Stahn, Agius, Brammertz, & Rohan: Legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: A Multidisciplinary Approach

Carsten Stahn (Leiden Univ. - Law), Carmel Agius (President, International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals), Serge Brammertz (Chief Prosecutor, International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals), & Colleen Rohan (Bedford Row) have published Legacies of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: A Multidisciplinary Approach (Oxford Univ. Press 2020). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) is one the pioneering experiments in international criminal justice. It has left a rich legal, institutional, and non-judicial legacy. This edited collection provides a broad perspective on the contribution of the tribunal to law, memory, and justice. It explores some of the accomplishments, challenges, and critiques of the ICTY, including its less visible legacies.

Advertisement

The book analyses different sites of legacy: the expressive function of the tribunal, its contribution to the framing of facts, events, and narratives of the conflict in the former Yugoslavia, and investigative and experiential legacies. It also explores lesser known aspects of legal practice (such as defence investigative ethics, judgment drafting, contempt cases against journalists, interpretation and translation), outreach, approaches to punishment and sentencing, the tribunals' impact on domestic legal systems, and ongoing debates over impact and societal reception. The volume combines voices from inside the tribunal with external perspectives to elaborate the rich history of the ICTY, which continues to be written to this day.

Orentlicher: Memories of Judgment: Constructing the ICTY's Legacies

Diane Orentlicher (American Univ. - Washington College of Law) has posted Memories of Judgment: Constructing the ICTY's Legacies (Washington University Global Studies Law Review, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Recent interdisciplinary scholarship helps explain why the work of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) did not dispel denialism about the nature of, and responsibility for, mass atrocities in Bosnia and elsewhere in the former Yugoslavia. Some studies suggest that efforts to counter denialism might even have a backfire effect, hardening the beliefs of committed nationalists. This research raises the unsettling question whether, at least in some circumstances, efforts to counter denialist narratives could instead lead those who espouse them to turn up the volume of toxic discourses. This article suggests that new social science research can productively be mined to develop effective strategies for persuading people to align their beliefs with facts rather than falsehoods. At the same time, the implications of research identifying a “backfire effect” should not be overstated, as more recent studies suggest this risk has been overstated. In addition, the author argues that, particularly since our understanding of social dynamics surrounding the entrenchment and abatement of denialism remains poor, we do well to honor and support the agency of survivors in identifying worthwhile processes of knowledge production and meaning-making in their societies. The article emphasizes as well that knowledge and memory-making processes are profoundly shaped by the political and social contexts in which they unfold. Accordingly, much of the work necessary to end denialism must be done in the realm of politics.

Sterio & Scharf: The Legacy of Ad Hoc Tribunals in International Criminal Law

Milena Sterio (Cleveland-Marshall College of Law) & Michael Scharf (Case Western Reserve Univ. - Law) have published The Legacy of Ad Hoc Tribunals in International Criminal Law: Assessing the ICTY's and the ICTR's Most Significant Legal Accomplishments (Cambridge Univ. Press 2019). The table of contents is here. Here's the abstract:

In the post-Nuremberg era two of the most important developments in international criminal law are the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). Created through UN Security Council resolutions, with specific mandates to prosecute those responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law, the ICTY and the ICTR played crucial roles in the development of international criminal law. Through a series of chapters written by leading authorities in the field, The Legacy of Ad Hoc Tribunals in International Criminal Law addresses the history of the ICTY and the ICTR, and the important aspects of the tribunals' accomplishments. From examining the groundwork laid by the ICTY and the ICTR for greater international attention to crimes against humanity to the establishment of the International Criminal Courts, this volume provides a comprehensive overview of the impact and lasting roles of these tribunals.

Orentlicher: Some Kind of Justice: The ICTY's Impact in Bosnia and Serbia

Diane Orentlicher (American Univ. - Law) has published Some Kind of Justice: The ICTY's Impact in Bosnia and Serbia (Oxford Univ. Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

Through an in-depth case study, Some Kind of Justice offers fresh insights about two questions now the subject of robust debate: What goals can we plausibly assign to international criminal tribunals? What factors determine the impact of distant courts on societies that have seen vicious violence? The book offers a timely and original account of how an international war crimes tribunal affects local communities, and the factors that shape its changing impact over time. It explores the influence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), launched in 1993 by the UN Security Council at the height of ethnic conflict accompanying the breakup of Yugoslavia, in two countries directly affected by its work. One, Bosnia-Herzegovina, experienced soaring levels of ethnic violence, culminating in the 1995 genocide in Srebrenica. The wartime government of the other country, Serbia, plunged the region into conflict. Scheduled to close at the end of 2017, the ICTY is the longest-running war crimes tribunal in history, and thus offers an incomparably rich case study of how a Nuremberg-inspired tribunal influences societies emerging from ruinous violence.

