By Polly Johnson
Senior Desk Officer, Europe

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – The International Criminal Court for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) sentenced a man this week for refusing to testify against former Kosovo Prime Minister Ramush Haradinaj, who was charged with crimes against humanity for his actions while in the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) during its conflict with Serbian forces in 1998-1999.

Shefqet Kabashi pleaded guilty on August 26 to two counts of contempt of court for his failure to testify in Haradinaj’s original trial in June 2007. Coincidentally, only four days before pleading guilty on August 17, Kabashi refused to testify once again in Haradinaj’s present retrial. The retrial had been scheduled for the sole purpose of obtaining Kabashi’s testimony. He gave no reasons for his current decision not to testify, though some Serbian media sources have reported witnesses being intimated and even murdered to prevent the dissemination of evidence. ICTY has denied those reports.

In handing down the ruling at The Hague, Judge Alphons Orie said that Kabashi had “deprived the trial chamber of the evidence relevant for an effective ascertainment of truth” in Haradinaj’s trial.

Kabashi served as a KLA guard during the 1998-1999 period, when Haradinaj, along with his subordinates Idriz Bala and Lahi Brahimaj, allegedly committed multiple crimes against Roma, Serb and Albanian civilians in the village of Jablanica in western Kosovo. Haradinaj subsequently garnered acclaim in Kosovo and served as the country’s prime minster until his 2005 indictment by ICTY.

When Kabashi refused to testify on June 5, 2007, in Haradinaj’s first trial, witness intimidation was cited as a possible motive. In the judge’s recent ruling on Kabashi’s refusal to testify in the re-trial, the judge discounted the defense’s claims of Kabashi’s frustration and war experience as motives for his actions. However, the ruling cited post-traumatic stress disorder made worse in a prison environment as a mitigating factor.

Haradinaj was acquitted in 2008 on charges including murder, rape, torture, abduction, cruel treatment, imprisonment, and forced deportation. The appellate court partially reversed his acquittal, calling for a retrial because of the original trial’s failure to obtain testimony from Kabashi and other witnesses.

For more information, please see:

Monsters & Critics – Unwilling witness in Haradinaj trial gets two months for contempt – 16 September 2011

Radio Netherlands – ICTY: Kabashi in contempt – 16 September 2011

UN News Centre – UN war crimes tribunal jails Kosovo witness who refused to testify – 16 September 2011

UPI – War crimes witness pleads to contempt – 26 August 2011

By Alexandra Halsey-Storch
Impunity Watch Desk Reporter, Europe

THE HAGUE, Netherlands – On Tuesday September 13, the Survivors Network of Those Abused by Priests (“SNAP”), a Chicago-based non-profit organization, and the Center for Constitutional Rights (“CCR”), a New York City-based non-profit organization, filed an 80-page complaint accompanied by 20,000 pages of evidence to the International Criminal Court (“ICC”) urging the investigation and prosecution of the Pope and three other top Vatican officials who “tolerated and enabled the systemic and widespread” concealment of child sex abuse.

The ICC is a criminal court, independent from the functions of the United Nations. The Court is governed by the “Rome Statute,” which are a set of international laws, ratified by 117 countries including Italy, Germany and Belgium.  The United States is not a signatory.

Florence Olara, a spokesperson from the ICC prosecutor’s office has said that those reviewing the complaint and supporting evidence will first consider whether the crimes fall under the Court’s jurisdiction. There has been some speculation from international law experts suggesting that the ICC will dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, meaning that the court does not have the statutory authority to hear the case.

Article 5 of the Rome Statute reads in relevant part that, “the jurisdiction of the court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The court has jurisdiction in accordance with this statute with respect to…crimes against humanity.” Furthermore, “crimes against humanity” are defined as, in relevant part, torture or rape (among others) or “other forms of sexual violence of comparable gravity when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of that attack.”

