Sniper Safaris in Sarajevo: How Wealthy Tourists Allegedly Paid to Kill Civilians During the Siege

Watch the Episode

Video originally published on November 28, 2025.

In November 2024, an Italian journalist's legal complaint triggered the first international investigation into 'sniper safaris'—alleged weekend trips where wealthy foreigners paid to shoot civilians during Sarajevo's four-year siege. If substantiated, these allegations expose a grotesque form of war-tourism that has evaded accountability for three decades and challenge fundamental assumptions about who can be prosecuted for war crimes. The case forces a reckoning with international justice systems designed to target state actors and military leaders, not private civilians acting as recreational killers.

Key Takeaways

Milan prosecutors opened the first international investigation into 'sniper safaris' in November 2024, targeting Italian nationals allegedly paid to shoot Sarajevo civilians during the 1992-1996 siege.
Alleged participants were wealthy foreigners from Italy, UK, Germany, US, Canada, and Russia who paid approximately $116,000 to access sniper nests, with additional fees for killing children and free kills for elderly persons.
The operational pipeline involved travel from Trieste to Belgrade via Serbian airline Aviogenex, then to Sarajevo, where Bosnian Serb forces provided spotters, security, and prepared firing positions.
Investigator Ezio Gavazzeni estimates at least 100 individuals participated over the war's duration, though the true number could be substantially higher, based on flight records, witness testimony, and financial trails.
Successful prosecution would establish unprecedented legal precedent: the first known war crimes trial of private civilians without formal military affiliation, potentially reshaping international accountability frameworks.
Three decades of inaction despite persistent allegations reflects a gap in international justice systems designed to target state and military actors, not private civilians engaging in recreational killing.

The Siege of Sarajevo: Context for Understanding the Allegations

When Bosnia declared independence from Yugoslavia in 1992, ethnic Serb forces encircled Sarajevo, trapping 300,000 to 400,000 civilians and 70,000 defenders inside the capital. The besieging force—never exceeding 23,000 troops—possessed heavy artillery, tanks, and logistical support from Slobodan Milošević's Serbia. Their objective was not conquest but leverage: inflict sufficient terror to force Bosnia's leadership and the international community to accept partition and the creation of a sovereign Serbian state. Snipers became the primary instrument of this terror campaign. Positioned on surrounding hills, they fired daily into streets designated 'sniper alleys,' targeting not only combatants but also children, the elderly, and rescue workers. According to the Research and Documentation Center in Sarajevo, 5,434 civilians died—including 1,601 children—with 56,000 injured. UNICEF documented that two of every five children were directly shot at, and more than half witnessed a death. The psychological toll was systematic: civilians could not move through their neighborhoods, collect water, or stand in bread lines without exposure to sniper fire. This backdrop of state-sponsored terror is essential context for understanding why foreign participation would constitute more than sensational rumor—any outsider entering Sarajevo during the siege could not have been ignorant of the carnage they were witnessing.

The Sniper Safari Network: Alleged Operations and Pricing

According to emerging evidence, a network of affluent individuals from Italy, the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States, Canada, Russia, and other nations allegedly arranged weekend trips to Sarajevo with explicit intent to shoot civilians. The operational pipeline was structured: participants would gather in Trieste, Italy, then fly via Serbian airline Aviogenex to the Sarajevo area, where Bosnian Serb forces allegedly provided pre-arranged sniper nests, spotters, and security. The pricing was chillingly specific. A basic 'ticket' to a sniper position cost approximately $116,000 (inflation-adjusted). Additional fees applied to specific targets: children commanded the highest price, while killing elderly persons was reportedly free. Participants were described by investigator Ezio Gavazzeni as 'wealthy people with reputations, entrepreneurs' and 'people with a passion for weapons' who brought their own rifles or were supplied weapons and firing positions on site. Some had backgrounds in hunting; others were simply gun enthusiasts seeking extreme recreational thrills. According to the 2022 documentary Sarajevo Safari, an anonymous Slovenian intelligence officer claimed to have witnessed seven sniper shootings by paying foreigners. A Bosnian intelligence officer reported interrogating a Serbian fighter who described encountering Italian tourists who had paid to shoot civilians. Gavazzeni's investigation estimates that at least 100 individuals participated over the war's duration, though the true number could be substantially higher. The motive was neither political nor ideological—participants sought personal satisfaction and the thrill of hunting humans, as one would hunt on an African safari.