King & Meernik: The Witness Experience: Testimony at the ICTY and Its Impact

Kimi Lynn King (Univ. of North Texas) & James David Meernik (Univ. of North Texas) have published The Witness Experience: Testimony at the ICTY and Its Impact (Cambridge Univ. Press 2018). Here's the abstract:

This book provides the most comprehensive and scientific assessment to date of what it means to appear before war crimes tribunals. This ground-breaking analysis, conducted with the cooperation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Victims and Witnesses Section, examines the positive and negative impact that testifying has on those who bear witness to the horrors of war by shedding new light on the process. While most witnesses have positive feelings and believe they contributed to international justice, there is a small but critical segment of witnesses whose security, health, and well-being are adversely affected after testifying. The witness experience is examined holistically, including witness' perceptions of their physical and psychological well-being. Because identity (gender and ethnicity) and war trauma were central to the ICTY's mandate and the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia, the research explores in-depth how they have impacted the most critical stakeholders of any transitional justice mechanism: the witnesses.

Bassiouni: Investigating War Crimes in the Former Yugoslavia War 1992-1994

M. Cherif Bassiouni (DePaul Univ. - Law) has published Investigating War Crimes in the Former Yugoslavia War 1992-1994 (Intersentia 2017). Here's the abstract:

Advertisement

Following World War Two, the progress towards international accountability and international criminal justice came to a halt as a result of the Cold War. But only three years since the end of the Cold War and forty-five years after the post-WWII prosecutions, the international community was forced to face the ethnic tensions and civil war tearing apart the republics that once comprised the former Yugoslavia.

United Nations Security Council Resolution 780 (1992), appointed a Commission of Experts to investigate war crimes and crimes against humanity amounting to violations of international humanitarian law in the territory of the former Yugoslavia and it was expected that the Commission would be the historic link to the post-WWII experiences. Despite the Commission’s mandate being the broadest of its kind since Nuremberg, those who opposed its work sought to hamper its success through bureaucratic and political chicanery, including the failure to fund the Commission’s work.

The investigation into the conflict is detailed in this book including the uncovering of 187 mass graves, the interviewing of 223 victims of rape and sexual assault, and the utilization of prison camps and mass expulsion for the purpose of ethnic cleansing. Along with the author’s personal insights and insider anecdotes on the conflict, this book highlights the continuing need for the pursuit of accountability and international criminal justice in a world of thriving bureaucracy and realpolitik.

The Commission broke the glass ceiling of realpolitik by fighting the hard battle that lead to the success of its mandate and to the establishment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. This timely work reminds us all that indeed the past is prologue.

Nouwen & Becker: Tadić v. Prosecutor: International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 1995

Sarah Nouwen (Univ. of Cambridge - Law) & Michael A Becker (Univ. of Cambridge - Law) have posted Tadić v. Prosecutor: International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 1995 (in Landmark Cases in Public International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Forthcoming in Landmark Cases in Public International Law (Hart, 2017), this chapter investigates the ‘landmark’ status of the decision of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in Tadić v Prosecutor (1995). The chapter differentiates between two types of landmarks: signposts for other travelers, indicating the direction to be followed, or high-water points, relics of a particular moment in time. This chapter considers the significance of the Tadić case in both senses of landmark. After reflecting upon the case as a matter of diplomatic and legal history, it analyses the interlocutory appeal decided by the Appeals Chamber on 2 October 1995 as a landmark with respect to three areas of international law: general international law, international humanitarian law and international criminal law. It ends with a perspective on the significance of the interlocutory appeal for legal reasoning in international law. It concludes that in some areas the Tadić Interlocutory Appeal has been a signpost (for instance, its validation of the power of the Security Council to pursue the project of international criminal law and developments in international humanitarian law, particularly the diminishing relevance of the distinction between international and non-international armed conflict), while in others more a high-water mark (for example, as a case study in judicial law-making and legal reasoning that invokes natural law or appeals to morality to overcome perceived shortcomings in the positive law).

