The verdict of the International Court of Justice on Serbian issue displayed the limits of the international law

PanARMENIAN.Net - The verdict of the International Court of Justice in the Hague, according to which Serbia doesn't carry any direct responsibility for the genocide committed during the war in Bosnia, has given rise to a number of questions, one of the most important among which is; who was to blame for the slaughter of the Bosnian Muslims? The Court admitted only one fact of the genocide in Bosnia during the interethnic conflict of 1992-95, that is the slaughter of the 8 thousand Muslim men and male children committed by Bosnian Serbs in the city of Srebrenica in 1995.

But it must be admitted, that the International Court of Justice in the Hague has become a very popular place for settling old and new accounts. Most likely Serbia really wasn't guilty; there was war, and who knows who really slaughtered those 8 thousand Bosnian Muslims? However the Court noticed that the Serbian Government didn't do its best to prevent the tragedy. Naturally, after the verdict was announced spiritual leaders of the Bosnian Muslims expressed their disappointment over the decision of the International Court of Justice in the Hague. The Times writes; "The positive side of the ten years' hearings was that the relatives of the victims to speak from international platforms, however the Court didn't have any chances to read the verdict of guilty from the very beginning and moreover to administer the measure of punishment. The verdict on Serbian issue displayed the limits of the international law."

This entire story may refer to Armenia as well. As it is known, Turkey is considering the opportunity to appeal to the International Court of Justice in the Hague regarding the issue of the Armenian Genocide. The Minister of Turkish Foreign Affairs Abdullah Gul announced about it. According to him diplomats are in retirement, Turkish and foreign "trustees" are carrying out detailed study of the issue. The article published in Milliyet which is entitled "Turkish Historical Course" states that the Turkish Government is "developing new policy" regarding "the confirmation" of the Armenian Genocide, which follows the sentence about establishing a committee of scholars.

The idea of Turkey's appeal to the International Court of Justice is not fresh, and its initiator is the Turkish diplomat Gunduz Aktan, who has been appointed the Turkish Ambassador to different European Structures. According to Ruben Safrastyan, Director of Department of Turkish Studies at Institute of Oriental Studies, Armenian National Academy of Sciences, there were two different Turkish policies developed towards the issue of the Armenian Genocide. "They were going to continue implementing the denial policy or to appeal to the International Court of Justice, mentioning that the Armenians in any case will not be able to prove that the events of 1915 can ever be qualified as Genocide. The decision was made on the highest level by the Turkish General Stuff", he mentioned. It should be mentioned that Aktan is one of the most unyielding Turkish politicians in this issue and as a member of Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Committee he has always spoken against the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

However it is very unlikely that Turkey will have the courage to appeal to the Hague Court. Perhaps Turkey will manage to give proves against the massacre committed in the years of World War I, but telegrams by Minister of Home Affairs Taleat Pasha regarding "the final decision of the Armenian issue" overbalance all the rest.

International Court of Justice is a higher judicial organ for settling different disputes between UN Member States. Its meetings have been held in the Peace Palace in the Hague since 1946. It is composed of 15 judges elected to nine year terms. If one of the parties doesn't carry out the Court's decision, the other party may appeal to the UN Security Council. All the decisions made by the International Court of Justice are to be carried out, are considered final and are not subject to any appeal.