The interesting thing of a compromise verdict is not only that everyone can have a part of the verdict to agree or disagree with (or maybe even to agree or disagree with the entire judgment); but to see how the newspaper headlines cover such a mixed verdict, and what aspect they focused on, since there were many aspects of the verdict. Just a preliminary running of the headlines, most headlines focused on the acquittal on the genocide charge; with a good chunk also focusing on the failing to prevent and punish genocide.
Just a few sample headlines...
"Serbia not guilty in genocide trial."
"Serbia cleared of genocide charge over killing 8,000 at Srebrenica."
"Serbia Failed To Prevent Genocide."
and a headline which actually seems to get most factors of the verdict in the headline: "Serbia not directly guilty of Bosnian genocide, but failed to prevent it."
or this headline: "Serbia cleared in genocide, to a point."
Showing posts with label verdicts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label verdicts. Show all posts
Monday, February 26, 2007
Walking the tightrope
Although dealing with different evidence, different "defendants" (individuals vs. state government) and different courts; the ICJ mixed verdict very much mirrors that of the ICTY's verdicts; which found that only Srebrenica constituted an act of genocide.
With regard to the Jelsic case dealing with atrocities committed in Brcko, the trial chamber found:
"With regard to the first option, the Trial Chamber was not satisfied that a global genocide, that is a genocide in the whole Brcko region, had been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt. It nevertheless underlined that this finding in no way negated that such a genocide might have taken place in this region, but only that it had not been established to the satisfaction of the court."
While the trial chamber at the Stakic chamber found that:
"Despite the scale of the atrocities, after a careful analysis of the facts and the state of mind of the actors, the Trial Chamber was unable to infer the necessary dolus specialis for genocide, this dolus specialis - or specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a group as such - being the core element of the crime. Thus, the Trial Chamber was not able to come to the conclusion, based on the evidence in this case, that Dr. Stakic or other actors had the necessary specific intent."
And of course, the Krajisnik verdict this past fall was a similar verdict; with the trial chamber confirming that that acts of genocide occured but that there was not the intent to commit genocide, hence his acquittal.
The findings of the ICTY with regards to the entire Bosnia region throughout the entire war, seems to be saying, that genocide occured, but that there was no specific intent for it to occur; or that genocide might of, or probably did occur, but it wasn't proven beyond a resonable doubt. I cannot comment on these verdicts from a legal perspective and I make no qualms about their soundness of their decisions but from a personal personal perspective these verdicts lead to many more questions than answers.
Meanwhile the blogging and internet news world is filled with some interesting comments on the ICJ's mixed verdict. Yakima Gulag gazett contains some interesting comments on the middle of the road verdict, which said that Serbia is not guilty of genocide; but is guilty of failing to prevent genocide.
Meanwhile, Jakob Finci, president of the Jewish community in Bosnia, told BIRN that:
"The verdict says genocide wasn't orchestrated from Serbia but committed by a number of individuals controlled by the government,”
"As such, the verdict has made the delicate situation in the region even more complicated, he went on.“It makes one wonder what exactly the ICJ tried to say in its final statement,” he continued. “On the one hand, it seems that the court wanted to acknowledge that genocide did take place while on the other, it apparently sought and found an option not to blame Serbia for it and pin it on individuals tried and convicted by ICTY,” he added.“The verdict has failed to resolve any of the controversial issue Bosnia and Herzegovina has encountered since 1996; on the contrary, it has made all our problems even more complex,” Finci concluded.
With regard to the Jelsic case dealing with atrocities committed in Brcko, the trial chamber found:
"With regard to the first option, the Trial Chamber was not satisfied that a global genocide, that is a genocide in the whole Brcko region, had been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt. It nevertheless underlined that this finding in no way negated that such a genocide might have taken place in this region, but only that it had not been established to the satisfaction of the court."
While the trial chamber at the Stakic chamber found that:
"Despite the scale of the atrocities, after a careful analysis of the facts and the state of mind of the actors, the Trial Chamber was unable to infer the necessary dolus specialis for genocide, this dolus specialis - or specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a group as such - being the core element of the crime. Thus, the Trial Chamber was not able to come to the conclusion, based on the evidence in this case, that Dr. Stakic or other actors had the necessary specific intent."