While the Vatican and the numerous Archdiocese Centers around the world have deemed sexual abuse to generally mean “inappropriate touching,” in an attempt to down-play the horrifying allegations, perhaps a Grand Jury in Philadelphia clarified the term best when it said, “sexual abuse does not just mean ‘inappropriate touching.’ We mean rape. Boys who were raped orally, boys who were raped anally, girls who were raped vaginally. But even those victims whose physical abuse did not include actual rape—those who were subjected to fondling, to masturbation, to pornography—suffered psychological abuse that scarred their lives and sapped the faith in which they had been raise.” For those crimes, Vatican officials “should be brought to trial like any other officials guilty of crimes against humanity.”

In their complaint, SNAP and CCR have argued that the sexual abuse against tens of thousands of children in Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Mexico, and the United States among others, constitutes a “serious crime” that “concerns the international community as a whole.”  Pam Spees, an attorney with CCR explained that, “national jurisdictions can’t really get their arms around this. Prosecuting individual instances of child molestation or sexual abuse has not gotten at the larger systemic problem here. Accountability is the goal, and the ICC makes the most sense given that it is a global problem.”

Furthermore, the complaint further alleges that, “the [named] Vatican officials charged in this case are responsible for rape and other sexual violence and for the physical and psychological torture of victims around the world both through command responsibility and through direct cover up of crimes,” explained Spees.

Specifically, the complaint and accompanying evidence identifies “intentional cover-ups and affirmative steps taken that serve to perpetuate the violence and exacerbate the harm.” For example, various policies and practices were (and still are) in place that allowed high-level officials to move offending priests from “parish to parish with no warning to parishioners and others with whom [the priests] came in contact.

Perhaps most disturbing, is that the same or similar practices and policies have been found in virtually every country where cases of sexual violence have been brought to light.

On the other hand, international law expert Mark Ellis from the International Bar Association has argued in response to SNAP’s complaint that a “widespread or systemic attack” is really a “policy, in which the government or authorities are planning the attack.  When you look at the concept of why and how the ICC was created,” he says, “I just don’t think this fits.”

In the past, Pope Benedict, speaking on behalf of the Vatican, has expressed “shame and sorry” over the tragic accusations of sexual abuse made by victims about priests; but, he has also maintained that priests are appointed by bishops and not the “Vatican hierarchy,” in an attempt to divert responsibility.

In response to the filing of this particular complaint, Vatican spokesperson Federico Lombardi did not release a comment to the press.

Regardless of whether or not the ICC dismisses the complaint or authorizes further investigation, the New York Times has called this current complaint the “most substantive effort yet to hold the Pope and Vatican accountable in an international court for sexual abuse by priests.” Even if the ICC does dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, as Mark Ellis pointed out, “the filing does something that’s important. It raises awareness.”

For more information, please visit:

Center for Constitutional Rights – ICC Vatican Prosecution – 13 Sept. 2011

Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests – Child Abuse Victims accuse Pope of Crimes Against Humanity – 13 Sept. 2011

Belfast Telegraph – ‘War crime’ court asked to prop Vatican– 14 Sept. 2011

The New York Times – Abuse Victims Ask Court to Prosecute the Vatican – 13 Sept. 2011

By Terance Walsh
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — Germany has turned to the United Nations’ highest court on Monday to repeal an order by an Italian court for Germany to pay reparations to Italian victims of Nazi war crimes in Italy during World War II.

In 2004 a court in Italy ruled that Luigi Ferrini, an Italian civilian, was owed restitution because he was deported to Germany in 1944 and was forced into slave labor in the armaments industry.  Ferrini initially filed his complaint against Germany in 1998.  Since the Italian court ruled in his favor hundreds of relatives of victims of Nazi war crimes have filed complaints for enslavement, imprisonment, and killing.

In 2008 the Italian court decided to seize Villa Vigoni, an Italian-German cultural center on Lake Cuomo, to pay for the judgment.  Germany initiated its case against Italy later that year.

