BELGRADE – The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in The Hague has determined that the late Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic was not responsible for war crimes committed during the 1992-95 Bosnian war.

In a stunning ruling, the trial chamber that convicted former Bosnian-Serb president Radovan Karadzic of war crimes and sentenced him to 40 years in prison, unanimously concluded that Slobodan Milosevic was not part of a “joint criminal enterprise” to victimize Muslims and Croats during the Bosnian war.

The March 24th Karadzic judgment states that “the Chamber is not satisfied that there was sufficient evidence presented in this case to find that Slobodan Milosevic agreed with the common plan” to permanently remove Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb claimed territory.

The Karadzic trial chamber found that “the relationship between Milosevic and the Accused had deteriorated beginning in 1992; by 1994, they no longer agreed on a course of action to be taken. Furthermore, beginning as early as March 1992, there was apparent discord between the Accused and Milosevic in meetings with international representatives, during which Milosevic and other Serbian leaders openly criticised Bosnian Serb leaders of committing ‘crimes against humanity’ and ‘ethnic cleansing’ and the war for their own purposes.”

The judges noted that Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic both favored the preservation of Yugoslavia and that Milosevic was initially supportive, but that their views diverged over time. The judgment states that “from 1990 and into mid-1991, the political objective of the Accused and the Bosnian Serb leadership was to preserve Yugoslavia and to prevent the separation or independence of BiH, which would result in a separation of Bosnian Serbs from Serbia; the Chamber notes that Slobodan Milosevic endorsed this objective and spoke against the independence of BiH.”

The Chamber found that “the declaration of sovereignty by the SRBiH Assembly in the absence of the Bosnian Serb delegates on 15 October 1991, escalated the situation,” but that Milosevic was not on board with the establishment of Republika Srpska in response. The judgment says that “Slobodan Milosevic was attempting to take a more cautious approach”

Slobodan Milosevic
Slobodan Milosevic

The judgment states that in intercepted communications with Radovan Karadzic, “Milosevic questioned whether it was wise to use ‘an illegitimate act in response to another illegitimate act’ and questioned the legality of forming a Bosnian Serb Assembly.”

The judges also found that “Slobodan Milosevic expressed his reservations about how a Bosnian Serb Assembly could exclude the Muslims who were ‘for Yugoslavia’.”

The judgment notes that in meetings with Serb and Bosnian Serb officials “Slobodan Milosevic stated that ‘[a]ll members of other nations and ethnicities must be protected’ and that ‘[t]he national interest of the Serbs is not discrimination’.”

Also that “Milosevic further declared that crime needed to be fought decisively.”

The trial chamber notes that “In private meetings, Milosevic was extremely angry at the Bosnian Serb leadership for rejecting the Vance-Owen Plan and he cursed the Accused.” They also found that “Milosevic tried to reason with the Bosnian Serbs saying that he understood their concerns, but that it was most important to end the war.”

The judgment states that “Milosevic also questioned whether the world would accept that the Bosnian Serbs who represented only one third of the population of BiH would get more than 50% of the territory and he encouraged a political agreement.”

At a meeting of the Supreme Defense Council the judgment says that “Milosevic told the Bosnian Serb leadership that they were not entitled to have more than half the territory in BiH, stating that: ‘there is no way that more than that could belong to us! Because, we represent one third of the population. […] We are not entitled to in excess of half of the territory – you must not snatch away something that belongs to someone else! […] How can you imagine two thirds of the population being crammed into 30% of the territory, while 50% is too little for you?! Is it humane, is it fair?!’”

In other meetings with Serb and Bosnian Serb officials, the judgment notes that Milosevic “declared that the war must end and that the Bosnian Serbs’ biggest mistake was to want a complete defeat of the Bosnian Muslims.”

Because of the rift between Milosevic and the Bosnian-Serbs, the judges note that “the FRY reduced its support for the RS and encouraged the Bosnian Serbs to accept peace proposals.”

The Tribunal’s determination that Slobodan Milosevic was not part of a joint criminal enterprise, and that on the contrary he “condemned ethnic cleansing” is of tremendous significance because he got blamed for all of the bloodshed in Bosnia, and harsh economic sanctions were imposed on Serbia as a result. Wrongfully accusing Milosevic ranks right up there with invading Iraq only to find that there weren’t any weapons of mass destruction after all.


