The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY / ICTY) has indicted Jadranko Prlić, Bruno Stojić, Slobodan Praljak, Milivoj Petković, Valentin Ćorić and Berislav Pušić. Indictees ...are charged with individual criminal responsibility (Article 7 (1) of the Statute) and criminal responsibility of a superior (Article 7 (3) of the Statute) for crimes against humanity: persecution on political, racial and religious grounds; killing; rape; deportation; inhumane acts; inhumane acts (forcible transfer); inhumane acts (conditions of detention); imprisonment, violations of the laws or customs of war: cruel treatment; cruel treatment (conditions of detention); illegal physical labor; reckless destruction of towns, settlements or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity; destruction or willful damage to institutions dedicated to religion or education; looting of public and private property; unlawful attack on civilians (Mostar); unlawful terrorism of civilians (Mostar); cruel treatment (siege of Mostar), violations of the Geneva Conventions: willful deprivation of life; inhuman treatment (sexual abuse); unlawful deportation of civilians; illegal transfer of civilians; unlawful detention of civilians; inhuman treatment; inhuman treatment (conditions of detention); destruction of large-scale property that is not justified by military necessity, and was carried out illegally and recklessly; confiscation of property that is not justified by military necessity, and was performed illegally and ruthlessly. The trial began on April 26, 2006. The Trial Chamber's judgment of 29 May 2013 concluded that the conflict between the Croatian Army / Croatian Defense Council (HV / HVO) and the Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (ARBiH) was of an international character. The factual evidence unequivocally showed that HV forces fought together with HVO members against ARBiH, and that the Republic of Croatia exercised general control over the armed forces and civilian authorities of the Croatian Community/Croatian Republic (HZ/HR) of Herceg-Bosna. The Council also found that there was a joint criminal enterprise (JCE) with the ultimate goal of establishing a Croatian entity, partly within the 1939 Croatian Banovina, to enable the unification of the Croatian people. The ultimate goal was the annexation of this area to the territory of the Republic of Croatia in case of disintegration of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (which corresponded to great state claims), or alternatively to make this area an independent state within Bosnia and Herzegovina, closely connected with Croatia. As early as December 1991, members of the HZ Herceg-Bosna leadership (including Mate Boban, president of HZ/HR Herceg-Bosna) and Croatian leaders (including Franjo Tuđman, president of Croatia) assessed that in order to achieve the ultimate goal of establishing a Croatian entity it is necessary to change the national composition of the population in the areas that were calculated to be part of it. JCE participants knew that achieving this goal means removing the Bosniak population from the area of the so-called Herceg-Bosna and that it is in contradiction with the peace negotiations that were held in Geneva. Numerous crimes committed from January 1993 to April 1994 indicate an obvious pattern of behavior where the commission of a crime was the outcome of a plan prepared by JCE participants. The Trial Chamber found that all persons covered by the Indictment made a significant contribution to the implementation of the JCE and that their contribution indicated that they had the intent to pursue a common criminal purpose. Following consideration of the Appeals filed by the Prosecution and the Defense of the Convicts, the ICTY Appeals Chamber issued a final Judgment on 29 November 2017 against Jadranko Prlić, Bruno Stojić, Slobodan Praljak, Milivoj Petković, Valentin Ćorić and Berislav Pušić, declaring them liable for the joint criminal enterprise in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This appellate judgment upheld the convictions handed down by the ICTY Trial Chamber in May 2013. In addition to participating in a joint criminal enterprise, the Appeals Chamber upheld responsibility for killings, persecution on political, racial and religious grounds, deportations, unlawful detention of civilians, forced labor, inhumane acts, inhumane treatment, unlawful and wanton destruction of large-scale property not justified by military necessity, destruction or willful damage to institutions dedicated to religion or education, unlawful attacks on civilians and unlawful terrorism of civilians, and individually for rape and sexual abuse. The verdict confirmed that the participants from Croatia in the joint criminal enterprise were Franjo Tudman, Janko Bobetko and Gojko Šušak. From the presented evidence it was concluded that the leaders of HZ/RHB, including Mato Boban, and the leaders of the Republic of Croatia, including Franjo Tudjman, in December 1991 assessed that the long-term political goal was to achieve the unification of the Croatian people entities, within the borders of the Banovina of Croatia from 1939, it is necessary to carry out “ethnic cleansing” in the territories that were claimed to belong to the HZ/RHB. Evidence confirms that a joint criminal enterprise has been established to achieve the political goal. In this context, it was established that Franjo Tudjman advocated the division of Bosnia and Herzegovina between Croatia and Serbia by annexing part of Bosnia and Herzegovina to Croatia or, if this was not possible, by establishing an autonomous Croatian territory that would be closely connected with Croatia. Prlić, Stojić, Praljak, Petković, Ćorić, and Pušić were convicted of crimes against humanity, violations of the laws or customs of war and grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions, specifically murder, willful deprivation of life, persecution on political, racial and religious grounds, deportation, unlawful detention of civilians, forced labor, inhumane acts, inhuman treatment, unlawful and wanton destruction of large-scale property not justified by military necessity, looting and confiscation of public and private property under the third category of liability for participation in JCE destruction or intentional infliction damage to institutions dedicated to religion or education, unlawful attacks on civilians and unlawful terrorism of civilians. In addition, Prlić, Stojić, Petković and Ćorić were convicted of rape and inhuman treatment (sexual abuse). Ćorić was additionally convicted for several crimes for which he is responsible as a superior.
