State responsibility for genocide in the open

05 March 2007 by HEIKELINA VERRIJN STUART

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.

Could Serbia be held responsible for genocide in Bosnia during the 1992-1995 conflict? Although crimes against humanity do not fall under its jurisdiction, the ICJ, closely following the footsteps of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), established that Serbia committed large-scale crimes against humanity. It also agreed with the ICTY that the Srebrenica massacre was genocide committed by the Bosnian Serbs. But for a State to be held responsible for genocide, it is necessary that the crimes were committed by organs of that State or under the instructions, directions or effective control of these organs, the Court said. The Court accepted that in the first years of the conflict such a strong link between Belgrade and the Bosnian Serb leadership did exist, but less so in 1995 when Srebrenica fell. Thus, it could ultimately not conclude, on the basis of the pattern of violence alone, that Serbia had the intent to destroy the Muslim population of Bosnia as such, in whole or in part, as required by the Genocide Convention.

Want to read more?

If you subscribe to a free membership, you can read this article and explore our full archive, dating back to 1997.

Subscribe now

Related articles

article
19 February 2007 by Laetitia Grotti

One year ago on January 6, 2006, the 17 members of Morocco's Equity and Reconciliation Commission (IER) were closing up shop after submitting their final report to King Mohammed VI. The Moroccan truth commission had received a flood of compliments from the international community praising the recommendations in its report, especially those advocating legislative and constitutional reforms. One year later, however, the results have been rather mixed.

article
11 September 2006 by our correspondent in Arusha

After having tried high-ranking officers, ministers, businessmen, priests, journalists, local officials and militiamen, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) is in uncharted waters. On September 11, the most famous rwandese troubadour of his generation will stand trial for genocide. 

article
23 October 2006 by Christine Chaumeau

China is keeping a polite distance from international criminal justice. Beijing is hardly disinterested, but China does want to make sure that these new global mechanisms are not going to infringe upon its sovereignty by delving into particularly sensitive cases such as Tibet. 

article
United Nations Operation in Burundi disarms rebel forces in Mbanda in February 2005 (Photo: Flickr/UN Photo/Martine Perret)
03 June 2015 by Janet H. Anderson, The Hague (The Netherlands)

Over the last month, Burundi has hit the headlines as the president put himself forward to be elected for a controversial third term, resulting in street protests, thousands of refugees who fled instability and an attempted coup. Behind the issues of elections and constitutionalism are also those of justice following Burundi’s long-running civil war. The international community supported an intensive process of negotiation and the signing of the Arusha Accord in 2000. But in the decade and a half since, its provisions on justice have been debated though never fully implemented.

article
06 November 2006 by Pierre Hazan

France's attitude towards international criminal justice is marked by ambiguity. Paris subscribes to a vision of the world in which international humanitarian law is considered a way to curb violence against civilian populations, but at the same time it is wary of an unchecked judicial system that could end up prosecuting French soldiers engaged in areas where it has old and deep-rooted interests.