Tuesday, 09.09.2014.
16:07
A memorial service for Serbs killed in September 1993 by Croatian forces in the Medak Pocket (Medački Džep) area was held in Belgrade on Tuesday.
Izvor: Tanjug
IMAGE SOURCE
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 18 September 2014 06:03) Because there was not any shred evidence on what Judge Harhoff said. I don't want my money to be spent on chasing ghosts :)
------
Too late mate. The ICTY circus, which accepts hearsay evidence, has been chasing and investigating ghosts, and admitting their testimony as evidence for close to two decades.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:58) When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
----
The essence and entire credibility of the ICTY had been challenged by one of its own vetted Judges.
I am glad that we both agree: an impartial investigation and hearing of the evidence is long overdue.
So far, the ICTY has refused to provide any answers or even launch an investigation. If the ICTY can't deal with this gross scandal and serious charge of judicial contempt, then those of us with our brains switched "on" are entirely justified in questioning the ICTY's credibility and capability in managing or judging any other investigation.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 17 September 2014 18:16)
Because there was not any shred evidence on what Judge Harhoff said. I don't want my money to be spent on chasing ghosts :)
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:58) When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
----
The essence and entire credibility of the ICTY had been challenged by one of its own vetted Judges.
I am glad that we both agree: an impartial investigation and hearing of the evidence is long overdue.
So far, the ICTY has refused to provide any answers or even launch an investigation. If the ICTY can't deal with this gross scandal and serious charge of judicial contempt, then those of us with our brains switched "on" are entirely justified in questioning the ICTY's credibility and capability in managing or judging any other investigation.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:54) That’s your opinion. You have provided no evidence for that other than hearsay that X site or person said so.
----------
The lunacy accepting hearsay evidence in the Tadic trial, from the ICTY website:
http://www.icty.org/sid/7324
The summaary from the hearsay decision in the Blaksic trial:
http://www.icty.org/sid/7700
Please ask the ringmaster at the ICTY circus why they only have the Press Releases for these decisions on the Case websites?
icj1, your demand for evidence is more stringent than that demanded by the Judges at the ICTY. Rather than challenging me, perhaps you should question the insanity running amok at the ICTY?
pre 9 godina
In its decision, the Trial Chamber noted that the Tribunal's Rules do not specifically exclude hearsay evidence.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Well, if the Statute approved by the UNSC says so, than it is not the Trial Chamber that is “laughable” – that Chamber is following the Law (i.e. the Statute), but it is Russia which is “laughable” in proposing and approving that Court.
----------
You strongly refuse to take to take my word
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Of course. Not just yours; I refuse to take anybody’s word until I see the supporting arguments. I can’t switch off my brain because somebody says so :)
----------
Do you agree with most reputable jurists, or do ignorantly follow the ICTY circus (without actually reading decisions) and their masquerade of a quasi-judicial farce that accepts and depends on hearsay evidence?
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Well, you have not shown a difference between most reputable jurists and ICTY so the question above really makes no sense until you show that :)
pre 9 godina
Dear icj1, you should realize that if the ICTY rejected hearsay, as most reptutable courts do, the OTP and the prosecution would not have had anything to present.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
That’s your opinion. You have provided no evidence for that other than hearsay that X site or person said so.
----------
I suggest that you "switch your brain on" and actually read some of the laughable tribunal decisions before ignorantly claiming they do not contravene general legal norms.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
I’ve read them and have not found anything laughable; that's similar to you that even with extensive effort in reading them still have not shown anything laughable that you have found.
----------
Precedence for the ICTY's general acceptance of hearsay evidence prior to the Blaksic trial chamber was provided during the Tadic trial. You may wish to turn on your brain and read the legal lunacy that was established in the Tadic case in a decision rendered on 5 August 1996, Trial Chamber II (Judges McDonald, Stephen, Vohrah) rejected a motion filed by counsel for Mr. Tadic seeking to exclude hearsay evidence during the trial as a general rule.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Again, no decision exists on 5 August 1996 by Trial Chamber II on Tadic’s case in ICTY’s website. Please provide a link to the decision.
pre 9 godina
Fine then, ignore the comments from a relative nobody. What about listening to a presumably reputable jurist like Judge Harhoff who passed your rigorous UNSC and UNGA vetting process. This ICTY Judge's own written record claims that that the verdicts from the court and its president are influenced by external political diktat.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 05:25)
Judge Harhoff passed the UNSC and UNGA vetting process to issue judgments, decisions, orders and opinions in accordance with the ICTY Statute. Nobody has vetted Judge Harhoff in writing emails. When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
pre 9 godina
The record of the ICTY shows total disregard for the this basic concept. The newly reconstituted Seselj trial chamber is not composed of three equal judges, wherein two heard the evidence differently from a third judge
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 22:17)
That point has already been addressed by the Court and they have very persuasive arguments that disagree with you because none of the points you mentions rejects the Court's arguments on this point. Any other arguments?
----------
In a Decision rendered on 21 January 1998, Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case (consisting of Judge Jorda, presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Shahabuddeen) rejected a motion filed on 30 September 1997 by Defence counsel for Defendant objecting to the admission of hearsay evidence.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
Please provide the link to the Decision you mention. There does not exist any Decision on 21 January 1998 by the Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case in ICTY’s website.
----------
Also noted in the written decision..."The Chambers shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
That’s obvious. The Chambers operate under rules of evidence as set in ICTY’s Statute approved by the UNSC not national rules of evidence. Not sure what you find scandalous about that.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:02) I’m just saying you are nobody RELATIVE to the judges who have passed a vetting process by the UNSC and UNGA.
----------
Fine then, ignore the comments from a relative nobody. What about listening to a presumably reputable jurist like Judge Harhoff who passed your rigorous UNSC and UNGA vetting process. This ICTY Judge's own written record claims that that the verdicts from the court and its president are influenced by external political diktat. Harhoff's subsequent swift termination more closely resembles a cover-up and attempt to a smother a whistleblower, rather than your false allegation of "integrity". A truly transparent organization minimally would have conducted an investigation and public hearing, in order to restore some semblance of credibility. Laughably, this is beyond the capabilities of the ICTY.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:01) asks "Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) ... beside your word for it?"
----------------
Precedence for the ICTY's general acceptance of hearsay evidence prior to the Blaksic trial chamber was provided during the Tadic trial. You may wish to turn on your brain and read the legal lunacy that was established in the Tadic case in a decision rendered on 5 August 1996, Trial Chamber II (Judges McDonald, Stephen, Vohrah) rejected a motion filed by counsel for Mr. Tadic seeking to exclude hearsay evidence during the trial as a general rule.
In its decision, the Trial Chamber noted that the Tribunal's Rules do not specifically exclude hearsay evidence.
You strongly refuse to take to take my word, as the notion of generally accepting hearsay is contrary to your understanding of criminal justice. Realize that these are not my words. They are the writings of the ICTY. Why won't you at least show a minimal amount of honesty and integrity and recognize the stupidity of the ICTY's own written decisions?
Most reputable jurists, unlike the ICTY, generally recognize the rule against hearsay as a fundamental rule of evidence.
Do you agree with most reputable jurists, or do ignorantly follow the ICTY circus (without actually reading decisions) and their masquerade of a quasi-judicial farce that accepts and depends on hearsay evidence?
.... icj1 mate, my dear, your silence is deafening....
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:01) Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) .. beside your word for it?
-----
Dear icj1, you obviously have not followed proceedings in any detail and appear to be blindly defending the ICTY. The issue of hearsay evidence is a very old and comical farce with the ICTY circus.
Please consult the numerous ICTY court records. Here is one early example:
In a Decision rendered on 21 January 1998, Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case (consisting of Judge Jorda, presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Shahabuddeen) rejected a motion filed on 30 September 1997 by Defence counsel for Defendant objecting to the admission of hearsay evidence.
The landmark decision: "Hearsay evidence is admissible."
Also noted in the written decision..."The Chambers shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
Dear icj1, you should realize that if the ICTY rejected hearsay, as most reptutable courts do, the OTP and the prosecution would not have had anything to present.
I suggest that you "switch your brain on" and actually read some of the laughable tribunal decisions before ignorantly claiming they do not contravene general legal norms.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:02) You’ve just made general and unsubstantiated allegations not supported by the record.
-------
Let's look at the recent ICTY's laughable disregard of a textbook mistrial in the Seselj case, as discussed by reputable jurists.
The Edwards reference that I previously supplied (Univ of Penn Law Review 2003) sates that finding the right answer is made more likely when “‘until a final judgment is reached, judges participate as equals in the deliberative process– each judicial voice carries weight, because each judge is willing to hear and respond to differing positions.”
