Zaključak sudskog vijeća po pitanju optužbi odbrane da je Armija BiH gađala pozicije u gradu s namjerom da optuži vojsku Republike Srpske i time stekne simpatije međunarodne zajednice. Prosudite sami i uporedite zaključke vijeća sa tumačenjem presude novinara RTRS-a tokom večerašnjeg priloga.
d. Bosnian Muslim side targeting own civilians
4515. The Chamber has analysed the evidence outlined above in the context of all the evidence it
has heard in this case in relation to sniping and shelling in Sarajevo. While the Chamber found
Garaplija to be credible, his evidence did not go as far as to show that the Bosnian Muslim side
targeted its own civilians, let alone that the Bosnian Muslim side was responsible for all major
shelling or sniping incidents in the city. Instead, his evidence merely showed that Herenda, a
member of a special police unit, was engaged in political executions of notorious Bosnian Muslim
individuals who were not civilians. Garaplija’s evidence further revealed that Herenda killed an
UNPROFOR soldier in order to blame the Bosnian Serb side and provoke international reaction
against them.
15129 However, as recounted above, when asked about the targeting of Bosnian
Muslim civilians, Garaplija responded that Herenda did not admit to any such practice.
4516. Having said that, the Chamber accepts the evidence of Fraser, Harland, KDZ185, and other
Prosecution witnesses that there were some incidents where Bosnian Muslim side targeted its own
territory, usually near the Presidency building, for political purposes. However, all those witnesses
limited the occurrence of such incidents to a minuscule number and all were firm in their position
that most of the fire on Sarajevo came from the Bosnian Serb side.
4517. Furthermore, Harland testified that these few incidents were attributed to the ”renegade
forces” on the Bosnian Muslim side. In contrast, the Accused’s claim, if true, would have meant a
conspiracy on a large scale involving many, if not all, ABiH and police units in the city colluding
over a number of years in order to secretly snipe and shell their own people. The Chamber does not
accept this. In addition, as seen in preceding sections, in many of the charged sniping and shelling
incidents, the Chamber found they were committed by the SRK.15130 There is therefore no evidence
of such a wide scale conspiracy.
4518. Even the witnesses called by the Accused did not go as far as to claim that all or most major
incidents in the city involving civilian casualties were caused by the Bosnian Muslim side. As
noted earlier, Garaplija’s evidence did not concern sniping on Bosnian Muslim civilians at all.
Demurenko testified of the impression he had that the Bosnian Muslims were sniping their own
people, conceding that this impression was difficult to prove. More significantly, while he authored
a large number of UN daily reports during his time in the city, many of which were admitted into
evidence in this case, only a miniscule number of those recorded specific incidents in which the fire
was said to have come from the ABiH-held territory.15131 Similarly, KW570’s testimony was
confined to the ABiH’s pattern of firing towards the presidency when an important delegation was
visiting the city. However, he made no mention of civilian victims resulting from such fire. Gray
also mentioned ABiH fire on the Presidency during foreign visits but recalled only one such
Presidency incident where civilian casualties were involved.15132 The SRK soldiers and officers,
such as Galić, Milošević, and Šarenac, who testified on this subject, were not located in the city
during these incidents and their testimony was based primarily on rumours and intelligence
gathered by their units. As such, it is of limited value.
4519. Finally, it is clear from the evidence above that, with the exception of a few individuals,
most of the international witnesses present on the ground never received any conclusive proof that
the Bosnian Muslim side was sniping or shelling its own civilians. Had there been a large scale
conspiracy of the kind alleged by the Accused, there is no doubt that those witnesses would have
been informed of or would have reported on such incidents with much greater frequency. They
would have also observed some of those incidents first-hand. Thus, for all these reasons, the
Chamber rejects the Accused’s argument that the Bosnian Muslim side was responsible for all
major incidents in the city or was, as part of a general policy, sniping and shelling its own civilians
throughout the conflict in Sarajevo. While such incidents may have taken place on a few
occasions, this did not occur frequently enough to throw doubt on the other findings made in this
Judgement relating to the conflict in Sarajevo.
strana 1827-1828
http://www.icty.org/x/cases/karadzic/tj ... gement.pdf