And of course, the Krajisnik verdict this past fall was a similar verdict; with the trial chamber confirming that that acts of genocide occured but that there was not the intent to commit genocide, hence his acquittal.
The findings of the ICTY with regards to the entire Bosnia region throughout the entire war, seems to be saying, that genocide occured, but that there was no specific intent for it to occur; or that genocide might of, or probably did occur, but it wasn't proven beyond a resonable doubt. I cannot comment on these verdicts from a legal perspective and I make no qualms about their soundness of their decisions but from a personal personal perspective these verdicts lead to many more questions than answers.
Meanwhile the blogging and internet news world is filled with some interesting comments on the ICJ's mixed verdict. Yakima Gulag gazett contains some interesting comments on the middle of the road verdict, which said that Serbia is not guilty of genocide; but is guilty of failing to prevent genocide.
Meanwhile, Jakob Finci, president of the Jewish community in Bosnia, told BIRN that:
"The verdict says genocide wasn't orchestrated from Serbia but committed by a number of individuals controlled by the government,”
"As such, the verdict has made the delicate situation in the region even more complicated, he went on.“It makes one wonder what exactly the ICJ tried to say in its final statement,” he continued. “On the one hand, it seems that the court wanted to acknowledge that genocide did take place while on the other, it apparently sought and found an option not to blame Serbia for it and pin it on individuals tried and convicted by ICTY,” he added.“The verdict has failed to resolve any of the controversial issue Bosnia and Herzegovina has encountered since 1996; on the contrary, it has made all our problems even more complex,” Finci concluded.
A "genocidal" people
A number of people on the political fringes have tried to show that a guilty verdict against Serbia would mean that Serbia is a “genocidal nation” and that the average Serb will have to bear a cross as being labeled part of a “genocidal people.”
While such phrasing does make for good headlines and appealing sound bites, not to mention, good political slogans to use on the latest campaigns; that view completely misses the point of the trial and the verdict. The trial was never about branding the Serbian people with the red letter “g” for genocidaire. The trial was about whether the Serbian government, through its organs and personnel committed genocide. Even if the verdict affirmed all of Bosnia’s claims; it still would not have labeled the Serbian people as being genocidal. As Andras Riedlmayer explains here, in a way the the ICJ trial is not too different in concept from the trials of citizens suing towns or city halls for discrimination. An affirmation that one was discriminated against, does not render every single person in that town guilty of discrimination; but the specific people and city government institutions that are responsible for said act of discrimination. Nevertheless that view is perhaps too nuanced and rational for some nationalist politicians who need to see everything in such over generalized and dramatic terms in order to cause enough worry and fear amongst the average person that usually leads to such nationalist politician being elected in the first place.
While such phrasing does make for good headlines and appealing sound bites, not to mention, good political slogans to use on the latest campaigns; that view completely misses the point of the trial and the verdict. The trial was never about branding the Serbian people with the red letter “g” for genocidaire. The trial was about whether the Serbian government, through its organs and personnel committed genocide. Even if the verdict affirmed all of Bosnia’s claims; it still would not have labeled the Serbian people as being genocidal. As Andras Riedlmayer explains here, in a way the the ICJ trial is not too different in concept from the trials of citizens suing towns or city halls for discrimination. An affirmation that one was discriminated against, does not render every single person in that town guilty of discrimination; but the specific people and city government institutions that are responsible for said act of discrimination. Nevertheless that view is perhaps too nuanced and rational for some nationalist politicians who need to see everything in such over generalized and dramatic terms in order to cause enough worry and fear amongst the average person that usually leads to such nationalist politician being elected in the first place.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
ICJ Verdict: Prelude
Serbia anxiously awaits verdict and in Bosnia, they brace ahead for landmark genocide ruling.
Meanwhile, Eric from East Ethnia puts it all together for us here.
Meanwhile, Eric from East Ethnia puts it all together for us here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
