Table of contents:
Element:
A. Evidentiary comment:
It should be noted that the relevant material element is phrased in the alternative (the perpetrator OR another person). Consequently, if the perpetrator is one obtaining or expecting the advantage, then the circumstance-component is not required.
P.39. Evidence inferred from an utterance, a document or a deed.
P.39.1. Evidence that another person received a reward from the perpetrator.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac et al., Cases No. IT-96-23-T and IT-96-23/1-T, Judgement (TC), 22 February 2001, paras. 43, 587:
"43. [ ] On 2 August 1992, they, together with five other women, were taken out of the Kalinovik High School and brought to a house in Aladza.136 FWS-191 was told that the women were "rewards" for the Serbs who had captured the Rogoj pass that very day.137 [ ]"
"136. FWS-191, T 3142 and 3154; FWS-186, T 2930-2935; FWS-190, T 3337-3339; FWS-205, T 3470-3477.
137. FWS-191, T 3155-3156."
"587. [ ] Prior to their being sold, Kovac had given two of these girls, FWS-75 and A.B., to other Serb soldiers who abused them for more than three weeks before taking them back to Kovac, who proceeded to sell one and give the other away to acquaintances of his."
B. Evidentiary comment:
The above case extract is from a case concerning enslavement, but this means of proof could also prove the relevant element of enforced prostitution.
P.40. Evidence inferred from a circumstance.
