PROSECUTOR V.

COLONEL MICHELL NAZIR

MEMORIAL FOR THE PROSECUTION

 I. PRELIMINARY MATTERS

1. Formation of the Bonham Liberation Organization

There has been a feeling among certain sections of the people of Bonham that they are
discriminated against in employment and economically in Donka and that their culture and
language are constantly disrespected and undermined.

BLO aims to achieve independence and statehood for Bonham and establish democracy
in the future of State of Bonham

1.1 The President of Donka designated three (3) eminent citizens from Bonham to
initiate a dialogue with BLO and to receive their complains and listen to their concerns.

Dissatisfied with this initiative The BLO called for a province-wide blockade of the public
transportation system. To thwart the closure and blockade, security forces arrested hundreds
of BLO activists a day before the blockade.

1.2 Reports that several BLO activists were detained by Donkan security forces across
Bonham.

It was also reported that during the six (6) incidents in that week, sixty nine (69) suspected
supporters of BLO were killed during exchanges of fire.

2. Donkan authorities launched investigations into the matter.

The Donkan authorities decided not to proceed due to the government’s reluctance to delve
into what should have been a confidential and bilateral report, as well as the political pressure
from Novara and the invocation of immunity by BDS.
 The inaction of Donkan authorities prompted the BHRF to appeal to the ZU. The BHRF
requested the ZU to intervene in the situation in Bonham to prevent further deterioration.

II. PLEADINGS

Count One - The acts commited at the community hall on the basis of individual criminal
responsibility for committing, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through
another person (Article 25(3)(a))

1.Colonel Nazir is liable under Art. 25(3)(a) which states that:

In accordance with this Statute, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for
punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court if that person: (a) Commits such a
crime, whether as an individual, jointly with another or through another person, regardless of
whether that other person is criminally responsible;

1.1 Colonel Nazir did not just merely take part in the operation which led to the deaths of
the civilians, but he was the head in accomplishing such.
He is the principal by inducement to the killings made which was made possible with the
participation of the co-principals, the military forces. The operation could not be considered as
legitimate because there were lots of civilians killed during the operation and their declarations
that the people died were all part of the BLO is a falsity. This could be proved by the statements
of the families of the deceased who were innocent and were just participating in the meeting for
the upcoming event. There was no due diligence in conducting the intelligence that the group of
people in the City Hall were really members of the activists.

2. The crime against humanity of extermination under Article 7(1)(b) of the ICC Statute.
Article 7(1)(b) of the ICC Statute states that: for the purpose of this Statute, ‘crime against
humanity’ means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or
systematic attack directed against any civilian population, with knowledge of the attack: (a)
Murder; (b) Extermination;
2.1 It is obvious that there was a widespread or systematic attack directed against the
civilians of Bonham during the 2nd of November.
It is considered as systematic because it was well-planned, and tactics were created to infiltrate
the place. It is of no question also that some of the victims which consists of a large number were
civilians as can be proven by the statements of the bereaved families. Of course, there was an
actual knowledge during the time if the attack because the perpetrators can’t succeed in
infiltrating the place and successfully exterminate the group of people inside the city hall. There
was an extermination because there were ruthless killings for a certain period without
discontinuance which led the deaths of many people.

Count Two- With Respect to Acts Committed on 28 December 2016 againts the Butterfly
Temple, on the basis of individual criminal responsibility for ordering, soliciting or
inducing the commission of (Article 25(3)(b))

Colonel Nazir ordered an attack on the Butterfly Café where beside it was the Butterfly Temple
wherein he received intelligence report the leaders of the BLO were said to have a meeting. As a
result, twelve (12) people died, seven (7) were seriously wounded and the temple was damaged:
ten (10) holy grails were broken, two (2) massive murals were scrubbed, the main statue was
thickly dotted, the door to the Temple was irreparably damaged, and the wall was riddled with
bullets.

1. Further, this lead to a violation in the Convention for the Protection of Cultural
Property in the Event of Armed Conflict (The Hague, 1954)
The Butterfly Temple is a cultural property which is a great importance to the Cultural heritage
of every people because of its historical and religious significance. Furthermore, the said
convention requires that every contracting state must safeguard these cultural properties situated
within their territory against the foreseeable effects of an armed conflict, by taking such
measures as they consider appropriate.