The principle of fair labelling has informed the creation of international crimes and other concepts of international criminal law since the modern inception of this discipline. In particular, it was ...the symbolic and condemnatory import of international labels such as genocide and crimes against humanity that partly motivated their introduction as offences separate from domestic ordinary crimes. Paradoxically, fair labelling has received marginal attention in legal scholarship and practice. Moreover, frequent instances of relabelling known as 'recharacterisation of crimes' may not be entirely consistent with that principle, inviting further analysis thereof. In this context, the purpose of this article is to provide a more systematic and comprehensive analysis of the principle of fair labelling in international criminal law, particularly in light of the phenomenon of recharacterisation of crimes. Its central claim is that fair labelling is as a fair trial right which precludes recourse to recharacterisation in certain circumstances.
This article is a response to Neve Gordon and Nicola Perugini's thought-provoking article, '"Hospital Shields" and the Limits of International Law', published in this issue. The authors advocate ...reforming the law to allow hospitals absolute protection, even in cases where they are also used by combatants for military purposes that are harmful to their adversary ('shielding hospitals'). Defining the contour of the desired protection for hospitals should start with both the institutional and personal attributes justifying their special protection as well as with the empirical data relating to the prevalence of attacks on hospitals - who and what triggers them. Against this background, this reply presents the prevailing law that grants strong protection to hospitals, albeit a contingent one that may be removed in exceptional cases of their abuse. It advocates retaining the contingent protection, though with some adjustments, and argues that the suggested absolute protection - in fact, immunity - for shielding hospitals is neither feasible nor normatively desirable. It would damage the current balance and rationale of the entire body of international humanitarian law in general and have a counter-effect upon the treatment of the sick and wounded in particular. Contrary to its apparent humanitarian rationale, absolute immunity for shielding hospitals would damage their ability to function as medical institutions and allow an adversary who controls a hospital full discretion in selecting its priorities regarding the use of its space and resources and might turn the sick and wounded into a means of warfare.
The First Rape Conviction at the ICC Clark, Janine Natalya
Journal of international criminal justice,
07/2016, Volume:
14, Issue:
3
Journal Article
Peer reviewed
Open access
On 21 March 2016, the International Criminal Court (ICC) convicted Jean-Pierre Bemba Gombo, a Congolese politician, of crimes against humanity (rape and murder) and war crimes (rape, murder and ...pillage). Specifically, the Trial Chamber found Bemba, the leader of the Mouvement de liberation du Congo (MLC), to be responsible under Article 28 of the ICC Statute for crimes committed by MLC soldiers in the Central African Republic. Bemba was the first defendant to be convicted of rape at the ICC, and the aim of this article is to explore how the judgment contributes to existing international jurisprudence on this crime. It focuses on the Trial Chamber's definition of rape, its discussion of the effects of rape and its reflections on the perpetrators' motives for committing rape.
Australian academics formed part of a feminist collective contributing as amici curiae to the appeal stage of International Criminal Court case Prosecutor v Dominic Ongwen. This comment discusses the ...significance of these amici curiae interventions.
The author examines the key components that make an apology credible and critically evaluates a series of apologies made by FW de Klerk, the last white president of apartheid South Africa. It is ...argued that to be taken seriously apology needs to be followed by reparation and restitution which is not evident in the case of de Klerk. The role of apology in relation to the Stolen Generation in Australia is also examined. The apology by Stephanus Coetsee, also in South Africa is held up as an example of genuine apology. The article is written against the backdrop of Covid 19 and Black Lives Matter and the murder of George Floyd which is also referenced.
