia and Bosnia, especially among victims, and generated political instability in Serbia. Impacts The controversial judgment will further discredit the ICTY and the very idea of international criminal justice in the eyes of critics. It followed Karadzic's 40-year prison sentence, which has dismayed victims and observers expecting a harsher sentence. Despite working towards closure in 2017, the ICTY is very likely to grant an appeal. However, Seselj himself is unlikely to reappear in The Hague voluntarily.

Agreement between the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia and the ICRC on procedures for visiting persons held on the authority of the Tribunal

1996 ◽  
Vol 36 (311) ◽  
pp. 238-242
Keyword(s):  
The Netherlands ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
The Hague ◽  
First Time

On 5 September 1995, three ICRC delegates, including a doctor and an interpreter, visited the only person being held at the time on the authority of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague.1 Since then, another visit has taken place during which this detainee was seen again and two others were visited for the first time. The detainees are being held in a prison in the Netherlands, in a wing set aside for the Tribunal and specially converted to house people detained on its authority.

The Right of the Accused to Self-Representation Before International Criminal Tribunals: Further Developments

2005 ◽  
Vol 99 (3) ◽  
pp. 663-668
Author(s):  
Nina H. B. Jørgensen
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Rapid Development ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The Law ◽  
Developing Area ◽  
The Right

In its decision on assigned counsel's motion for withdrawal in the Milosevic case, the trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) observed “that assignment of counsel against the wishes of the accused is a developing area of the law both in national and international jurisdictions.” This area of law witnessed rapid development by international criminal tribunals in the latter half of 2004.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document