Bosnia v. Serbia

This article uses the recent judgment of the ICJ in Bosnia v. Serbia to highlight the potential problems that arise when international courts have to adjudicate on overlapping situations. It describes the dispute between the ICJ and the ICTY on the appropriate legal standard for the attribution of state responsibility, and finds that the ICJ's approach in this case suggests that those keen to minimize the fragmentation of international law between adjudicative bodies should not overlook the need for consistency within those bodies. With regard to fact finding, this article raises serious concerns about the manner in which the ICJ relied on the ICTY's work. The decision of the ICJ not to demand crucial documents from Serbia is discussed and criticized. Based on its approach to fact finding in this case, doubts are raised as to whether the ICJ will ever hold a state responsible for genocide outside the parameters of the prior criminal convictions of individual perpetrators

Adjudication · Consistency (knowledge bases · Economic Justice · Genocide · International court · International law · Political science · Public international law · State (computer science · Tribunal · European and International Law Studies · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law

• Local Uses of International Criminal Justice in Bosnia-Herzegovina

  Open Access•Dejan Guzina, Branka Marijan•Studies in Social Justice•2013

  Add to list

• An Earlier Genocide Debate

  Open Access•A Dirk Moses•Law and Critique•2025

  Add to list