Talk:Joint criminal enterprise

Human rights Start‑class Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human rights, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Human rights on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Human rightsWikipedia:WikiProject Human rightsTemplate:WikiProject Human rightsHuman rights articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Crime and Criminal Biography Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

A bad article

This article is, to put it bluntly, bollocks - plainly written by someone who has little knowledge of the legal issues and has a POV animus against the ICTY. I'll have a go at rewriting it from scratch (there's not much that can be salvaged). -- ChrisO (talk) 01:06, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article is bad.I agree on everything ChrisO said.--(GriffinSB) (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article should be mentioned in books about Sebrian bullshit

wanted to defend Serbs in the Yugoslav republic of Croatia, so he helped recruit soldiers to fight in the armies opposing the Croatian militias. They joined local Serbs who were terrified by the policies of Franjo Tudjman and the terror that he unleashed.

What terror,WTF are you guys talking about???????????

F serb ultranationalists..--(GriffinSB) (talk) 17:31, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article needs to be re-witten in a NPOV way or it has to be deleted. It's totaly biased.--(GriffinSB) (talk) 21:59, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dubious template -- joint criminal enterprise

I have added two dubious templates to the article.

The first is for the statement "The court has determined, through a series of trials, that the Serbian political and military leaders participated in a joint criminal enterprise."

The court may have determined that some members of the "Serbian political and military leaders participated in a joint criminal enterprise." but they should be listed as not all leaders have been found guilty. -- PBS (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not all, but it is correct to say "many Serbian political and military leaders".--Mladifilozof (talk) 12:07, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have added many to "that many Serbian political and military leaders participated in a joint criminal enterprise." Why did you choose many over some? "Many" needs a neutral reliable source that states "many" because "many" is a statement of fact but it carries a POV as does "some". --PBS (talk) 13:08, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was not enterprise of a few unimportant individuals. It was cooperation of top members of Serb war and political elite of that time.--Mladifilozof (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The wording does not state their relative importance, it states quantity -- "many". Such an assessment needs a citation. See also my comment below about what does "Serb" mean in this context. -- PBS (talk) 23:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AFAICT the "joint criminal enterprise" was not "the plotters' goal [of ] the creation of Greater Serbia from the disintegrating Yugoslavia", but specific criminal enterprises to commit crimes such as genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The second one is on the phrase "According to the Court" because it implies that there is no distinction between what the prosecutors alleged and the final judgements. The list needs to be separated into those accused of being members of a joint criminal enterprise by the prosecution and those found guilty of being members of a joint criminal enterprise. For example the prosecution alleged that Slobodan Milosevic was part of a joint criminal enterprise to commit genocide, but he was not found guilty of such a crime. -- PBS (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There is a further problem with the article and its use of the term "Serb" as it does not make clear if it means ethnic Serbs (such as Bosnian Serbs) or Serbs of Serbian nationality -- those Serb military and political leaders of the Serbian state. -- PBS (talk) 13:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the context of Yugoslav Wars, term "Serb" ussualy means ethnic Serbs, not exclusively citizen of Serbia. See also definition of "Serbian forces" in the article.--Mladifilozof (talk) 16:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The ICJ judgement in the Bosnian Genocide Case is clear in making a distinction between servants of the Serbian state and those ethnic Serbs in Bosnia when it declared that there was a genocide in Bosnia but the Serbian government was no complicit in that genocide. What is your English language source for claiming that this distinction is not the usual one and I would have thought that the opinion of the ICJ is of enough significance to be noted in this article. -- PBS (talk) 19:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Serb government was not complicit because it gave it's orders via undisclosed channels, behind closed doors and no tape recorders or mobile phones for the time. The fact is simple, before Milosevic made his famous "Greater Serbia" speech in Kosovo in 1989, there was no war in Bosnia. Then he made his moves and Yugoslavia was wrecked by chaos. Next thing you have brainwashed so-called "Bosnian Serbs" who recently colonized Bosnia trying to annex it into Serbia with a war errupting and then the war crimes they comit are so-called "behind the backs" of the Serb government. Whta fairytale are you reading Philip Bird Shearer. Wikipeacekeeper (talk) 13:39, 17 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Joint Criminal Enterprise

"The Court has determined, through a series of trials, that some of the top Serbian political and military leaders participated in a joint criminal enterprise. The indictments maintain that the participants' goal was the creation of Greater Serbia from the disintegrating Yugoslavia."

AFAICT from reading the transcripts of the judgements there was not one/"a" joint criminal enterprise but several different ones under common law they would be called conspiracies eg conspiracy to commit genocide.

The juxtaposition of the second sentence implies that the participants' goal was the creation of Greater Serbia was in itself a Joint Criminal Enterprise. Is there an English language source that claims that the ICTY and the ICJ found that there was one overriding conspiracy and that working towards a greater Serbia was in itself the one and only "Joint Criminal Enterprise" (if it were then what does that make those who are working towards the goal of making the EU a fully soverign state?). -- PBS (talk) 19:56, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]