The latest updates from the Hague tribunal.
HARADINAJ TRIAL TO START IN FEBRUARY OR MARCH 2007 Trial of KLA leaders accused of war crimes and abuses committed against Serb civilians.
DOMAGOJ MARGETIC: NOT GUILTYTrial of Croatian journalist charged with contempt of court for publishing the names of protected witnesses.
ZELENOVIC DOESN’T WANT TO BE TRIED BEFORE A BH COURT Zelenovic is charged with rape & torture in Foca in 1992.
DOCUMENT OR “SUBJECTIVE VIEWS OF A JOURNALIST”
The testimony of a British journalist testifying in the case against 6 Serb policemen in Kosovo.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Zelenovic should be hanged for rape of girls and women.
Rape is worse than murder.
He is guilty, he knows it.
These days with AIDS I think rape ought to have the death penalty. Rape becomes a death sentence if the woman gets AIDS and it is social death in so many societies, and even when it isn't social death, it's a memory that never goes away. I have thank God never been raped, but I have had at least six friends who were and it takes a long time to just get to where it doesn't affect every single moment of the victim's life. No one I know that got raped has ever been the same and for them it usually was only one man.
Think what it does to women and girls who are the victims of gang rape!
Then there's all the physical consequences.
Owen, thanks for the links & your research. I haven't had time to look at it yet, but I hope to do so later on today.
I *believe* that in the States. (although I'm not sure if it is a law in all 50 states) if you know you have AIDS and have sex with someone without telling them your status, you can be charged with murder (note: I'm not sure if it is 1st degree murder, 2nd Degree, manslaughter or what).
Although not the exact same situation of getting AIDS after being raped, there was one case in the U.S. fairly recently of a father who purposely gave his then infant son AIDS tainted blood in hopes that the baby would die so he would not have to pay child support. He was convicted of 1st degree assult and sentenced to life in prison. If the child dies, he could be charged with murder.
That case has got to be the most disgusting and reprehensible crime I have ever heard of; 1st of all, trying to kill your own baby. 2nd, giving your child AIDS and subjecting him to a long and painful death.
The case is probably one of the most infamous "AIDS murder/assult" cases.
AIDS is a deadly weapon, just as surely as a knife, gun can be.
If someone knows they have AIDS and has sex with another person; or in the case of that "father"-if a person purposely infects someone with the HIV virus than they should be charged with assult, murder or whatever the case might be.
As it has already been pointed out, even before the very serious and often deadly risk of AIDS, rape has disaterous physical, emotional and social impacts as well.
One of the ICTY's biggest accomplishments in my opinion is that how they dealt with rape and other crimes against (primarily) women in the absolutely serious way that it should be dealt with. I believe that organized mass rape (as was done in Bosnia) is certainly a form of genocide. Especially when you look at the fact that pregancy was an expressed goal of the assults.
But, I'm not a legal expert by any means.
The ICTR agrees with me though that mass rape can be considered of genocide, the first genocide ruling handed down by that court was the mayor of the Taba commune charged with crimes related to rape. The prosecutor, Pierre Prosper, argued that rape was a form of destruction that meets the criteria for genocide.
(If I find more exact information on Prosper's arguement, I'll post it).
The book: "The Key To My Neighbor's House" looks at both Srebrenica, and the case of the Taba Commune. Two examples of genocides on two different continents in the mid 1990s.
Owen, I haven't looked at the judgement-but the book "A Problem From Hell" gives a very brief outline of Prosper's argument.
Pg 486:
"Propser believed that a group could physically exist, or escape extermination, but be left so marginalized or so irrelevant to society that it was, in fact, destroyed."
Pg 485:
"Downplaying the letter of the genocide convention, Prosper returned to its spirit.
...
Prosper echoed Lemkin when he insisted, "Complete annihilation, or intended annihilation of a group need not occur."
Prosper also argued that the genocide convention was not a rigid document, but instead an elastic, living breathing document, and it was important to interpret the convention broadly.
If he hasn't already, I hope Prosper writes a book about his experiences as a prosecutor for the ICTR and about how he developed and formated his legal argument.
It really is a landmark moment in legal history; not only was it the first genocide convention but an international tribunal; but the legacy of the ruling: that "destroy" does not necessarily means annihilation has had a tremendous impact in how genocide is percieved by the courts and legal scholars. Along with many other cases, the kristic judgement cited the Taba Commune case in their verdict.
I think we've come along way in our understanding of what 'genocide' is. I doubt if the same case was to take place 30 years ago, an international court would delegate gang rape, and sexual slavery to be a form of genocide.
Owen-no apologies needed!!
It was a very informative excerpt.
Post a Comment