Slobodan Milosevic was vilified by the entire western press corps and virtually every politician in every NATO country. They called him “the Butcher of the Balkans.” They compared him to Hitler and accused him of genocide. They demonized him and made him out to be a bloodthirsty monster, and they used that false image to justify not only economic sanctions against Serbia, but also the 1999 NATO bombing of Serbia and the Kosovo war.

Slobodan Milosevic had to spend the last five years of his life in prison defending himself and Serbia from bogus war crimes allegations over a war that they now admit he was trying to stop. The most serious charges that Milosevic faced, including the charge of genocide, were all in relation to Bosnia. Now, ten years after his death, ICTY admits that he wasn’t guilty after all.

The ICTY did nothing to publicize the fact that they had cleared Milosevic of involvement in the joint criminal enterprise. They quietly buried that finding 1,303 pages into the 2,590 page Karadzic verdict knowing full well that most people would probably never bother to read it.

The presiding judge in the Radovan Karadzic trial, O-Gon Kwon of South Korea, was also one of the judges in the Slobodan Milosevic trial. Milosevic’s exoneration by the Karadzic trial chamber may be an indication of how the Milosevic chamber would have eventually ruled, at least on the Bosnia charges, if Milosevic had lived to see the conclusion of his own trial.

It’s worth recalling that Slobodan Milosevic died under a very suspicious set of circumstances. He died of a heart attack just two weeks after the Tribunal denied his request to undergo heart surgery in Russia. He was found dead in his cell less than 72 hours after his attorney delivered a letter to the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs in which he said that he feared he was being poisoned.

The Tribunal’s official report on the inquiry into his death confirmed that, “Rifampicin had been found in a blood sample taken from Mr. Milosevic on 12 January 2006.” And that “Mr. Milosevic was not told of the results until 3 March 2006 because of the difficult legal position in which Dr. Falke (the Tribunal’s chief medical officer) found himself by virtue of the Dutch legal provisions concerning medical confidentiality.”

The presence of Rifamicin (a non-prescribed drug) in Milosevic’s blood would have counteracted the high blood pressure medication he was taking and increased his risk of the heart attack that ultimately did kill him. The Tribunal’s admission that they knew about the Rifampicin for months, but didn’t tell Milosevic the results of his own blood test until just days before his death because of “Dutch legal provisions concerning medical confidentiality” is an incredibly lame and disingenuous excuse. There is no provision of Dutch law that prohibits a doctor from telling the patient the results of his own blood test — that would be idiotic. On the contrary, concealing such information from the patient could be seen as malpractice.

This all gives rise to well-founded suspicion that powerful geopolitical interests would rather Milosevic die before the end of his trial than see him acquitted and have their vicious lies exposed. U.S. State Department cables leaked to Wikileaks confirm that The Tribunal did discuss Milosevic’s medical condition and his medical records with U.S. Embassy personnel in The Hague without his consent.They clearly didn’t care about medical confidentiality laws when they were blabbing about his medical records to the American embassy.

It’s an unsatisfying outcome that Milosevic has been quietly vindicated for the most serious crimes that he was accused of some ten years after his death. At a minimum financial compensation should now be paid to his widow and his children, and reparations should be paid to Serbia by the western governments who sought to punish Serbia in order to hold Milosevic “accountable” for crimes that their own Tribunal now admits he wasn’t responsible for, and was in fact trying to stop.


  1. Milosevic Not Guilty…by Wm. Dorich

    July 21, 20162
    March, 2016 — The UN war crimes tribunal has determined that the late Serbian president was not responsible for war crimes committed in Bosnia during the 1992-95 war. The judges determined that Slobodan Milosevic was not part of a “joint criminal enterprise” to victimize Bosnian Muslims and Croats.
    The verdict of this Kangaroo Court in The Hague should not only outrage the people of Serbia, we should be seeing screaming headlines from all of those in the media that became the judge, jury and executioners of Slobodan Milosevic. The biased court to prosecute war crimes only for the war in former Yugoslavia was a ruse as the court totally ignored the real genocide in 1945 when 1.5 million Serbs, 60,000 Jews and 47,000 Roma were exterminated as the disgusting prejudice of the media fanned the flames for 96,400 victims on all sides in Former Yugoslavia in the 1990’s. This is the same media that profited from the 8 years of their claim of “250,000 deaths in Bosnia,” a total media hoax.

