Jump to Content Jump to Main Navigation
Lašva Valley, Prosecutor v Blaškić (Tihomir), Appeal judgment, Case No IT-95-14-A, ICL 34 (ICTY 2004), 29th July 2004, United Nations [UN]; United Nations Security Council [UNSC]; International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia [ICTY]; Appeals Chamber [ICTY]

Lašva Valley, Prosecutor v Blaškić (Tihomir), Appeal judgment, Case No IT-95-14-A, ICL 34 (ICTY 2004), 29th July 2004, United Nations [UN]; United Nations Security Council [UNSC]; International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia [ICTY]; Appeals Chamber [ICTY]

From: Oxford Public International Law (http://opil.ouplaw.com). (c) Oxford University Press, 2015. All Rights Reserved.date: 21 May 2019

Whether a standard of mens rea that was lower than direct intent could apply in relation to ordering under Article 7(1) of the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (the ‘Statute’).

What was the most appropriate interpretation of the ‘had reason to know’ standard of Article 7(3) of the Statute.

Whether an accused could be held individually responsible for the commission of crimes under both Article 7(1) and Article 7(3) of the Statute.

Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content. Please, subscribe or login to access all content.