CYIL vol. 11 (2020)

IVAN RYŠKA CYIL 11 (2020) purpose – to annihilate different culture and understanding of the world, and even more importantly to destroy the roots and identity of local communities who were related to those places. 63 Such behavior has already been tried before an international criminal tribunal – the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) was dealing with several similar cases and its judgments can represent a good example of possible future approach for the ICC. Cultural Rights before the ICTY The ICTY tried a number of cases related to attacks directed against cultural property. The court basically divided them into two categories. The first were the attacks that took place during military operations and the court examined whether the affected cultural property constituted a military objective or not. 64 The second category contained cases when such attacks were committed with a different purpose as part of ethnic cleansing and attacks against civil population. 65 The second category is significant for the analysis of cultural rights protection under ICL – the acts in this category were recognized by the Court as crimes against humanity, having argued that such recognition better reflects their nature. Although the attention of the international community was drawn by the destruction of world famous sites like Dubrovnik old town or Stari Most in Mostar, the majority of damaged cultural heritage was far less famous and its destruction had various reasons. There were multiple reports of systematic attacks against local cultural heritage in certain areas, especially against religious sites. 66 Those acts were closely related to the ethnic cleansing policy that took part in the region. 67 The purpose was clear: to create ethnically homogeneous territories and remove all evidence of previous multi-ethnic past. 68 One of the most obvious proofs of the past is the architecture – that is why the historical buildings connected with a certain ethnic group were deliberately targeted and systematically destroyed. There is also the second reason for this behavior: to prevent return of the evicted members of the community and remove their roots. 69 The perpetrators were aware of the link between the cultural heritage and the local community and the fact that cultural heritage constitutes a precondition for future existence of such community. These facts were also considered in the decisions of the ICTY, most notably in the case Kordić & Čerkez . The case was dealing with acts committed in the Lašva valley in Bosnia in 1993, where a systematic eviction of the local Muslim population took place and its houses and mosques were deliberately destroyed. In the Trial Judgement, rendered in February 2001, both defendants were convicted of, among other crimes, the persecution as crime against humanity. 70 65 BEVAN, Robert. The destruction of memory. Architecture at war . London: Reaktion Books, 2016. pp. 39-82. 66 United Nations Security Council, S/1994/674-27 May 1994. Final Report of the Commission of Experts. Established Pursuant to Security Council Resolution 780 (1992). Online: http://www.his.com/~twarrick/ commxyu1.htm. 67 Ibid. 68 Ibid. 69 BEVAN, Robert. The destruction of memory. Architecture at war . London: Reaktion Books, 2016. pp. 39-82. 70 Prosecutor v. Dario Kordić & Mario Čerkez judgment . Case No. IT-95-14/2-T. 63 Ibid. p. 67. 64 See e.g. Prlić et al. Case that was dealing with destruction of Stari most in Mostar.

338