here - Humanitarian Law Center/Fond za humanitarno pravo

lot of time with them. To the best of their knowledge, the accused did not have a uniform and was
not armed. They did not recognize any of the faces in the photograph the court presented to them.
After pronouncing the judgment, Judge Vinka Beraha Nikićević, who presided over the chamber,
outlined the reasons the chamber was guided by in deciding on the judgment.
The court established that over the course of proceedings it had been established beyond doubt
that the accused had committed the act for which he was indicted and in the manner specified in
the amended indictment. The chamber did not accept the accused’s defence, considering it
unconvincing, contradictory to the testimonies of the injured parties and witnesses, and aimed at
evading criminal responsibility. The chamber gave credence to the testimony of the injured party
Đurović, who, at identification and confrontation, as well in the photograph published in the daily
newspaper Blic and Ilustrovana politika magazine identified the accused as the person who had
unlawfully detained and beat him, because his identification was corroborated by other witnesses.
That the event occurred in the manner described by Đurović was confirmed by the testimony
given by the injured party Zdravković. Witness Jovanović confirmed elements relating to the
events that occurred during the confinement of the injured parties in the yard. Witness Milan
Petrović, also identified the accused as the person shown on the photograph published in the
press. The chamber did not give credence to the testimonies of witnesses Kemal Baca and Lir
Bytyqi, friends and neighbors of the accused, considering them very vague, unconvincing and
aimed at helping the accused, by corroborating his alibi, particularly so, given that witness Kemal
Baca is an old and close friend of the accused. It was established that the accused, uniformed and
armed, joined KLA members after they had moved into Prizren, although there was no evidence
indicating that the accused was a KLA member. The court found the accused’s participation in
the detention of the injured parties, as civilians, to be unlawful and motivated solely by the
ethnicity of the injured parties. By unlawfully detaining the injured parties and violating their
bodily integrity, the accused treated them in an inhumane manner and thus violated international
law.
Assessing the mental state of the accused with regard to the criminal act, the court reached a
conclusion that the accused was aware of his act and intended to commit it, and therefore
established the existence of a direct intent.
In determining sentence, the court did not find any aggravating circumstances. The accused’s
family situation, the fact that he is father of six adult daughters, that the injured party did not
suffer from any harmful consequences and that 13 years passed since the commission of the act,
were considered as particularly mitigating factors, and hence the accused was given a reduced
sentence, even below the statutory minimum for this offence.
48