Alic: Key Video Evidence

The trial of Sefik Alic – a former member of Hamza battalion, 5th Corps of BiH Army – has begun before the War Crimes Chamber. The first witnesses will appear on 18 May.

The Prosecution and Defence have announced that, during the main trial, they will present, as key evidence, video recordings of events described in the indictment. The Defence claims that the video recording in question is not authentic.

Alic (1968) is charged to have been responsible, as an individual and a commander, for the torture and murder of four prisoners of war who were members of Srpska Krajina Army. The alleged crime was committed in August 1995 during the “Oluja” operation, which was performed simultaneously on the territory of BiH and Republic of Croatia with involvement of armies of the two countries.

The murder itself is has been blamed on Arabian citizen Al Harbi Tewfik, who was not a member of the unit, but fought together with them during the war. Tewfik is currently on the run.

The indictment alleges that Alic was assistant commander for security of the Hamza battalion. This is denied by the defence, which bases its evidence process on this.

The Prosecutor plans to show the video evidence at the beginning of the evidence process on 18 May. The tape allegedly shows the four prisoners and also explains how the indictee treated the prisoners and other soldiers in the battalion.

The Prosecutor has announced that most of the witnesses will be former members of the Hamza battalion, including his subordinates, but also his superiors.

Prosecutor Peter Kidd has said that the aforementioned video recording does not contain the murder of the prisoners, but the bodies of the killed can be seen.

The Prosecution wants to prove that Alic did not prevent the torture and murders nor did he initiate an investigation or reported the crime to his superiors, after the crime had been committed.

Senad Kreho, defence attorney, said that the evidence provided by the Prosecution confirm his client’s innocence.

The defence attorney said he would show an authentic video recording and also said that some parts of the footage provided by the prosecution had been “deliberately cut off”.

He also announced that the as a part of Prosecution documents is a proof that Alic did not have command responsibility “unlike some of the Prosecution witnesses who were my client’s superiors”.

Kreho also said that the date mentioned in the indictment – 5 August 1995 – was not the date when the persons, whose murders have been charged upon the indictee by the prosecution, were killed.

Kreho added that, according to data available to the defence team, the persons mentioned in the indictment had still not been found and that they had disappeared on a different date and place, and not the ones mentioned in the indictment.

“The defence will have a relatively easy task considering the evidence provided by the prosecution”, the defence attorney concluded his introductory statement.