Command Responsibility The Contemporary Law

The doctrine of “command responsibility” was established by the Hague Conventions IV (1907) and X (1907) and applied for the first time by the German Supreme Court in Leipzig after World War I, on the Trial of Emil Muller.  Miller was sentenced by the Court for failing to prevent the commission of crimes and to punish the perpetrators thereof.  Command responsibility is an omission mode of individual criminal liability: the superior is responsible for crimes committed by his subordinates and for failing to prevent or punish (as opposed to crimes he ordered). The doctrine was invoked by the International Military Tribunals after World War II and developed further through international and domestic jurisprudence: inter alia, the High Command, In Re Yamashita, Hostages and Abbaye Ardenne cases after World War II, and the Medina case dealing with war crimes in Vietnam.


HLC and YUCOM for Establishing the Facts and Ensuring Justice for the Assassination of Prime Minister

The Humanitarian Law Center (HLC) and Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights (YUCOM) are deeply concerned over the irresponsible behavior demonstrated by the parties to the proceedings for the assassination of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjić.   By failing to sever the cases against the 13 defendants, the court and prosecutor’s office have helped to create an impression that murdering a prime minister is a crime of the same magnitude as drugs trafficking, auto theft, robbery and the like.


HLC AND YUCOM FOR ESTABLISHING THE FACTS AND ENSURING JUSTICE FOR THE ASSASSINATION OF PRIME MINISTER

The Humanitarian Law Center (HLC) and Lawyers’ Committee for Human Rights (YUCOM) are deeply concerned over the irresponsible behavior demonstrated by the parties to the proceedings for the assassination of Prime Minister Zoran Djindjić.   By failing to sever the cases against the 13 defendants, the court and prosecutor’s office have helped to create an impression that murdering a prime minister is a crime of the same magnitude as drugs trafficking, auto theft, robbery and the like.

This serious flaw could be removed if the court accepts a motion made the deputy Special Prosecutor on 10 February this year to sever the case against those specifically accused of assassinating the prime minister so that they could be tried separately.


How to Protect Witnesses Who Are Seen by Public and Police as Traitors?

The new trial of Saša Cvjetan before the Belgrade District Court is the first for war crimes in Kosovo in which ethnic Albanians have testified in a Serbian court.  But, as in the case of a military trial of a Yugoslav Army captain and two privates for the murder of two Kosovo Albanians, the victims remained mostly unidentified.  Prosecutors here obviously do not see themselves as representing the victims and do not go to the trouble of establishing their names.  This, sadly, indicates that the names of Albanian victims do not matter to us in Serbia.


Followers of Radovan Karadžić’s Persona and Work Should Not Be in SCG Institutions

The Humanitarian Law Center addressed a letter to the SCG (Serbia and Montenegro) and Montenegrin Ministers of Foreign Affairs, Vuk Drašković and Miodrag Vlahović, demanding from them urgent dismissal of the diplomat Novak Kilibarda, who is a Political Advisor in the Embassy in Sarajevo, because of his open long-term support of the Hague indictees’ politics and encouragement of hatred directed against members of other nations. The HLC considers presence of Novak Kilibarda in the SCG Embassy in Sarajevo an offence to the victims, disapproval of their dignity, and admittance that politicians who are still appreciated in Serbia and Montenegro are those who protect the legacy of Slobodan Milošević and Radovan Karadžić.


«‹356357358359360361362363364›»