8/19/2019 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

1/2

 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia andMontenegro

Brief Fact Summary. Bosnia and Herzegovina (P brought suit against the !ederal "epublic of 

#ugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro ($ in the %nternational Court of &ustice in ')* on the

grounds of violations of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 

Genocide.

Synopsis of Rule of Law. +nder %nternational la,* the conduct of an- state organ is to be

considered an act of the state* therefore giving rise to the responsibilit- of the state if the

conduct constitutes a breach of an international obligation of the state.

Facts. he republics of Bosnia and Herzegovina (P* Croatia* Macedonia and Slovenia declared

independence ,hen the Socialist !ederal "epublic of #ugoslavia began to brea/ up in the earl-

'0s. this led Serbia and Montenegro to declare themselves the !ederal "epublic of #ugoslavia (!"# ($. A massacre ,as perpetrated b- Serbian forces on 1000 Bosnia Muslim

men of fighting age in a small village called Srebrenica in &ul- '2 during armed conflicts that

arose in '34'2 ,ithin Bosnia and Herzegovina (P. A suit ,as filed against the !"# (Serbia

and Montenegro ($ b- Bosnia and Herzegovina (P in ') in the %nternational Court of 

&ustice* claiming violations of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of 

Genocide* on the theor- that the !"# ($ ,as responsible for the actions of Serbian forces.

Issue. +nder %nternational la,* is the conduct if an- state organ considered an act of the state*

,hich can give rise to the responsibilit- of the state if the conduct constitutes a breach of an

international obligation of the state5

Held. (&udge not identified in caseboo/ e6cerpt. #es. +nder %nternational la,* the conduct of 

an- state organ is to be considered an act of the state* therefore giving rise to the responsibilit-

of the state if the conduct constitutes a breach of an international obligation of the state. his is

a rule of customar- international la, that ,as codified in Article 7 of the %8C Articles of State

responsibilit-.9o evidence sho,ed that the Serbian forces ,ere de :ure organs of !"# ($ and this case did

not sho, that the arm- of the !"# ($ too/ part in the massacres or that the political leaders of 

8/19/2019 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

2/2

the state had an- part of it. hough the !"# ($ ,as providing some sought of financial and

other support to the Serbian forces* this does not automaticall- ma/e them organs of the !"#

($.

 Also* no evidence ,as provided to prove that the Serbs ,ere under the effective control of !"#

($ ,hile conducting the massacre at Srebrenica. his can onl- impl- that those ,ho ,ere

responsible for the massacre ,ere not organs of the !"# ($ and the !"# ($ cannot ta/e

responsibilit- under international la, for the massacres.

Discussion. he brief for the first part of this case* interpreting the re;uirements of the

Genocide Convention* ,hich is e6cerpted on page '