This decision was made on June 8 in response to a defence motion for acquittal filed last week, at the end of the prosecution case some eight months after the trial began.
“We enter a judgment of acquittal of the accused of the charges brought against him in counts four and six of the indictment, namely of the charge of plunder of public or private property,” said presiding Judge Carmel Agius of Malta.
However, the judges decided that Oric’s trial will continue on four other counts in the indictment, which charges him with the murder and abuse of Serb detainees held in Srebrenica prison in 1992 and 1993 by the men allegedly under his command, as well as with wanton destruction of Serb villages, not justified by military necessity.
In a passionate presentation of the defence’s motion for acquittal last week, Oric’s lawyer John Jones said the prosecution had failed to prove any of the charges against his client beyond reasonable doubt and that their case was so weak it should be dismissed in its entirety.
“This is a case which does not deserve to continue one moment longer,” Jones told the judges.
But they disagreed.
“There is evidence which, if believed, would tend to show beyond reasonable doubt that although sometimes disputed, the accused’s authority over local commanders in the Srebrenica area did indeed exist and that local commanders saw him as their [superior],” Judge Agius said this week. “In other words, that he had real and effective control.”
Many prosecution witnesses who have appeared in court over the last several months - including the insiders - testified to the contrary and claimed that Oric did not have effective command over “poorly organised groups of armed men” in Srebrenica.
They also said “no one, including Oric” could have prevented hordes of starved civilians from looting and burning Serb houses in a desperate search for food.
But the judges were not convinced that their testimonies should result in Oric’s acquittal.
“Upon examining the totality of the relevant evidence, we have come to the conclusion that the prosecution has adduced evidence which, if believed, could lead to the conclusion that the accused failed to prevent or punish the perpetrators for the alleged wanton destruction,” they explained in their decision to continue the trial.
The judges also added that the prosecution had provided enough evidence which, if believed, could lead to the conclusion beyond reasonable doubt that Oric had de jure and de facto “superior authority over the guards at the Srebrenica police station” who allegedly murdered seven Serb detainees and tortured and abused a number of others in 1992 and 1993.
The defence has argued from the beginning of the trial that Oric did not have effective command over these guards and that he was not even aware of the murders and beatings taking place in the prison. Surprisingly, many prosecution witnesses – including former Serb prisoners – have supported these claims.
As for the counts four and six in the indictment – charging Oric with plunder of public or private property, “namely cattle, furniture and television sets” - the judges have said the prosecution had not shown enough evidence to support these charges, and ordered that they be deleted from the indictment.
“Although there is evidence that a bed and a television set may have been taken away, this does not rise to the level of seriousness which is related to the jurisdictional requirements…of the tribunal,” explained Judge Agius.
As for the cattle that were stolen during Muslim raids on Serb villages around Srebrenica in the period relevant to the indictment, judges believe these acts were justified.
“Under normal circumstances, the taking away of livestock or cattle would undoubtedly amount to plunder, but in the extraordinary circumstances of this case…it had become indispensable for the survival of the population of Srebrenica,” they noted.
The defence will start presenting its case on July 4.
Merdijana Sadovic is an IWPR reporter in The Hague.
