Whether the financial liability of a convicted person for reparations should be strictly limited to the wording of the conviction’s disposition, or whether the Trial Chamber’s reasoning should also be considered.
Whether the victim of an alleged crime that took place in close territorial proximity to an area where a crime manifestly covered by the conviction was committed should be eligible for reparations.
Whether the inability of the victims to provide precise temporal details of the crimes they endured should automatically make them ineligible for reparations.
Whether the victims of the underlying acts of the crime against humanity of persecution should be eligible for reparations when the defendant was acquitted or not convicted for these same acts as other separate crimes.
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full
to access all content.