The discharge of nuclear-contaminated water containing radionuclides into the ocean by Japan will lead to its integration into the entire ecosystem through processes of circulation and ...biomagnification, eventually entering the human body via the food chain. This poses a substantial risk of irreversible damage to both the ecosystem and human health, a situation that will worsen with the ongoing discharge of such water. The respect and protection of human rights represent an international consensus, and safeguarding fundamental human rights is a substantial obligation that states must undertake in accordance with both international and domestic law. Since the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan has continuously violated its international legal obligations to protect human rights in several areas, including the resettlement of disaster victims, the reduction of nuclear radiation levels, and the handling of contaminated water. Such actions have compromised and will continue to compromise the basic human rights of not only its citizens but also those of people worldwide, including environmental rights, the right to life, development rights, and food rights. In the aftermath of the Fukushima meltdown, the public and workers involved in handling nuclear contaminants have been continually exposed to high radiation levels, endangering their rights to life, development, and health. Japan’s inadequate efforts in victim resettlement and environmental restoration have jeopardized the environmental and food rights of its citizens to live healthily and access food in an environment unaffected by nuclear radiation. The release of nuclear-contaminated water poses a risk of Japan’s nuclear pollution to the people of neighboring countries and the global population at large. The principle of human rights underpins the theory of a community with a shared future for humanity, and human rights are a crucial area of China’s active participation in United Nations affairs and global governance. By voicing concerns over Japan’s potential human rights violations globally, China demonstrates its role as a responsible major country. In response to Japan’s breach of legal obligations and human rights violations, China can adopt a reasoned and beneficial approach, including calling on the international community to hold Japan criminally accountable for crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute and advancing scholarly discussions on ecocide and crimes against the marine environment. Furthermore, China should persist in seeking advisory opinions from the International Court of Justice and strive for substantive accountability, utilizing the mechanisms of international human rights organizations to make its voice heard.
With regard to crime, unceasing efforts are being made at the European Union level, in the context in which the war in Ukraine has given the offenders new levers to use. Equally at present, as always ...in the past, the conflict situations generate criminality, and its development becomes significant when the stake is high. Both the crisis caused by the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian military aggression against Ukraine created networks for offenders as well as a suitable ground to relate to. Human trafficking, cyberattacks, online fraud, embezzlement of funds intended for refugees, and gun trafficking are threats for which the European Union established its priorities in the fight against organized crime.
...despite reports that the North Korean government has killed infants with disabilities, forced the disappearance of children with disabilities, and willfully neglected prisoners with disabilities ...resulting in their deaths, the UN Commission of Inquiry established to investigate possible crimes against humanity committed by North Korea “barely noted” these abuses.4 Forced sterilization has occurred in a wide range of countries, including India, Japan, Sweden, and the United States.5 Persons with disabilities are disproportionately and involuntarily institutionalized and thereby exposed to “serious risk of sexual and physical violence, sterilization and human trafficking,” as well as “a higher risk of being subjected to torture and inhuman and degrading treatment, including forced medication and electroshock, restraints and solitary confinement.” 6 The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the magnitude of the systematic violations committed against this group, as people in institutional settings experienced the highest rates of mortality7 due to neglect and segregation, and older persons and persons with disabilities represent the majority of institutionalized people globally.8 In addition, in many countries, they were at greater risk of discrimination in accessing healthcare and life-saving procedures during the pandemic outbreak, facing health care rationing decisions, including triage protocols (e.g. intensive care beds, ventilators), that left them with no medical service based on assumptions about quality or value of life based on disability.9 In the last two decades, international human rights law has begun to address the rights of persons with disabilities and the corresponding obligations of states. The international system must ensure equal access to justice for all persons with disabilities by providing the necessary substantive, procedural, and age- and gender-appropriate accommodations and support, in order to facilitate their effective role as direct and indirect participants, including as witnesses, in all legal proceedings, including at investigative and other preliminary stages. Article 13 of the Convention, which requires the parties to “ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others, including through the provision of procedural and age-appropriate accommodations,” represents a paradigm shift in the legal recognition of the autonomy of persons with disabilities.14 In the justice system, persons with disabilities have often been considered to be unworthy of, unable to benefit from, or even likely to be harmed by due process protections provided to all other citizens.
PDF
