search_tooltip! X

Sense Tribunal

Perisic

Momcilo Perisic

News 82

THE HAGUE | 20.03.2014.

NO RECONSIDERATION OF PERISIC JUDGMENT

The prosecution’s motion to the Appeals Chamber for the reconsideration of the judgment against former chief of the Yugoslav Army General Staff Momcilo Perisic has been denied. Perisic was acquitted of aiding and abetting the crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica. ‘The interest of the victims’ is not a legal ground for reconsideration, the judges note in their decision
THE HAGUE | 20.02.2014.

PROSECUTION RESPONDS TO PERISIC: ‘FINALITY’ OF JUDGMENT IS NOT ABSOLUTE

The prosecution has responded to the motion in which Momcilo Perisic’s defense asked the judges not to reconsider Momcilo Perisic’s acquittal because the judgment was ‘final and certain’. The right to a ‘final’ judgment is not ‘absolute’ and shouldn’t ‘trump the manifest injustice’ to the victims of the crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica, the prosecution argued
THE HAGUE | 14.02.2014.

DEFENSE: PERISIC’S JUDGMENT IS FINAL

In a response to the prosecution’s request for the reconsideration of Momcilo Perisic’s acquittal, the defense notes that the Appeals Chamber ‘doesn’t have the power to reconsider a final judgment’. The defense concludes that the prosecution has failed to present legally sound arguments or any basis that would allow the reconsideration
THE HAGUE | 03.02.2014.

PROSECUTION ASKS FOR RECONSIDERATION OF PERISIC JUDGMENT

The prosecution has called on the Appeals Chamber to reject the standard of ‘specific direction’ and to apply a correct legal standard in the reconsideration of the judgment in which Momcilo Perisic, former chief of the Yugoslav Army General Staff, was acquitted of aiding and abetting crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica
THE HAGUE | 06.03.2013.
In the wake of Momcilo Perisic’s judgment (3)

SPECIFIC DIRECTION OF APPEALS CHAMBER’S LATEST JUDGMENTS

What is the ‘specific direction’ of the judgments acquitting Gotovina, Markac and Perisic? What is the majority in the Appeals Chamber aiding and abetting here?
THE HAGUE | 05.03.2013.
In the wake of Momcilo Perisic’s judgment (2)

JUDGES COULDN’T SEE THE WOOD FOR THE TREES

Did the Appeals Chamber in the Perisic case follow the same pattern of restricting the definition of individual responsibility as in the case against Gotovina and Markac last year? If so, was the acquittal the only possible outcome?
THE HAGUE | 04.03.2013.
In the wake of Momcilo Perisic’s judgment

NO CONSISTENCY OR RIGOUR

In his separate dissenting opinion appended to the judgment acquitting Momcilo Perisic, Judge Liu warned that the criterion of ‘specific direction’ – used by the majority to quash the trial judgment – has not been used consistently or rigorously in the jurisprudence. As he notes, it is not necessary to prove there was a ‘specific direction’ in order to prove aiding and abetting. To insist on ‘specific direction’, Judge Liu notes, ‘effectively raises the threshold…and allows those responsible for knowingly facilitating the most grievous crimes to evade responsibility for their acts’
THE HAGUE | 28.02.2013.

APPEALS CHAMBER ACQUITS GENERAL PERISIC

In the statement of reasons attached to its judgment acquitting Momcilo Perisic, the majority in the Appeals Chamber, with Judge Liu dissenting, found that the assistance the VJ had provided to the VRS was ‘not directed specifically at committing crimes’ but at the general war effort of the Bosnian Serb army. The Chamber also found that Perisic didn’t have effective control over the SVK personnel responsible for the rocket attacks on Zagreb. Following the acquittal, the Appeals Chamber ordered Perisic’s immediate release
THE HAGUE | 15.02.2013.

FINAL JUDGMENT FOR PERISIC ON 28 FEBRUARY 2013

The Appeals Chamber will render its final judgment in the case against former chief of the VJ General Staff Momcilo Perisic on 28 February 2013. The prosecution didn’t file an appeal, while Perisic sought the reversal of the trial judgment. The Trial Chamber found Perisic guilty of aiding and abetting crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica and failing to punish those who committed crimes in Zagreb
THE HAGUE | 30.10.2012.

APPELLATE HEARING IN GENERAL PERISIC'S CASE

The defense and the prosecution responded to the judges' question whether the support in the form of personnel, logistics and funds Perisic had provided to the Serb armies in Bosnia and Croatia was ‘specifically directed' at aiding and abetting crimes or if it merely supported their war effort

Cases

Schedule

The reports are delivered to Sense-Tribunal Service subscribers immediately after they are posted on the website. The full text of the reports will be available on the website the following day from 12:00 pm (noon).