Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T06:00:17.894Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia-Herzegovina v. Yugoslavia)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Peter H. F. Bekker  and
Paul C. Szasz
Peter H. F. Bekker
Affiliation:
Winthrop, Stimson, Putnam & Roberts
Paul C. Szasz
Affiliation:
New York University School of Law
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
International Decisions
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 91 , Issue 1 , January 1997 , pp. 121 - 126
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The voting on the six preliminary objections of Yugoslavia that are discussed below was as follows: (1) first, second and third objections: 14-1; (2) fifth objection: 11-4; and (3) sixth and seventh objections: 14-1. Yugoslavia withdrew its fourth preliminary objection. See infra note 7.

2 In his Order of July 23, 1996, the President of the Court fixed July 23, 1997, as the time limit for the filing of the Counter-Memorial of Yugoslavia.

3 Preliminary Objections, Judgment, para. 18 [hereinafter slip op.].

4 1951 ICJ Rep. 15, 23.

5 Slip op., paras. 21–23.

6 Id., para. 24.

7 Id., para. 25. Following the Dayton/Paris Agreement, Yugoslavia withdrew its fourth preliminary objection, which complained, inter alia, that Bosnia-Herzegovina “has been recognized in contravention of the rules of international law and that it has never been established in the territory and in the form in which it pretends to exist ever since its illegal declaration of independence.”

8 Id., paras. 25–26.

9 Id., para. 29.

10 Id., paras. 30–31.

11 Id., para. 31.

12 Id., para. 32.

13 Id., para. 34.

14 Id., para. 37.

15 Article 37 of the ICJ Statute states:

Whenever a treaty or convention in force provides for reference of a matter to a tribunal to have been instituted by the League of Nations, or to the Permanent Court of International Justice, the matter shall, as between the parties to the present Statute, be referred to the International Court of Justice.

16 Slip op., para. 38.

17 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Yugo.), Provisional Measures, 1993 ICJ Rep. 325, 341, para. 33.

18 Slip op., para. 39.

19 On March 20, 1993, Bosnia-Herzegovina submitted a request for the indication of provisional measures, pursuant to Article 41 of the ICJ Statute. In its written observations of April 1, 1993, relating to that request, Yugoslavia requested that the Court order provisional measures against Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Court indicated certain provisional measures in its Order of April 8, 1993, see 1993 ICJ Rep. 3. A new request was filed by Bosnia-Herzegovina on July 27, 1993. On August 10, 1993, Yugoslavia also submitted a request for the indication of provisional measures. On September 13, 1993, the Court reaffirmed the measures that it had indicated in its Order of April 8, 1993, see 1993 ICJ Rep. 325.

20 Slip op., para. 40.

21 Id., para. 43.

22 Id., para. 44.

23 The “Serbia Today” newspaper reported on October 4, 1996, that Presidents Milosevic and Izetbegovic, in a joint statement of October 3, 1996, had promised to refrain from any political and judicial acts not conducive to the development of friendly relations and cooperation between Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

24 See, e.g., those of the Bosnian and Croatian Permanent Representatives set out in UN Doc. A/47/474 (1992), and of the General Assembly itself in Resolution 48/88, para. 19 (Dec. 20, 1993). The Secretary-General’s responses to these objections appear, respectively, in UN Docs. A/47/485 (1992) and A/48/847 (1994).

25 See 1993 ICJ Rep. 3, 14, para. 18.