The record of the ICTY shows total disregard for the this basic concept. The newly reconstituted Seselj trial chamber is not composed of three equal judges, wherein two heard the evidence differently from a third judge.
Can we expect that the new judge’s views will legitimately test the perspectives of the judges who were actually present throughout the course of the trial? Discuss this with a any first year law student who knows that this runs counter to the established practice of deferring to trial judges who—precisely because they were present throughout the course of the trial—are presumed in a better position to assess the facts than judges who later review court records.
Drop Serbianna.com or SenseTribunal tribunal as your source of legal information and access other scholarly reviews. You may eventually achieve your goal of a "switched on your brain".
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia"
---…--
Dear icj1, I do not require, nor do I seek your meaning or endorsement. One of your earlier postings in another thread broadly labeled me and other commentators on B92 as "nobodies", to expose your nihilistic bias.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 19:58)
Well, if you don’t provide evidence of "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" than what you say is just your opinion. And, with all due respect, comparing the ICTY judges who are there after being vetted by the USNC and the UNGA with you, you are nobody. Again, don’t take it wrong – I’m not saying you are ABSOLUTELY nobody, I’m just saying you are nobody RELATIVE to the judges who have passed a vetting process by the UNSC and UNGA.
----------
For those truly interested, I have previously provided references and I'll be glad to do so again: see the postings of a number of experts on Opinio Juris, the discussions on EIJL Talk or Dov Jacobs legal blog, to name a few.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 19:58)
You have provided no concrete and detailed account proving your points other than others said so. You’ve just made general and unsubstantiated allegations not supported by the record.
pre 9 godina
Wrong, mate. In most reputable judiciaries, public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation are an abomination of justice. Your inability to distinguish them from other internet comments, is your problem.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 18:21)
Sorry, where did I say that “public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation” are not “an abomination of justice”. They are, indeed, and that’s why the judge who made them was removed from the case, thus demonstrating ICTY’s integrity. Glad to see that actually you, me and ICTY all agree on that point.
----------
ICTY, where hearsay and hooded witnesses are common,
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 18:38)
Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) or hooded witnesses beside your word for it? Or that's what "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" said in Serbianna.com... pardon, I meant, in Opinio Juris, etc...
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia"
----------------------
Dear icj1, I do not require, nor do I seek your meaning or endorsement. One of your earlier postings in another thread broadly labeled me and other commentators on B92 as "nobodies", to expose your nihilistic bias.
For those truly interested, I have previously provided references and I'll be glad to do so again: see the postings of a number of experts on Opinio Juris, the discussions on EIJL Talk or Dov Jacobs legal blog, to name a few.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) posts that "comments by Judge Harhoff" are not the word of God... They are just as good as comments or unsubstantiated allegations made by anybody.
Wrong, mate. In most reputable judiciaries, public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation are an abomination of justice. Your inability to distinguish them from other internet comments, is your problem.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) ... even Judge Harhoff did not offer any evidence. But I understand that some people prefer to switch off their brains and say something just because somebody else said it without any sort of critical thinking :)
----------
Here I agree with you... It is not only Judge Harhoff. Other judges and the judicial process at the ICTY, where hearsay and hooded witnesses are common, force the impartial observer to switch off their brains ... without any sort of critical thinking.
pre 9 godina
And yes, Hauge IS a Kangaroo court designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more.
(Peggy, 10 September 2014 12:02)
A court PROPOSED and APPROVED by Russia is designed designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more?!!! But we're told here by the most patriotic of Serbs that Russia is Serbia's most trusted friend and ally!!!
pre 9 godina
You should realize that many international criminal law experts and reputable jurists have been posting about the peculiarities masquerading as "justice" at the ICTY for a very long time.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
Yep, where "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia" :) keep up the good job, mate haha
----------
As one small example, you may have missed the comments by Judge Harhoff summarizing how the ICTY president Meron influences verdicts according external political diktat.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
"comments by Judge Harhoff" are not the word of God... They are just as good as comments or unsubstantiated allegations made by anybody and even Judge Harhoff did not offer any evidence. But I understand that some people prefer to switch off their brains and say something just because somebody else said it without any sort of critical thinking :)
----------
No need for you to wait or depend on Serbs to discredit the ICTY, as this organization has done an excellent job themselves.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
Here I agree... That organization has done an excellent job and it's obvious that Serbs are nobody to be able to discredit it since ICTY has the backing of the UNSC.
pre 9 godina
"perhaps hearing is truthinessly selective."
Bravo!!! :)
pre 9 godina
Well actually Balkan i told you you wouldnt have to wait long. Please see "Peggys" remarks - ironically directly below yours.
=======================
We should not be afraid to tell the truth just because a bigot like you will label us racist.
pre 9 godina
it would seem i am not the only one that's noticed half-hearted-truthiness.
to play a bit of devil's advocate
you talk of no yugoslav songs, or insigna, nor military. you made it clear all were serbs, disjoint from yugoslavia. so, in your perception, milosevic, the yugoslav didn't send his military in, didn't interfer one way or the other, yet he's just as bad as arkan. how is that? he wasn't involved. it was serb milita according to your accounts. strictly serb militia.
but, further to the point. you accuse serbs of rampant nationalism in the 90s, yet in 2014 croatia hosted a nationalist "artist". i wonder how many enlighted croatian souls thomopson has played his songs of ehtnic hatred to, yet narry a mention of this continued undercurrent of hatred and endorsed violence in you diatrab.
if you expect serbs to learn from their history and mistakes, and to fully own it, you should expect the same from croatians. you thought serbs singing serb nationalistic songs is bad, and rightfully so, but did those ears not hear songs glorify ustashe regime? others certainly did. perhaps hearing is truthinessly selective.
you mention serb-republic in bosnia. however conviently forgot to mention how croatia attacked mostar with original intent to annex it into croatia.
and if we are counting numbers: 230K croats were expelled from the territory of the federation, while 150k from serb republic. yet, narry a word of big bad bosnian, who hurt croats more in bosnia than serbs.
pre 9 godina
So in other words, you don't have an answer to an accusation you originally postulated. Thanks for clearing up what I already suspected.
(Balkan Anthropologist, 10 September 2014 14:59)
Well actually Balkan i told you you wouldnt have to wait long. Please see "Peggys" remarks - ironically directly below yours.
Now have a wonderful day :)
pre 9 godina
The Croatian Army should've wiped out every one who refused to obey Croatian constitutional law. May the corpses of dead Serbs never have a proper burial. Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
(Bam Bam, 10 September 2014 11:38)
Here you go, truthiness, this is the perpetual nazi croatian way of your "healing and justice".
pre 9 godina
(truthiness, 10 September 2014 02:49) alleged that "- postings on this site will be rampant of the "injustice " and "Nato conspiracy" and "kangaroo court" yadda yadda yadda"
You should realize that many international criminal law experts and reputable jurists have been posting about the peculiarities masquerading as "justice" at the ICTY for a very long time.
As one small example, you may have missed the comments by Judge Harhoff summarizing how the ICTY president Meron influences verdicts according external political diktat.
No need for you to wait or depend on Serbs to discredit the ICTY, as this organization has done an excellent job themselves.
pre 9 godina
Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
(Bam Bam, 10 September 2014 11:38)
Hush now, the grownups are talking. Go play make-believe in your room.
pre 9 godina
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there
(truthiness, 10 September 2014 02:49)
So in other words, you don't have an answer to an accusation you originally postulated. Thanks for clearing up what I already suspected. Perhaps you ought to take a page from your own rulebook about myths and half truths since your argument is conveniently based at the point of founding RSK and not looking into the reasons for it. I'm sure you'd like to think it was simple Serb adventurism, but perhaps you'd like to look into the status Serbs were given in the new Croatian constitution? Perhaps you'd also like to look into the half-assed way Tudjman's attempts at promoting anything "Croatian" as a positive thing including things that were highly controversial and grotesquely insensitive to Serbs with memories from five decades earlier? Interesting how you pin everything on one side and conveniently forget the other. That to me is more of a sign of engaging in "half truths. lies and propoganda" as you say than those Serbs you suddenly couldn't identify as Mladic supporters.
pre 9 godina
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
(Balkan Anthropologist, 9 September 2014 23:06)
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there, but i can say to wait until the verdicts of Karadzic, Mladic. Seselj etc and watch one of two things:
=================================
In other words you don't know sh!t from clay but will still say anything that comes to mind.
Yes, you're right, some will condemn Karadzic, Mladic etc. and some will see them as heroes. What makes this any different to people's reactions in any other country?