Tortora: The Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals: A Unique Model and Some of Its Distinctive Challenges

Giorgia Tortora (Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals) has posted an ASIL Insight on The Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals: A Unique Model and Some of Its Distinctive Challenges.

Call for Submissions: ICTY Celebrities: War Criminals after Trial and Their Homecoming

The International Criminal Justice Review has issued a call for submissions for a special issue on "ICTY Celebrities: War Criminals after Trial and Their Homecoming." The call is here.

ICTR, ICTY, and MICT Case Law Database

The Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals (MICT) has launched a new version of its Case Law Database to further promote and facilitate access to the jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), and the MICT. The database is here.

Rigney: Postcard from the ICTY: Examining International Criminal Law's Narratives

Sophie Rigney (Univ. of Melbourne - Law) has posted Postcard from the ICTY: Examining International Criminal Law's Narratives (in International Law's Objects: Emergence, Encounter and Erasure Through Object and Image, Jessie Hohmann & Daniel Joyce eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

This chapter examines a postcard which is readily available at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. As an object of international criminal law, the postcard reveals a great deal about the aims of international criminal law, and the concomitant image of international criminal law. I argue that the postcard demonstrates international criminal law’s particular preoccupation with two aims: ending impunity, and providing a meaningful voice for victims. I also examine the postcard as an object that is used in the branding and marketing of international criminal law. In particular, I examine the claims to end impunity and to provide a place for victims as statements to market the ICTY and international criminal law. But why does an object designed to ‘market’ an international criminal tribunal use language and imagery that suggests guilt? What is the effect of this? And what does the placement of the victim’s handcuffs and the accused’s handcuffs tell us about the place of the victim and the accused in these trials? I argue that these aspects of the postcard are problematic. As a marketing technique, this postcard succeeds in promoting particular aspects of international criminal law – but in doing so, it also manipulates (and reinforces) unhelpful tropes of good versus evil, of ‘deserving’ victimhood, and of conviction as a core component of international criminal law. The postcard and the handcuffs provide a place to critically analyse the system of international criminal law, and the stories it tells about its aspirations and operations.

Hayashi & Bailliet: The Legitimacy of International Criminal Tribunals

Nobuo Hayashi (Universitetet i Oslo - PluriCourts) & Cecilia M. Bailliet (Universitetet i Oslo - Law) have published The Legitimacy of International Criminal Tribunals (Cambridge Univ. Press 2017). Contents include:

• Nobuo Hayashi, Cecelia M. Bailliet & Joanna Nicholson, Introduction
• Larry May & Shannon Fyfe, The legitimacy of international criminal tribunals
• Silje Aambø Langvatn & Theresa Squatrito, Conceptualising and measuring the legitimacy of international criminal tribunals
• Sergey Vasiliev, Between international criminal justice and injustice: theorising legitimacy
• Asad Kiyani, Legitimacy, legality, and the possibility of a pluralist international criminal law
• Athanasios Chouliaras, The legitimacy and effectiveness of international criminal tribunals: a criminal policy perspective
• Rogier Bartels, Legitimacy and ICC jurisdiction following Security Council referrals: conduct on the territory of non-Party States and the legality principle
• Nobuo Hayashi, Is the Yugoslav Tribunal guilty of hyper-humanising international humanitarian law?
• Jakob V H. Holtermann, 'One of the challenges that can plausibly be raised against them'? On the role of truth in debates about the legitimacy of international criminal tribunals
• Timothy William Waters, Hidden legitimacy: crafting judicial narratives in the shadow of secrecy at a war crimes tribunal - a speculation
• Ignaz Stegmiller, Positive complementarity and legitimacy - is the International Criminal Court shifting from judicial restraint towards intervention?
• Dorothy Makaza, African supranational criminal jurisdiction: one step towards ending impunity or two steps backwards for international criminal justice?
• Martin Wählisch, Legitimacy defects and legal flaws of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon: dilemmas of the 'peace through justice' theorem
• Damien Rogers, Prosecutors' opening statements: the rhetoric of law, politics and silent war
• Barbora Hola, Jessica Kelder & Joris van Wijk, Effectiveness of international criminal tribunals: empirical assessment of rehabilitation as sentencing goal
• Stephen Smith Cody, Procedural justice, legitimacy, and victim participation in Uganda
• Victor Peskin, Things fall apart: battles of legitimation and the politics of noncompliance and African sovereignty from the Rwanda tribunal to the ICC
• Mistale Taylor, Financing lady justice: how the funding systems of ad hoc tribunals could lend themselves to the possibility of judicial bias
• Kjersti Lohne, Claiming authority in the name of the other: human rights NGOs and the ICC

