On May 13, 2025, the War Crimes Department of the Higher Court in Belgrade issued a verdict in the retrial of the Zagreb case, in which Branko Tunić was found guilty in absentia of war crime against prisoners of war under Article 144, paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia and sentenced to eight years of imprisonment.
In accordance with the instructions of the Court of Appeals – which had previously stated that the accused’s actions in the original first-instance verdict were described too generally, without specification concerning each of the victims, and that the reasoning failed to link factual conclusions with individual testimonies of the victims – the Office of the War Crimes Prosecutor revised the indictment accordingly.
During the pronouncement of the verdict, the presiding judge emphasized that, in line with the revised indictment, the murder of Marko Utržan was omitted from the operative part, while the rest of the indictment was fully proven. Tunić was found guilty of intimidating, torturing, and physically injuring prisoners of war – soldiers serving mandatory military service in the Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) – who had previously surrendered their weapons and given themselves up, in the settlement of Rakitje, during the period from September 14 to October 1, 1991. Referring to the principle of ne bis in idem (no one shall be tried twice for the same offense), the court excluded the murder of soldier Marko Utržan from the verdict, as proceedings for that crime had already been finally concluded in Croatia.
As the written version of the verdict was not available at the time of this statement, the Humanitarian Law Center cannot analyze the court’s reasoning, particularly regarding the evidence supporting the prosecution’s claims. It is undisputed, however, that all in absentia trials lack the participation of the accused in the proceedings, which prevents their active defense, including presenting facts and evidence, and proposing witnesses. In this light, an important legal question arises regarding the validity of such proceedings and whether the verdict, though possibly perceived as just from the victims’ perspective, is truly fair to the accused.
Furthermore, although in absentia trials are allowed under domestic criminal legislation, the Humanitarian Law Center believes such proceedings should not be conducted in war crimes cases. Instead, these cases should be addressed through regional cooperation. Unlike in absentia trials, regional cooperation allows the accused to be genuinely brought to justice, while ensuring that the process is more efficient and based on evidence from both the defense and the prosecution, with the presence of both the accused and witnesses from both sides.
Until mid-2024, the Zagreb case was the only case before the War Crimes Department of the Higher Court in Belgrade conducted in the absence of the accused. However, there is a noticeable trend of increasing numbers of such cases, as a result of political pressure to initiate proceedings for crimes against Serbs, regardless of the realistic prospects of carrying them out.
