Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:54:26.380Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Netherlands v. Nuhanović & the Netherlands v. Mustafić –Mujić Et Al. (Sup. Ct. Neth.)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Amir Čengić
Amir Čengić*
Affiliation:
United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Following the takeover of Srebrenica by Bosnian Serb forces on July 11, 1995, Rizo Mustafić and his family, as well as Hasan Nuhanović’s parents and brother, were sent away from the UN compound in Potočari, within the Srebrenica enclave, by the Dutch forces (Dutchbat) who were based there. Shortly thereafter, Bosnian Serb forces killed Rizo Mustafić, Ibro Nuhanović, Nasiha Nuhanović-Mehinagić, and Muhamed Nuhanović. Mustafić’s surviving wife and children, and Nuhanović’s other son (applicants) filed separate suits for incurred damages against the Netherlands, arguing that the Dutchbat acted wrongfully by sending their relatives away from the compound. On September 6, 2013, the Dutch Supreme Court issued its two judgments in the matter, holding that the Netherlands was responsible for the conduct of the Dutchbat and had acted wrongfully towards the applicants.

Type
International Legal Materials
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 53 , Issue 3 , June 2014 , pp. 512 - 537
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 Supreme Court of the Netherlands website (visited June 18, 2014), http://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie/Hoge-Raad/OverDeHogeRaad/publicaties/Documents/12%2003324.pdf.

* This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the Supreme Court of the Netherlands website (visited June 18, 2014), http://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie/Hoge-Raad/OverDeHogeRaad/publicaties/Documents/12%2003329.pdf.

1 The cases were dealt with separately and each resulted in its own judgment. However, the reasoning of the judgments is identical. References in this analysis will be made to the Mustafic´ Judgment. Paragraph numbers referred to herein are the same in both judgments.

2 See S.C. Res. 819, U.N. Doc. S/RES/819 (Apr. 16, 1993).

3 Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Case No.: 12/03329, 6 September 2013 The State of the Netherlands v. Mehida Mustafić, Damir Mustafić, and Alma Mustafić [hereinafter Mustafić Supreme Court Judgment], available at http://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie/Hoge-Raad/OverDeHogeRaad/publicaties/Documents/12%2003329.pdf (English language translation).

4 District Court in The Hague, Case No.: 265615/HA ZA 06- 1671 ¶ 4.15, 10 September 2008 Hasan Nuhanović v. The State of the Netherlands, [hereinafter Nuhanovic´ District Court Judgment], available at http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBSGR:2008:BF0181 (English language translation); District Court in The Hague, Case No.: 265618/HA ZA 06-1672, ¶ 4.17, 10 September 2008 Mehida Mustafić, Damir Mustafić, and Alma Mustafić v. The State of the Netherlands, available at http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:RBSGR:2008:BF0182 (English language translation).

5 Court of Appeal in The Hague, Case No.: 200.020.174/01 ¶¶ 6.1-56.21, 5 July 2011 Hasan Nuhanović v. The State of the Netherlands, [hereinafter Nuhanovic´ Appeal Judgment], available at http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id= ECLI:NL:GHSGR:2011:BR5388 (English language translation). Court of Appeal in The Hague, Case No.: 200.020.173/01 ¶¶ 6.14-6.21, 5 July 2011 Mehida Mustafić, Damir Mustafić, and Alma Mustafić v. The State of the Netherlands, available at http://uitspraken.rechtspraak.nl/inziendocument?id=ECLI:NL:GHSGR:2011:BR5386&keyword_Mustafic (English language translation). With respect to Hasan Nuhanović, the Court of Appeal held that the State was not liable for the death of his mother since the Dutchbat could not have anticipated that she would be killed, as only men were targeted at the time. See Nuhanović Appeal Judgment, supra note 5. ¶ 6.20.

6 Supreme Court of the Netherlands, Case No.: 12/03324, 6 September 2013 The State of the Netherlands v. Hasan Nuhanović [hereinafter Nuhanović Supreme Court Judgment], available at http://www.rechtspraak.nl/Organisatie/HogeRaad/OverDeHogeRaad/publicaties/Documents/12%2003324.pdf (English language translation). See also Mustafić Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 3.

7 See Mustafić Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 3, ¶ 3.6.2.

8 See id. ¶ 3.8.2.

9 See id. ¶¶ 3.9.1-3.9.5. (The Supreme Court relied on Articles 6, 7, 48 of DARIO and also on the Commentary to DARIO.)

10 See Mustafić Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 3, ¶ 3.10.2.

11 See id. ¶ 3.11.3.

12 See id. ¶ 3.11.2.

13 See id. ¶¶ 3.12.2-3.12.3.

14 See id. ¶ 3.13.

15 See id. ¶¶ 3. 15.2-3. 15.5. (With regard to these ECHR and ICCPR provisions on the right to life and the prohibition of inhuman treatment, the court of appeal held that they were part of customary international law and as such binding on the State.)

16 See id. ¶ 3.15.5.

17 See id. ¶ 3.17.2. (The Supreme Court referred to Al Skeini and Others v. the United Kingdom, ECtHR Case No.: 55721/07, 7 July 2011.)

18 See Mustafić Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 3, ¶ 3.17.3.

19 See id. ¶ 3.17.3.

20 It should be noted that these cases concerned civilians. However, nothing in the cases seems to suggest that members of armed forces should be treated differently. Indeed, it is difficult to see why the reasoning would be any different even if the persons concerned were members of an armed force and faced the same risk.

21 See ANP, 20.000 Euro Schadevergoeding Voor Nabestaanden Srebrenica, Trouw Apr. 10, 2014, http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4492/Nederland/article/detail/3633053/2014/04/10/20-000-euro-schadevergoeding-voor-nabestaanden-Srebrenica.dhtml (Dutch language).

22 See Libya and Lockerbie: Bloody Money, Economist, May 30, 2002, http://www.economist.com/node/1159224.

23 Netherlands Code of Criminal Procedure (Neth. Crim. Proc.), art. 12 (allowing parties affected to request prosecution in case the Public Prosecutor’s office does not pursue one for a number of reasons). See also ANP, Alsnog Berechting Commandant Karremans Geëist, Trouw, Apr. 7, 2014, available at http://www.trouw.nl/tr/nl/4492/Nederland/article/detail/3630231/2014/04/07/Alsnog-berechtingcommandant-Karremans-geeist.dhtml (Dutch language).

24 See Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, art. 1, http://www.icty.org/x/file/Legal%20Library/Statute/statute_sept09_en.pdf (including aiding and abetting a mode of liability pursuant to which these individuals could be charged).