1.1 ARTICLE 4 – RESPECT FOR CULTURAL PROPERTY

1. The High Contracting Parties undertake to respect cultural property situated within their own
territory as well as within the territory of other High Contracting Parties by refraining from any
use of the property and its immediate surroundings or of the appliances in use for its protection
for purposes which are likely to expose it to destruction or damage in the event of armed confl
ict; and by refraining from any act of hostility, directed against such property.
2. The obligations mentioned in paragraph 1 of the present Article may be waived only in cases
where military necessity imperatively requires such a waiver.
3. The High Contracting Parties further undertake to prohibit, prevent and, if necessary, put a
stop to any form of theft, pillage or misappropriation of, and any acts of vandalism directed
against, cultural property. They shall refrain from requisitioning movable cultural property
situated in the territory of another High Contracting Party.
4. They shall refrain from any act directed by way of reprisals against cultural property.
5. No High Contracting Party may evade the obligations incumbent upon it under the present
Article, in respect of another High Contracting Party, by reason of the fact that the latter has not
applied the measures of safeguard referred to in Article 3.

2. Second Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event
of Armed Conflict (1999)

2.1 ARTICLE 5 OF THE SECOND PROTOCOL

Safeguarding of cultural property Preparatory measures taken in time of peace for the
safeguarding of cultural property against the foreseeable effects of an armed confl ict pursuant to
Article 3 of the Convention shall include, as appropriate, the preparation of inventories, the
planning of emergency measures for protection against fi re or structural collapse, the
preparation for the removal of movable cultural property or the provision for adequate in situ
protection of such property, and the designation of competent authorities responsible for the
safeguarding of cultural property.
Count Three- The treatment of persons who where arrested on the 28 December 2016 and
detained in the old building on the basis of command responsibility (Article 28(a))
The Republic of Donka failed to provide for protection and care against members of the BLO
who were suspected in transporting weapons from the State of Page to Bohamnia. Based on the
reliable information received by the Republic of Donka that leathal weapons were received by
the BLO rebel such persons were subsequently arrested and were taken to an old government
building where there was no electricity or even running water and other unjust and humane
conditions, which caused 6 detainees to commit suicide.

1. Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949

1.1 ARTICLE 12
Members of the armed forces and other persons mentioned in the followingArticle, who are
wounded or sick, shall be respected and protected in all circumstances. They shall be treated
humanely and cared for by the Party to the conflict in whose power they may be, without any
adverse distinction founded on sex, race, nationality, religion, political opinions, or any other
similar criteria. Any attempts upon their lives, or violence to their persons, shall be strictly
prohibited; in particular, they shall not be murdered or exterminated, subjected to torture or to
biological experiments; they shall not wilfully be left without medical assistance and care, nor
shall conditions exposing them to contagion or infection be created.

1.2 ARTICLE 13
The Present Convention shall apply to the wounded and sick belonging to the following
categories:
1) Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or
volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.
2) Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized
resistance movements, belonging to a Party to the conflict and operating in or outside their own
territory, even if this territory is occupied, provided that such militias or volunteer corps,
including such organized resistance movements, fulfil the following conditions: a) that of being
commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates; b) that of having a fixed distinctive
sign recognizable at a distance; c) that of carrying arms openly; d) that of conducting their
operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war.
3) Members of regular armed forces who profess allegiance to a Government or an authority not
recognized by the Detaining Power.
4) Persons who accompany the armed forces without actually being members thereof, such as
civilian members of military aircraft crews, war correspondents, supply contractors, members of
labour units or of services responsible for the welfare of the armed forces, provided that they
have received authorization from the armed forces which they accompany.
5) Members of crews including masters, pilots and apprentices of the merchant marine and the
crews of civil aircraft of the Parties to the conflict, who do not benefit by more favourable
treatment under any other provisions in international law.
6) Inhabitants of a non-occupied territory who, on the approach of the enemy, spontaneously
take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into
regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.

In which the members of the Bohamnian Liberation Movement were members of a resistance
movement belonging to a party to the conflict is entitled to be treated humanely and cared for by
the parties to the conflict without any adverse distinction founded on sex, race, nationality,
religion, political opinions, or any other similar criteria.

PRAYER

The Prosecution respectively requests this Honourable Court to adjudge and declare that Colonel
Nazir is criminally responsible under the different statutes and conventions herein recited above.

Respectfully Yours,

The Prosecution