No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 February 2017
1 Buergenthal, Thomas, United States Holocaust Memorial Council Lecture: International Law and the Holocaust (Occasional Papers, 2004)Google Scholar.
2 See Osiel, M. J., Making Public Memory Publicly, in Human Rights in Political Transitions: Gettysburg to Bosnia 217 (Hesse, C. & Post, R. eds., 1999)Google Scholar.
3 The novelist V. S. Naipul describes Argentina as a society without a history, only annals. Osiel, supra note 2, at 232.
4 “Prosecutor v. Mrkšić, Radié and Šljivanèanin, No. IT-95-13/1-T (Oct. 26, 2005).
5 Miroljub Vujović et al, Judgment (Dec. 12 2005) (fourteen persons were convicted, and two were acquitted); Milan Bulić, Judgment (Jan. 30, 2006); proceedings in Saša Radak, commenced on 7 July 2005, are continuing.
6 The “Scorpions” case (Slobodan Medic, Pero Petrašević, Aleksandar Medic, Aleksandar Vukov, and Branislav Medić).
7 Prosecutor v. Stanković, Decision on Referral of Case Under Rule lifers, No. IT-96-23/2 (May 17, 2005); Prosecutor v. Stanković, Decision on Rule 11 bis Referral, No. It-96-23/2-AR11bis; (Sept. 1, 2005); Prosecutor v. Mejakić et al., Decision on Prosecutor’s Motion for Referral of Case Pursuant to Rule 11 bis, No. IT-02-65-PT (July 20, 2005); Prosecutor v. Mejakić et al., Decision on Joint Defence Appeal Against Decision on Referral Under Rule 11 bis, No. IT-02-65-AR11bis.1 (Apr. 7, 2006).
8 Prosecutor v. Ademi and Norac, Decision for Referral to the Authorities of the Republic of Croatia Pursuant to Rule 11 Ms, No. IT-04/78 (Sept. 14, 2005.)
9 Case Concerning Legality of Use of Force (Serb. & Mont. v. Belg.), General List No. 105 (Int’l Ct. Justice, Dec. 15, 2004).
10 Banković v. Belgium, Admissibility, App. No. 52207/99 (Eur. Ct. H.R. Dec. 12, 2001).
11 According to the ICTY press release, the prosecutor decided not to open a criminal investigation, which she announced in her address to the Security Council on June 2, 2000. Her decision was based on the Final Report to the Prosecutor by the Committee Established to Review the NATO Bombing Campaign Against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (June 8, 2000), reprinted in 39 ILM 1257 (2000), available at <http://www.un.org/icty/pressreal/nato061300.htm>.
12 Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Dem. Rep. Congo v. Uganda), Judgment, General List No. 116 (Int’l Ct. Justice Dec. 19, 2005).
13 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz v. Yugo. (Serb. & Mont.)), Admissibility, General List No. 91 (Int’l Ct. Justice Mar. 20, 1993).
14 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Croat. v. Yugo. (Serb. & Mont.)), General List No. 118 (Int’l Ct. Justice July 2, 1999).
15 There is no prohibition against hearsay before the ICTY either, but it is only accepted in a very limited manner.
16 Supra, note 6.
17 Prosecutor v. Milošević, Decision on Application for a Limited Re-opening of the Bosnia and Kosovo Components of the Prosecution Case, No. IT-02-54-T (Dec. 13, 2005).
18 Prosecutor v. Strugar, Third Amended Indictment, No. IT-01-42, Schedule II (Dec. 10, 2003).
19 Bruno Carnez & Colin Kaiser, Report on the Status of the Cultural Heritage in the Old Town of Dubrovnik Following the Bombardments of October, November and December 1991, Exhibit P63.6, in Prosecutor v. Strugar, supra note 18.
20 Prosecutor v. Strugar, Judgment, No. IT-01-42, para. 318 (Jan. 31, 2005).
21 Prosecutor v. Krstić, Trial Judgment, No. IT-98-33-A (Aug. 2, 2001); Prosecutor v. Krstić, Appeals Judgment, No. IT-98-33-A (Apr. 19, 2004).
22 Prosecutor v. Stakić, Trial Judgment, No. IT-97-24-T (July 31,2003); Prosecutor v. Stakić, Appeals Judgment, No. IT-97-24-A (Mar. 22, 2006).
No CrossRef data available.