And yes, Hauge IS a Kangaroo court designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more.
pre 9 godina
Truthiness - some people died in a horrible way, is it not ok for their relatives to mourn them?Its not always about politics and who did what to who.
(Andy UK, 10 September 2014 08:11)
Andy I agree 100% with your comment. It was not my intention to somehow diminish or belittle the sufferings of innocence - be them Serb, Albanian, Croat or whatever - i have never done that nor do i condone that.
What i wanted to point out was for victims to heal , justice also involves asking and answering "why" did this happen to us. In order for a full understanding of their circumstances, it ABSOLUTLEY essential that the whole picture potrayed - not just a one sides slanted view as seems to be so popular for populist journalism.
And let me repeat, before the Croats launched any military ops to recapture lost territory, there 200,000 other victims - victims of Serb actions to be clear.
As i said below - healing and justice wont happen with half truths. lies and propoganda - it needs "understanding' the "why" , not "justifying" "who".
pre 9 godina
Imagine being a Shia Muslim in Iraq and your neighbours started to support ISIS wouldn't you want to expel them before they destroyed you? Question is who is the fascist in the Yugoslav scenario.... My money's on guess who?? The Serbs are guilty of nothing except as you sarcastically implied defending themselves and deep down you know it,you just can't bring yourself to admit it.
(Still not holding my breath, 10 September 2014 08:03)
ok 2 points here Einstein, :
1 - thank you for pointing out to the world you actually supported the expulsion of non -serbs from Krajina, thereby actually admitting you caused the suffering of said 200,000 non serbs
and
2 you just justified Operation Storm against your own Serbs.
if i was you id start breathing again, because me thinks the lack of oxygen to your brain had begun to "dim your lights"
Oh and by the way - i just checked and no, sorry, "deep down" your still wrong.
pre 9 godina
The Croatian Army should've wiped out every one who refused to obey Croatian constitutional law. May the corpses of dead Serbs never have a proper burial. Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
pre 9 godina
Truthiness - some people died in a horrible way, is it not ok for their relatives to mourn them?Its not always about politics and who did what to who.
pre 9 godina
"truthiness" is a rather inappropriate name considering the one sided nationalistic hyperbole you just wrote. Just one analogy and I can think of many regarding your banal comments and less than half truthiness.Imagine being a Shia Muslim in Iraq and your neighbours started to support ISIS wouldn't you want to expel them before they destroyed you? Question is who is the fascist in the Yugoslav scenario.... My money's on guess who?? The Serbs are guilty of nothing except as you sarcastically implied defending themselves and deep down you know it,you just can't bring yourself to admit it.
pre 9 godina
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
(Balkan Anthropologist, 9 September 2014 23:06)
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there, but i can say to wait until the verdicts of Karadzic, Mladic. Seselj etc and watch one of two things:
if guilty - postings on this site will be rampant of the "injustice " and "Nato conspiracy" and "kangaroo court" yadda yadda yadda, thereby creating a further myth of Serb victimisation, and glorification of the above.
if innocent- then watch how all the right wingers will sing thier praises and regurgitate old hatefilled motives and actions as being legitimised.
Im fairly certain the future actions of individuals here and (some) in Serbia will vindicate my position.
pre 9 godina
Time to insist that Croatia deals with their crimes properly was before they got the nod and became a member of EU.
Just like they insisted that Serbia hand over just about everyone old enough to fight in the war before they even considered membership they should have insisted on Croatia confronting their past. Naturally that was never going to happen because Croatia is a darling of Geman nation while Serbia was made to be the bad guy.
Just wondering if our friends who are already in the EU even tried to put this condition on Croatia and if not why not.
There is a good youtube video about this with interviews from members of the Canadian batallion stationed there. The horror still haunts them and yet some lowlife defends this horror as tit for tat.
pre 9 godina
Given the way Serbs here (and in Serbia) celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al , and by that they also celebrate their crimes, seems to be a bit hypocrytical to start crticising Croatia.
(truthiness, 9 September 2014 21:22)
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
pre 9 godina
Given the way Serbs here (and in Serbia) celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al , and by that they also celebrate their crimes, seems to be a bit hypocrytical to start crticising Croatia.
Moreso it seems all the more tragic that b92 is reporting (yet again) another half story of Serb victimisation without reporting the full story of why the Croats launched that military ofensive in the first place - i.e. the Serbian attempt to carve out a Greater Serbia from the republics of old Yugoslavia.
And by the way - before any deluded nutters try painting this as some "Yugoslav" civil war, or how Serbs were defending themselves and Yugolsavia, here are some facts to ponder:
-Before this Croat offensive (and Op Storm before this) 200k NON Serbs expelled from occupied territory in Croatia
-Occupied land was renemaed "SERB" republic of Krajina (Note not Yugoslav Republic of Krajina)
-Paramilitaries were waearing SERB insignia - not Yugolsav
-Paramiltiaries singing Serb nationalist/Chetnik songs, not Yugoslav.
- In Bosnia today we have 2 entities , one is called the Bosnian "SERB Republic" - note its not called the Bosnian "Yugoslav Republic" or Bosnian "Republika Yugoslovenska"
Propogating half truths, myths and lies wont help any regugees or victims.It may be uselfull for some members of this forum to understand the diference between "Justifying" a situation, and "Understanding" a situation. It seems some Serbs are only interested in the former.
pre 9 godina
They'll put them on trial eventually only problem is they'll be in their 90's by then. Just like Artukovic and the rest of the previous Ustashe band like Asner et al they all die before they answer for their crimes or will be given insultingly short sentences.That's justice Croatia (NDH) style. They pursue their drunk drivers with more gusto than they do their war criminals.
pre 9 godina
They'll put them on trial eventually only problem is they'll be in their 90's by then. Just like Artukovic and the rest of the previous Ustashe band like Asner et al they all die before they answer for their crimes or will be given insultingly short sentences.That's justice Croatia (NDH) style. They pursue their drunk drivers with more gusto than they do their war criminals.
pre 9 godina
Given the way Serbs here (and in Serbia) celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al , and by that they also celebrate their crimes, seems to be a bit hypocrytical to start crticising Croatia.
Moreso it seems all the more tragic that b92 is reporting (yet again) another half story of Serb victimisation without reporting the full story of why the Croats launched that military ofensive in the first place - i.e. the Serbian attempt to carve out a Greater Serbia from the republics of old Yugoslavia.
And by the way - before any deluded nutters try painting this as some "Yugoslav" civil war, or how Serbs were defending themselves and Yugolsavia, here are some facts to ponder:
-Before this Croat offensive (and Op Storm before this) 200k NON Serbs expelled from occupied territory in Croatia
-Occupied land was renemaed "SERB" republic of Krajina (Note not Yugoslav Republic of Krajina)
-Paramilitaries were waearing SERB insignia - not Yugolsav
-Paramiltiaries singing Serb nationalist/Chetnik songs, not Yugoslav.
- In Bosnia today we have 2 entities , one is called the Bosnian "SERB Republic" - note its not called the Bosnian "Yugoslav Republic" or Bosnian "Republika Yugoslovenska"
Propogating half truths, myths and lies wont help any regugees or victims.It may be uselfull for some members of this forum to understand the diference between "Justifying" a situation, and "Understanding" a situation. It seems some Serbs are only interested in the former.
pre 9 godina
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
(Balkan Anthropologist, 9 September 2014 23:06)
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there, but i can say to wait until the verdicts of Karadzic, Mladic. Seselj etc and watch one of two things:
if guilty - postings on this site will be rampant of the "injustice " and "Nato conspiracy" and "kangaroo court" yadda yadda yadda, thereby creating a further myth of Serb victimisation, and glorification of the above.
if innocent- then watch how all the right wingers will sing thier praises and regurgitate old hatefilled motives and actions as being legitimised.
Im fairly certain the future actions of individuals here and (some) in Serbia will vindicate my position.
pre 9 godina
Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
(Bam Bam, 10 September 2014 11:38)
Hush now, the grownups are talking. Go play make-believe in your room.
pre 9 godina
Given the way Serbs here (and in Serbia) celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al , and by that they also celebrate their crimes, seems to be a bit hypocrytical to start crticising Croatia.
(truthiness, 9 September 2014 21:22)
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
pre 9 godina
Imagine being a Shia Muslim in Iraq and your neighbours started to support ISIS wouldn't you want to expel them before they destroyed you? Question is who is the fascist in the Yugoslav scenario.... My money's on guess who?? The Serbs are guilty of nothing except as you sarcastically implied defending themselves and deep down you know it,you just can't bring yourself to admit it.
