Appeals Court in Belgrade: Ilija Jurišić Acquitted of Charges in Tuzla Column Case

The Appeals Court in Belgrade, ruling on the appeal filed by the defense of Ilija Jurišić, who was previously found guilty of committing the criminal offense of using prohibited means of warfare under Article 148, paragraph 2, in conjunction with paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code of the FRY and sentenced to 12 years in prison, in its second-instance decision and hearing held on December 25, 2015, granted the appeal of the accused's defenders and overturned the first-instance verdict, thereby acquitting Ilija Jurišić of the charge of committing the criminal offense of using prohibited means of warfare under Article 148, paragraph 2, in conjunction with paragraph 1 of the Criminal Code of the FRY, reports the BH news agency Patria.

Jurišić was accused that during the armed conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina, which took place between armed formations on the side of the Bosniak, Croat, and Serb peoples from the beginning of 1992 to 1995, and between armed formations of the Bosniak and Croat peoples on one side, and armed formations of the Yugoslav People's Army in the period from the first half of 1992, on May 15, 1992, in Tuzla, as a member of the Bosniak and Croat sides in the conflict – in his capacity as duty officer in the operational staff of the Public Security Service in Tuzla and with the authority to issue orders to all armed formations of that side in the conflict in the Tuzla area, violated the rules of international law, resulting in the death of 50 JNA soldiers and the wounding of approximately 50 others.

The Appeals Court, after holding a public hearing, found that the first-instance court had rendered the appealed verdict based on an incorrectly and incompletely established factual situation, for which reason it should have been annulled. However, since the first-instance verdict had already been annulled once in this case, the Appeals Court could not annul it again and was obliged to rule on this criminal-legal matter itself. Therefore, the Appeals Court held a hearing, at which it re-examined the witnesses, and after assessing and analyzing the evidence presented, found that there were no direct evidence that the accused committed the criminal offense for which he was accused, and that such a conclusion, as the only possible one, could not be reached indirectly from the facts that were indisputably established during the proceedings. According to the Appeals Court's understanding, the allegations in the indictment of the War Crimes Prosecutor's Office remained at the level of doubt, for which reason this court rendered an acquittal judgment, as the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that the court shall resolve doubt regarding the proven facts of significance for the decision in favor of the accused.