Superb write up
The Prosecution in the cases of Ante Gotovina and Mladen Markač (currently on appeal) must think we are fools. Their August 17 response to the Gotovina Motion challenging the jurisdiction of the Appeals Chamber to consider an alternative mode of liability (given that the conviction was on the basis of a supposed Joint Criminal Enterprise) was obscenely disingenuous. If they get away with this artifice, it will be a reprehensible example of the disparity between law and justice.
Superficially, the response seems reasonable enough. They quote Article 25 of the Statute, which says that the Appeals Chamber may “revise” decisions of the Trial Chamber, and they cite the precedents of other ICTY and ICTR cases.
The first problem with this is that while the Appeals Chamber may revise decisions made by the Trial Chamber, it cannot revise something that doesn’t exist. How do you reconsider something that wasn’t considered in…
View original post 573 more words








Leave a reply to Michael Silovic Cancel reply