Genocidal Intent and Transitional Justice in Bosnia

Abstract

Convictions for genocide in relation to the war in Bosnia (1992–1995) provide the strongest sense of justice-having-been-done to victims and their families. But at the ICTY, the reputation of which has been marred by a series of controversies, the few perpetrators found guilty of genocide were involved in the Srebrenica massacres of July 1995. Other courts have convicted individuals from a range of different locations (and periods) in the war, giving arguably a more complete sense of justice to victims, and a more accurate contribution to the historical record. It is widely perceived that the Genocide Convention has been narrowly interpreted. As most genocides do not result in total destruction, what counts as “part” of a group, especially when combined with other acts, is a key issue explored here. Two cases (outside Srebrenica) in which genocide indictees were not held responsible for genocide are examined, with the Jelisic case, involving a foot-soldier of genocide, the main focus for critical analysis. Reflection on the implications for Bosnian society are given in conclusion.