veličina fonta

verzija za štampu

copyright

pošalji komentar

Sipic: Court Rejects Plea Agreement

Sipic 120

17 December 2007  An agreement reached by the state Prosecution and indictee Idhan Sipic has been thrown out by judges.

The Court of BiH has rejected the guilt admission agreement between the state Prosecution and Idhan Sipic, who is charged with war crimes against civilians committed in Kljuc municipality, because the indictee does not fully agree with the "factual description" of the crimes charged upon him.


"I plead guilty to this crime, but I do not agree with the way the crime is described," said Sipic, explaining his disagreement with the statement given by Samir Jusic, alleged eye-witness of the crime, who said that Sipic cut the victim into pieces.


The indictment charges Sipic, former member of the Fifth Corps with the Army of BiH, with having killed one woman, in Korjenovo Brdo village, Kljuc municipality, in mid September 1995, and then of having "cut her body and threw one piece after the other into a well".


"I did not cut her up. I threw her into the well in one piece," said Sipic.


After he surrendered and admitted guilt, Sipic reached a guilt admission agreement with the Prosecution on November 23. The agreement stipulated that he could be sentenced to a sentence of between six and ten years' imprisonment. However, the indictee told the Trial Chamber at the hearing that he had signed the agreement before reading the indictment.


Due to the indictee's resistance, the Court did not accept the guilt admission agreement. Judge Minka Kreho asked the indictee to enter a plea of guilty or not guilty. Sipic pleaded guilty, and he repeated it several times. He also said he did not want to be tried, but he wanted "all this to be solved as soon as possible". However, the chamber has "entered" a plea of not guilty on his behalf.


"You can make further agreements with the Prosecution. In the meantime, we shall plan for the commencement of the trial," said Minka Kreho.


After the hearing, Sipic's Defence attorney Binasa Abaspahic told Justice Report that she is still considering an agreement, but only after the indictment has been changed.


Asked why the indictee signed the agreement before the indictment was filed and confirmed, Abaspahic said that "all elements needed for an agreement existed" and the only thing that was missing was witness Samir Jusic's statement.