Geographical area of crimes

Notion(s) Filing Case
Decision on Referral - 11.07.2007 LUKIĆ & LUKIĆ
(IT-98-32/1-AR11bis.1)

22. The Appeals Chamber also considers that the Referral Bench placed too much stress on the local character of the Appellant’s crimes.  Of course, this is a relevant factor and in some situations can be a significant one.[1] […] Since the criminal acts of paramilitary leaders are likely to be limited to a municipal (or at most regional) scope, an undue emphasis on geographic scope might thwart the intent of the Security Council that the Tribunal retain jurisdiction over at least the most significant paramilitary leaders.  There is no necessary nexus between, on the one hand, leadership responsibility for the most serious crimes and, on the other hand, a broad geographic area.  […] The Appeals Chamber also takes note of the fact that the Appellant’s paramilitary group appears to have operated for at least two years.[2]  In light of these facts, the Appeals Chamber considers that the Referral Bench underestimated the level of responsibility allegedly held by the Appellant. 

[1] See Todović Decision of 4 September 2006, para. 16.

[2] See Second Amended Indictment, paras 3, 5-7, 11-13, and 17.

Download full document
ICTR Rule Rule 11 bis ICTY Rule Rule 11 bis