Perisic

What is the ‘specific direction’ of the judgments acquitting Gotovina, Markac and Perisic? What is the majority in the Appeals Chamber aiding and abetting here?

Did the Appeals Chamber in the Perisic case follow the same pattern of restricting the definition of individual responsibility as in the case against Gotovina and Markac last year? If so, was the acquittal the only possible outcome?

In his separate dissenting opinion appended to the judgment acquitting Momcilo Perisic, Judge Liu warned that the criterion of ‘specific direction’ – used by the majority to quash the trial judgment – has not been used consistently or rigorously in the jurisprudence. As he notes, it is not necessary to prove there was a ‘specific direction’ in order to prove aiding and abetting. To insist on ‘specific direction’, Judge Liu notes, ‘effectively raises the threshold…and allows those responsible for knowingly facilitating the most grievous crimes to evade responsibility for their acts’

In the statement of reasons attached to its judgment acquitting Momcilo Perisic, the majority in the Appeals Chamber, with Judge Liu dissenting, found that the assistance the VJ had provided to the VRS was ‘not directed specifically at committing crimes’ but at the general war effort of the Bosnian Serb army. The Chamber also found that Perisic didn’t have effective control over the SVK personnel responsible for the rocket attacks on Zagreb. Following the acquittal, the Appeals Chamber ordered Perisic’s immediate release

The Appeals Chamber will render its final judgment in the case against former chief of the VJ General Staff Momcilo Perisic on 28 February 2013. The prosecution didn’t file an appeal, while Perisic sought the reversal of the trial judgment. The Trial Chamber found Perisic guilty of aiding and abetting crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica and failing to punish those who committed crimes in Zagreb

The defense and the prosecution responded to the judges' question whether the support in the form of personnel, logistics and funds Perisic had provided to the Serb armies in Bosnia and Croatia was ‘specifically directed' at aiding and abetting crimes or if it merely supported their war effort

The defense of the former chief of the VJ General Staff Momcilo Perisic states in its notice of appeal that the majority in the Trial Chamber ‘criminalized war’, noting that ‘if Perisic’s judgment is upheld’ then ‘every military commander […] that gives military help to a foreign state […] during an international armed conflict’ is guilty of aiding and abetting crimes

By a majority vote, the Trial Chamber found the former chief of the VJ General Staff Momcilo Perisic guilty of aiding and abetting crimes against humanity and war crimes in Sarajevo and Srebrenica and of failure to punish those who ordered the rocket attacks on Zagreb

The minutes of the Supreme Defense Council meetings admitted into evidence at the Momcilo Perisic trial show that Belgrade provided more than just personnel and logistical support but transferred vast sums to the Serbs in Bosnia and Krajina and their armies. The relevant minutes of the Supreme Defense Council meetings can be accessed here

At the trial of Momcilo Perisic, the prosecution used the minutes from the Yugoslav Supreme Defense Council meetings to prove that the VJ provided not only personnel to the Serb armies in Bosnia and Krajina, but also ‘large quantities of arms, ammunition, materials and other logistical support necessary for the commission of crimes’ in Sarajevo, Srebrenica and Zagreb. The relevant minutes of the Supreme Defense Council meetings can be accessed here