That Someone Guilty Be Punished - International Center for ...

148. The ICTY Appeals Chamber summarized the practice of the Tribunal itself and the ICTR in
a 2009 judgment, recalling: “It is well established that, at the Tribunal and at the ICTR, retribution
and deterrence are the main objectives of sentencing.” Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik, Case No.
IT-00-39-A, Appeal Judgment, 775 (Mar. 17, 2009). See also Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No.
IT-97-24-T, Trial Judgment, 900 (July 31, 2003); Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski, Case No.: IT-95-14/1-
A, Appeal Judgment 185 (Mar. 24, 2000).
149. Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik, Case No. IT-00-39-A, Appeals Judgment, 775 (Mar. 17, 2009);
Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski, Case No. IT-95-14/1-A, Appeals Judgment, 185 (Mar. 24, 2000); Prosecutor
v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Trial Judgment, 900 (July 31, 2003). While victims
speak of the need for punishment that is adequate in light of the gravity of the offenses committed,
the ICTY has also recognized the notion of retribution as incorporating a “principle of restraint”
in sentencing. See, for example, Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik, Case No. IT-00-39-A, Appeals
Judgment, 804 (Mar. 17, 2009); Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić and Mario Cˇerkez, Case No. IT-95-14/2-
A, Appeals Judgment, 1075 (Dec. 17, 2004); Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski, Case No. IT-95-14/1-A,
Appeals Judgment, 185 (Mar. 24, 2000).
150. We describe her criticisms in Chapter IV.
151. Interview with Hatidža Mehmedović, president, Association of Srebrenica Mothers, Potočari,
July 21, 2009.
152. Interview with Tarik Jusić, program director, Mediacentar Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Dec. 6, 2006.
153. Interview with Zdravko Grebo, director, Center for Interdisciplinary Postgraduate Studies,
University of Sarajevo, Sarajevo, Dec. 4, 2006. Former judge Vehid Šehić and others insist, for
reasons we explore in some depth in Chapter VI, that no prosecutions would have taken place
if the ICTY had not been established: “I only know for a fact that in case the Hague Tribunal
was never established war criminals would have never been tried or prosecuted.” Interview with
Vehid Šehić, president, Citizens Forum of Tuzla, Tuzla, July 15, 2009. Civil society activist Mervan
Maraščija made much the same point: “If there were no ICTY,” he told us, “I don’t know how the
whole process would start. We definitely didn’t have any possibility to process war crimes” in local
courts. Interview with Mervan Miraščija, law program coordinator, Open Society Fund Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Nov. 29, 2006.
154. Interview with Sinan Alić, director, Foundation Truth, Justice, Reconciliation, Tuzla, Dec. 5,
2006.
155. As we note in later chapters, however, many Bosnians have expressed growing frustration
with the ICTY alongside growing confidence in the national war crimes chamber that has operated
since 2005. Even so, none of our interlocutors believes that Bosnian courts could have provided
justice during the war or in the immediate postwar years.
156. Interview with Mirsad Tokača, president, Research and Documentation Center Sarajevo,
Sarajevo, Dec. 6, 2006.
157. S.C. Res. 827, preamble; UN Doc. S/RES/827 (May 25, 1993).
158. Report of the International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Persons Responsible for Serious
Violations of International Humanitarian Law Committed in the Territory of the former Yugoslavia
since 1991, UN Doc. A/49/342-S/1994/1007, 13 (Aug. 29, 1994).
159. Id.
THAT SOMEONE GUILTY BE PUNISHED 147