Milanovic: Courting Failure: When are International Criminal Courts Likely to Be Believed by Local Audiences?

Marko Milanovic (Univ. of Nottingham - Law) has posted Courting Failure: When are International Criminal Courts Likely to Be Believed by Local Audiences? (in The Oxford Handbook of International Criminal Law, Kevin Jon Heller, Frederic Megret, Sarah Nouwen, Jens David Ohlin, & Darryl Robinson eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

The primary role of international criminal courts and tribunals is to punish those deserving of punishment. But beyond dispensing individualized justice, the question still remains whether such tribunals can also help deeply traumatized and divided societies heal on a more fundamental level. To do that, the factual accounts these tribunals produce – about the guilt of specific individuals for specific crimes, but also about the systemic nature and causes of these crimes – at least at some point need to be accepted by their local audiences. Crimes need to be believed to be remedied.

Some courts, like the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, have failed in this broader task. But is every international criminal court or tribunal similarly doomed to fail? Can we at least with some measure of reliability predict when such failure is likely? Drawing on research in social psychology and on a series of opinion polls in the former Yugoslavia, as well as on an analysis of the successes and failures of the Nuremberg, Tokyo, Rwanda, Sierra Leone and Cambodia tribunals, this chapter puts forward such a general predictive theory.

The chapter thus argues that whether an international criminal tribunal and its account of responsibility for committed atrocities will be trusted by local populations depends little on the quality of the tribunal’s work, the fairness of its procedures, or the scope of its outreach programme. It depends mostly on whether the tribunal’s outputs – decisions on whom to prosecute, convict, or acquit – align with what these populations want to hear in their particular context and at that particular time. Psychological mechanisms of identity-protective reasoning can easily lead to the widespread rejection of the relevant tribunal and its factual account. Whether this will in fact happen depends largely on one variable – the reaction of dominant local political, media and intellectual elites. The likelihood and potency of an adverse reaction can, in turn, be predicted by reference to four factors: (1) the degree of continuing group cohesion and polarization; (2) the degree of elite continuity in terms of both personnel and ideology; (3) the degree of authoritarianism in the relevant society; and, most importantly (4) the degree of threat that the work of the tribunal is perceived to pose to the power and influence of these elites.

AJIL Unbound Symposium: The International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Broadening the Debate

AJIL Unbound has posted a symposium on "The International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Broadening the Debate," which extends the discussion of the tribunals that appeared in AJIL's April issue. The symposium includes an introduction by Eyal Benvenisti and Sarah M.H. Nouwen and contributions by Larissa van den Herik, Kelly-Jo Bluen, Karen Engle, Kirsten Campbell, Kenneth A. Rodman, Veronika Bílková, Bing Bing Jia, David Luban, and Samuel Moyn.

Robinson & MacNeil: The Tribunals and the Renaissance of International Criminal Law: Three Themes

Darryl Robinson (Queen's Univ., Canada - Law) & Gillian MacNeil (Queen's Univ., Canada - Law) have posted The Tribunals and the Renaissance of International Criminal Law: Three Themes (American Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

In this contribution to the AJIL agora on the legacy of the Yugoslavia and Rwanda Tribunals, we examine the Tribunals’ impact on substantive international criminal law. We highlight three themes permeating the Tribunals’ transformative influence on the law: updating the law to reflect contemporary values and context; adapting to collective dimensions of the crimes; and engaging with fundamental principles.

In our conclusion, we situate the Tribunals within the overall trajectory of international criminal law, and show how their design left a distinctive imprimatur on the law. While questions have been raised about some expansive doctrines and the legality principle, it may also be true that some element of rupture was essential for the revitalization of international criminal law.

