Following the main trial, the Trial Panel of Section I for War Crimes of the Court of BiH, pronounced the first-instance Verdict on 22 November 2011 under which the Accused Nisvet Gasal and Senad Dautović were found guilty of War Crimes against Civilians and sentenced to prison term of six and thirteen years respectively. Under the said Verdict, the Accused Musajb Kukavica was acquitted of all charges.
The Prosecution alleged an overarching joint criminal enterprise for the crimes committed in the aftermath of the conflict in Bugojno in July of 1993. Senad Dautović was convicted of participating in two distinct joint criminal enterprises with other members of the Bugojno War Time Presidency headed by Dževad Mlačo. The first was a plan to identify and execute detained persons of Croat ethnicity believed to be the extremists behind crimes which were considered to have partially led to the conflict. The second joint criminal enterprise found was a plan to take blood from persons of Croat ethnicity who were detained resulting in the crime of inhuman treatment. Additionally, for crimes committed in detention facilities that Senad Dautović controlled in his role as the Chief of the Public Security Station Bugojno, he was convicted of inhuman treatment for the conditions in these facilities as well as for the illegal acts of the men he supervised under the doctrine of command responsibility.
Nisvet Gasal was convicted for inhuman treatment in his role as Camp Warden of the Football Club Iskra Stadium. Gasal was held responsible for aiding and abetting in the execution of orders issued by the military to use detainees from the Stadium for forced labor on the front lines. Additionally, he was held responsible under the doctrine of command responsibility for the illegal acts of his subordinates for a series of beatings which occurred while he was the Camp Warden.
On this basis Musajb Kukavica, who was Commander of Camp Security at the FC Iskra Stadium was acquitted of all crimes as there was no evidence he ever participated in any of the beatings. It was clear from the evidence that his function was primarily administrative and he had no independent authority to punish. He was under a legal duty to complain about illegal behavior that he was aware of and he did so.
