Genocide on the agenda for ICJ's 60th anniversary


From February 28 to May 9, the fifteen judges of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague listened to oral arguments from the parties in the genocide case that Bosnia-Herzegovina brought in March 1993 against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY), which became Serbia and Montenegro in 2003 and then simply Serbia after the May 21 yes vote on the referendum on Montenegro's independence. The ICJ is expected to issue a decision by year end. If convicted, Serbia could have to pay several billion dollars to its neighbor. This ruling represents more than just the first time that a State has been prosecuted for genocide. The Court in this case must render a decision on essentially two main points: does the ICJ have jurisdiction in this matter; and did the FRY commit genocide in Bosnia?

Thirteen years ago, in a somewhat desperate attempt to end the aggression and violence it was suffering at the hands of Serbia, Bosnia-Herzegovina turned to the ICJ on the only legal basis available at that time: the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. Now, thirteen years later, just when the matter is under court deliberation, there is a serious debate about the wisdom of these proceedings as to whether they will contribute to, or obstruct the possibilities of reconciliation, and on the consequences that will result from the payment of damages. However, this debate is left for a later stage. For the moment, the judges of this long-standing international institution celebrating its 60th anniversary this year are faced with tough legal issues.

Want to read more?

We have tailor-made memberships for students, individuals, groups of professionals and large companies and organizations. A subscription entitles you to receive the International Justice Tribune every two weeks as well as become a member of the Justice Tribune Foundation, supporting independent reporting on international justice.

Subscribe now

Related articles


Some say that this has been the most difficult case in the history of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), a 60-year old UN court that rules on disputes between States, such as border issues or coastal fishing zones. On February 26, the ICJ finally concluded the genocide case of Bosnia-Herzegovina against Serbia, which had been running for almost 14 years.

03 June 2011 by Geraldine Coughlan

There were cries of emotion from Srebrenica survivors in the public gallery when former Bosnian Serb General Ratko Mladic did not enter a plea to charges he called "monstrous" and "obnoxious".


Since the death of Slobodan Milosevic, ultranationalist leader Vojislav Seselj is without doubt the best-known accused standing before the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). On 3 November, Seselj - the "scandal monger", as he called himself during his testimony in the Milosevic trial - became suddenly very polite in court. Although on 20 October the court authorized him to defend himself, the Appeals Chamber warned Seselj that "should his self-representation substantially obstruct the proper and expeditious proceedings in this case, the Trial Chamber will be justified in promptly assigning him counsel".

06 September 2004 by Thierry Cruvellier

"Pa bavite se!" "Well, you deal with that!" Slobodan Milosevic shouted to the court, his arms outstretched as if throwing a sack of hot potatoes towards the feet of his judges. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) had not only just decided to end the three-year freedom of the Serbian ex-head of state to conduct his own defence. It also had the temerity to ask him how he wanted to proceed from now on.

Ratko Mladic and Radovan Karadzic together in an undated image (Photo: Flickr/ICTY)
22 December 2016 by Stephanie van den Berg

The closing arguments in the case against former Bosnian Serb military commander General Ratko Mladic finished up last week. The 1992-95 war in Bosnia ended over twenty years ago and Mladic's is the last trial for the tribunal which has seen interest in its trials waning, is this case too little, too late or did the tribunal save the best for last?

Justice Tribune spoke to Iva Vukusic about the significance of the case and the closing arguments of the parties. Vukusic is former journalist who also worked in the prosecutions office of the Bosnian state court's war crimes chambers and is now a PhD candidate at Utrecht University where she focuses on paramilitarism during the 1990s wars in the former Yugoslavia.