From Documentary to Legal Investigation: The Milan Probe

The sniper safari allegations remained largely confined to Balkan discourse until the 2022 release of Sarajevo Safari, which presented testimony from intelligence sources and detailed the operational pipeline. The documentary generated international shock but also skepticism; the global response was divided between horror at the allegations and uncertainty about whether to pursue formal investigations. This changed in November 2024 when Milan-based journalist Ezio Gavazzeni filed a legal complaint with prosecutors, marking the transition from rumor to formal legal scrutiny. Gavazzeni had spent years after the documentary's release collecting evidence: witness statements, flight records documenting Aviogenex usage, financial trails showing six-figure payments to besieging forces, and a supporting report from Benjamina Karic, Sarajevo's former mayor and a siege survivor. The Milan prosecutor's office subsequently opened the first international investigation into sniper safaris, targeting Italian nationals suspected of participating. The investigation draws on earlier sources: a 1992 BBC documentary showing Russian extremist Eduard Limonov firing a machine gun in Serbia; John Jordan's 2007 testimony as a retired US Marine and volunteer firefighter describing non-locals escorted to sniper positions by Serb fighters; and Luca Leone's 2014 book The Bastards of Sarajevo, which alleged regular weekend trips by Europeans to shoot civilians. While the Milan probe remains in early stages with no specific charges filed, the opening of a formal case represents a decisive shift from 'urban myth' to matter of legal accountability.

The Legal Vacuum: Why Three Decades Passed Without Investigation

Despite persistent allegations, sniper safaris have never been the subject of formal war crimes investigation. Post-war tribunals focused on high-level political and military leaders; civilian tourists fell outside existing prosecutorial frameworks. The Republika Srpska and Bosnian Serb veterans' groups have uniformly denied allegations as fabrications. British soldiers who served in Bosnia publicly dismissed claims as an 'urban myth' and 'logistically difficult to accomplish,' reinforcing international reluctance to allocate resources to a case appearing to lack concrete evidence. Time compounds investigative challenges: many witnesses have died, documents may have been destroyed, and potential perpetrators have had three decades to conceal involvement. The legal vacuum reflects a gap in international justice architecture where civilian actors committing war crimes resist easy categorization. Without coordinated multinational efforts, the Milan investigation must rely on Italian evidence and foreign government cooperation that may be unwilling or unable to pursue leads. This inertia has allowed alleged crimes to remain unpunished, exposing a critical weakness in accountability mechanisms designed for state and military actors, not private civilians engaging in recreational killing.

Legal Precedent and Accountability: Implications for International Justice

If substantiated, sniper safari prosecutions would establish unprecedented legal territory. War crimes have traditionally targeted combatants and state actors; holding private civilians liable for voluntary murder during foreign conflicts would expand doctrine significantly. Successful prosecution would create the first known instance of civilians tried for war crimes without formal military affiliation, potentially deterring future war-tourism and establishing that nationality offers no shield for atrocities committed abroad. The case challenges the foundational assumption that international justice systems address only organized state violence. It exposes how privilege and wealth can enable participation in atrocities, raising questions about the responsibility of airlines, travel facilitators, and intelligence services that may have enabled such trips. The alleged involvement of Aviogenex—a state airline—suggests state-level complicity extending beyond passive awareness to active facilitation, implicating Serbian bureaucracy in enabling foreign civilians to participate in sniper operations. Prosecution would also establish that Bosnian Serb forces, loyal to Radovan Karadzic (already imprisoned for genocide and crimes against humanity), knowingly profited from and facilitated civilian participation in systematic killing. The precedent would fundamentally reshape how international law addresses non-state actors who voluntarily participate in armed conflict for profit or recreation.

Moral Reckoning: War-Tourism, Victim Justice, and Societal Accountability

Confirmation of sniper safaris would represent war-tourism's grotesque extreme: a market where human hunting replaces wildlife hunting, and civilian death becomes a commodity for wealthy foreigners. The ethical breach extends beyond individual perpetrators to systemic complicity. Siege survivors already bear trauma from living under constant sniper fire; knowledge that strangers paid to amplify that terror for sport would deepen psychological wounds and erode any sense of closure or justice. The case forces societies to examine how privilege weaponizes violence against the vulnerable. It raises urgent questions about institutional responsibility: Did airlines knowingly facilitate these trips? Did intelligence services enable or profit from them? Did governments ignore evidence to avoid reopening old wounds? Beyond personal suffering, confirmed allegations would expose how international systems have normalized violence as entertainment, allowing three decades of inaction despite persistent rumors. The investigation compels a reckoning with the broader culture that permits wealthy individuals to purchase access to atrocities. It demands examination of how the international community's reluctance to investigate—rooted partly in discomfort with confronting such grotesque crimes—has itself become a form of injustice to survivors. Successful prosecution would signal that no amount of time, distance, or privilege shields perpetrators from accountability, and that societies have a moral obligation to pursue truth regardless of how uncomfortable that truth may be.

