Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Twilight of Impunity: The War Crimes Trial of Slobodan Milosevic
View through CrossRef
Judith Armatta, a lawyer and journalist, attended the proceedings of the trial of former Serbian president Slobodan Milošević over a period of nearly three years. During this period, the court was in session for 466 days, interrupted by repeated breaks necessitated by the accused’s increasing health problems. Charged with sixty-six counts of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, Milošević declined to have counsel appointed, electing instead to defend himself. The court’s willingness to allow Milošević to do so and to do so on his own terms proved to be a huge mistake, as Armatta stresses. The fallen Serbian leader’s priority was not to defend himself but rather to portray himself as a martyr for Serbia, outline an alternative history of events in the post-Yugoslav region, and demolish, as far as he was able, the testimony of witnesses. But what is striking is that Milošević’s line of cross-examination repeatedly proved to be damaging to his case, his own witnesses often proved to be more useful to the prosecution that to the defense, and Milošević used up a lot of time with speeches and with lines of questioning entirely irrelevant to the charges against him. Milošević also did his best to intimidate witnesses, entering into arguments with them; one witness, Agim Zeqiri, a farmer, was so shaken after the first day that he refused to continue.
Title: Twilight of Impunity: The War Crimes Trial of Slobodan Milosevic
Description:
Judith Armatta, a lawyer and journalist, attended the proceedings of the trial of former Serbian president Slobodan Milošević over a period of nearly three years.
During this period, the court was in session for 466 days, interrupted by repeated breaks necessitated by the accused’s increasing health problems.
Charged with sixty-six counts of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, Milošević declined to have counsel appointed, electing instead to defend himself.
The court’s willingness to allow Milošević to do so and to do so on his own terms proved to be a huge mistake, as Armatta stresses.
The fallen Serbian leader’s priority was not to defend himself but rather to portray himself as a martyr for Serbia, outline an alternative history of events in the post-Yugoslav region, and demolish, as far as he was able, the testimony of witnesses.
But what is striking is that Milošević’s line of cross-examination repeatedly proved to be damaging to his case, his own witnesses often proved to be more useful to the prosecution that to the defense, and Milošević used up a lot of time with speeches and with lines of questioning entirely irrelevant to the charges against him.
Milošević also did his best to intimidate witnesses, entering into arguments with them; one witness, Agim Zeqiri, a farmer, was so shaken after the first day that he refused to continue.
Related Results
An Empirical Study on Cyber Crimes Against Women and Children in India
An Empirical Study on Cyber Crimes Against Women and Children in India
The aim of the study is to understand the Cyber-crimes against women and Children in India for a period of five years from 2017 to 2021. The study is based on Secondary data collec...
International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG)
International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG)
This section provides current contact details and a summary of recent or ongoing clinical trials being coordinated by International Breast Cancer Study Group (IBCSG). Clinical tria...
The use of ECHR practice during the investigation of war crimes
The use of ECHR practice during the investigation of war crimes
In the article it has been examined the issue of using the practice of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in the process of pre-trial investigations of war crimes. The impor...
Aleksandar Lukashenko - Slobodan Milošević: A comparison
Aleksandar Lukashenko - Slobodan Milošević: A comparison
The first period of Milošević's rule, dominated by plebiscitary-populist legitimacy, bears an uncanny resemblance to the rule of Napoleon III. But there is also one contemporary wh...
24 War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity
24 War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity
Abstract
Four elements distinguish war crimes from crimes against humanity. War crimes may only be committed during an armed conflict, whereas crimes against humanit...
Crimes Against Humanity and Other International Crimes
Crimes Against Humanity and Other International Crimes
Abstract
This concluding chapter provides an overview of crimes against humanity. Crimes against humanity are characterized by several core features. First, they are...
Crimes against Humanity
Crimes against Humanity
Crimes against humanity have both a colloquial and a legal existence. In daily parlance, the term is employed to condemn any number of atrocities that violate international human r...
Genocide in Ukraine: problems of proof
Genocide in Ukraine: problems of proof
The article emphasizes that genocide was first criminalized immediately after the Second World War, precisely in 1948 when the UN General Assembly unanimously adopted the Conventio...