    At the DePaul University Law School in Chicago Mahmoud Cherif Bassiouni, an Egyptian-born Muslim and specialist in international law gathered 65,000 documents of so-called “war crimes,” a biased propaganda ploy paid for by Hungarian billionaire George Soros. Those documents sit on the floor today at The Hague and are treated as irrelevant trash.

    Kalshoven, a prominent professor of international law at the University of Leiden, criticized the legal veracity of “evidence” of 20,000 alleged mass rapes gathered by the European Parliament’s Warburton Commission in 1993. Much of the same so-called evidence, derived from Bosnian government sources in Sarajevo and continuously embellished and recycled by hundreds of journalists and humanitarian organizations, found its way to the final report from the Commission of Experts to the U.N. Security Council and was forwarded to The Hague in May 1994. Bassiouni’s resurrection of rape estimates and numerical extrapolations were deceptions, said Kalshoven, in the campaign to exact “justice” against the Serbs using this biased research from DePaul. “It was just a number, just guesswork,” said Kalshoven.

    The DePaul project’s yield of “65,000 documents” was produced, using Bassiouni’s “multiplier effect,” a comparatively modest roster of just 5,000 incidents of murder, rape, torture, kidnapping, mass graves and prison camps. Expected to produce evidence to support earlier claims of “50,000 rapes against Muslim women” from Bosnian government propagandists, the DePaul research ranged uncertainly between 500 to 1,673 alleged victims—but eventually fell back on its earlier investigation by the Commission of Experts which documented only 105 cases of rape. The rush to judgment was detoured through unthinkable shortcuts in comparison with the American judicial system, it included:
    *Allowing substantial forfeiture of defense rights to cross-examine witnesses.
    *Disallowing the rights of accused to confront their accusers.
    *Permitting liberal use of hearsay and minimized requirements for production of forensic evidence if not allowing its outright absence.
    *Depreciation of guarantees as equal protection under the law.
    *And more repugnant to most of the thinking of the American legal system, the Tribunal with its selective oversight could bring defendants to trial again after acquittals therefore eliminating protection from double-jeopardy.

    Conspicuously silent since March, 2016 and The Hague verdict are The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, CNN and The Times of London to name a few of the Partisan journalists who participated in “Advocacy” journalism to the detriment of Slobodan Milosevic and his right to “Equal Justice Under the Law” as etched over the doorway of the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Where are the voices of Christiane Amanpour of CNN, Roy Gutman and John Burns who received a Pulitzer for their lies and deceptions in Bosnia? Where is Nicholas Burns and Amanpour’s husband James Rubin who was a regular on CNN spewing lies against Milosevic “guilt” for 8 years? Where is Carla Del Ponte when you need her? Where is Joan Phillips and Charles Lane who advanced their careers by promoting their own brand of propaganda?

    Where is James Harf of Ruder/Finn PR who made millions promoting known lies and fabrications for the Croat and Muslim governments? Where is Chris Hedges, Charlene Hunter Galt, media charlatans like Maggie O’Kane who broke the “camp story” in the British press…Do any of these hypocrites have a conscience to confess that they were part of a media conspiracy to destroy Serbia to assist the real “Criminal Enterprise” of Madeleine Albright’s State Department and Hillary Clinton’s desire to move Monica Lowinsky off of the front pages as she encouraged President Clinton to violate the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, the Geneva Conventions and the NATO Treaty to bomb the Serbs then lie about entering Bosnia under “Sniper Fire”?

    Where is Tom Post who wrote the infamous front page article in Newsweek about “50,000 Bosnian Muslim Rapes”? Where is Sylvia Poggioli who skillfully wrote disinformation in the Neiman Report at Harvard, a piece of disinformation crap? Where is John Pomfret of the Washington Post who claimed he saw “4,000 men and boys from Srebrenica who made their way to safety in Tuzla”, his silence appears as though the media has gone into hiding as they continue to screw the Serbian people who are owed an explanation why the media used their power to distort the crisis to sell newspapers that helped to murder the Serbian president.

    Where is David Rohde whose books and articles demonized the Serbian people with great cunning? And where is Carol Williams of the Los Angeles Times who wrote more hateful journalism, anti-Orthodox and pro-Catholic dogma in one year than most journalists could get away with in a decade?

