Five things you need to know about the Radovan Karad啪i膰 case
, Senior Lecturer in Law at wrote this 'explainer' article for prior to the recent judgment. Read the .
The is issuing its judgment in the case of Radovan Karad啪i膰, arguably its most high-profile accused since the trial of Slobodan Milo拧evi膰, which ended in 2005. Here鈥檚 all you need to know about this landmark decision.
1. Who is Radovan Karad啪i膰?
He鈥檚 the former president of Republika Srpska, an autonomous region established in in 1992 at in the region. It ended in December 1995 and Karad啪i膰 lost power. He then went into hiding and wasn鈥檛 captured until 2008, when he was found in Belgrade. He had apparently been working as an for several years. His neighbours were unaware of his true identity.
2. What is he charged with?
Karad啪i膰 is charged with 11 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of the laws of war. The tribunal has already convicted a number of defendants for their role in the genocide in the enclave of where more than 7,000 men and boys were separated from their families and killed, while women, young children and some elderly men were forcibly removed from the enclave. Karad啪i膰 is charged with this genocide. He denies the charges.
He is also charged with genocide committed in seven other municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Earlier in the case, the Trials Chamber was found that there was not sufficient evidence about what happened in these seven municipalities for it to be considered genocide against Bosnian Muslim and/or Bosnian Croat groups, and the charge was dropped. However, the Appeals Chamber found that the evidence did reach the threshold, and it reinstated the charge.
Another interesting charge is the war crime of taking hostages. This is the first time that the tribunal has charged anyone with this crime. In 1995, Bosnian Serb forces detained UN peacekeepers, purportedly in an attempt to stop the NATO bombing that was going on at the time. that, because of NATO鈥檚 involvement and the peacekeepers' link thereto, the peacekeepers were lawfully detained prisoners of war. This argument has been unsuccessful to date, and is unlikely to hold sway in the Trial Chamber鈥檚 judgment.
3. How long did the trial last?
Karad啪i膰鈥檚 trial ran from 2010 to 2014. The Trial Chamber has been deliberating on its much anticipated judgment since October 2014. Over the course of the trial, the chamber heard evidence from almost 600 witnesses, received thousands of pages of evidence and received filings from both the prosecution and defence totalling 90,000 pages. Karad啪i膰 has received almost 3m pages of disclosed evidence from the prosecution. Right up , the chamber was deciding on motions where the prosecution had failed in its obligation to disclose exculpatory (in other words favourable) evidence to the accused.
4. Did he get a fair trial?
Karad啪i膰 chose to represent himself at trial and as a result, received less legal aid than he would have if he were represented by a lawyer. There have been issues with the and for the preparation of the defence case throughout the trial, only some of which were resolved by the Trial Chamber.
Karad啪i膰 has been critical of the use of written witness statements in the place of full oral testimony, and of the doctrine of which admits previously adjudicated facts from other cases into the record in this case. Furthermore, one of Karad啪i膰鈥檚 key witnesses, his wartime ally and former military leader (who is currently also standing trial in The Hague) refused to answer any questions when called to testify. Although the tribunal issued a subpoena for Mladi膰 to appear, it failed to take any further action to compel him to testify, such as charging him with contempt of court, so Karad啪i膰 missed out on this testimony.
5. What sort of sentence will he get, if convicted?
Unlike many legal systems, international criminal courts do not have sentencing guidelines, so it is hard to predict. However, if convicted of even some of the charges, it鈥檚 likely that Karad啪i膰 will spend the rest of his life in prison.
His good behaviour and co-operation with the tribunal throughout the trial will be acknowledged as a mitigating factor in sentencing, but his refusal to surrender to the tribunal will likely act against him. Furthermore, if he is found guilty, his leadership position is likely to be an aggravating factor when it comes to sentencing.
Publication date: 30 March 2016