Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY
Share Embed Flag
Download ePaper

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY Gotovina et al Judgement Volume I - ICTY

cpi.hr
12.07.2015 Views

39247would file criminal reports with the military prosecutor in Split. 392 Consequently, on 8September 1995, Gotovina ordered the Commanding Officer of the 4th Guards Brigadeand the Commanding Officer of the 72nd VP Battalion to implement the Commission’sproposed disciplinary measures. 393133. On 9 August 1995, Laušić ordered that all VP units which had been engaged incombat activities during Operation Storm be disengaged from the area of combatactivities at 7 a.m. on 10 August 1995. The same units were ordered to engage inmopping-up operations of the liberated territory as of 7 a.m. on 12 August 1995. 394 Theorder was addressed to the commanders of the 67th Battalion in Zagreb, the 69thCompany in Bjelovar, the 70th Company in Karlovac, the 71st Battalion in Rijeka, andthe 72nd and 73rd Battalions in Split. 395134. The Trial Chamber has further received evidence in relation to Gotovina’spowers and obligations vis-à-vis crimes and disciplinary infractions committed by unitsunder his command. According to Marko Rajčić, the chief of artillery of the Split MDfrom April 1993 to June 1996, 396 Gotovina had no command authority over the VP inKnin, but he could ask the VP battalion commander to initiate a procedure under therules of discipline. 397 The VP could then submit a report, whereafter a disciplinarymeasure could be imposed, as in the Law on Defence Forces. 398135. Gotovina stated in a letter dated 23 May 1995 that through oral communicationswith members of the recipient’s unit, he had discovered that reports were sent to theoffenders’ original units so that disciplinary proceedings could be initiated. Accordingto the letter, reports were sent to Gotovina’s department for informational purposes.Gotovina requested information regarding the unit to which the offenders belonged sothat his command could have thorough insight and carry out appropriate preventativeactivities. 399 Consequently, in a report dated 29 September 1995 sent to Gotovina,Colonel Mihael Budimir enclosed the disciplinary and misdemeanour charges filed by392 Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10864, 10866; P1013 (Report on measures taken signed by Ante Gotovina, 8September 1995), pp. 5-6.393 P1013 (Order imposing disciplinary measures signed by Ante Gotovina, 8 September 1995), p. 7.394 D837 (Order by Mate Laušić, 9 August 1995), p. 2.395 D837 (Order by Mate Laušić, 9 August 1995), p. 1.396 D1425 (Marko Rajčić, witness statement, 13 February 2009), para. 1; Marko Rajčić, T. 16236, 16275;P2323 (Military Police official note of Rajčić interview, 11 July 2008), p. 1.397 Marko Rajčić, T. 16509-16510, 16512-16513.398 Marko Rajčić, T. 16513.399 P1029 (Letter regarding reports on traffic offenders signed by Ante Gotovina, 23 May 1995), p. 3.68Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

39246the Traffic Company of the 72nd VP Battalion for traffic offences committed between25 August and 25 September 1995. 400136. Botteri testified that the commander of a unit had the obligation to inform theVP as soon as he learned of the commission of a criminal offence. 401 Botteri testifiedthat not every criminal offence involved a breach of the rules of military discipline andthat criminal charges against military personnel were therefore conducted in separateproceedings before a military court. 402137. Article 5 of the Code of Military Discipline defined two types of disciplinarybreaches: minor and major disciplinary offences. 403 For a minor disciplinary offence,any commander from the platoon commander level upwards could take disciplinarymeasures, while the disciplinary sentence for a major violation could only be issued bya military disciplinary court. 404 Criminal investigations generally subsumed disciplinaryinvestigations. 405 Although Article 31 of the Code of Military Discipline allowed anofficer to initiate disciplinary proceedings after informing the Prosecutor of his findingsthat a certain offence against military discipline was also a criminal offence, Botteritestified that in practice such cases were only dealt with in the investigative departmentof the County Courts. 406138. Article 35 of the Code of Military Discipline, authorized superior officers toconduct regular evaluations of decisions on disciplinary measures within 30 days of thedate that they were pronounced. 407 According to Botteri, Gotovina’s position requiredthat he assess the regularity and adequacy of every disciplinary measure pronounced byhis direct subordinates. 408 Gotovina’s assessment of the disciplinary measures issued by400 P1030 (Report on traffic offenders signed by Colonel Mihael Budimir, 29 September 1995).401 P1006 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 8 November 2007), para. 10.402 D878 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 24 October 2008), para. 23; D893 (Report on militarycourts’ disciplinary measures and sentences from October to December 1995 signed by Brigadier PeroToljan, 15 April 1996), p. 7.403 P1006 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 8 November 2007), para. 3; D878 (Ljiljana Botteri, witnessstatement, 24 October 2008), para. 4; Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10962; P1007 (Code of Military Discipline, 25April 1992), Article 5.404 P1006 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 8 November 2007), para. 3; P1007 (Code of MilitaryDiscipline, 25 April 1992), Articles 21, 23, 53.405 Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10948-10949.406 D878 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 24 October 2008), para. 8, Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10944; P1007(Code of Military Discipline, 25 April 1992), Article 31.407 P1007 (Code of Military Discipline, 25 April 1992), Article 35.408 Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10936.69Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