    And finally, where are creatures like Minna Schrag, Senior American prosecutor who was on loan to The Hague Tribunal from a New York law firm and who told international law scholars, “It was a novel experience to be deciding precedent on rules of evidence and procedure during impromptu conversations in the hallways at the Yugoslav Tribunal”?

    If the media and the legal system is this corrupt and Serbians run for cover from the truth, then they deserve the contempt of a world that was hell bent to conspire against them—a world that deliberately manipulated the facts to demonize Serbs with collective guilt, unseen in Europe since Hitler, these are the monsters who made the word “Serb” synonymous with evil, an ugly process being used even today as they all congratulated themselves and give each other awards for being clever and deceitful as they cynically conspired to pull off media crimes against Serbia in violation of human rights that they professed to be defending.

    May they all rot in hell for this hideous stage managed legal charade. Albright, the stage manager, should be standing in the dock at The Hague along with General Wesley Clark and William Jefferson Clinton.
    Wm. Dorich is author of six books on Balkan history. His newest book is, Memoirs of a Serbian American Dissident.

  2. And Radovan Karadzic is appealing his conviction by the kangaroo court.
    When even a Kangaroo Court which never even allowed Milosevic to get to the defense part of his trial cannot convict him, then you know there have nothing on him.
    As for the Bosnian Serbs excluding pro-Yugoslav Muslims – well Fikret Abdic (who actually won the pre-war Presidency vote) and his followers were allies of the Bosnian Serbs and were attacked by Izetbegovic’s government forces. Also I was told by a U.S. KFOR soldier (who had immigrated from Russia as a youth), who was there right after the war ended, that Bosnian Muslims south of Brcko were also allied with the Serbs for the entire war. (He also said that the Croatian army had soldiers still stationed in the Brcko area several months into 1996 in violation of the Dayton Accords.)

  3. Yes, Not GUILTY !

    Justice Served by whom … The Devil Himself !!

    My Brothers and Sisters sacrificed without any Mercy for Human Life, and Still to this very day my People, OUR ( Children) dying from CANCER !!!!!! From their BOMBS .
    All for their Agenda to Rule over us and to Milk our Blood !
    … And then on Top of this, I hear that my TRADER of a Government , wants closer ties with this unspeakable EVIL !
    Someone PLEASE …Tell me that this is just a Bad Dream ?

  4. I want to comment on the following article paragraph that quoted the ICTY:
    The judges also found that “Slobodan Milosevic expressed his reservations about how a Bosnian Serb Assembly could exclude the Muslims who were ‘for Yugoslavia’.”

    That’s an oxymoronic statement. This ICTY is trying to insinuate again that Bosnian Serbs were excluding Muslims from the Serb Republic. There are two massive pieces of evidence proving the ICTY is wrong in their 2500-page judgement of the accused, Radovan Karadzic:
    1. Bosnian Serbs never excluded Muslims. Many Muslims within the Serb Republic wished to leave the country until the civil war was over. The Muslims specifically made this request to leave the Serb Republic. The Karadzic government fulfilled their constituent’s wishes and issued Power of Attorney forms to be completed for their properties, while they were gone. CNN camera’s recorded some of these events as soldiers issuing these forms to the Muslims, while they were boarding the trains just in case they didn’t receive them prior to their arrival at the train station. Christiane Amanpour’s report showed action video footage of this peaceful event as if it were ethnic cleansing. A few years after the civil war, the Muslims returned and found Krajina Serb and Bosnian Serb refugees occupying their homes. The Serb Republic informed the Serb refugees that the government has Power of Attorney over these Muslim homes in written form from the home owners that left during the civil war. The Muslim homeowners had their homes returned unoccupied.

    2. Muslims that did not side with Sarajevo Muslims of Alija Izetbegovic either sided with the Bosnian Serbs or created their own autonomous region within Bosnia, not long after the illegal succession of Bosnia from Yugoslavia. This region was originally known as the autonomous region of western Bosnia, which was led by Fikret Abdic. Fikret Abdic’s Muslim dominated autonomous region was amicably incorporated into the Serb Republic. These Bosnian Muslims chose the Serb Republic, not the Muslim and Croat dominated Izetbegovic government in Sarajevo. Prior to the civil war, Fikret Abdic was the Muslim candidate that received more votes than Alija Izetbegovic in their SDA political party, but since the Muslim dominated party had a biased non-democratic member structure (similarly found in a U.S. political party), Fikret Abdic did not become leader of the SDA party. (Imagine the historical outcome if they did not copy a racist U.S. political party, and made it a truly democratic electoral process?)