Hiéramente & Schneider: The Defence in International Criminal Trials

Mayeul Hiéramente & Patricia Schneider have published The Defence in International Criminal Trials: Observations on the Role of the Defence at the ICTY, ICTR and ICC (Nomos 2016). Here's the abstract:

• Benjamin Ferencz, Preface
• Heiko Ahlbrecht, Vorwort
• Colleen Rohan, The Defence in International Criminal Trials: Important Actor or Necessary Evil?
• Mayeul Hiéramente, Die Deutungshoheit im Gerichtssaal oder „Die Bändigung des Ungeheuers“ Anmerkungen zum sich selbst verteidigenden Angeklagten
• Philipp Graebke, Die Verteidigung im Verfahren gegen Adolf Eichmann
• Julia Gebhard, Arguing Human Rights from the Bench? How Judges in International Criminal Courts Perceive International Human Rights Law
• Marie O’Leary, Compelling Fair Trials: The Necessity of Effective Court Powers to Ensure a Defendant’s Right “to examine, or have examined, the witnesses against him or her”
• Masha Fedorova, Disclosure of Information as an Instrument Ensuring Equality of Arms in International Criminal Proceedings
• Eleni Chaitidou & Elisa Hoven, The Person’s Liberty at Stake – A Tour d’Horizon on the Rights of the Arrested Person under the Rome Statute
• Sally Alexandra Longworth, Sentencing at the International Criminal Court
• Isabel Düsterhöft & Dominic Kennedy, How to Manage the Defence – Experiences from the ADC-ICTY
• Philipp Müller, Promoting Justice between Independence and Institutional Constraints: The Role of the Office of the Public Counsel of the Defence at the ICC
• Mayeul Hiéramente & Patricia Schneider, Kein faires Verfahren ohne effektive Verteidigung – Zusammenfassende Bemerkungen zu einem vergessenen Akteur der internationalen Strafjustiz und Ausblick

Brammertz & Jarvis: Prosecuting Conflict-Related Sexual Violence at the ICTY

Serge Brammertz (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia) & Michelle Jarvis (International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia) have published Prosecuting Conflict-Related Sexual Violence at the ICTY (Oxford Univ. Press 2016). Here's the abstract:

Although sexual violence directed at both females and males is a reality in many on-going conflicts throughout the world today, accountability for the perpetrators of such violence remains the exception rather than the rule. While awareness of the problem is growing, more effective approaches are urgently needed for the investigation and prosecution of conflict-related sexual violence crimes. Upon its establishment in 1993, the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) began the challenging task of prosecuting the perpetrators of conflict-related sexual violence crimes, alongside the many other atrocities committed during the conflicts in the former Yugoslavia.

This book documents the experiences, achievements, challenges, and fundamental insights of the OTP in prosecuting conflict-related sexual violence crimes at the ICTY over the past two decades. It draws on an extensive dossier of OTP documentation, court filings, trial exhibits, testimony, ICTY judgements, and other materials, as well as interviews with current and former OTP staff members. The authors provide a unique analytical perspective on the obstacles faced in prioritizing, investigating, and prosecuting conflict-related sexual violence crimes. While ICTY has made great stridesin developing international criminal law in this area, this volumeexposes the pressing need for determined and increasingly sophisticated strategies in order to overcome the ongoing obstacles in prosecuting conflict-related sexual violence crimes. The book presents concrete recommendations to inform future work being done at the national and international levels, including that of the International Criminal Court, international investigation commissions, and countries developing transitional justice processes. It provides an essential resource for investigators and criminal lawyers, human rights fact-finders, policy makers, rule of law experts, and academics.

Milanovic: Establishing the Facts About Mass Atrocities: Accounting for the Failure of the ICTY to Persuade Target Audiences

Marko Milanovic (Univ. of Nottingham - Law) has posted Establishing the Facts About Mass Atrocities: Accounting for the Failure of the ICTY to Persuade Target Audiences (Georgetown Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

In an earlier piece, forthcoming in the American Journal of International Law, I discussed the findings of a series of public opinion surveys in the former Yugoslavia probing the attitudes of the respondent populations regarding the mass atrocities committed during the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s, such as the Srebrenica genocide. That article concluded that the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the first modern, post-Nuremberg international criminal jurisdiction, failed to persuade the target audiences in the former Yugoslavia that the findings in its judgments are true. The surveys show that denialism is widespread and governed by ethnic bias – for example, only 10% of the Serbian population accept the facts about the Srebrenica genocide, the greatest crime committed in Europe since World War II, as they were established by the ICTY.

