The idea behind the Krajisnik judgment

09 October 2006 by HEIKELINA VERRIJN STUART

On September 27, sixty-one year old Momcilo Krajisnik, president of the Assembly of Bosnian Serbs from 1991-1995, was sentenced to 27 years in prison by the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia for crimes against humanity. He was acquitted on the charge of genocide. Would the judges have ruled differently if his indictment had covered the Srebrenica massacre - a crime that has led to the only two genocide convictions before the ICTY?

Both in their analysis of the genocidal intent and in their description of the joint criminal enterprise formed by the Bosnian Serb leadership, the judges in the Krajisnik case adopted a "strictly empirical approach" as they called it. Since the underlying crimes of deportation, extermination, murder, sexual assault, unlawful detention and more had already been established, there was only one evidentiary hurdle to proving genocide: the intent to destroy a group in whole or in part. In looking at the documents, speeches and witness statements, the Chamber concluded that there was a common objective among the Bosnian-Serb leadership, which included Radovan Karadzic, Biljana Plavsic, Nikola Koljevic, Momcilo Krajisnik and others. According to the judgment, Krajisnik, though not an official member of the Bosnia-Serb presidency was a de facto member by virtue of having attended all the meetings, but one. Though not a man of many words, Krajisnik clearly stated the objective of the joint criminal enterprise: "to implement what we have agreed upon - ethnic division in the field".

Purchase content: 

Want to read more?

We have tailor-made memberships for students, individuals, groups of professionals and large companies and organizations. A subscription entitles you to receive the International Justice Tribune every two weeks as well as become a member of the Justice Tribune Foundation, supporting independent reporting on international justice.

Subscribe now

Related articles

article
13 July 2010 by Hermione Gee

When Serge Brammertz took over as Chief Prosecutor for the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in 2008, Radovan Karadzic was still on the run. Today he’s on trial, but two other men are still at large. Brammertz told the IJT why it’s so important to bring them to justice.

article
Radovan Karadzic before ICTY
24 March 2016 by Stephanie van den Berg, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Judges of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) on Thursday convicted former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic of genocide for the 1995 Srebrenica massacre and nine other counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. He was sentenced to 40 years in prison for his role in the 44-month siege of Sarajevo, the establishment of a network of detention camps in Prijedor where non-Serbs were abused and tortured and taking UN personnel hostage and many other crimes.

article
13 July 2010 by Cintia Taylor

There is a constant background noise in Srebrenica of water running and birds singing. The atmosphere seems relaxed and calm - appropriate for a former spa destination. And standing in the centre of town that is all one can hear - the water stream. Now and then a car will drive by, a dog will bark, the church bells will chime, and the speakers of the recently rebuilt mosque will sound the call to prayer. Time is still. 

article
11 November 2009 by Sebastiaan Gottlieb

Radovan Karadzic conducts his own defence in his genocide trial, but he has an international team of top lawyers, academics and interns at his disposal. For months they have been preparing the defence of the former Bosnian-Serb leader. 

article
07 November 2005 by HEIKELINA VERRIJN STUART

"By planned and well-thought-out combat operations, create an unbearable situation of total insecurity with no hope of further survival or life for the inhabitants of Srebrenica and Zepa." Such were the instructions of President Radovan Karadzic in March 1995. The "purifying" intention of the directive, later known by the code name of Krivaja 95, is in no doubt. Yet it leaves open the issue of the intention to commit genocide. Legal experts at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia have been scrutinizing the gap between genocide and ethnic cleansing in an attempt to legally establish the existence of genocide in Srebrenica.