## Facts

- During an armed conflict in the former Yugoslavia, Croatian forces captured T. and interned him in a prisoner-of-war (POW) camp.
- Although T. was himself a POW, the Croatian authorities designated him as a “watchman” over other POWs.
- In 24 separate incidents, T. allegedly assisted his captors in beating, kicking, and bludgeoning fellow POWs.
- Two POWs allegedly died as a result of the violence.
- T. later made his way to Denmark.
- The Danish Director of Public Prosecutions charged T. with war crimes under Danish legislation implementing Geneva Convention III (treatment of POWs) and Geneva Convention IV (treatment of protected persons).
- The prosecution supported the charges with evidence.
- T. argued that the alleged conduct was not a sufficiently grave violation of the Geneva Conventions to permit the Danish High Court to exercise jurisdiction over conduct committed abroad against non-Danish victims.

## Issues

1. Whether the alleged repeated beatings of POWs, including conduct resulting in two deaths, constituted grave breaches (or equivalent serious violations) of the Geneva Conventions as implemented in Danish law.
2. Whether, if the conduct qualified as such a serious violation, Danish courts could exercise jurisdiction to prosecute T. in Denmark for acts committed outside Denmark against non-Danish victims.
3. Whether T.’s alleged role as a camp “watchman” assisting the captors in assaults on protected persons could give rise to individual criminal responsibility under the Danish implementing legislation.

## Decision

- The Eastern High Court rejected T.’s argument that the alleged conduct fell outside the category of serious violations covered by the Danish Geneva Conventions implementing legislation.
- The court accepted that Danish jurisdiction could be exercised on the basis of the implementing legislation for Geneva Conventions III and IV, even though the alleged crimes occurred abroad and involved non-Danish victims.
- Treating the alleged mistreatment and killings as war-crimes conduct covered by the implementing statutes, the court proceeded to impose sentence in the criminal case.

## Legal Principles

- Danish legislation implementing the Geneva Conventions may confer jurisdiction on Danish courts to prosecute serious wartime violations committed abroad when the accused is later found in Denmark.
- Serious violence against POWs—especially repeated assaults and conduct causing death—falls within the class of grave breaches addressed by Geneva Convention III and corresponding domestic implementing provisions.
- Individual liability is not limited to formal commanders; a detainee assigned authority within a camp may incur criminal responsibility if he actively assists captors in unlawful violence against protected persons.
- A jurisdictional objection based on labeling the alleged conduct as “not grave enough” fails when the acts alleged involve sustained, severe mistreatment of POWs, including killings.

## Conclusion

In *Director of Public Prosecutions v. T., Sentence of Eastern High Court (1994)*, the Danish Eastern High Court addressed a prosecution of a former POW who had allegedly been appointed a camp watchman and, in 24 incidents, assisted Croatian captors in violent abuse of fellow POWs that included two deaths; the court treated the alleged acts as serious violations within Danish Geneva Conventions implementing legislation, accepted Danish jurisdiction despite the foreign locus and non-Danish victims, and proceeded to sentence T. on that basis.