(Still not holding my breath, 10 September 2014 08:03)
ok 2 points here Einstein, :
1 - thank you for pointing out to the world you actually supported the expulsion of non -serbs from Krajina, thereby actually admitting you caused the suffering of said 200,000 non serbs
and
2 you just justified Operation Storm against your own Serbs.
if i was you id start breathing again, because me thinks the lack of oxygen to your brain had begun to "dim your lights"
Oh and by the way - i just checked and no, sorry, "deep down" your still wrong.
pre 9 godina
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there
(truthiness, 10 September 2014 02:49)
So in other words, you don't have an answer to an accusation you originally postulated. Thanks for clearing up what I already suspected. Perhaps you ought to take a page from your own rulebook about myths and half truths since your argument is conveniently based at the point of founding RSK and not looking into the reasons for it. I'm sure you'd like to think it was simple Serb adventurism, but perhaps you'd like to look into the status Serbs were given in the new Croatian constitution? Perhaps you'd also like to look into the half-assed way Tudjman's attempts at promoting anything "Croatian" as a positive thing including things that were highly controversial and grotesquely insensitive to Serbs with memories from five decades earlier? Interesting how you pin everything on one side and conveniently forget the other. That to me is more of a sign of engaging in "half truths. lies and propoganda" as you say than those Serbs you suddenly couldn't identify as Mladic supporters.
pre 9 godina
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
(Balkan Anthropologist, 9 September 2014 23:06)
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there, but i can say to wait until the verdicts of Karadzic, Mladic. Seselj etc and watch one of two things:
=================================
In other words you don't know sh!t from clay but will still say anything that comes to mind.
Yes, you're right, some will condemn Karadzic, Mladic etc. and some will see them as heroes. What makes this any different to people's reactions in any other country?
And yes, Hauge IS a Kangaroo court designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more.
pre 9 godina
The Croatian Army should've wiped out every one who refused to obey Croatian constitutional law. May the corpses of dead Serbs never have a proper burial. Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
(Bam Bam, 10 September 2014 11:38)
Here you go, truthiness, this is the perpetual nazi croatian way of your "healing and justice".
pre 9 godina
it would seem i am not the only one that's noticed half-hearted-truthiness.
to play a bit of devil's advocate
you talk of no yugoslav songs, or insigna, nor military. you made it clear all were serbs, disjoint from yugoslavia. so, in your perception, milosevic, the yugoslav didn't send his military in, didn't interfer one way or the other, yet he's just as bad as arkan. how is that? he wasn't involved. it was serb milita according to your accounts. strictly serb militia.
but, further to the point. you accuse serbs of rampant nationalism in the 90s, yet in 2014 croatia hosted a nationalist "artist". i wonder how many enlighted croatian souls thomopson has played his songs of ehtnic hatred to, yet narry a mention of this continued undercurrent of hatred and endorsed violence in you diatrab.
if you expect serbs to learn from their history and mistakes, and to fully own it, you should expect the same from croatians. you thought serbs singing serb nationalistic songs is bad, and rightfully so, but did those ears not hear songs glorify ustashe regime? others certainly did. perhaps hearing is truthinessly selective.
you mention serb-republic in bosnia. however conviently forgot to mention how croatia attacked mostar with original intent to annex it into croatia.
and if we are counting numbers: 230K croats were expelled from the territory of the federation, while 150k from serb republic. yet, narry a word of big bad bosnian, who hurt croats more in bosnia than serbs.
pre 9 godina
Truthiness - some people died in a horrible way, is it not ok for their relatives to mourn them?Its not always about politics and who did what to who.
pre 9 godina
Truthiness - some people died in a horrible way, is it not ok for their relatives to mourn them?Its not always about politics and who did what to who.
(Andy UK, 10 September 2014 08:11)
Andy I agree 100% with your comment. It was not my intention to somehow diminish or belittle the sufferings of innocence - be them Serb, Albanian, Croat or whatever - i have never done that nor do i condone that.
What i wanted to point out was for victims to heal , justice also involves asking and answering "why" did this happen to us. In order for a full understanding of their circumstances, it ABSOLUTLEY essential that the whole picture potrayed - not just a one sides slanted view as seems to be so popular for populist journalism.
And let me repeat, before the Croats launched any military ops to recapture lost territory, there 200,000 other victims - victims of Serb actions to be clear.
As i said below - healing and justice wont happen with half truths. lies and propoganda - it needs "understanding' the "why" , not "justifying" "who".
pre 9 godina
Time to insist that Croatia deals with their crimes properly was before they got the nod and became a member of EU.
Just like they insisted that Serbia hand over just about everyone old enough to fight in the war before they even considered membership they should have insisted on Croatia confronting their past. Naturally that was never going to happen because Croatia is a darling of Geman nation while Serbia was made to be the bad guy.
Just wondering if our friends who are already in the EU even tried to put this condition on Croatia and if not why not.
There is a good youtube video about this with interviews from members of the Canadian batallion stationed there. The horror still haunts them and yet some lowlife defends this horror as tit for tat.
pre 9 godina
And yes, Hauge IS a Kangaroo court designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more.
(Peggy, 10 September 2014 12:02)
A court PROPOSED and APPROVED by Russia is designed designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more?!!! But we're told here by the most patriotic of Serbs that Russia is Serbia's most trusted friend and ally!!!
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:02) You’ve just made general and unsubstantiated allegations not supported by the record.
-------
Let's look at the recent ICTY's laughable disregard of a textbook mistrial in the Seselj case, as discussed by reputable jurists.
The Edwards reference that I previously supplied (Univ of Penn Law Review 2003) sates that finding the right answer is made more likely when “‘until a final judgment is reached, judges participate as equals in the deliberative process– each judicial voice carries weight, because each judge is willing to hear and respond to differing positions.”
The record of the ICTY shows total disregard for the this basic concept. The newly reconstituted Seselj trial chamber is not composed of three equal judges, wherein two heard the evidence differently from a third judge.
Can we expect that the new judge’s views will legitimately test the perspectives of the judges who were actually present throughout the course of the trial? Discuss this with a any first year law student who knows that this runs counter to the established practice of deferring to trial judges who—precisely because they were present throughout the course of the trial—are presumed in a better position to assess the facts than judges who later review court records.
Drop Serbianna.com or SenseTribunal tribunal as your source of legal information and access other scholarly reviews. You may eventually achieve your goal of a "switched on your brain".
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:01) Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) .. beside your word for it?
-----
Dear icj1, you obviously have not followed proceedings in any detail and appear to be blindly defending the ICTY. The issue of hearsay evidence is a very old and comical farce with the ICTY circus.
Please consult the numerous ICTY court records. Here is one early example:
In a Decision rendered on 21 January 1998, Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case (consisting of Judge Jorda, presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Shahabuddeen) rejected a motion filed on 30 September 1997 by Defence counsel for Defendant objecting to the admission of hearsay evidence.
The landmark decision: "Hearsay evidence is admissible."
Also noted in the written decision..."The Chambers shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
Dear icj1, you should realize that if the ICTY rejected hearsay, as most reptutable courts do, the OTP and the prosecution would not have had anything to present.
I suggest that you "switch your brain on" and actually read some of the laughable tribunal decisions before ignorantly claiming they do not contravene general legal norms.
pre 9 godina
"truthiness" is a rather inappropriate name considering the one sided nationalistic hyperbole you just wrote. Just one analogy and I can think of many regarding your banal comments and less than half truthiness.Imagine being a Shia Muslim in Iraq and your neighbours started to support ISIS wouldn't you want to expel them before they destroyed you? Question is who is the fascist in the Yugoslav scenario.... My money's on guess who?? The Serbs are guilty of nothing except as you sarcastically implied defending themselves and deep down you know it,you just can't bring yourself to admit it.
pre 9 godina
(truthiness, 10 September 2014 02:49) alleged that "- postings on this site will be rampant of the "injustice " and "Nato conspiracy" and "kangaroo court" yadda yadda yadda"
You should realize that many international criminal law experts and reputable jurists have been posting about the peculiarities masquerading as "justice" at the ICTY for a very long time.
As one small example, you may have missed the comments by Judge Harhoff summarizing how the ICTY president Meron influences verdicts according external political diktat.
No need for you to wait or depend on Serbs to discredit the ICTY, as this organization has done an excellent job themselves.
pre 9 godina
So in other words, you don't have an answer to an accusation you originally postulated. Thanks for clearing up what I already suspected.
(Balkan Anthropologist, 10 September 2014 14:59)
Well actually Balkan i told you you wouldnt have to wait long. Please see "Peggys" remarks - ironically directly below yours.
