This post is also available in: Bosnian (Bosnian)
Presenting its closing statement, the Sarajevo Cantonal Prosecution called on the Court to pronounce Curtic guilty, while the Defence proposed to the Trial Chamber to acquit the indictee of all charges.
“The Prosecution has proved through the examination of witnesses and presentation of evidence that the indictee participated, as guide of one part of “Maturice” Unit of the Croatian Defence Council, HVO, in an attack against the Bosniak population in Stupni do village. The witnesses saw him in Stupni do village and recognised him,” said Safet Hrapo, Prosecutor with the Sarajevo Cantonal Prosecution.
The Cantonal Prosecution in Sarajevo charges Curtic with having participated in the attack on Stupni do village in October 1993 and unlawful deprivation of liberty, torture and inhumane treatment of the Bosniak population, as well as pillaging of their property.
“On October 23, 1993, following the attack on Stupni do village, where members of “Maturice” Unit killed 38 Bosniak civilians and then pillaged and set their houses on fire, Curtic kicked Muamer Mahmutovic in her face, threatened her by saying that he would kill her and took her golden jewelry away,” Hrapo said.
Prosecutor Hrapo mentioned that, on that same day the indictee, who was accompanied by two other HVO members, hit Besim Paralangaj with his legs, hands and gun butt and then took his money and golden jewellry away.
“A conclusion that the indictee committed the criminal actions charged upon him undoubtedly emerges from the witnesses’ statements and material evidence,” Prosecutor Hrapo said, adding that the statements given by Defence witnesses were contradictory and that the Trial Chamber could not trust them.
Prior to presenting his closing statement, Nedim Dobojlic, Defence attorney of indictee Curtic, expressed his opinion about the revised indictment, saying that it was “unclear”.
Dobojlic asked the Trial Chamber to acquit the indictee of all charges and release him to liberty immediately. “The actions charged upon my client do not constitute a war crime. There is no evidence that he committed the crimes charged upon him under the revised indictment,” Dobojlic said.
Curtic’s Defence attorney pointed out that the Defence did not have the right to question Prosecution witnesses, considering the fact that the statements they gave in 1996 were read during the course of this trial.