VARVARIN TRIAL TAKEN TO FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT
FEDERAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RESPONDS TO CONSTITUTIONAL COMPLAINT
The
so-called Varvarin lawsuit is based upon the bombing of a bridge in the Serbian
hinterland during the NATO operation 'Allied Force' in the Kosovo War. On 30
May, 1999, a religious holiday and market day, NATO bombers carried out two
attacks on a bridge in the small town of Varvarin. Ten people were killed and
30 injured (17 severely). Since several German courts rejected any claims for
damages, an action was filed by ECCHR Secretary General Wolfgang Kaleck, among
others.
The German government replied with a comprehensive statement underlining that any compensation for damages to the victims would be denied. The complainants were granted an opportunity to comment on this. A final judgment is expected sometime this year.
In a decision delivered in 2006, the Federal High Court stated that any claims based on international law cannot be considered because individual plaintiffs are not subject to it. Only states - and even then only in isolated cases - can assert claims according to the framework of diplomatic immunity. Liability claims according to German law are not given as the German law of government liability is displaced by the rules of the international law of war. The respective state of emergency of international law largely suspends the legal system as it works in times of peace.
ECCHR is currently preparing a response to the government statement. Aggrieved parties of acts of war must have access to ordinary courts to be able to prosecute claims of damages if necessary, in other words if they are denied voluntary payments. In particular, this applies to acts of war under the umbrella of international organizations such as NATO and the UN.
The German government replied with a comprehensive statement underlining that any compensation for damages to the victims would be denied. The complainants were granted an opportunity to comment on this. A final judgment is expected sometime this year.
In a decision delivered in 2006, the Federal High Court stated that any claims based on international law cannot be considered because individual plaintiffs are not subject to it. Only states - and even then only in isolated cases - can assert claims according to the framework of diplomatic immunity. Liability claims according to German law are not given as the German law of government liability is displaced by the rules of the international law of war. The respective state of emergency of international law largely suspends the legal system as it works in times of peace.
ECCHR is currently preparing a response to the government statement. Aggrieved parties of acts of war must have access to ordinary courts to be able to prosecute claims of damages if necessary, in other words if they are denied voluntary payments. In particular, this applies to acts of war under the umbrella of international organizations such as NATO and the UN.