# Jurisprudence map — WCC-BiH

A topic-by-topic map of WCC-BiH's principal holdings. This is an **index**, not a substitute for the underlying decisions.

## 1. Genocide — Srebrenica jurisprudence

WCC-BiH has produced the **largest body of national-level Srebrenica genocide jurisprudence**. Cases include:

- **Stupar et al. (Kravica)** — First-Instance Verdict 29 July 2008 (Case No. X-KR-05/24); Appellate Verdict 9 September 2009. Genocide convictions for participation in mass executions at the Kravica warehouse during the Srebrenica events of July 1995. Subsequently subject to *Maktouf*-based review.

- **Trbić** — Rule 11 bis case referred from ICTY 2007. First-Instance Verdict 16 October 2009. Genocide conviction for participation in the Srebrenica genocide.

- **Vuković, Andrun** — multiple judgments on individual perpetrators.

Findings are consistent with ICTY *Krstić* (Appeals Judgment 19 April 2004) and *Popović et al.* (Trial Judgment 10 June 2010), but apply BiH-specific procedural and evidentiary frameworks.

## 2. Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Foča sexual violence cases

- **Janković (Gojko Janković)** — Rule 11 bis case referred from ICTY 2005. First-Instance Verdict 16 February 2007 (Case No. X-KR-05/161); Appellate Verdict 23 October 2007. Findings on systematic sexual violence in Foča in 1992 (rape camps), parallel to ICTY *Kunarac et al.* findings.

- **Samardžić** — locally-initiated case on Foča-region sexual violence. First-Instance Verdict 7 April 2006.

- **Stanković (Radovan Stanković)** — Rule 11 bis case referred 2005; **first Rule 11 bis case at WCC-BiH**. First-Instance Verdict 14 November 2006. Stanković subsequently escaped custody in 2007; his recapture and re-trial proceedings extended into the 2010s.

These cases consolidate the doctrinal characterisation of **rape as a crime against humanity** and **torture** in the BiH conflict context, building on ICTY jurisprudence.

## 3. Crimes against humanity and war crimes — Prijedor/Omarska/Keraterm

- **Mejakić et al.** — Rule 11 bis case referred 2006 (4 accused: Mejakić, Gruban, Knežević, Fuštar). First-Instance Verdict 30 May 2008 (Case No. X-KR-06/200); Appellate Verdict 16 February 2009. Findings on the Omarska and Keraterm camps in Prijedor in 1992. Parallel to ICTY *Tadić*, *Kvočka et al.*, *Sikirica et al.* findings.

- **Rašević and Todović** — Rule 11 bis case referred 2006. Foča Kazneno-Popravni Dom (KP Dom) prison camp findings.

## 4. Command/superior responsibility

WCC-BiH has applied **command/superior responsibility** following ICTY and ICTR jurisprudence. Notable cases include findings on:
- Military command structures (VRS - Bosnian Serb Army)
- Paramilitary unit commanders
- Detention camp commanders
- Civilian authorities exercising effective control

Specific applications require verification against the underlying judgments.

## 5. Joint criminal enterprise (JCE)

WCC-BiH applies the **three-tier JCE doctrine** established by ICTY *Tadić* (Appeals Judgment 15 July 1999). Application is case-specific.

## 6. Temporal application — *Maktouf and Damjanović*

The European Court of Human Rights, Grand Chamber, in *Maktouf and Damjanović v. BiH* (App. Nos. 2312/08 and 34179/08, 18 July 2013), held that the WCC-BiH had **violated Article 7 ECHR** by applying the 2003 BiH Criminal Code retroactively to 1992-1995 conduct where the 1976 SFRY Criminal Code (in force at the time) prescribed **lighter sentences** for the relevant offence.

**Consequences:**
- The Constitutional Court of BiH has set aside multiple WCC-BiH judgments for re-trial
- Subsequent WCC-BiH judgments engage in *lex mitior* analysis case-by-case
- Some pre-2013 convictions stand because the 2003 Code's application was **not** less favourable

This is the **most important doctrinal development** in WCC-BiH practice. Any citation to a pre-2013 judgment should consider potential *Maktouf*-based revision.

## 7. Witness protection and support

The WCC-BiH has developed substantial procedural practice on:
- **Witness protection** (closed sessions, voice/image alteration, pseudonyms)
- **Vulnerable witness support** (notably for sexual violence survivors)
- **Cross-border witness arrangements** (witnesses residing outside BiH)

The OSCE Mission to BiH report *Witness Protection and Support in BiH War Crimes Trials* (2010) is the principal analytical treatment.

## 8. ICTY Rule 11 bis referrals — operational record

Cases referred from ICTY to WCC-BiH under Rule 11 bis:

| Case | ICTY case no. | Referred | WCC outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stanković | IT-96-23/2 | 17 May 2005 | First-Instance Verdict 14 Nov 2006; subsequent escape and recapture |
| Janković | IT-96-23/2 | 22 July 2005 | First-Instance Verdict 16 Feb 2007 |
| Mejakić et al. | IT-02-65 | 20 July 2005 | First-Instance Verdict 30 May 2008 |
| Rašević and Todović | IT-97-25/1 | 8 July 2005 | First-Instance Verdict 28 Feb 2008 |
| Trbić | IT-05-88/1 | 27 April 2007 | First-Instance Verdict 16 Oct 2009 |
| Lukić and Lukić | IT-98-32/1 | 12 April 2007 | **Referral revoked 4 July 2007** — case returned to ICTY |

For each referral, the relevant ICTY Referral Bench decision should be cited as part of the institutional record.

## 9. Application of customary international law

WCC-BiH judgments cite **customary international law** for offences (notably crimes against humanity in its 1992-1995 customary formulation) where:
- The 2003 BiH Code provides a domestic basis for criminalisation, AND
- Customary international law confirmed the criminalisation at the time of the conduct

This dual-foundation approach is part of the answer to non-retroactivity objections.

## 10. Reparations and victim participation

WCC-BiH criminal proceedings do **not** include a developed reparations component within the criminal verdict (distinct from ECCC's Civil Parties or ICC reparations). Victims may seek civil compensation through separate proceedings under BiH civil law. The procedural integration of victims at WCC-BiH is more limited than at the major hybrid tribunals.

## How to use this map

1. Identify the user's substantive question and locate the relevant section above.
2. For a precise legal finding, identify the specific case and judgment.
3. Verify the cited passage through `verification-workflow.md` — fetch the actual text (sudbih.gov.ba) and confirm.
4. Cite using the conventions in `citation-format.md`.
5. If the case is pre-2013, consider *Maktouf*-based subsequent revision.

The Law on the Court of BiH, the Criminal Code of BiH 2003, the SFRY Criminal Code 1976, and the actual WCC-BiH and ECHR decisions are the territory. This file is a map of them.