Now have a wonderful day :)
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) ... even Judge Harhoff did not offer any evidence. But I understand that some people prefer to switch off their brains and say something just because somebody else said it without any sort of critical thinking :)
----------
Here I agree with you... It is not only Judge Harhoff. Other judges and the judicial process at the ICTY, where hearsay and hooded witnesses are common, force the impartial observer to switch off their brains ... without any sort of critical thinking.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia"
----------------------
Dear icj1, I do not require, nor do I seek your meaning or endorsement. One of your earlier postings in another thread broadly labeled me and other commentators on B92 as "nobodies", to expose your nihilistic bias.
For those truly interested, I have previously provided references and I'll be glad to do so again: see the postings of a number of experts on Opinio Juris, the discussions on EIJL Talk or Dov Jacobs legal blog, to name a few.
pre 9 godina
Wrong, mate. In most reputable judiciaries, public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation are an abomination of justice. Your inability to distinguish them from other internet comments, is your problem.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 18:21)
Sorry, where did I say that “public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation” are not “an abomination of justice”. They are, indeed, and that’s why the judge who made them was removed from the case, thus demonstrating ICTY’s integrity. Glad to see that actually you, me and ICTY all agree on that point.
----------
ICTY, where hearsay and hooded witnesses are common,
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 18:38)
Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) or hooded witnesses beside your word for it? Or that's what "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" said in Serbianna.com... pardon, I meant, in Opinio Juris, etc...
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia"
---…--
Dear icj1, I do not require, nor do I seek your meaning or endorsement. One of your earlier postings in another thread broadly labeled me and other commentators on B92 as "nobodies", to expose your nihilistic bias.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 19:58)
Well, if you don’t provide evidence of "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" than what you say is just your opinion. And, with all due respect, comparing the ICTY judges who are there after being vetted by the USNC and the UNGA with you, you are nobody. Again, don’t take it wrong – I’m not saying you are ABSOLUTELY nobody, I’m just saying you are nobody RELATIVE to the judges who have passed a vetting process by the UNSC and UNGA.
----------
For those truly interested, I have previously provided references and I'll be glad to do so again: see the postings of a number of experts on Opinio Juris, the discussions on EIJL Talk or Dov Jacobs legal blog, to name a few.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 19:58)
You have provided no concrete and detailed account proving your points other than others said so. You’ve just made general and unsubstantiated allegations not supported by the record.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:01) asks "Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) ... beside your word for it?"
----------------
Precedence for the ICTY's general acceptance of hearsay evidence prior to the Blaksic trial chamber was provided during the Tadic trial. You may wish to turn on your brain and read the legal lunacy that was established in the Tadic case in a decision rendered on 5 August 1996, Trial Chamber II (Judges McDonald, Stephen, Vohrah) rejected a motion filed by counsel for Mr. Tadic seeking to exclude hearsay evidence during the trial as a general rule.
In its decision, the Trial Chamber noted that the Tribunal's Rules do not specifically exclude hearsay evidence.
You strongly refuse to take to take my word, as the notion of generally accepting hearsay is contrary to your understanding of criminal justice. Realize that these are not my words. They are the writings of the ICTY. Why won't you at least show a minimal amount of honesty and integrity and recognize the stupidity of the ICTY's own written decisions?
Most reputable jurists, unlike the ICTY, generally recognize the rule against hearsay as a fundamental rule of evidence.
Do you agree with most reputable jurists, or do ignorantly follow the ICTY circus (without actually reading decisions) and their masquerade of a quasi-judicial farce that accepts and depends on hearsay evidence?
.... icj1 mate, my dear, your silence is deafening....
pre 9 godina
The Croatian Army should've wiped out every one who refused to obey Croatian constitutional law. May the corpses of dead Serbs never have a proper burial. Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
pre 9 godina
Well actually Balkan i told you you wouldnt have to wait long. Please see "Peggys" remarks - ironically directly below yours.
=======================
We should not be afraid to tell the truth just because a bigot like you will label us racist.
pre 9 godina
"perhaps hearing is truthinessly selective."
Bravo!!! :)
pre 9 godina
You should realize that many international criminal law experts and reputable jurists have been posting about the peculiarities masquerading as "justice" at the ICTY for a very long time.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
Yep, where "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia" :) keep up the good job, mate haha
----------
As one small example, you may have missed the comments by Judge Harhoff summarizing how the ICTY president Meron influences verdicts according external political diktat.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
"comments by Judge Harhoff" are not the word of God... They are just as good as comments or unsubstantiated allegations made by anybody and even Judge Harhoff did not offer any evidence. But I understand that some people prefer to switch off their brains and say something just because somebody else said it without any sort of critical thinking :)
----------
No need for you to wait or depend on Serbs to discredit the ICTY, as this organization has done an excellent job themselves.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
Here I agree... That organization has done an excellent job and it's obvious that Serbs are nobody to be able to discredit it since ICTY has the backing of the UNSC.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) posts that "comments by Judge Harhoff" are not the word of God... They are just as good as comments or unsubstantiated allegations made by anybody.
Wrong, mate. In most reputable judiciaries, public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation are an abomination of justice. Your inability to distinguish them from other internet comments, is your problem.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:02) I’m just saying you are nobody RELATIVE to the judges who have passed a vetting process by the UNSC and UNGA.
----------
Fine then, ignore the comments from a relative nobody. What about listening to a presumably reputable jurist like Judge Harhoff who passed your rigorous UNSC and UNGA vetting process. This ICTY Judge's own written record claims that that the verdicts from the court and its president are influenced by external political diktat. Harhoff's subsequent swift termination more closely resembles a cover-up and attempt to a smother a whistleblower, rather than your false allegation of "integrity". A truly transparent organization minimally would have conducted an investigation and public hearing, in order to restore some semblance of credibility. Laughably, this is beyond the capabilities of the ICTY.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:54) That’s your opinion. You have provided no evidence for that other than hearsay that X site or person said so.
----------
The lunacy accepting hearsay evidence in the Tadic trial, from the ICTY website:
http://www.icty.org/sid/7324
The summaary from the hearsay decision in the Blaksic trial:
http://www.icty.org/sid/7700
Please ask the ringmaster at the ICTY circus why they only have the Press Releases for these decisions on the Case websites?
icj1, your demand for evidence is more stringent than that demanded by the Judges at the ICTY. Rather than challenging me, perhaps you should question the insanity running amok at the ICTY?
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:58) When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
----
The essence and entire credibility of the ICTY had been challenged by one of its own vetted Judges.
I am glad that we both agree: an impartial investigation and hearing of the evidence is long overdue.
So far, the ICTY has refused to provide any answers or even launch an investigation. If the ICTY can't deal with this gross scandal and serious charge of judicial contempt, then those of us with our brains switched "on" are entirely justified in questioning the ICTY's credibility and capability in managing or judging any other investigation.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 18 September 2014 06:03) Because there was not any shred evidence on what Judge Harhoff said. I don't want my money to be spent on chasing ghosts :)
------
Too late mate. The ICTY circus, which accepts hearsay evidence, has been chasing and investigating ghosts, and admitting their testimony as evidence for close to two decades.
pre 9 godina
The record of the ICTY shows total disregard for the this basic concept. The newly reconstituted Seselj trial chamber is not composed of three equal judges, wherein two heard the evidence differently from a third judge
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 22:17)
That point has already been addressed by the Court and they have very persuasive arguments that disagree with you because none of the points you mentions rejects the Court's arguments on this point. Any other arguments?
----------
In a Decision rendered on 21 January 1998, Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case (consisting of Judge Jorda, presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Shahabuddeen) rejected a motion filed on 30 September 1997 by Defence counsel for Defendant objecting to the admission of hearsay evidence.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
Please provide the link to the Decision you mention. There does not exist any Decision on 21 January 1998 by the Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case in ICTY’s website.
----------
Also noted in the written decision..."The Chambers shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
That’s obvious. The Chambers operate under rules of evidence as set in ICTY’s Statute approved by the UNSC not national rules of evidence. Not sure what you find scandalous about that.
pre 9 godina
Dear icj1, you should realize that if the ICTY rejected hearsay, as most reptutable courts do, the OTP and the prosecution would not have had anything to present.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
That’s your opinion. You have provided no evidence for that other than hearsay that X site or person said so.
----------
I suggest that you "switch your brain on" and actually read some of the laughable tribunal decisions before ignorantly claiming they do not contravene general legal norms.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
I’ve read them and have not found anything laughable; that's similar to you that even with extensive effort in reading them still have not shown anything laughable that you have found.
