The ICJ Decision - Bosnia The ICJ Decision - Bosnia and Herzegovina and Herzegovina v.v. Serbia Serbia

and Montenegroand Montenegro (FRY)(FRY)

ICJ v. ICTYICJ v. ICTY

International Court of International Court of JusticeJustice

It is a It is a civil civil court and court and tries tries states states

i.e. Bosnia-Herzegovina i.e. Bosnia-Herzegovina v. Serbia and v. Serbia and Montenegro Montenegro

Jurisdiction for this case Jurisdiction for this case is based on Article IX of is based on Article IX of the Convention of the the Convention of the Prevention and Prevention and Punishment of the Punishment of the Crime of Genocide Crime of Genocide (December 9(December 9thth, 1948)., 1948).

International Criminal International Criminal Tribunal of Tribunal of YugoslaviaYugoslavia

It is a It is a criminal criminal court court

and tries and tries individualsindividuals Established by

Resolution 827 of the UN Security Council, which was passed on May 25th, 1993

It has tried people It has tried people such as Slobodan such as Slobodan MiloševićMilošević

Does the ICJ have jurisdiction in this Does the ICJ have jurisdiction in this case? - YEScase? - YES

The Court recalls that it already decided it had The Court recalls that it already decided it had jurisdiction in 1996 and was not open to jurisdiction in 1996 and was not open to reexamination. reexamination.

Jurisdiction is based on Article IX of the Convention Jurisdiction is based on Article IX of the Convention of the Prevention and Punishmentof the Prevention and Punishment

Court finds that “the convention necessarily implies Court finds that “the convention necessarily implies a prohibition against States themselves committing a prohibition against States themselves committing genocide, and that, if an organ of the State, genocide, and that, if an organ of the State, commits an act of genocide or a related act commits an act of genocide or a related act enumerated in Article III of the Convention, the enumerated in Article III of the Convention, the international responsibility of the State is incurred.”international responsibility of the State is incurred.”

Has Serbia committed, conspired, or Has Serbia committed, conspired, or been complicit in genocide? – NObeen complicit in genocide? – NO

““The Court is not convinced that those killings The Court is not convinced that those killings were accompanied by the specific intent on the were accompanied by the specific intent on the part of the perpetrators to destroy, in whole or in part of the perpetrators to destroy, in whole or in part, the group of Bosnian Muslims.”part, the group of Bosnian Muslims.”

Court claims that it as not been conclusively Court claims that it as not been conclusively established that “the FRY supplied aid to the established that “the FRY supplied aid to the perpetrators of the genocide in full awareness perpetrators of the genocide in full awareness that the aid supplied would be used to commit that the aid supplied would be used to commit genocide.”genocide.”

Court notes that crimes may account to war Court notes that crimes may account to war crimes or crimes against humanity but claims no crimes or crimes against humanity but claims no jurisdiction to determine this.jurisdiction to determine this.

Did Serbia violate an obligation to Did Serbia violate an obligation to prevent genocide? – YESprevent genocide? – YES

FRY “failed to take all measures to prevent FRY “failed to take all measures to prevent genocide which were within its power.”genocide which were within its power.”

The FRY was in ‘a position of power’ with political, The FRY was in ‘a position of power’ with political, military, and financial links between FRY and military, and financial links between FRY and Bosnian SerbsBosnian Serbs

This decision was based solely on actions prior This decision was based solely on actions prior and during the Srebrenica Massacre. and during the Srebrenica Massacre.

Should an order of reparation be Should an order of reparation be issued for Serbia? - NOissued for Serbia? - NO

““Since it has not been shown that the genocide in Since it has not been shown that the genocide in Srebrencia would in fact have been averted if the Srebrencia would in fact have been averted if the Respondent (FRY) had attempted to prevent it, Respondent (FRY) had attempted to prevent it, financial compensation for the failure to prevent financial compensation for the failure to prevent the genocide at Srebrenica is not the appropriate the genocide at Srebrenica is not the appropriate form of reparation.”form of reparation.”

Appropriate response by FYR is a declaration of:Appropriate response by FYR is a declaration of: Failure ‘to comply with obligation to prevent the Failure ‘to comply with obligation to prevent the

crime of genocide’ crime of genocide’ Continued breach of obligations of transfers to Continued breach of obligations of transfers to

the ICTYthe ICTY