    ICTY, and the prosecution in particular, have shown they are enemies of ethnic Serbs. Bosnian Serbs held 64% of the legal land deeds before the civil war. During the war the Serb Republic held 75% (which included Fikret Abdic’s region), Izetbegovic Muslims held 9% and the Bosnian and Croatian Croats held the remainder. The ICTY is trying to convince people that a western puppet in Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic, was acting on behalf of the Serbian electorate in Serbia AND the Bosnian Serb electorate? Yet, Serbia Serbs volunteered in helping Serbs in Bosnia? The ICTY has walked off the cliff, long ago, by adhering to false intelligence- intentionally. Serbs were entitled to their legal land deeds, regardless of the forced upon racist Dayton Peace Accord.

    Furthermore, the Bosnian Serb government were acting on behalf of the Bosnian Serb wishes. Vice president Nikola Koljevic specifically told me in New York during the first round of peace talks sponsored by the UN, in February 1993, that “we [the Serb Republic government] cannot act against the wishes of the Bosnian Serbs” or else “we would have to seek refugee status in the United States”. Do you know what that means? It means the Bosnian Serb government and Serbian Serb Milosevic cannot tell Bosnian Serbs to hand over their land to Sarajevo Muslims and Bosnian & Croatian Croats. Bosnian Serbs held the legal land deeds before the war, and occupied that land before Islam invaded Europe more than half a millennium ago. And, Serbs occupied that land half a millennium before Roman Catholics separated from the Orthodox Christians. The world, their governments and false foreign courts have no jurisdiction over Bosnian Serb land, even with the massive population loss of Bosnian Serbs. Prior to World War I, Bosnian Serbs accounted for two thirds of the population in Bosnia. Forty-five years after World War II (1990), Bosnian Serbs managed to account for one third of the Bosnian population, yet they maintained 34% of the legal land deeds.

    Milosevic acted like a Russian and western puppet. His Serbian Serbs placed sanctions on Bosnian Serbs. That is something that is not disputed by anyone. His Serbia participated in an economic strangle of Bosnian Serbs, which Serbs will never forgive him, nor any of the governments in Belgrade. He does not qualify to be buried among righteous Serbs that gave their life to Serbdom.

    It was Milosevic that signed the “Dayton Peace Accord” that was forced onto the Bosnian Serbs by the UN, via NATO bombing, which Russia did not object with its veto. Milosevic was just as big a bully to Bosnian Serbs as his Russian and western friends. Milosevic may be exonerated by western enemies of Serbs that murdered him, but he is not exonerated by Serbs for his actions against Serbs.

  5. A 2500 page document containing descriptions and an outline of the evidence of the crimes of genocide, persecution, murder, deportation, attacks on civilians etc committed by Karadzic and all you take from it the one line that says that Mladic didn’t help him?
    WTF is wrong with you?

    • You’re completely missing the point Dwight, and it’s not Mladic that we’re talking about it’s Slobodan Milosevic. Serbia was put under economic sanctions and vilified because it was said that Slobodan Milosevic was responsible for the carnage in Bosnia. The Tribunal’s admission that Milosevic wasn’t at fault after all is of tremendous significance because it means that the people of Serbia were unjustly punished for crimes that their President not only wasn’t guilty of, but was in fact trying to stop. If you can’t understand the significance of that, then you’re the one who has something wrong with them.

      • My Mladic was a typo, I meant Milosevic, I resubmitted the comment but it never appeared.

        I am not missing the point, you are. or rather the author.
        The headline in particular is extremely misleading
        Finding Kardzic guilty of war crimes without Milosevic’s assistance has zero bearing on whether Milosevic is guilty of other war crimes in Bosnia or elsewhere.
        That is like saying that I didn’t steal a car on Tuesday with Aleks therefore I am innocent of ever stealing a car

        Second, show me the sanctions that were put on Serbia because of the war crimes of Slobodan Milosevic in Bosnia
        I think all embargoes were initially on Yugoslavia (all sides) or on Bosnian Serbs. Embargoes on Serbia only were later and because of Kosovo

        I’ll give you one thing, the tribunal did say that Milosevic supported Karadzic initially but this support was very little by the time of Srebrenica.

