1. I think that Sesjel is guilty as hell and a 'legitimate war' does not exclude people from their responsibility but I find the opinion of the majority of the judges on the status of the war actually quite a bombshell.
    (Bob, 31 March 2016 15:21
    ===…==
    Seeing how he wasn't in power then and didn't carry a gun can you please explain why you think he's as guilty as Hell and of exactly what?
    What command was given by him to go out and murder? Which divisions was he in charge of?
    What war strategy was used wich was his direct command?
    Seriously, what exactly are his crimes?
    Having radical opinions?
    (Peggy, 5 April 2016 03:18)

    # Comment link

  2. I often worry that the ICTY doesn't function all that well, but it's still a better alternative to local courts.
    (Nenad, 1 April 2016 12:45)
    ===…==
    Your sound a little disappointed that they couldn't keep him in jail a lot longer.
    Gee, I don't recall reading the same commentary from you when Gotovina, Haradinaj and Oric were let go. Do you have an opinion on those verdicts?

    BTW, ask Serbs around Srebrenica, Medak Pocket and Kosovo how they feel about those three being found not guilty.
    (Peggy, 5 April 2016 03:14)

    # Comment link

  3. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who knows? The guy was acquitted but he's not necessarily innocent. Stanisic and Simatovic were acquitted, too, but are back on trial.

    Ask people from Vojvodina, Croatia and Bosnia what they think of Seselj and his paramilitaries and you might find that lots of them would agree with this dissenting judge.

    In the end, we're talking about a court case. Sometimes, justice isn't served. The prosecution can't successfully prove charges, the judge(s) can't competently rule, the defense comes up with some ingenious argument (and I'm not implying that the latter occurred here).

    I often worry that the ICTY doesn't function all that well, but it's still a better alternative to local courts.
    (Nenad, 1 April 2016 12:45)

    # Comment link

  4. "He did not command any troops and he never fired a weapon."

    Enough said.

    ##

    It took 12 years to realize this?

    Or did it take so long because it knew it could not convict... but still wanted to punish?

    If you answer the first, then you are incompetent.

    If you answer the second, then you are guilty of not delivering the accused his right to a speedy trial.

    A banana court.
    (factman, 31 March 2016 19:13)

    # Comment link

  5. There is no doubt that widespread crimes were committed against non-Serbs in Bosnia and Croatia. But none of that was planned or commanded by Dr. Seselj. The Hague Tribunal made the only verdict that was possible - acquittal. Dr. Seselj may be an extremist and a radical thinker, but he is certainly not a war criminal. He did not command any troops and he never fired a weapon. How on earth could he be convicted for war crimes?
    (Michael Thomson, 31 March 2016 15:55)

    # Comment link

  6. This dissent is an interesting albeit complicated read. The majority of the judges appear to think that the war situation in Yugoslavia was the result of an "unlawful secession" and they think that the war was legitimate. I think that Sesjel is guilty as hell and a 'legitimate war' does not exclude people from their responsibility but I find the opinion of the majority of the judges on the status of the war actually quite a bombshell.
    (Bob, 31 March 2016 15:21)

    # Comment link