413. In light of the foregoing, the Appeals Chamber finds that there was a discernible error in the Trial Chamber’s exercise of discretion in imposing the sentence.[1] Even though the Trial Chamber did not err in its factual findings, considering the above findings of the Trial Chamber on the gravity of the crimes, and in particular the consequences of the torture upon the victims and their families, the particular vulnerability of the prisoners, and the very large number of victims, the Appeals Chamber finds that the sentence of five years’ imprisonment is so unreasonable that it can be inferred that the Trial Chamber must have failed to exercise its discretion properly.[2] The Appeals Chamber thus finds that a five years’ imprisonment sentence does not adequately reflect the level of gravity of the crimes committed by Šljivančanin.

In the present case, the Appeals Chamber found, by majority, Judge Pocar partially dissenting and Judge Meron dissenting, that “the sentence of only 20 years was so unreasonable and plainly unjust, in that it underestimated the gravity of Galić’s criminal conduct, that it is able to infer that the Trial Chamber failed to exercise its discretion properly.” (para. 455).

For a full account of the Appeals Chamber’s discussion, see paras 444-456.