This post is also available in: Bosnian
Dragan Stupar, Prosecutor with the Prosecution of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, FBiH, said that he stuck by the introductory arguments presented at the first instance trial before the Cantonal Court in Mostar, announcing that the Prosecution would base its evidence presentation on “witnesses’ statements and medical documentation”.
In its introductory statement the Defence said that it considered that “the indictee’s actions do not contain crimes or war crimes”.
According to the charges, in the early morning on March 23, 1993 Hakalovic entered Jela Rajic’s house, fired a burst of bullets from an automatic gun and killed Zvonimir Djopa. After Rajic had tried to run away with her two sons, the indictee caused severe bodily injuries to her by firing a burst of bullets on both of her lower legs.
The indictment alleges that, once Rajic had been taken to a hospital in Konjic, Hakalovic unlawfully detained her sons, both minors at the time, in a house basement.
On September 24, 2010 the Cantonal Court in Mostar acquitted Hakalovic of the charges that he deprived one person of his life and wounded another person in Gostovici village on March 23, 1993.
The Prosecution of Herzegovina-Neretva Canton appealed the verdict passed down by the Mostar Cantonal Court. In March this year the Supreme Court of FBiH revoked the verdict and ordered a retrial.
Ignjacije Dodik, Chairman of the Trial Chamber of the FBiH Supreme Court, said that the witnesses, who had been invited to testify at this hearing, failed to appear, although they had been informed about it. He said that they would therefore not be directly examined, but their statements, given during the course of the previous trial, would be read.
“Jela Rajic, who was due to be examined at this hearing, said that she could not come due to her health condition. The two other witnesses said that they had already testified in this case,” judge Dodik said.
At the retrial the parties agreed that it was not necessary to present all pieces of evidence that were presented during the first instance trial. The evidence was then read.
The trial is due to continue on October 20 this year, when closing statements will be presented.