----------
Precedence for the ICTY's general acceptance of hearsay evidence prior to the Blaksic trial chamber was provided during the Tadic trial. You may wish to turn on your brain and read the legal lunacy that was established in the Tadic case in a decision rendered on 5 August 1996, Trial Chamber II (Judges McDonald, Stephen, Vohrah) rejected a motion filed by counsel for Mr. Tadic seeking to exclude hearsay evidence during the trial as a general rule.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Again, no decision exists on 5 August 1996 by Trial Chamber II on Tadic’s case in ICTY’s website. Please provide a link to the decision.
pre 9 godina
In its decision, the Trial Chamber noted that the Tribunal's Rules do not specifically exclude hearsay evidence.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Well, if the Statute approved by the UNSC says so, than it is not the Trial Chamber that is “laughable” – that Chamber is following the Law (i.e. the Statute), but it is Russia which is “laughable” in proposing and approving that Court.
----------
You strongly refuse to take to take my word
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Of course. Not just yours; I refuse to take anybody’s word until I see the supporting arguments. I can’t switch off my brain because somebody says so :)
----------
Do you agree with most reputable jurists, or do ignorantly follow the ICTY circus (without actually reading decisions) and their masquerade of a quasi-judicial farce that accepts and depends on hearsay evidence?
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Well, you have not shown a difference between most reputable jurists and ICTY so the question above really makes no sense until you show that :)
pre 9 godina
Fine then, ignore the comments from a relative nobody. What about listening to a presumably reputable jurist like Judge Harhoff who passed your rigorous UNSC and UNGA vetting process. This ICTY Judge's own written record claims that that the verdicts from the court and its president are influenced by external political diktat.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 05:25)
Judge Harhoff passed the UNSC and UNGA vetting process to issue judgments, decisions, orders and opinions in accordance with the ICTY Statute. Nobody has vetted Judge Harhoff in writing emails. When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:58) When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
----
The essence and entire credibility of the ICTY had been challenged by one of its own vetted Judges.
I am glad that we both agree: an impartial investigation and hearing of the evidence is long overdue.
So far, the ICTY has refused to provide any answers or even launch an investigation. If the ICTY can't deal with this gross scandal and serious charge of judicial contempt, then those of us with our brains switched "on" are entirely justified in questioning the ICTY's credibility and capability in managing or judging any other investigation.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 17 September 2014 18:16)
Because there was not any shred evidence on what Judge Harhoff said. I don't want my money to be spent on chasing ghosts :)
pre 9 godina
The Croatian Army should've wiped out every one who refused to obey Croatian constitutional law. May the corpses of dead Serbs never have a proper burial. Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
pre 9 godina
Given the way Serbs here (and in Serbia) celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al , and by that they also celebrate their crimes, seems to be a bit hypocrytical to start crticising Croatia.
Moreso it seems all the more tragic that b92 is reporting (yet again) another half story of Serb victimisation without reporting the full story of why the Croats launched that military ofensive in the first place - i.e. the Serbian attempt to carve out a Greater Serbia from the republics of old Yugoslavia.
And by the way - before any deluded nutters try painting this as some "Yugoslav" civil war, or how Serbs were defending themselves and Yugolsavia, here are some facts to ponder:
-Before this Croat offensive (and Op Storm before this) 200k NON Serbs expelled from occupied territory in Croatia
-Occupied land was renemaed "SERB" republic of Krajina (Note not Yugoslav Republic of Krajina)
-Paramilitaries were waearing SERB insignia - not Yugolsav
-Paramiltiaries singing Serb nationalist/Chetnik songs, not Yugoslav.
- In Bosnia today we have 2 entities , one is called the Bosnian "SERB Republic" - note its not called the Bosnian "Yugoslav Republic" or Bosnian "Republika Yugoslovenska"
Propogating half truths, myths and lies wont help any regugees or victims.It may be uselfull for some members of this forum to understand the diference between "Justifying" a situation, and "Understanding" a situation. It seems some Serbs are only interested in the former.
pre 9 godina
They'll put them on trial eventually only problem is they'll be in their 90's by then. Just like Artukovic and the rest of the previous Ustashe band like Asner et al they all die before they answer for their crimes or will be given insultingly short sentences.That's justice Croatia (NDH) style. They pursue their drunk drivers with more gusto than they do their war criminals.
pre 9 godina
Time to insist that Croatia deals with their crimes properly was before they got the nod and became a member of EU.
Just like they insisted that Serbia hand over just about everyone old enough to fight in the war before they even considered membership they should have insisted on Croatia confronting their past. Naturally that was never going to happen because Croatia is a darling of Geman nation while Serbia was made to be the bad guy.
Just wondering if our friends who are already in the EU even tried to put this condition on Croatia and if not why not.
There is a good youtube video about this with interviews from members of the Canadian batallion stationed there. The horror still haunts them and yet some lowlife defends this horror as tit for tat.
pre 9 godina
Given the way Serbs here (and in Serbia) celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al , and by that they also celebrate their crimes, seems to be a bit hypocrytical to start crticising Croatia.
(truthiness, 9 September 2014 21:22)
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
pre 9 godina
"truthiness" is a rather inappropriate name considering the one sided nationalistic hyperbole you just wrote. Just one analogy and I can think of many regarding your banal comments and less than half truthiness.Imagine being a Shia Muslim in Iraq and your neighbours started to support ISIS wouldn't you want to expel them before they destroyed you? Question is who is the fascist in the Yugoslav scenario.... My money's on guess who?? The Serbs are guilty of nothing except as you sarcastically implied defending themselves and deep down you know it,you just can't bring yourself to admit it.
pre 9 godina
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
(Balkan Anthropologist, 9 September 2014 23:06)
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there, but i can say to wait until the verdicts of Karadzic, Mladic. Seselj etc and watch one of two things:
=================================
In other words you don't know sh!t from clay but will still say anything that comes to mind.
Yes, you're right, some will condemn Karadzic, Mladic etc. and some will see them as heroes. What makes this any different to people's reactions in any other country?
And yes, Hauge IS a Kangaroo court designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more.
pre 9 godina
Ok, I'll take the bait, if only to chuckle over the response.
Can you please provide the names of the commenters here who "celebrate Milosevic, Mladic, Karadzic, Arkan et al"?
(Balkan Anthropologist, 9 September 2014 23:06)
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there, but i can say to wait until the verdicts of Karadzic, Mladic. Seselj etc and watch one of two things:
if guilty - postings on this site will be rampant of the "injustice " and "Nato conspiracy" and "kangaroo court" yadda yadda yadda, thereby creating a further myth of Serb victimisation, and glorification of the above.
if innocent- then watch how all the right wingers will sing thier praises and regurgitate old hatefilled motives and actions as being legitimised.
Im fairly certain the future actions of individuals here and (some) in Serbia will vindicate my position.
pre 9 godina
And yes, Hauge IS a Kangaroo court designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more.
(Peggy, 10 September 2014 12:02)
A court PROPOSED and APPROVED by Russia is designed designed for only one purpose and that is to demonize Serbs even more?!!! But we're told here by the most patriotic of Serbs that Russia is Serbia's most trusted friend and ally!!!
pre 9 godina
Imagine being a Shia Muslim in Iraq and your neighbours started to support ISIS wouldn't you want to expel them before they destroyed you? Question is who is the fascist in the Yugoslav scenario.... My money's on guess who?? The Serbs are guilty of nothing except as you sarcastically implied defending themselves and deep down you know it,you just can't bring yourself to admit it.
(Still not holding my breath, 10 September 2014 08:03)
ok 2 points here Einstein, :
1 - thank you for pointing out to the world you actually supported the expulsion of non -serbs from Krajina, thereby actually admitting you caused the suffering of said 200,000 non serbs
and
2 you just justified Operation Storm against your own Serbs.
if i was you id start breathing again, because me thinks the lack of oxygen to your brain had begun to "dim your lights"
Oh and by the way - i just checked and no, sorry, "deep down" your still wrong.
pre 9 godina
it would seem i am not the only one that's noticed half-hearted-truthiness.
to play a bit of devil's advocate
you talk of no yugoslav songs, or insigna, nor military. you made it clear all were serbs, disjoint from yugoslavia. so, in your perception, milosevic, the yugoslav didn't send his military in, didn't interfer one way or the other, yet he's just as bad as arkan. how is that? he wasn't involved. it was serb milita according to your accounts. strictly serb militia.
but, further to the point. you accuse serbs of rampant nationalism in the 90s, yet in 2014 croatia hosted a nationalist "artist". i wonder how many enlighted croatian souls thomopson has played his songs of ehtnic hatred to, yet narry a mention of this continued undercurrent of hatred and endorsed violence in you diatrab.
if you expect serbs to learn from their history and mistakes, and to fully own it, you should expect the same from croatians. you thought serbs singing serb nationalistic songs is bad, and rightfully so, but did those ears not hear songs glorify ustashe regime? others certainly did. perhaps hearing is truthinessly selective.
you mention serb-republic in bosnia. however conviently forgot to mention how croatia attacked mostar with original intent to annex it into croatia.
and if we are counting numbers: 230K croats were expelled from the territory of the federation, while 150k from serb republic. yet, narry a word of big bad bosnian, who hurt croats more in bosnia than serbs.
pre 9 godina
Well actually Balkan i told you you wouldnt have to wait long. Please see "Peggys" remarks - ironically directly below yours.
