Criminal Responsibility: In-depth Analysis of Tadic and Karadzic Cases

This essay examines the concept of criminal responsibility through the analysis of two significant cases: Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic and Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadzic. The essay delves into the specifics of each case, highlighting the charges, legal proceedings, and the nature of the crimes committed. The Tadic case involves issues of political interference and the wrongful use of power during wartime, while the Karadzic case focuses on the removal of Muslims from Bosnian territory. Both cases are interconnected through the wrongful use of power, questioning the fairness of the judicial system, and the impact of collective criminality. The essay concludes that many crimes do not result from individual propensity but are often influenced by political positions and collective actions, ultimately impacting the integrity of the nation and the rights of individuals.

Most of these crimes do not result from the criminal propensity of single individuals but
constitute manifestation of collective criminality the crime

Contents
CRIMINAL INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY..................................................................................3

CRIMINAL INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY
According to the Criminal Law Act, 1967, the crime is punishable if they are affecting
the right of any person or also infringing their right regarding putting restriction on enjoying
their fundamental rights. As two type of matters are affecting the person such as civil matters
which is relating to harming any person without any intention or theft or fraud committed
with any person1. Criminal matters relating to rape or murder of any person or also dealing in
any illegal activity which affecting the integrity of the country.
In this essay the discussion is undertaken on the bases of two cases which reflects the
matters of the criminal nature. As both the cases are inter linked with each other as both are
dealing in criminal matters and also they committing the crime individually2. In case of
Prosecutor v Dusko Tadic ICTY as the case is imposed upon the matters relating to
committing crime under affecting the twelve counts of grave breaches of the Geneva
Convention or twelve counts of the crime committed which is against the humanity and ten
counts of violation of the customs of war3. As during the preceding of trail, Tadic raises issue
in respect of not carrying the judicial power to provide judgment relating to the
imprisonment.
By referring the case relating to the individual criminal responsibility, it is also
presented through the case of Prosecutor v Radovan Karadzic. As in this case the matters is
related to the affecting the right of the humanity in respect of reducing the Bosnain Serb
forces in their territory. In respect of conducting the investigation against the Karadzic, it is
stated that he committed the murder, rape and torture to Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian
Croats in respect of removing them permanently from such territory. Thus, he is charges of
committing the criminal offences individually and also charged for nine several offences.
In first case i.e. Prosecutor v Dusko Tadic, the matters is related to the political
interferences or using wrongful position of the power in respect of bringing conflict in
country. Thus the reason behind developing the criminals in this aspects is relating to using
the wrongful action of their position regarding developing the illegal foundation of the
international tribunal4. It also conducting the wrongful primacy of the international tribunal
over the nation’s courts5. Thus, in this case, the impact is raised in respect of not taking the
right decision during the impact of war is raised in country. Thus, resulting in affecting the
1 SáCouto, S., Sadat, L. N. and Sellers, P. V., 2020. Collective criminality and sexual
violence: Fixing a failed approach. Leiden Journal of International Law. 33(1).
pp.207-241.
2 Armstrong, G., Rosbrook-Thompson, J. and Hobbs, D., 2019. Dislocation and
Criminality: The ‘Lithuanian Problem’in East London. Edited by Italo Pardo,
Giuliana B. Prato and James Rosbrook-Thompson. p.51.
3 Dannenbaum, T., 2019. Aggression and Atrocity: The Interstate Element, Politics,
and Individual Responsibility. Rethinking the Crime of Aggression: International and
Interdisciplinary Perspectives (TMC Asser), Forthcoming.
4 ICTY, The Prosecutor v. Tadić, Appeals Chamber, Jurisdiction. 2020. [Online].
Available through: < https://casebook.icrc.org/case-study/icty-prosecutor-v-tadic >.

integrity of the nation and also dealing in wrongful use of power regarding not securing the
status of the country.
In second case i.e. Prosecutor v Radovan Karadzic, the reason behind making the
person criminal is relating to removing the Muslims from the Bosnian6. As Radovan is the
founding member of the Serbian Democratic Party and also he is the president of the
Republika and also in charge of managing the issues of war which arises in country during
the period of 1992 to 19957. Thus, this carried to be the major reason which results in
motivating them to use the power and also remove the Muslims from the Bosnian territory.
In first case the matters is relating to violating the country norms which is made for
very citizen of the country and also everyone person are bound to follow it. The government
of UK designed such laws after passing the bill in various department and after getting
confirmation and signed by the monarch, the bill is imposed upon country. As Tadic
demanded from the country that, he itself fight for his case as he no longer carry the truth
upon the lawyer Milan Vujin as he is obliged under the guilty of contempt the court. As the
decision is also made by the Tadic regarding not fighting or securing his interest instead of
serving or defending the Serbia8. As no matter, the nature of crime is, if it violating the right
of the person or also the decision which is undertaken against the willingness of country, they
are liable to be considered under the criminal offences.
In second case the matters related to the affecting the human without committing any
crime by them. As the simple issues which is faced by Karadzic is that he want to remove
Muslims from that areas and by this aspects, he deal in committing illegal offences such as
torture, rape of Muslims women or boys and also kill them9. This reason in bringing conflict
between the caste and also he wrongfully uses his power in taking any illegal activity in
country. In terms of humanity, it is not stated that every person are bad or also the conflict or
issue is raised between the caste is fair10. In terms of law, every person are equal in the eyes
of law and also they carry the right to be treated equally until they deal in violating any of the
norms.
5 Li, Z., 2018. System Criminality and International Responsibility: Back to Canonical
Questions. Wis. Int'l LJ. 36. p.474.
6 The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia Trial of Radovan
Karadzic. 2020. [Online]. Available through:
<https://www.hrw.org/news/2009/10/23/qa-international-criminal-tribunal-former-
yugoslavia-trial-radovan-karadzic>.
7 Islam, M. R., 2019. The Liability Regime: Modes of Criminal Responsibility.
In National Trials of International Crimes in Bangladesh. (pp. 203-237). Brill
Nijhoff.
8 Pasculli, L. and Ryder, N. eds., 2019. Corruption in the global era: Causes, sources
and forms of manifestation. Routledge.
9 Ambos, K., 2016. Art. 25-Individual Criminal Responsibility. Triffterer/Ambos,
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Commentary),
10 Burke, R. H., 2017. An introduction to criminological theory. Routledge.

From the above case study, it is concluded that in both the case, the matters are linked
up with the similar matters relating to dealing in wrongful use of their position in respect of
committing illegal offences. As in first case the wrong decision are taken on the bases of
committing war in the country and in secondary case the use of power is undertaken in
respect of removing the Bosnian from the country. Another point which is similar in this case
is relating to both questioning about the criteria which is the judicial system are using to
provide justice to parties are unfair. Thus, it results in causing impact upon the judicial
system regarding not providing fair decision to the parties.
By this aspects, the statement proved to be true that most of the crime do not results in
approaching to criminal propensity. But usually it is collected by the group which motivates
the person to commit the crime. In this the motivation is mainly undertaken by the political
position which is undertaken by both the person regarding dealing in committing crimes.