While that companion piece addressed the empirical, “what” question, this one looks at the equally, if not even more important, “why” question – why has the ICTY proven to be so ineffectual in inducing attitude change? In answering this question I proceed primarily from the theoretical standpoint of social psychology, enabling a more sophisticated understanding of how the target audiences in the former Yugoslavia have so persistently resisted internalizing the ICTY’s factual findings. I argue that the causes of the ICTY’s ineffectiveness are complex, turning on an interplay between subjective and objective limitations on individuals’ processing of information about war crimes, limitations that are largely independent of the quality of the Tribunal’s own work.

For example, average citizens normally lack any immediate experience of the event, which necessitates the mediation of information by third parties, e.g. the media and political and intellectual elites, while they similarly lack the time, expertise and resources to rigorously examine the information by themselves. Remoteness from the event also facilitates the avoidance of revising previously acquired beliefs about the event, for instance through discrediting certain sources of information, such as the ICTY. Crucially, ethnic nationalism continues to play a central role in the politics of the region, providing key political actors with both the opportunity and the incentive to engage in the deliberate manipulation of the (already heavily mediated) information that citizens receive about specific atrocities and the ICTY. These objective limitations then feed into the numerous cognitive biases which shape the processing of any information about mass atrocities, essentially pushing individuals (at an unconscious level) to believe what they want to believe and reason about the ICTY and its work in a way that is most protective of their own sense of identity.

The article thus argues that even had the ICTY been run perfectly – and it was not – it would not have been able to overcome the many barriers insulating the peoples of the former Yugoslavia from the positive effects of its work. Operating in a bias-driven downward spiral, the more it challenged established nationalist narratives the more it generated distrust, and hence the less likely it was that it would be believed. In other words, as a mechanism of transitional justice the Tribunal was from the outset doomed to fail. Valuable lessons can, however, be learned from that failure, and not every other international criminal court and tribunal will necessarily find itself in the same unenviable position.

Milanovic: The Impact of the ICTY on the Former Yugoslavia: An Anticipatory Post-Mortem

Marko Milanovic (Univ. of Nottingham - Law) has posted The Impact of the ICTY on the Former Yugoslavia: An Anticipatory Post-Mortem (American Journal of International Law, forthcoming). Here's the abstract:

Has the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia persuaded target populations that the findings in its judgments are true? To answer that question, foundational for transitional justice processes, the article discusses a series of public opinion surveys in Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia and Kosovo. The detail and amount of data obtained through these surveys provide an unprecedented level of insight into the reception of factual determinations by international criminal tribunals by target audiences in post-conflict societies.

The surveys show that denialism and revisionism are rampant in the former Yugoslavia. For example, twenty years on, barely one-fifth of the Bosnian Serb population believe that any crime (let alone genocide) happened in Srebrenica, while two-fifths say that they never even heard of any such crime. The acceptance levels for many other serious crimes are in the single digits. They also demonstrate a strong relationship between the respondents’ ethnicity, their perception of the ICTY’s bias against members of their own group, and their distrust in the ICTY and in its findings, which increases the more the ICTY challenges the group’s dominant internal narratives.

This article tries to answer the “what” question – what was the impact of the ICTY on the attitudes of the peoples of the former Yugoslavia towards specific crimes that were the object of its judgments? At best, the answer to that question is that the ICTY failed to persuade the relevant target populations that the findings in its judgments are true.This is simply a fact, as established by the best evidence we have available. Equally important, but more open and contestable, is the “why” question – why has the ICTY proven to be so ineffectual in inducing attitude change? I address this “why” question in detail in a companion article forthcoming in the Georgetown Journal of International Law.

Note: This is a pre-print draft that has not been copy-edited by the AJIL.

Ravanides: Srebrenica at 20: The ICTY Issues Long-Due Final Convictions

Christos Ravanides (Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals) has posted an ASIL Insight on Srebrenica at 20: The ICTY Issues Long-Due Final Convictions.