    • Judges INFERRED a non-Karadzic telephone call makes him guilty for what ICTY claims was a genocide in Srbrenica. The ICTY believes no counterattack is permissible for the massacre of 3500 Serbs from March 1992 by Muslims being safeguarded in the UN’s safe haven of Srenrenica until July 1995.

      It was the Durch attack on Serbs that sparked the long overdue counter attack on Srebrenica and overrun it.. Name me the UN peace keeping resolution that gave the Dutch peace keepers a mission to bomb Serbs with a F16? Because of that attack the Dutch became belligerence in the civil war and were about to be annihilated by the Serb ground forces.

      The ICTY exonerated Karadzic for the other false charges in other municipalities.

  6. I find it very interesting how sometime desicions of ICTY are welcomed and there is no negative comments when people in Serbia like what ICTY rules (like in this case exonerating Milosevic). But when Serbians do not like some of the desicions, in that case ICTY and all other courts are lawless, they don’t know the international and domestic laws, they are against Serbia, they hate Serbians…Seems like people and governments accept desicions only when they like what they hear, otherwise not.

  7. @ Marco

    Wake Up and get a LIFE !!
    This ICTY KOSHER Agenda Hollywood Court, is just another Big Brother Production. A Forced cover up against the TRUTH and the Freedom to Defend oneself !
    Guilty or Not Guilty coming from the Devil Himself .

    From Serbia with Love .

  8. Marco, that is true. The deranged comment above by Slavko was an excellent example – almost a parody – of this poisoned mindset.

    • You just make statements without facts. What deranged comment?

      Go to Slavko’s webiste You’ll learn he’s a witness to history and participated in the events.

      Only foreign wrong-doing agents have opposition to his words, not the former Yugoslavs that were killing each other. It was the foreign agents that escalated the events in Yugoslavia.

  9. @ KTJ

    I AM a witness myself to this world MATRIX System, that has been installed in every Country and on every Corner, taken Many Many People from all walks of Life (including Mr. Slavko himself) on a Walt Disney carpet ride. People played out like children , over and over Again !!! I must say… This World has been trained very well by their Bolshevik LAW of Rule ~ divide the animal groups and conquer them !!!!
    We are Very very much in Need to hear the Real TRUTH, along with Constructive Criticism, instead of just More and More KOSHER pressed Propaganda ! Milosevic, Milosevic and Milosevic …

  10. Dear Serbia:

    I am sorry for what our government did to you. I am sickened that our country turned on you. I wont ever forget how you saved our pilots.
    I am so sorry.

  11. I can only surmise that the flatly false headline and correspoding “news article” are the work of the same people who brought us the film “Weight of Chains” in hopes of convincing the world that Milosevic and his country were victims.


  12. Geoffrey Nice, once a deputy prosecutor at the Hague trial of Slobodan Milosevic, sees disgraceful and unfounded attempts to rehabilitate the former president.

    ‘There is no shortcut for people like Clark, who are trying to rehabilitate Milosevic, to take a paragraph from the whole judgment, citing it incorrectly and using it out of context,’ said Nice.

    Nice claims that, although all sides committed war crimes, it is ‘a simple and irrefutable fact’ that it was Serbia that committed by far the most crimes during the conflicts of the 1990’s – ‘both by number and severity’ – and that they ‘lead to Milosevic.’

    According to him, this is something that was also concluded by the trial chamber at the end of the presentation of the prosecution’s evidence – ‘but Milosevic’s death prevented a verdict.’


    In the same paragraph in which deniers claim that supposedly the court acquitted Milosevic, just in the previous sentence it says clearly that Milosevic helped the convicted criminals with personnel (human resources), provisions and weapons during the conflict, in order to fulfill their objective, [namely to establish ‘clear’ national territories via ethnic cleansing of the non-Serbs]».

    Is this acquittal?

    This is in the SAME paragraph from which you quoted, see for yourself:


    One can only be acquitted or convicted in his trial.
    NOT in other people’s trials.
    Nobody can discuss innocence or guiltiness of a person A in the trial of a person B.
    You may live in some other legal universe, where you can distort everything, but in OUR LEGAL UNIVERSE, this is the case:


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here