61
 
It should, however, be noted that in the context of the Rule 61 Decision in the Karadzic and Mladic case, Trial Chamber I found that the evidence before it indicated a sufficient basis for applying Article 7(1) in preference to Article 7(3). The Trial Chamber stated,

"The conditions for the responsibility of superiors under Article 7(3) of the Statute, that is those constituting criminal negligence of superiors, have unquestionably been fulfilled:

- The Bosnian Serb military and police forces committing the offences alleged were under the control, command and direction of Radovan KARADZIC and Ratko MLADIC during the whole period covered in the indictment;

- through their position in the Bosnian Serb Administration, Radovan KARADZIC and Ratko MLADIC knew or had reasons to know that their subordinates committed or were about to commit the offences in question;

- lastly, it has been established that Radovan KARADZIC and Ratko MLADIC failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such acts or to punish the perpetrators thereof.

The Trial Chamber does consider, however, that the type of responsibility incurred is better characterised by Article 7(1) of the Statute. The evidence and testimony tendered all concur in demonstrating that Radovan KARADZIC and Ratko MLADIC would not only have been informed of the crimes allegedly committed under their authority, but also and, in particular, that they exercised their power in order to plan, instigate, order or otherwise aid and abet in the planning, preparation or execution of the said crimes."

It is submitted that this aspect of the Karadzic and Mladic case bears remarkable similarity to the present discussion of the responsibility of President Milosevic, Jovica Stanisic and Vlastimir Djordevic in the Kosovo context.