Table of contents:
P.18. Evidence inferred from an utterance, a document or a deed of the perpetrator.
P.18.2. Evidence inferred from identifying group membership by use of identity cards.
P.18.3. Evidence inferred from separating out different groups.
P.18.4. Evidence inferred from calling out residents names for future transfer.
Element:
P.18. Evidence inferred from an utterance, a document or a deed of the perpetrator.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Human Rights and Equal Opportunities Commission (Australia), Bringing them Home: Report of the National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families, House of Representatives Official Hansard, 38th Parliament, 26 May 1997, p. 4002; online: www.humanrights.gov.au/social_justice/bth_report/report/index.html,:
Henry Prinsep wrote a report in which he conveyed the view that aboriginal children growing up with their families would become vagrants and outcasts and a menace to society. He felt it necessary to affect transfer away from the group of aborigines to the group of English settlers.
B. Evidentiary comment:
P.18.2. Evidence inferred from identifying group membership by use of identity cards.
A. Legal authority/source and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Clément Kayishema and Obed Ruzindana, Case No. ICTR-95-1-T, Judgement (TC), 21 May 1999, para. 287:
"287. [ ] According to this witness what they had to do was to use identity cards to separate the Tutsis from the Hutus. The Tutsis were arrested and thereafter executed, at times, on the spot."169
169.Trans., 5 Mars. 1998, p.105.
[B. Evidentiary comment:]
P.18.3. Evidence inferred from separating out different groups.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Duko Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-T, Judgement (TC), 7 May 1997, para. 379:
"379. Several witnesses testified to the acts alleged in subparagraph 4.1 and to the accused's role therein. There are essentially three aspects to this charge: the attack; the collection and forced transfer to detention camps; and the killings and beatings. Considerable evidence has been presented regarding the attack on Kozarac and the hamlets in the surrounding area. Many witnesses testified that the attack on Kozarac began with heavy shelling on 24 May 1992 after the expiration of an ultimatum demanding the surrender of weapons and a pledge of loyalty. Ample evidence was also presented that after the Muslims of Kozarac surrendered, beginning on 26 May 1992, long columns of civilians from the outlying areas, almost entirely non-Serb with the great majority consisting of Muslims, moved through the centre of Kozarac to collection centres where they were then separated and transferred to one of the three principal camps operating in the opstina: Omarska, Keraterm or Trnopolje."
[B. Evidentiary comment:]
P.18.4. Evidence inferred from calling out residents names for future transfer.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Duko Tadić, Case No. IT-94-1-T, Judgement (TC), 7 May 1997,para. 387:
"387. The Trial Chamber has found beyond reasonable doubt that the accused entered the villages of Sivci and Jaskici together with other armed men as charged in paragraph 12. In Sivci, the accused took part in the removal of the men from that village, who had been separated from the women and children, to the Keraterm camp and, in Jaskici, took part in the calling-out of residents, the separation of men from women and children and the beating and removal of the men."
[B. Evidentiary comment:]