The gravamen of the dispute is Germany’s contention that the Italian court’s ruling violates German sovereign immunity.  The Germans maintain that allowing national courts to have jurisdiction over other nations would lead to “legal disorder.”  Such a system would open the door for complainants to “shop around for the most favorable national courts” to hear their grievances, Germany’s top legal adviser said.  By issuing an order of restitution, Italy “failed to respect the jurisdictional immunity” Germany is due under international law.  Instead of focusing on the individuals, the Italian court should be concerned with the broader legal implications of its ruling.

Susanne Wasum-Rainer, Germany’s director-general of legal affairs, is concerned that if Italy were allowed to demand reparations “the consequences would be severe.”  A decision favorable to Italy “would put in question and challenge open to challenges before domestic courts.”

“What this case is not about is the Second World War, violations of international humanitarian law or the question of reparations,” Wasum-Rainer added.

In response Italy asserts that the protection of human rights supersedes all other legal interests.  No immunity, sovereign or otherwise, can be afforded in issues of crimes against humanity.

“Germany… has adopted a stance that denies Italian victims access to justice,” said Salvatore Zappala, Italy’s legal representative to the UN.  “States cannot absolve themselves from the responsibility of reparations for serious violations of humanitarian law.”

“State sovereignty cannot be absolute,” added Giacomo Aiello, another member of Italy’s legal team.  The Italian court held Ferrini’s rights higher than Germany’s interest in sovereign immunity because the crimes committed against Ferrini were “international crimes,” which took precedence over sovereign immunity.

The Greeks stand behind Rome in this matter.  Many of Greece’s citizens have similar claims against Germany and will be allowed to argue their case before the World Court.  The Greeks’ claims arise from the killing of 214 Greek civilians in the village of Distomo at the hands of the Nazis in June 1944.

To Miltiadis Sfountouris, the law suits are not about money.  “It’s a moral thing, to find justice.”  Sfountouris said his 78-year-old mother jumped from a window in Distomo to escape the Nazi death squads.  She still lives in Distomo and has never received reparations.  Even though courts have ruled in favor the victims’ families for war reparations, the victims have been blocked from confiscating German property in Greek territory to pay for the damages.  As a result, no reparations have actually been paid for the massacre.

In addition to individual Greek lawsuits, the Greek government will exercise its right to participate in the dispute between Italy and Germany.  Prime Minister George Papandreou announced the decision last January to his cabinet.  “We are all aware of the gravity and significance of this issue and of its special symbolism,” he said.  He cited “obvious moral, legal and political reasons but also important issues of the highest national importance and the overall interests of the country at a specially crucial period for our homeland….  Our actions serve a self-evident debt to actively honor the memory of those that sacrificed themselves for this homeland.”

Recently Germany paid almost $6 billion to over one million people or their relatives who were exploited by the Third Reich.

The UN Court will be charged with weighing individual rights against the order and consistency of state sovereign immunity.  Germany and Italy will argue their cases this week but the court is not expected to rule on the matter for several months.

For more information please see:

IOL News — Victims of Nazi war turn to court — 16 September 2011

Expatica — Nazi crimes victims before Italian courts a “last resort” — 13 September 2011

Tengri News — Germany, Italy before UN world court over Nazi reparations — 13 September 2011

Deutsche Welle — Germany, Italy face off in court over Nazi war crime reparations — 12 September 2011

The State — Germany, Italy at UN court over WWII compensation — 12 September 2011

Athens News — Greek government to back war reparations claim in ICJ — 12 January 2011

By Polly Johnson
Senior Desk Officer, Europe

BUDAPEST, Hungary – Hungary’s National Bureau of Investigation (NNI) will launch an inquiry into alleged war crimes committed by the Soviet army more than sixty years ago in Osaszfalu, near Zirc, Veszprém County, according to Hungarian newspaper Magyar Hírlap.