=======================
We should not be afraid to tell the truth just because a bigot like you will label us racist.
pre 9 godina
"perhaps hearing is truthinessly selective."
Bravo!!! :)
pre 9 godina
Truthiness - some people died in a horrible way, is it not ok for their relatives to mourn them?Its not always about politics and who did what to who.
pre 9 godina
Truthiness - some people died in a horrible way, is it not ok for their relatives to mourn them?Its not always about politics and who did what to who.
(Andy UK, 10 September 2014 08:11)
Andy I agree 100% with your comment. It was not my intention to somehow diminish or belittle the sufferings of innocence - be them Serb, Albanian, Croat or whatever - i have never done that nor do i condone that.
What i wanted to point out was for victims to heal , justice also involves asking and answering "why" did this happen to us. In order for a full understanding of their circumstances, it ABSOLUTLEY essential that the whole picture potrayed - not just a one sides slanted view as seems to be so popular for populist journalism.
And let me repeat, before the Croats launched any military ops to recapture lost territory, there 200,000 other victims - victims of Serb actions to be clear.
As i said below - healing and justice wont happen with half truths. lies and propoganda - it needs "understanding' the "why" , not "justifying" "who".
pre 9 godina
Regretfully Balkan i am not a spy agency that keeps track of individual postings so i cant help you there
(truthiness, 10 September 2014 02:49)
So in other words, you don't have an answer to an accusation you originally postulated. Thanks for clearing up what I already suspected. Perhaps you ought to take a page from your own rulebook about myths and half truths since your argument is conveniently based at the point of founding RSK and not looking into the reasons for it. I'm sure you'd like to think it was simple Serb adventurism, but perhaps you'd like to look into the status Serbs were given in the new Croatian constitution? Perhaps you'd also like to look into the half-assed way Tudjman's attempts at promoting anything "Croatian" as a positive thing including things that were highly controversial and grotesquely insensitive to Serbs with memories from five decades earlier? Interesting how you pin everything on one side and conveniently forget the other. That to me is more of a sign of engaging in "half truths. lies and propoganda" as you say than those Serbs you suddenly couldn't identify as Mladic supporters.
pre 9 godina
(truthiness, 10 September 2014 02:49) alleged that "- postings on this site will be rampant of the "injustice " and "Nato conspiracy" and "kangaroo court" yadda yadda yadda"
You should realize that many international criminal law experts and reputable jurists have been posting about the peculiarities masquerading as "justice" at the ICTY for a very long time.
As one small example, you may have missed the comments by Judge Harhoff summarizing how the ICTY president Meron influences verdicts according external political diktat.
No need for you to wait or depend on Serbs to discredit the ICTY, as this organization has done an excellent job themselves.
pre 9 godina
The Croatian Army should've wiped out every one who refused to obey Croatian constitutional law. May the corpses of dead Serbs never have a proper burial. Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
(Bam Bam, 10 September 2014 11:38)
Here you go, truthiness, this is the perpetual nazi croatian way of your "healing and justice".
pre 9 godina
So in other words, you don't have an answer to an accusation you originally postulated. Thanks for clearing up what I already suspected.
(Balkan Anthropologist, 10 September 2014 14:59)
Well actually Balkan i told you you wouldnt have to wait long. Please see "Peggys" remarks - ironically directly below yours.
Now have a wonderful day :)
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia"
---…--
Dear icj1, I do not require, nor do I seek your meaning or endorsement. One of your earlier postings in another thread broadly labeled me and other commentators on B92 as "nobodies", to expose your nihilistic bias.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 19:58)
Well, if you don’t provide evidence of "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" than what you say is just your opinion. And, with all due respect, comparing the ICTY judges who are there after being vetted by the USNC and the UNGA with you, you are nobody. Again, don’t take it wrong – I’m not saying you are ABSOLUTELY nobody, I’m just saying you are nobody RELATIVE to the judges who have passed a vetting process by the UNSC and UNGA.
----------
For those truly interested, I have previously provided references and I'll be glad to do so again: see the postings of a number of experts on Opinio Juris, the discussions on EIJL Talk or Dov Jacobs legal blog, to name a few.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 19:58)
You have provided no concrete and detailed account proving your points other than others said so. You’ve just made general and unsubstantiated allegations not supported by the record.
pre 9 godina
Even the E.U will not stop us from eliminating the Serbs that continue to remain.
(Bam Bam, 10 September 2014 11:38)
Hush now, the grownups are talking. Go play make-believe in your room.
pre 9 godina
You should realize that many international criminal law experts and reputable jurists have been posting about the peculiarities masquerading as "justice" at the ICTY for a very long time.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
Yep, where "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia" :) keep up the good job, mate haha
----------
As one small example, you may have missed the comments by Judge Harhoff summarizing how the ICTY president Meron influences verdicts according external political diktat.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
"comments by Judge Harhoff" are not the word of God... They are just as good as comments or unsubstantiated allegations made by anybody and even Judge Harhoff did not offer any evidence. But I understand that some people prefer to switch off their brains and say something just because somebody else said it without any sort of critical thinking :)
----------
No need for you to wait or depend on Serbs to discredit the ICTY, as this organization has done an excellent job themselves.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 10 September 2014 17:12)
Here I agree... That organization has done an excellent job and it's obvious that Serbs are nobody to be able to discredit it since ICTY has the backing of the UNSC.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) ... even Judge Harhoff did not offer any evidence. But I understand that some people prefer to switch off their brains and say something just because somebody else said it without any sort of critical thinking :)
----------
Here I agree with you... It is not only Judge Harhoff. Other judges and the judicial process at the ICTY, where hearsay and hooded witnesses are common, force the impartial observer to switch off their brains ... without any sort of critical thinking.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" means a certain "Amnesty Yugoslavia"
----------------------
Dear icj1, I do not require, nor do I seek your meaning or endorsement. One of your earlier postings in another thread broadly labeled me and other commentators on B92 as "nobodies", to expose your nihilistic bias.
For those truly interested, I have previously provided references and I'll be glad to do so again: see the postings of a number of experts on Opinio Juris, the discussions on EIJL Talk or Dov Jacobs legal blog, to name a few.
pre 9 godina
Wrong, mate. In most reputable judiciaries, public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation are an abomination of justice. Your inability to distinguish them from other internet comments, is your problem.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 18:21)
Sorry, where did I say that “public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation” are not “an abomination of justice”. They are, indeed, and that’s why the judge who made them was removed from the case, thus demonstrating ICTY’s integrity. Glad to see that actually you, me and ICTY all agree on that point.
----------
ICTY, where hearsay and hooded witnesses are common,
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 11 September 2014 18:38)
Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) or hooded witnesses beside your word for it? Or that's what "international criminal law experts and reputable jurists" said in Serbianna.com... pardon, I meant, in Opinio Juris, etc...
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:02) You’ve just made general and unsubstantiated allegations not supported by the record.
-------
Let's look at the recent ICTY's laughable disregard of a textbook mistrial in the Seselj case, as discussed by reputable jurists.
The Edwards reference that I previously supplied (Univ of Penn Law Review 2003) sates that finding the right answer is made more likely when “‘until a final judgment is reached, judges participate as equals in the deliberative process– each judicial voice carries weight, because each judge is willing to hear and respond to differing positions.”
The record of the ICTY shows total disregard for the this basic concept. The newly reconstituted Seselj trial chamber is not composed of three equal judges, wherein two heard the evidence differently from a third judge.
Can we expect that the new judge’s views will legitimately test the perspectives of the judges who were actually present throughout the course of the trial? Discuss this with a any first year law student who knows that this runs counter to the established practice of deferring to trial judges who—precisely because they were present throughout the course of the trial—are presumed in a better position to assess the facts than judges who later review court records.
Drop Serbianna.com or SenseTribunal tribunal as your source of legal information and access other scholarly reviews. You may eventually achieve your goal of a "switched on your brain".
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:01) Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) .. beside your word for it?
-----
Dear icj1, you obviously have not followed proceedings in any detail and appear to be blindly defending the ICTY. The issue of hearsay evidence is a very old and comical farce with the ICTY circus.
