Mr. Gotovina, in his First and Third Grounds of Ap
peal, and Mr. Markač, in his First
and Second Grounds of Appeal, in part, submit that
the artillery attacks on Knin,
Benkovac, Obrovac, and Gračac, or the “Four Towns”,
were not unlawful and that
without a finding that the artillery attacks were u
nlawful, the Trial Chamber’s
conclusion that a JCE existed cannot be sustained.
The Prosecution responds that the Trial Chamber di
d not err in finding either that
unlawful artillery attacks against the Four Towns took pla
ce or that a JCE existed.
The Appeals Chamber recalls that the Trial Chamber
concluded that the Appellants
were members of a JCE whose common purpose was to p
ermanently remove Serb
civilians from the Krajina by force or threat of fo
rce. The Trial Chamber’s conclusion
that a JCE existed was based on its overall assessm
ent of several mutually-reinforcing
findings. The Appeals Chamber, Judge Agius and Judg
e Pocar dissenting, considers that
the touchstone of the Trial Chamber’s analysis conc
erning the existence of a JCE was its
conclusion that unlawful artillery attacks targeted
civilians and civilian objects in the
Four Towns, and that these unlawful attacks caused
the deportation of large numbers of
civilians from the Krajina region.