Lenah
Follow us
Justice Hub
  • My Justice
  • News
  • Insights
  • Justice Explained
  • About Us
No Result
View All Result
Justice Hub
  • My Justice
  • News
  • Insights
  • Justice Explained
  • About Us
No Result
View All Result
Justice Hub
No Result
View All Result

(I)ncredibly (C)omplicated (J)argon – Croatia v Serbia

February 8, 2015
in News
0
0
Home News
FacebookTwitterLinkedInWhatsappEmail

After two hours of mens rea, dolus specialis and actus reus, the International Court of Justice finally dismissed a claim and counter-claim of genocide between Serbia and Croatia. Judge Peter Tomka soldiered doggedly through the judgment which in its full printed form exceeded 700 pages. With the world able to watch the judgment unfolding live via webcast, the international justice Twitter circle spent hours going through every sentence of the decision.

As Judge Tomka wrapped up the judgment with a final sip of juice, it became clear that neither Serbs nor Croats were any nearer  closure on this delicate issue that has haunted them for the last two decades. In fact, some people argue that the court’s decision and the long process were only of benefit to a few individuals.

Tomorrow, ICJ will decide that both Croatia and Serbia have been phenomenally successful in financing a small group of lawyers.

— Eric Gordy (@EricGordy) February 2, 2015

On my way to BBC TV to talk about the Serbia v Croatia match in The Hague. Lawyers laughing all the way to the bank. Moronic cases @ ICJ

— Tim Judah (@timjudah1) February 3, 2015

The decision by the judges to dismiss both cases boiled down in the end to both parties inability to prove the mental aspect of genocide. Without getting too technical, neither side proved the other party’s intent to destroy a group in full or in part. But for some people, the message from the judges was a lot simpler than that.

In a much larger number of words, ICJ is telling Serbia and Croatia, "don't bring us problems your politicians are supposed to resolve."

— Eric Gordy (@EricGordy) February 3, 2015

Picking up on the same train of thought, Andrea Oskari Rossini came to a similar conclusion

“Serbia and Croatia are invited to “cooperate”, in particular to address the issue of people still missing and to provide “adequate compensation to the victims”, thus consolidating “peace and stability in the region”. After 16 years, the courts returned the ball to the parties.”

International law largely relies on previous decisions in future cases. Therefore the ICJ had an opportunity to establish jurisprudence for cases to come. Instead, this decade-and-a-half long legal process seemingly taught us only one thing about the court.

Not sure in the end what Serbia v. Croatia ICJ case established, though, other than that ICJ judgments take decades. http://t.co/ZI8fgqbL8f

— Julian Ku 古舉倫 (@julianku) February 3, 2015

But in what many called an unsurprising judgment, the devil (or the devilish surprise) was still in the detail. In an article by Janet Anderson for Justice Hub, Oliver Ribbelink at the TMC Asser Institute found the level of detail in the judgment the most surprising.

“I found it surprising that they went into so much detail on the actual events – what happened here and what happened there. Many place names and municipalities have been mentioned by the Court. And they relied very much on the Yugoslavia Tribunal jurisprudence. That tribunal has dealt with so many of these issues.”

But the thing that might be the most controversial could, according to some, be published by both countries.

At the end of the day all that seems clear that people left the court knowing roughly the same about the legal implication of genocide as they did two hours earlier.

So…

  • Does the ICJ take too long to make a judgment?
  •  What will be the impact of the judgment on the relationship between Croatia and Serbia?
  • Isn’t the proof of acts of genocide enough to prove genocide?

Lead image: Judge Peter Tomka (Photo: UN Photo/CIJ-ICJ/Frank van Beek)

The Weekly Hubble features the most popular or controversial international justice story of the past week and reactions on social media to the news. 

Tags: ICJ (International Court of Justice)Justice News
ShareTweetShareSendSend

Niklas Jakobsson

Niklas Jakobsson is a communications expert

Related Posts

ICL Media Review: Russian veterans seek ICC investigation into use of mercenaries in Syria
ICL Media Review

ICL Media Review: Russian veterans seek ICC investigation into use of mercenaries in Syria

by ICL Media Review
November 18, 2019
0
26

In this week's review, news about the ECCC conviction of Chea and Samphan for genocide, the adjournment of Kwoyelo’s trial...

Read more
NPWJ: Trump’s Transgender Military Ban Gets a Boost

NPWJ: Trump’s Transgender Military Ban Gets a Boost

January 24, 2019
42
ICL Media Review: Charles Taylor’s ex-wife pleads not guilty in UK trial on torture in Liberia

ICL Media Review: Charles Taylor’s ex-wife pleads not guilty in UK trial on torture in Liberia

January 24, 2019
38
ICL Media Review: Uganda ordered to compensate former LRA fighter Thomas Kwoyelo

ICL Media Review: Uganda ordered to compensate former LRA fighter Thomas Kwoyelo

January 24, 2019
29
NPWJ: European Parliament to hold hearing on the current human rights and humanitarian situation in Yemen

NPWJ: European Parliament to hold hearing on the current human rights and humanitarian situation in Yemen

January 22, 2019
45

Niklas Jakobsson

Niklas Jakobsson is a communications expert

Justice Hub

Justice Hub is an online platform aimed at a worldwide audience of 18-35 year olds, especially in countries where people are looking for sustainable and innovative solutions to problems of justice, peace and security. Justice can feel too abstract, too often owned by experts. We make the conversations lively and accessible.

Follow Us

Quick Links

  • Featured
  • My Justice
  • News
  • Insights
  • Justice Explained
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy

 

  HPPJ Forum Login
Creative Commons Licence
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
No Result
View All Result
  • My Justice
  • News
  • Insights
  • Justice Explained
  • About Us

© 2018 Justice Hub

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Fill the forms bellow to register

*By registering into our website, you agree to the Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.
All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In

Login

Lost password?
This website uses cookies. By continuing to use this website you are giving consent to cookies being used. Visit our Privacy and Cookie Policy.

REPUBLISHING TERMS

You may republish this article online or in print under our Creative Commons license. You may not edit or shorten the text, you must attribute the article to Aeon and you must include the author’s name in your republication.

If you have any questions, please email nsharafa@gmail.com

License

Creative Commons License AttributionCreative Commons Attribution
(I)ncredibly (C)omplicated (J)argon – Croatia v Serbia