30 May 2013 - ICTY

49278
findings. 5006 In organizing the financing of the SDG over a period of time, Stanišić took the
risk that the SDG would commit murders during that period. However, the majority, Judge
Picard dissenting, does not consider the evidence regarding the Accused’s financing of the
SDG to establish that Stanišić’s intent went beyond the intent to support these forces in
establishing and maintaining Serb control over Banja Luka. As a result, the majority, Judge
Picard dissenting, is unable to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that Stanišić intended to
further the alleged common criminal purpose through the commission of crimes.
2334. With regard to the Skorpions, the Trial Chamber recalls its finding (chapter 3.7.1) that
the Skorpions committed the crime of murder of six Muslim men and boys at Godinjske Bare
in July 1995, in the context of the Treskavica/Trnovo 1995 operation. The Trial Chamber also
found that during this operation, the Skorpions received ammunition from Pajzoš on at least
one occasion in July 1995. 5007 Before receiving the supplies, members of the SDG and the
Skorpions claimed permission from the JATD Pajzoš commander on duty at the time. On this
basis, the Trial Chamber concluded that on at least one occasion in the course of the
Skorpions’ involvement in the Treskavica/Trnovo operation, the Accused supplied the
Skorpions with ammunition. The evidence does not establish whether this ammunition was
provided before or after the commission of the murders, nor does it establish whether the
Accused’s provision of ammunition to the Skorpions was linked to the murders, rather than to
the broader and ongoing Treskavica/Trnovo operation. Under these circumstances, the
majority, Judge Picard dissenting, does not consider the evidence regarding the Accused’s
provision of ammunition to the Skorpions sufficient to establish that Stanišić’s intent went
beyond supporting these forces in establishing and maintaining Serb control over
Treskavica/Trnovo. As a result, the majority, Judge Picard dissenting, is unable to establish
beyond a reasonable doubt that Stanišić intended to further the alleged common criminal
purpose through the commission of crimes.
2335. In conclusion, the Trial Chamber has reviewed what can be inferred from Stanišić’s
actions during the Indictment period. As noted above, the Trial Chamber has not been able to
5006 The Trial Chamber recalls its findings in chapter 6.4 that i) the Accused financed the involvement of the
SDG in Operations Pauk in 1994/1995, Trnovo/Treskavica in 1995, and SBWS in 1995, by paying per diems to
a number of SDG members; (ii) the Accused remunerated SDG members outside of particular operations
between 1994 and 1995; (iii) the Accused supported the SDG in Operation Pauk in 1994/1995 by their presence
on the ground and involvement in the Pauk headquarters; (iv) the Accused supported the SDG in Operation
Trnovo/Treskavica in 1995 through the on-the-ground support of Serbian DB official Vasilije Mijović; (v) the
Accused supported the SDG in Operation SBWS 1995, by on at least two occasions supplying SDG members
with, inter alia, ammunition and uniforms; (vi) the Accused provided support to the SDG outside of particular
operations between 1994 and 1995 by arranging for their medical care,
5007 In this respect, the Trial Chamber recalls its findings in chapter 6.5.3.
Case No. IT-03-69-T 840
30 May 2013