THE HAGUE | 13.02.2013.
‘STRATEGIC’ SHELLING OF HOSPITAL
Quoting the statement of the health minister in the wartime Bosnian Serb cabinet, Dr Bakir Nakas claims that the VRS intended to destroy the hospitals Sarajevo because they wanted ‘to strip the enemy of the possibility of medical treatment’
THE HAGUE | 18.11.2008.
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE CONFIRMS IT HAS JURISDICTION IN CROATIA VS. SERBIA CASE
The world’s highest court has rejected preliminary objections raised by Belgrade regarding the jurisdiction and acceptability of the suit filed in 1999 by Croatia, accusing Serbia of violations of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide
THE HAGUE | 30.05.2008.
CROATIA: DISMISS SERBIA’S OBJECTION
In the closing argument before the International Court of Justice, Croatia’s legal counsel Ivan Simonovic urges the highest world court to dismiss Serbia’s objection and declare it has jurisdiction to hear the case Zagreb brought against Belgrade for violations of the Genocide Convention
THE HAGUE | 29.05.2008.
TWO ANSWERS TO THE SAME QUESTION
In the closing arguments at the hearing before the International Court of Justice, Belgrade’s representatives note that in 2004 the highest world court ruled it lacked jurisdiction in a case Serbia instituted against NATO member states. If the court were to find now it did have jurisdiction in the case brought by Croatia, it ‘would give two answers to Serbia to the same question’
THE HAGUE | 27.05.2008.
CROATIA AND BH ‘TWO SIDES OF THE SAME COIN’
As the hearing about the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the Croatia vs. Serbia case continues, Zagreb’s legal counsel contend that there is no reason for the Court to rule differently than it ruled in the case brought before the Court by BH
HAG/DEN HAAG | 26.05.2008.
SERBIA: NO GENOCIDE IN CROATIA
At the opening of the preliminary hearing in the Croatia vs. Serbia case, Belgrade’s legal representatives claim the crimes in Croatia cannot be qualified as genocide and challenge the jurisdiction of the International Court of Justice in the case Croatia brought before the Court asking it to find Serbia responsible for the violation of the Genocide Convention
27.02.2007.
THE MISSING LINK
What is the meaning and the import of the judgment delivered by the International Court of Justice in the Bosnia-Herzegovina vs. Serbia and Montenegro case? Serbia continuously breaches the Genocide Convention. Did the outcome of the 14-year long legal suit come too early for Bosnia Herzegovina?
26.02.2007.
SERBIA FOUND GUILTY OF FAILURE TO PREVENT AND PUNISH GENOCIDE
The judgment delivered by the International Court of Justice today confirmed that the Bosnian Serb forces committed the genocide in Srebrenica in July 1995. Serbia, in the first place, failed to prevent it, and afterwards failed to punish the perpetrators – first and foremost Ratko Mladic - and surrender them to the Tribunal. BH’s claim for reparation was dismissed by the ICJ
13.02.2007.
BH VS. SaM: JUDGMENT DUE ON 26 FEBRUARY 2007
On Monday 26 February 2007, the International Court of Justice will deliver its judgment on whether the former FRY or the former SaM is responsible for genocide in Bosnia Herzegovina. The judgment comes fourteen years after the legal suit was filed and a year after the start of hearings on the merits
10.05.2006.
HEARING ADJOURNED, VERDICT UNCERTAIN
At the end of the nine weeks of hearings before the International Court of Justice, the lawyers representing Sarajevo and Belgrade talk to SENSE agency, assessing the arguments and evidence. They also discuss the probability that the BH vs. SaM case might end without a judgment on the merits of the case, with the judges deciding they lack jurisdiction in the case
09.05.2006.
BELGRADE: DISMISS ALL BH DEMANDS
Belgrade's representatives urged the judges to dismiss all Sarajevo demands, as the nine-week hearings before the International Court of Justice in the BH vs. SaM case drew to a close. The judges will first deliberate whether they have jurisdiction to adjudicate in the case; if they decide they do, they will then decide on the merits of the case: whether genocide was committed in BH and whether the then FRY – now SaM – is responsible for it
08.05.2006.
BELGRADE: SUM OF ISOLATED CRIMES IS NOT TANTAMOUNT TO GENOCIDE
Bosnia and Herzegovina has failed to present any evidence to prove the existence of a "genocidal pattern", Serbia and Montenegro representatives claim before the International Court of Justice. The pattern of many "isolated crimes that are not tantamount to genocide" cannot, Belgrade contends, be taken as "confirmation that genocide was committed". Belgrade cannot disclose to the other party and the court unredacted documents originating from the Supreme Defense Council
04.05.2006.
BELGRADE: NO EVIDENCE GENOCIDAL PLAN EXISTED
While she did not deny that “there were crimes and serious violations of international norms” in BH, Belgrade’s legal representative Faveau-Ivanovic denied the existence of genocidal intent and plan as the second round of SaM arguments before the International Court of Justice continued. Her argument was that the crimes did not target other ethnic groups but political opponents of the Bosnian Serbs
03.05.2006.
DEFENSE, MILOSEVIC-STYLE
In their efforts to challenge the allegations made by the BH party on Belgrade's responsibility for the crimes committed by the Red Berets, Arkan’s men, Seselj’s men and Scorpions, SaM representatives use arguments used by Milosevic in his trial before the ICTY to defend himself against the same charges
02.05.2006.
OFFICERS WERE NOT PAID TO FIGHT WAR
Belgrade’s representatives use the fact that Belgrade continued to pay Republika Srpska Army officers seven years after the peace accords as evidence that even before Dayton they had not been paid to fight the war