Related Coverage

FAQ

What were sniper safaris and how did they operate during the Sarajevo siege?

Sniper safaris were alleged weekend trips where wealthy foreigners paid Bosnian Serb forces to escort them to sniper nests overlooking Sarajevo. Participants traveled from Trieste to Belgrade via Serbian airline Aviogenex, then to the Sarajevo area, where they were provided rifles or brought their own weapons, positioned at prepared firing locations, and given spotters and security by Bosnian Serb fighters. They could then shoot civilians, including children, for a base fee of approximately $116,000 (inflation-adjusted), with additional charges for specific targets. Children commanded the highest price; killing elderly persons was reportedly free.

Who were the alleged participants and what motivated them?

Alleged participants were affluent individuals from Italy, the United Kingdom, Germany, the United States, Canada, Russia, and other nations. Investigator Ezio Gavazzeni described them as 'wealthy people with reputations, entrepreneurs' and 'people with a passion for weapons' who sought personal satisfaction and recreational thrill rather than political or ideological goals. Many had backgrounds in hunting or were gun enthusiasts. Their motivation paralleled African safari hunting—the pursuit of extreme recreational experience through killing, driven by wealth and access to facilitators rather than any commitment to the Bosnian Serb cause.

What evidence supports the sniper safari allegations?

Evidence includes the 2022 documentary Sarajevo Safari featuring testimony from an anonymous Slovenian intelligence officer claiming to have witnessed seven sniper shootings by paying foreigners, and a Bosnian intelligence officer's report of interrogating a Serbian fighter who described Italian tourists paying to shoot civilians. Journalist Ezio Gavazzeni compiled flight records documenting Aviogenex usage, witness statements from former Bosnian Serb fighters, financial trails showing six-figure payments, and a supporting report from Sarajevo's former mayor Benjamina Karic, a siege survivor. Additional sources include a 1992 BBC documentary showing Russian extremist Eduard Limonov firing weapons in Serbia, John Jordan's 2007 testimony as a retired US Marine describing non-locals escorted to sniper positions, and Luca Leone's 2014 book The Bastards of Sarajevo alleging regular weekend trips by Europeans to shoot civilians.

How is the Italian investigation proceeding and what charges could result?

The Milan prosecutor's office opened the first international investigation into sniper safaris in November 2024, targeting Italian nationals suspected of participating. The investigation is in early phases with no specific charges filed yet. If evidence proves sufficient, prosecutors may charge participants with voluntary murder aggravated by cruelty and abject motives. Successful prosecution would be unprecedented—the first known war crimes trial of private civilians without formal military affiliation, potentially establishing new legal precedent for civilian accountability in foreign conflicts.

What role did Bosnian Serb forces and Serbian state actors play?

Bosnian Serb fighters on the ground reportedly welcomed the activity, providing spotters, security teams, and prepared sniper nests. They collected payments directly from participants, though it remains unclear whether money was retained locally or funneled to higher command or siege operations. Serbian intelligence was likely aware of the tourist trips and possibly facilitated them. The alleged involvement of Aviogenex, Serbia's state airline, suggests state-level complicity extending beyond passive awareness to active facilitation, implicating Serbian bureaucracy in enabling foreign civilian participation in systematic killing.

Why has no formal investigation occurred for three decades despite persistent allegations?

Post-war tribunals focused on high-level political and military leaders; civilian tourists fell outside existing prosecutorial frameworks. The Bosnian Serb community uniformly denied allegations as fabrications, and British soldiers dismissed claims as an 'urban myth' and 'logistically difficult to accomplish,' reinforcing international reluctance to investigate. Time has compounded challenges: many witnesses have died, documents may have been destroyed, and potential perpetrators have had decades to conceal involvement. The legal vacuum reflects a gap in international justice systems designed for state and military actors, not private civilians engaging in recreational killing. Without coordinated multinational efforts, investigations face significant inertia and resource constraints.

What legal precedent would successful prosecution establish?

Successful prosecution would create unprecedented legal territory by establishing the first known war crimes trial of private civilians without formal military affiliation. This would expand international law doctrine beyond traditional focus on state and military actors to encompass private civilians who voluntarily participate in atrocities for profit or recreation. The precedent would signal that nationality offers no shield for war crimes committed abroad, potentially deter future war-tourism, and reshape accountability frameworks to address gaps where privilege and wealth enable participation in systematic killing.

Sources

About the Author

Jackson Reed

Jackson Reed creates and presents analysis focused on military doctrine, strategic competition, and conflict dynamics.

About the Team →