39246the Traffic Company of the 72nd VP Batt<strong>al</strong>ion for traffic offences committed b<strong>et</strong>ween25 August and 25 September 1995. 400136. Botteri testified that the commander of a unit had the obligation to inform theVP as soon as he learned of the commission of a crimin<strong>al</strong> offence. 401 Botteri testifiedthat not every crimin<strong>al</strong> offence involved a breach of the rules of military discipline andthat crimin<strong>al</strong> charges against military personnel were therefore conducted in separateproceedings before a military court. 402137. Article 5 of the Code of Military Discipline defined two types of disciplinarybreaches: minor and major disciplinary offences. 403 For a minor disciplinary offence,any commander from the platoon commander level upwards could take disciplinarymeasures, while the disciplinary sentence for a major violation could only be issued bya military disciplinary court. 404 Crimin<strong>al</strong> investigations gener<strong>al</strong>ly subsumed disciplinaryinvestigations. 405 Although Article 31 of the Code of Military Discipline <strong>al</strong>lowed anofficer to initiate disciplinary proceedings after informing the Prosecutor of his findingsthat a certain offence against military discipline was <strong>al</strong>so a crimin<strong>al</strong> offence, Botteritestified that in practice such cases were only de<strong>al</strong>t with in the investigative departmentof the County Courts. 406138. Article 35 of the Code of Military Discipline, authorized superior officers toconduct regular ev<strong>al</strong>uations of decisions on disciplinary measures within 30 days of thedate that they were pronounced. 407 According to Botteri, <strong>Gotovina</strong>’s position requiredthat he assess the regularity and adequacy of every disciplinary measure pronounced byhis direct subordinates. 408 <strong>Gotovina</strong>’s assessment of the disciplinary measures issued by400 P1030 (Report on traffic offenders signed by Colonel Mihael Budimir, 29 September 1995).401 P1006 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 8 November 2007), para. 10.402 D878 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 24 October 2008), para. 23; D893 (Report on militarycourts’ disciplinary measures and sentences from October to December 1995 signed by Brigadier PeroToljan, 15 April 1996), p. 7.403 P1006 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 8 November 2007), para. 3; D878 (Ljiljana Botteri, witnessstatement, 24 October 2008), para. 4; Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10962; P1007 (Code of Military Discipline, 25April 1992), Article 5.404 P1006 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 8 November 2007), para. 3; P1007 (Code of MilitaryDiscipline, 25 April 1992), Articles 21, 23, 53.405 Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10948-10949.406 D878 (Ljiljana Botteri, witness statement, 24 October 2008), para. 8, Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10944; P1007(Code of Military Discipline, 25 April 1992), Article 31.407 P1007 (Code of Military Discipline, 25 April 1992), Article 35.408 Ljiljana Botteri, T. 10936.69Case No.: IT-06-90-T 15 April 2011 `

logo

products

Resources

Company

Terms of service
Privacy policy
Cookie policy
Cookie settings
Imprint
Change language
Made with love in Switzerland
© 2024 Yumpu.com all rights reserved

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!