Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T21:16:47.273Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Marguš v. Croatia (Eur. Ct. H.R.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Elizabeth Stubbins Bates
Elizabeth Stubbins Bates*
Affiliation:
SOAS, University of London London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE); Amnesty International
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

On May 27, 2014, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights rendered its judgment in the case of Marguš v. Croatia. The applicant, who had served in the Croatian Army, was convicted of war crimes in 2007, following an earlier decision in 1997 to grant him amnesty for these crimes. A majority of the Grand Chamber drew on Articles 2 and 3 of the European Convention of Human Rights (the Convention) and general international law to argue that Article 4 of Protocol No. 7 of the Convention (the right not to be tried or punished twice) was inapplicable in these circumstances and that the applicant’s claim on this point was inadmissible. The Grand Chamber also ruled that there had been no violation of Article 6 of the Convention (the right to a fair trial).

Type
International Legal Materials
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 53 , Issue 5 , October 2014 , pp. 751 - 809
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2014

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the European Court of Human Rights website (visited October 17, 2014), http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/pages/search.aspx?i=001-144276.

1 Marguš v. Croatia, App. No. 4455/10, 2014 Eur. Ct. H.R., available at http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/fra/pages/search.aspx?i=001-144276.

2 Protocol No. 7 to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, art. 4(3), Nov. 22, 1984, E.T.S. 117 [hereinafter Protocol No. 7].

3 General Amnesty Act (Official Gazette no. 80/1996) (Croat.) (unofficial translation), available at http://www.vsrh.hr/CustomPages/Static/HRV/Files/Legislation__General-Amnesty-Act_1996.pdf.

4 Marguš v. Croatia, supra note 1, ¶ 87.

5 Id. ¶ 88.

6 Id. ¶ 90–91.

7 Protocol No. 7, supra note 2, art. 4(3).

8 Id. art. 4(1).

9 Id. art. 4(2).

10 Marguš v. Croatia, supra note 1, ¶ 98.

11 Id. ¶ 116.

12 Id. ¶ 120.

13 Id. ¶ 125.

14 Id. ¶ 126.

15 Id. ¶ 127.

16 Id. ¶ 128–129.

17 Id. ¶ 139.

18 Id. ¶ 140–141.

1 See the Supreme Court’s practice in respect of this provision in paragraphs 32–34 below.

2 Adopted by Resolution 260 (III) A of the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948.

3 Adopted on 26 November 1968; entry into force on 11 November 1970. It was ratified by Croatia on 12 October 1992.

4 Adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly Resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984; entry into force 26 June 1987.

5 Adopted at the Inter-American Specialized Conference on Human Rights, San José, Costa Rica, 22 November 1969.

6 The interveners relied on the following sources: Louise Mallinder, Amnesty, Human Rights and Political Transitions, Bridging the Peace and Justice Divide (Hart Publishing 2008); Louise Mallinder, “Amnesties’ Challenge to the Global Accountability Norm? Interpreting Regional and International Trends in Amnesty Enactment”, in Francesca Lessa and Leigh A. Payne, Amnesty in the Age of Human Rights Accountability (CUP 2012); Tricia D. Olsen, Leigh A. Payne and Andrew G. Reiter, Transitional Justice in Balance, Comparing Processes, Weighing Efficacy (United States Institute of Peace Press 2010); Leslie Vinjamuri and Aaron P. Boesnecker, Accountability and Peace Agreements, Mapping trends from 1998 to 2006 (September 2007), Center for Humanitarian Dialogue, 9.