UN Court Hears Ratko Mladic of Srebrenica Massacre Case on Appeal

Must Read

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work,...

There Can Be No Leniency Shown To Appellant Who Pleaded To Reduce Sentence: Delhi High Court

Facts On 25.2.2016 the victim’s sister who was 13 years old was present with her sister who was 2 years...

Violation of Executive Instructions Cannot Be Sole Ground to Invalidate Transfer Orders: Tripura High Court

In Dr Bithika Choudhury vs the State of Tripura & Ors., a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra...

Case Regarding Anticipatory Bail, Applicant May Be Released Imposing Suitable Conditions: Gujarat High Court

A Single-Judge Bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Dr Justice A.P. Thakur had been hearing submissions of...

Proof of Infliction of Fatal Injury Not Mandatory for Conviction Under Section 307, IPC: Tripura High Court

In the case of Mamin Miah vs the State of Tripura, a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S....

Follow us

Ratko Mladic, former Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s military commander appealed against his life sentence. He had earlier been convicted of genocide, crimes against humanity, and violation of laws and customs of war.

Background 

The judgment was rendered on 22 November 2017 by the Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The chamber convicted him and awarded a life sentence. Mladic was convicted of genocide for leading and playing a grave role in these crimes. The four joint enterprises are the permanent removal of Bosnian Muslims and Croats from the Serb claimed territory, to spread terror among civilians by perpetrating inhumane acts such as selling and shipping, Elimination of the men and boys by killing and also capturing the United Nations personnel. The Appeals Chamber of the International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals (IRMCT) heard appeals.

The Srebrenica Massacre 

In July 1995 thousands of Bosnian Muslims were slain in cold blood, perpetrated by the Bosnian Serb forces in Srebrenica. In addition to the killings of young boys and men, there was a process of ethnic cleansing that took place by expelling over 20,000 civilians from the area. This widened the Bosnian Conflict for the coming years and resulted in irreconcilable political scenarios. The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was established to scrutinize the conduct of the military. The responsibility for the genocide was put on the senior officers of the Serb army. 

Hearing 

Mladic requested the appeal chamber for an appeal on the claim that he did not receive a fair trial. His prayer consisted of a reduction of the sentence and order of a retrial. He claimed that the Trial Chamber has erred in law and fact. The prosecution appealed to the chamber that Mladic should be convicted for genocide, the genocide against the Bosniaks and the Croats during the Bosnian War. 

Judgment 

Judge Ibanda-Nahamya was present in the courtroom in person, while Judges Nyambe, N’gum, Kam, and Panton participated through video conferencing. The judges are expected to deliver their ruling in early 2021. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Delhi High Court Temporarily Restrains Vintage Moments’ Alcohol Sale in Case of Trademark Infringement

The manufacturers of the Alcohol Brand Magic Moments had filed a suit. The Delhi High Court has passed an order restraining the manufacturing, marketing,...

NGT Red-Flags Kaleshwaram Project: Green Clearance Violated the Law, Halt Work

Excerpt The National Green Tribunal (NGT), Principal Bench, dated 20th October 2020, directed the Telangana government to stop all work, except the drinking water component...

There Can Be No Leniency Shown To Appellant Who Pleaded To Reduce Sentence: Delhi High Court

Facts On 25.2.2016 the victim’s sister who was 13 years old was present with her sister who was 2 years old (victim) at their home....

Violation of Executive Instructions Cannot Be Sole Ground to Invalidate Transfer Orders: Tripura High Court

In Dr Bithika Choudhury vs the State of Tripura & Ors., a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S.G. Chattopadhyay...

Case Regarding Anticipatory Bail, Applicant May Be Released Imposing Suitable Conditions: Gujarat High Court

A Single-Judge Bench of Gujarat High Court consisting of Honourable Dr Justice A.P. Thakur had been hearing submissions of the Applicant to release him...

Proof of Infliction of Fatal Injury Not Mandatory for Conviction Under Section 307, IPC: Tripura High Court

In the case of Mamin Miah vs the State of Tripura, a Division Bench consisting of Hon’ble Justice S. Talapatra and Hon’ble Justice S....

Bombay High Court Pursues Case Alleging Media Trial, Says NBSA Guidelines Must Be Toothed by Centre

Amid the pleas alleging media trials, the Division Bench had been hearing submissions of the News Broadcasters’ Authority (NBA). It prayed that severe restrictions...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -