Mistake of Fact as Grounds for Review of a Judgment in the Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

The relevance of this study is due to the need to consider appeals in order to ensure fairness and legality of justice. The purpose of the work is to analyze legal solutions for reviewing ICTY court decisions based on errors of fact and their practical application. To this end, the author sets the following objectives: to eliminate the normative-legal regulation of the review of court decisions; to pay attention to the case law of the ICTY in cases where an error of fact led to the sentencing; to determine the criteria for proving errors of fact and their role in the qualification of crimes (according to the principle of *actus reus* aiding and abetting); the emergence of problems allows avoiding uncertainties in the interpretation of the elements of crimes during appellate review. The study confirmed that an error of fact is an emerging, but difficult to prove basis for reviewing ICTY sentences. The key problem in review is the broad adoption of decisions in accordance with the interpretations of the elements of crimes (for example, the need for "specific instructions" for the qualification of aiding and abetting), which leads to contradictory wording.
The results of the study can be used in legislative activities to harmonize the rules on reviewing decisions at the public and societal level, for the development of training courses on international criminal law and justice, as well as in the practical activities of lawyers arising in international criminal proceedings (for formulating appeal strategies).

1. Кораблёва С.Ю. Ошибка в факте и ошибка в праве как частные правила исключения вины лица в международном уголовном праве // Вестник Московского государственного лингвистического университета. Образование и педагогические науки. 2021. № 2 (839). С. 228–237.

2. Уголовно-процессуальный закон Королевства Саудовская Аравия / Науч. рея. докт. юрид. наук, проф. Н.Г. Стойко; послесловие П.А. Гусеновой, Н.Г. Стойко; пер. с англ. Н.Г. Гусеновой. СПб.: Изд-во «Юридический центр», 2016. 168 с.

3. Международный пакт о гражданских и политических правах (Принят 16.12.1966 г. Резолюцией 2200 (XXI) на 1496-ом пленарном заседании Генеральной Ассамблеи ООН) // СПС КонсультантПлюс.

4. Международное право: проблемы современности / Отв. ред. А.И. Абдуллин, Л.Х. Мингазов, Г.Р. Шайхутдинова. Казань: Казан. ун-т, 2013. 184 с.

5. Трикоз Е.Н. Международное уголовное право: практикум / науч. ред. А.Х. Абашидзе. М.: Норма, 2007.400 с.

6. Updated Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, ICC. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/file/Legal%20Library/Statute/statute_sept09_en.pdf (дата обращения: 12.02.2025).

7. Prosecutor v. Naser Orić, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Аppeals judgement summary, case IT03-68-А,03.07.2008. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/oric/acjug/en/080703_Oric_summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 24.02.2025).

8. Prosecutor v. Sefer Halilović, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Аppeals judgement summary, case IT-01-48-А,16.10.2007. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/halilovic/acjug/en/071016_Halilovic_summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 24.02.2025).

9. Prosecutor v. Momčilo Perišiс, ICTY, [In trial chamber I] Judgement, case IT-04-81-T, 06.09.2011. URL: https://ucr.irmct.org/LegalRef/CMSDocStore/Public/English/Judgement/NotIndexable/IT-04-81/JUD233R0000338816.pdf (дата обращения: 24.02.2025).

10. Prosecutor v. Momčilo Perišiс, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT-04-81-А, 28.02.2013. URL: https://ucr.irmct.org/LegalRef/CMSDocStore/Public/English/Judgement/NotIndexable/IT-04-81-A/JUD248R0000399801.pdf (дата обращения: 18.03.2025).

11. Prosecutor v. Mile Mrksic, Veselin Sljivancanin, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT95-13/1-A, 05.05.2009. URL: https://ucr.irmct.org/LegalRef/CMSDocStore/Public/English/Judgement/NotIndexable/IT-95-13%231-A/JUD204R0000259801.pdf (дата обращения: 18.03.2025).

12. Prosecutor v. Dusko Tadic, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT-94-1-А, IT-94-1-Аbis 26.01.2000. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/tadic/acjug/en/000126_summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 11.03.2025).

13. Prosecutor v. Miroslav Kvoсka, Mlado Radic, Zoran Zigie, Dragoljub Prcac,Milojica Kos, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT-98-30/1-А, 9.05.2007.2000. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/kvocka/acjug/en/050228_Kvokaetal._summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 11.03.2025).

14. Prosecutor v. Mitar Vasiljević, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT-98-32-А, 25.02.2004. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/vasiljevic/acjug/en/040225_Vasiljevi_summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 11.03.2025).

15. Prosecutor v. Tihomir Blaskić, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT-95-14-А, 29.07.2004. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/blaskic/acjug/en/040730_Blaki_summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 11.03.2025).

16. Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević, Dragan Jokić, ICTY, [Аppeals Сhamber] Judgement, case IT-94-1-А, IT-02-60-А 09.05.2007. URL: https://www.icty.org/x/cases/blagojevic_jokic/acjug/en/070509_Blagojevic_Jokic_summary_en.pdf (дата обращения: 11.03.2025).