Please consult the numerous ICTY court records. Here is one early example:
In a Decision rendered on 21 January 1998, Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case (consisting of Judge Jorda, presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Shahabuddeen) rejected a motion filed on 30 September 1997 by Defence counsel for Defendant objecting to the admission of hearsay evidence.
The landmark decision: "Hearsay evidence is admissible."
Also noted in the written decision..."The Chambers shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
Dear icj1, you should realize that if the ICTY rejected hearsay, as most reptutable courts do, the OTP and the prosecution would not have had anything to present.
I suggest that you "switch your brain on" and actually read some of the laughable tribunal decisions before ignorantly claiming they do not contravene general legal norms.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:01) asks "Any evidence of hearsay (accepted by the judges) ... beside your word for it?"
----------------
Precedence for the ICTY's general acceptance of hearsay evidence prior to the Blaksic trial chamber was provided during the Tadic trial. You may wish to turn on your brain and read the legal lunacy that was established in the Tadic case in a decision rendered on 5 August 1996, Trial Chamber II (Judges McDonald, Stephen, Vohrah) rejected a motion filed by counsel for Mr. Tadic seeking to exclude hearsay evidence during the trial as a general rule.
In its decision, the Trial Chamber noted that the Tribunal's Rules do not specifically exclude hearsay evidence.
You strongly refuse to take to take my word, as the notion of generally accepting hearsay is contrary to your understanding of criminal justice. Realize that these are not my words. They are the writings of the ICTY. Why won't you at least show a minimal amount of honesty and integrity and recognize the stupidity of the ICTY's own written decisions?
Most reputable jurists, unlike the ICTY, generally recognize the rule against hearsay as a fundamental rule of evidence.
Do you agree with most reputable jurists, or do ignorantly follow the ICTY circus (without actually reading decisions) and their masquerade of a quasi-judicial farce that accepts and depends on hearsay evidence?
.... icj1 mate, my dear, your silence is deafening....
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 12 September 2014 04:02) I’m just saying you are nobody RELATIVE to the judges who have passed a vetting process by the UNSC and UNGA.
----------
Fine then, ignore the comments from a relative nobody. What about listening to a presumably reputable jurist like Judge Harhoff who passed your rigorous UNSC and UNGA vetting process. This ICTY Judge's own written record claims that that the verdicts from the court and its president are influenced by external political diktat. Harhoff's subsequent swift termination more closely resembles a cover-up and attempt to a smother a whistleblower, rather than your false allegation of "integrity". A truly transparent organization minimally would have conducted an investigation and public hearing, in order to restore some semblance of credibility. Laughably, this is beyond the capabilities of the ICTY.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 11 September 2014 05:10) posts that "comments by Judge Harhoff" are not the word of God... They are just as good as comments or unsubstantiated allegations made by anybody.
Wrong, mate. In most reputable judiciaries, public comments by judges regarding on going cases or litigation are an abomination of justice. Your inability to distinguish them from other internet comments, is your problem.
pre 9 godina
Fine then, ignore the comments from a relative nobody. What about listening to a presumably reputable jurist like Judge Harhoff who passed your rigorous UNSC and UNGA vetting process. This ICTY Judge's own written record claims that that the verdicts from the court and its president are influenced by external political diktat.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 05:25)
Judge Harhoff passed the UNSC and UNGA vetting process to issue judgments, decisions, orders and opinions in accordance with the ICTY Statute. Nobody has vetted Judge Harhoff in writing emails. When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:58) When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
----
The essence and entire credibility of the ICTY had been challenged by one of its own vetted Judges.
I am glad that we both agree: an impartial investigation and hearing of the evidence is long overdue.
So far, the ICTY has refused to provide any answers or even launch an investigation. If the ICTY can't deal with this gross scandal and serious charge of judicial contempt, then those of us with our brains switched "on" are entirely justified in questioning the ICTY's credibility and capability in managing or judging any other investigation.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 17 September 2014 18:16)
Because there was not any shred evidence on what Judge Harhoff said. I don't want my money to be spent on chasing ghosts :)
pre 9 godina
The record of the ICTY shows total disregard for the this basic concept. The newly reconstituted Seselj trial chamber is not composed of three equal judges, wherein two heard the evidence differently from a third judge
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 22:17)
That point has already been addressed by the Court and they have very persuasive arguments that disagree with you because none of the points you mentions rejects the Court's arguments on this point. Any other arguments?
----------
In a Decision rendered on 21 January 1998, Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case (consisting of Judge Jorda, presiding, Judge Riad and Judge Shahabuddeen) rejected a motion filed on 30 September 1997 by Defence counsel for Defendant objecting to the admission of hearsay evidence.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
Please provide the link to the Decision you mention. There does not exist any Decision on 21 January 1998 by the Trial Chamber I in the Blaksic case in ICTY’s website.
----------
Also noted in the written decision..."The Chambers shall not be bound by national rules of evidence."
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
That’s obvious. The Chambers operate under rules of evidence as set in ICTY’s Statute approved by the UNSC not national rules of evidence. Not sure what you find scandalous about that.
pre 9 godina
Dear icj1, you should realize that if the ICTY rejected hearsay, as most reptutable courts do, the OTP and the prosecution would not have had anything to present.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
That’s your opinion. You have provided no evidence for that other than hearsay that X site or person said so.
----------
I suggest that you "switch your brain on" and actually read some of the laughable tribunal decisions before ignorantly claiming they do not contravene general legal norms.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 12 September 2014 23:49)
I’ve read them and have not found anything laughable; that's similar to you that even with extensive effort in reading them still have not shown anything laughable that you have found.
----------
Precedence for the ICTY's general acceptance of hearsay evidence prior to the Blaksic trial chamber was provided during the Tadic trial. You may wish to turn on your brain and read the legal lunacy that was established in the Tadic case in a decision rendered on 5 August 1996, Trial Chamber II (Judges McDonald, Stephen, Vohrah) rejected a motion filed by counsel for Mr. Tadic seeking to exclude hearsay evidence during the trial as a general rule.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Again, no decision exists on 5 August 1996 by Trial Chamber II on Tadic’s case in ICTY’s website. Please provide a link to the decision.
pre 9 godina
In its decision, the Trial Chamber noted that the Tribunal's Rules do not specifically exclude hearsay evidence.
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Well, if the Statute approved by the UNSC says so, than it is not the Trial Chamber that is “laughable” – that Chamber is following the Law (i.e. the Statute), but it is Russia which is “laughable” in proposing and approving that Court.
----------
You strongly refuse to take to take my word
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Of course. Not just yours; I refuse to take anybody’s word until I see the supporting arguments. I can’t switch off my brain because somebody says so :)
----------
Do you agree with most reputable jurists, or do ignorantly follow the ICTY circus (without actually reading decisions) and their masquerade of a quasi-judicial farce that accepts and depends on hearsay evidence?
(Amnesty Yugoslavia, 13 September 2014 01:14)
Well, you have not shown a difference between most reputable jurists and ICTY so the question above really makes no sense until you show that :)
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:54) That’s your opinion. You have provided no evidence for that other than hearsay that X site or person said so.
----------
The lunacy accepting hearsay evidence in the Tadic trial, from the ICTY website:
http://www.icty.org/sid/7324
The summaary from the hearsay decision in the Blaksic trial:
http://www.icty.org/sid/7700
Please ask the ringmaster at the ICTY circus why they only have the Press Releases for these decisions on the Case websites?
icj1, your demand for evidence is more stringent than that demanded by the Judges at the ICTY. Rather than challenging me, perhaps you should question the insanity running amok at the ICTY?
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 17 September 2014 04:58) When Judge Harhoff or some other Judge issues a judgment, decision, order or opinion under the ICTY Statute confirming what Judge Harhoff claimed, then I’ll believe it after I read the reasoning in that judgment, decision, order or opinion and it looks sound.
----
The essence and entire credibility of the ICTY had been challenged by one of its own vetted Judges.
I am glad that we both agree: an impartial investigation and hearing of the evidence is long overdue.
So far, the ICTY has refused to provide any answers or even launch an investigation. If the ICTY can't deal with this gross scandal and serious charge of judicial contempt, then those of us with our brains switched "on" are entirely justified in questioning the ICTY's credibility and capability in managing or judging any other investigation.
pre 9 godina
(icj1, 18 September 2014 06:03) Because there was not any shred evidence on what Judge Harhoff said. I don't want my money to be spent on chasing ghosts :)
------
Too late mate. The ICTY circus, which accepts hearsay evidence, has been chasing and investigating ghosts, and admitting their testimony as evidence for close to two decades.
38 Komentari
Sortiraj po: