Statement of the Office of the Prosecutor on the Judgement of Vojislav Šešelj We fully understand that many victims and communities will be disappointed by the Trial Chamber’s judgment. We will carefully review the Trial Chamber’s reasoning that led to this outcome, including the dissenting opinion and the Trial Chamber’s findings that depart from the consistent jurisprudence of the Tribunal. We will then determine whether there are grounds to appeal the judgment. It should be recalled that an indictment and arrest warrants are currently pending against three of Šešelj’s associates, including two members of his defence team, for allegedly having threatened, intimidated, offered bribes to, or otherwise interfered with two Prosecution witnesses. In addition, Šešelj has been convicted three times of contempt of court for revealing the identities of protected Prosecution witnesses and sentenced to a total of 4 years and 9 months imprisonment for those crimes.

Trial Judgement in the case of Vojislav Šešelj delivered The Trial Chamber III of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) today acquitted Vojislav Šešelj, President of the Serbian Radical Party and a former member of the Assembly of the Republic of Serbia. Vojislav Šešelj faced nine counts of which three were for crimes against humanity (persecution, deportation and inhumane act of forcible transfer) and six were for war crimes (murder, torture and cruel treatment, wanton destruction, destruction or wilful damage done to institutions dedicated to religion or education, plunder of public or private property). He was accused of having directly committed, incited, aided and abetted those crimes committed by Serbian forces during the period from August 1991 until September 1993, and to have been part of their commission through his participation in a joint criminal enterprise (JCE). The Majority, Judge Flavia Lattanzi dissenting, found that the Prosecution failed to prove the existence of a criminal purpose, a legal requirement to the JCE. The Majority concluded that the objective of the creation of Greater Serbia was more of a political venture than a criminal project. The Majority acknowledged that crimes had been committed by Serbian forces in the process, but that they were not inherently linked to the fulfilment of the purpose of Greater Serbia. The Majority, Judge Lattanzi dissenting, also found that the recruitment of volunteers through which Vojislav Šešelj was deemed to have participated in the JCE or aided and abetted the crimes, was a legal activity regulated by the Yugoslav constitution and other relevant laws at the time. In any event, the Majority, concluded that the volunteers, once recruited and sent to the front, were not under the authority of Vojislav Šešelj, but rather under military command, as per the principle of Unicity of Command embodied in the pertinent regulations. The Prosecution also alleged that Vojislav Šešelj directly committed a certain number of crimes, notably by public and direct denigration, in speeches inciting hatred of the non-Serbian population. For some of those speeches, the Majority, could not rule out the reasonable possibility that they were made in a context of conflict and were meant to boost the morale of the troops of his camp, rather than calling upon them to spare no one. Another Majority, Judge  Jean-Claude Antonetti dissenting, found that two other speeches constituted clear appeals for the expulsion and forcible transfer of Croats. This holding was not sufficient, however, to enter a conviction since the Majority, Judge Lattanzi dissenting, did not find that there were widespread or systematic attacks against a civilian population during the relevant period, ruling out thereby the existence of crimes against humanity. The Majority also held that the Prosecutor did not offer compelling evidence to establish or assess the impact of Šešelj’s speeches or the link to crimes committed at a later stage or in remote areas. V ojislav Šešelj was cleared of all charges of the Indictment, with a majority decision on eight counts and a unanimous decision on one count. Parties have the right to appeal the judgement. In the course of this trial, which commenced on 7 November 2007, the Chamber admitted close to 1,400 exhibits. It heard 99 witnesses, of whom 90 testified for the Prosecution and nine were called directly by the Chamber. The judgement consists of just over 100 pages and includes two annexes, a concurring opinion from Judge Antonetti, a statement from Judge Mandiaye Niang and a partially dissenting opinion from Judge Lattanzi. Since its establishment, the Tribunal has indicted 161 persons for serious violations of humanitarian law committed on the territory of the former Yugoslavia between 1991 and 2001. Proceedings against 149 have been concluded. Proceedings are currently ongoing for 11 accused.  

On the picture Florence Hartmann. The Hague, 29 March – The Mechanism’s President today issued a decision on the “Urgent Request to the President of the MICT to Grant Florence Hartmann Early Release”, which was dated 25 March 2016 and transmitted to the Mechanism’s President on 29 March 2016. Ms. Hartmann was granted early release, with the decision effective as soon as practically possible. In determining that Ms. Hartmann should be granted early release, the President considered that her exemplary conduct in the United Nations Detention Unit and her completion of more than two thirds of her sentence militated in favour of her release. President Judge Theodor Meron also consulted the majority of the Judges of the sentencing Chamber who are Judges of the Mechanism, pursuant to the Mechanism’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence.

Statement of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, following admission of guilt by the accused in Mali war crime case: “An important step for the victims, and another first for the ICC”   Today the Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) confirmed the charge of war crime brought by my Office against Mr Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, and committed him to trial for attacking historic monuments and buildings dedicated to religion in Timbuktu, Mali between approximately 30 June and 11 July 2012. Following this decision, I can now publicly note a further significant development.   On 1 March 2016, Mr Al Mahdi explicitly expressed before ICC Judges and in the presence of his lawyers, his wish to plead guilty. He did so during the course of the confirmation of charges proceedings, at a point where the exchanges were in closed session. This part of the court record has now been made public.  This case is in many ways historically important in that it focuses exclusively on the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against ‘cultural property’. The deliberate and wanton destruction of historic mausoleums and buildings dedicated to religion, as witnessed in this case, caused severe harm to the religious practices, historical heritage, and cultural identity of the people of Timbuktu, Malians and the region more generally. The loss was not locally confined. The magnitude of the loss of such irreplaceable physical embodiment of history and culture was felt by the whole of humanity, and at the expense of future generations. This case underscores the seriousness of such crimes, and the necessity to hold perpetrators accountable.  My Office is determined to continue to do its part to counter the scourge of such reprehensible crimes. This is the first time that a suspect has expressed his intention to plead guilty to criminal conduct for which he is being prosecuted by my Office; a serious crime for which we had gathered overwhelming evidence. Such an admission of guilt, provided for in article 65 of the Rome Statute, will be a milestone in the history of the ICC. This case is also unprecedented in terms of its expeditiousness and efficiency. The arrest warrant against Mr Al Mahdi was issued in September 2015. The arrest took place in the ensuing days, facilitated by the impressive cooperation of the States involved. The initial appearance hearing was held on 30 September 2015. The charge and the legal and factual submissions in support of the charge were filed on 17 and 18 December 2015. The confirmation of charges hearing was held on 1 March 2016.  The case will shortly be referred to a Court’s Trial Chamber. It will be for the designated judges of that Chamber to decide how the case should proceed in light of Mr Al Mahdi’s stated intention to admit guilt.  This now potentially clears the way for proceedings which will benefit victims, witnesses, and the suspect himself — who, in this way, should be able to obtain a final judgement in this case in a relatively short time. The impact of my Office’s overwhelming evidence, combined with Mr Al Mahdi’s intention to acknowledge guilt together represent a positive development towards the establishment of the truth in this case and the 2012 events which left their painful mark on Timbuktu, and this World Heritage site. More broadly, it represents a further step towards the realisation of tangible justice for atrocity crimes in Mali. In addition to the ends of justice, it is my sincere hope that this judicial development will contribute to peace, stability and reconciliation in Mali.         

ICC Pre-Trial Chamber I confirms the charge against Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi and commits him to trial  Today, 24 March 2016, Pre-Trial Chamber I of the International Criminal Court (“ICC” or “Court”) confirmed against Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi the war crime charge regarding the destruction of historical and religious monuments in Timbuktu (Mali), and committed Mr Al Mahdi to trial before a Trial Chamber. Pre-Trial Chamber I is composed of Presiding Judge Joyce Aluoch, Judge Cuno Tarfusser and Judge Péter Kovács. The decision confirming the charges can be appealed only with the authorisation of Pre-Trial Chamber I. The ICC Presidency will assign the case to a Trial Chamber in due course. The Chamber found that the evidence presented by the Prosecutor is sufficient to establish substantial grounds to believe that Mr Al Mahdi is criminally responsible, pursuant to article 25(3)(a) (perpetration and co-perpetration); article 25(3)(b) (soliciting, inducing); article 25(3) (c) (aiding, abetting or otherwise assisting) or article 25(3) (d) (contributing in any other way) of the ICC Rome Statute, for the commission of a war crime alleged by the Prosecutor regarding intentionally directing attacks against the following buildings: 1) the mausoleum Sidi Mahamoud Ben Omar Mohamed Aquit, 2) the mausoleum Sheikh Mohamed Mahmoud Al Arawani, 3) the mausoleum Sheikh Sidi Mokhtar Ben Sidi Muhammad Ben Sheikh Alkabir, 4) the mausoleum Alpha Moya, 5) the mausoleum Sheikh Sidi Ahmed Ben Amar Arragadi, 6) the mausoleum Sheikh Muhammad El Mikki, 7) the mausoleum Sheikh Abdoul Kassim Attouaty, 8) the mausoleum Ahmed Fulane, 9) the mausoleum Bahaber Babadié, and 10) Sidi Yahia mosque (the door).   The confirmed charge concerns a crime allegedly committed in Timbuktu between around 30 June 2012 and around 11 July 2012. The Chamber indicated that the targeted buildings were regarded and protected as a significant part of the cultural heritage of Timbuktu and of Mali and did not constitute military objectives. They were specifically identified, chosen and targeted precisely in light and because of their religious and historical character. As a consequence of the attack, they were either completely destroyed or severely damaged. Their destruction was considered as a serious matter by the local population. The Chamber based its decision on the evidence presented to it by the Prosecutor and by the Defence which included witnesses’ testimonies, video materials, imagery materials, experts’ analyses, official documents emanating from Malian authorities and international organisations (including UNESCO) and media reports. It is alleged that Mr Al Mahdi, born in Agoune, 100 kilometres west of Timbuktu, Mali, was an active personality in the context of the occupation of Timbuktu. He allegedly was a member of Ansar Eddine, a mainly Tuareg movement associated with Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (“AQIM”), working closely with the leaders of the two armed groups and in the context of the structures and institutions established by them. It is alleged that, until September 2012, he was the head of the “Hisbah” (body set up to uphold public morals and prevent vice), set up in April 2012. He was also associated with the work of the Islamic Court of Timbuktu and participated in executing its decisions. It is alleged that he was involved in the destruction of the buildings mentioned in the charge. Mr Al Mahdi was surrendered to the ICC on 26 September 2015 pursuant to a warrant of arrest issued on 18 September 2015. The confirmation of charges hearing in this case took place on 1 March 2016.