During World War II, Red Army soldiers allegedly shot thirty-two men and boys while their parents watched. Reports vary as to whether the dead were buried in mass graves or in pits.

It is the first time in Hungary’s history that the Soviet Red Army and the secret police, the NKVD, have been accused of mass atrocities and war crimes. It is widely known that both groups committed mass looting, rape, murder, and deportations.

The murders remained a secret while the Soviets occupied the small village from 1945 until 1989. It was not until ten years after the Soviets left that families erected tombstones and raised memorials.

A Hungarian website reporting the allegations quotes Jozsef Toth, the vice mayor of the village, who said: “They laid them in a long trench, a few centimeters from each other. None of them were given coffins, they just took them off a wagon where they lay wrapped in sheets, there was no funeral. Neither priest, nor the families, not even the mothers could weep above those murdered.”

In related news, ninety-seven year old Hungarian Sándor Kepiro, a former police captain and alleged Nazi war crimes criminal who was acquitted this year, died on September 3.

Kepiro was acquitted in July of charges of the deaths of thirty-six civilians in northern Serbia during World War II raids by Hungarian forces. More than 1,200 civilians, mostly Serbs and Jews, were killed during the raids. The massacre became known as the Novi Sad massacre.

His case was turned over to the Hungarian authorities in 2006 by the Simon Wiesenthal center, which had deemed him the most-wanted Nazi war crimes criminal. He admitted to rounding people up prior to the massacre, but denied shooting or ordering anyone to be shot.

Kepiro had been found guilty in two previous trials, first in 1944, and second, in 1946. He was released after his first conviction because Germany was under the control of Nazis. By the time of his second conviction, Kepiro had fled to Argentina.

For more information, please see:

Digital Journal – First-ever war crimes prosecution against Soviet Army in Hungary – 12 September 2011

Budapest Times – Suspect dies after war crimes acquittal – 12 September 2011

New York Times – Sandor Kepiro Dies at 97; Acquitted of Holocaust-Era Crimes – 4 September 2011

Politics.hu – Hungarian investigators to probe alleged Soviet war crime – 29 August 2011

By Greg Hall
Impunity Watch Reporter, Europe

AMSTERDAM, Netherlands – In 1985, the Netherlands passed a civil code that required transgender people to take hormones and undergo surgery to alter their bodies to permanently and irreversibly sterilize their bodies before their gender would be legally recognized.  This law, article 28 of the civil code, is being scrutinized because it violates transgender people’s rights to personal autonomy and physical integrity and to define their own gender identity.

Human Rights Watch (HRW) argued that the law should be amended to respect transgender people’s rights by separating legal and medical questions for transgender people.

Boris Dittrich, advocacy director in the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender (LGBT) Rights Program at HRW stated, “the Dutch law causes anguish for trans people who have not had the required surgery.  Their documents do not match their deeply felt gender identity.  This leads to frequent public humiliation, vulnerability to discrimination, and great difficulty finding or holding a job.”

HRW interviewed several people about the law.  One of the interviewees stated, “People are left dangling in between two worlds for far longer than is necessary. It is needlessly traumatizing for people who are already very vulnerable.” Another comically commented that the “state should stay out of our underwear.”

Under the current law, some courts have held that the transgender people do not even have the right to use their chosen first name.  The Dutch government has made statements about repealing the law that violates human rights.  In March of 2011 the state secretary for security and justice promised to present a bill that would abolish the infertility requirement.  However, the bill has yet to be introduced.

Dittrich stated, “trans people are tired of waiting and hearing empty promises.  They want legal action now. Before any new law goes into effect, a lot of time will have passed. Meanwhile trans people have to cope with daily humiliation, discrimination, and frustration.”

For more information, please see:

Human Rights Education Associates – The Netherlands: Transgender Law Violates Human Rights – 13 September 2011

Human Rights Watch – The Netherlands: Transgender Law Violates Human Rights – 13 September 2011