Prevention of Genocide & State Responsibility
- Created by: bethbladen96
- Created on: 17-05-19 17:23
View mindmap
- Bosnia and Herzegovina v Serbia (2007)
- Srebrenican massacre against Bosnians
- Could gain compensation from ICJ.
- Civil liability - required to pay compensation
- Could gain compensation from ICJ.
- Prevention of Genocide and State responsibility
- Art. 1 GC
- Contracting parties confirm obligation to prevent and punish
- ICJ
- Art. IX GC
- Disputes between contracting parties - interpretation, application, fulfilment of convention submitted to ICJ at request of dispute parties
- Art. 1 GC
- Contracting parties confirm obligation to prevent and punish
- Art. IX GC
- State responsibility
- Art. 58 ILC Articles on SR
- Article 2(4) ICC Statute
- No provision of individual crim. responsibility shall affect state responsibility under IL
- Interplay SR & IR
- Reliance on facts established by ICTY
- Through attribution - Bosnian Serb forces complicity in gen
- Art. 16 draft articles on SR
- Organs unaware gen. about to be committed
- Bosnia v Serbia - relied on ICTY evidence
- Organs unaware gen. about to be committed
- Art. 16 draft articles on SR
- Through attribution - Bosnian Serb forces complicity in gen
- Reliance on facts established by ICTY
- Attribution
- 'effective control' (ICJ) v. 'overall control (ICTY) fragmentation?
- If state controls groups - US controls armed groups in Nicaragua - can US be held accountable?
- If test is met - conduct of some groups is attributable
- ICTY used own test
- No commission of genocide - no direct state responsibility
- Complicity?
- No commission of genocide - no direct state responsibility
- If state controls groups - US controls armed groups in Nicaragua - can US be held accountable?
- 'effective control' (ICJ) v. 'overall control (ICTY) fragmentation?
- Difference SR & ICR
- ICTY - test - determining nature of conflict
- ICTY - test - too broad for SR
- Obligations under GC
- Obligation to prevent - where the state has failed
- Serbia was responsible
- did not cooperate with ICTY
- Failure to prevent and punish - in brach of GC
- did not cooperate with ICTY
- Serbia was responsible
- Art. 6 - states have to be active, try or hand to int'l tribunal
- obligation to punish = dormant
- Obligation to prevent - where the state has failed
- Serbia
- Key differences between state responsibility & individual crim responsibility
- usual remedy for SR: reparation, restitution,compensation
- did not comply w GC
- Key differences between state responsibility & individual crim responsibility
- Art. 1 GC
- Srebrenican massacre against Bosnians
- Gen = crime under int'l law in peace or war
- No provision saying ICJ has power to deal with intra state disputes
- Prevention of Genocide and State responsibility
- ICJ
- Art. IX GC
- Disputes between contracting parties - interpretation, application, fulfilment of convention submitted to ICJ at request of dispute parties
- Art. IX GC
- State responsibility
- Art. 58 ILC Articles on SR
- Article 2(4) ICC Statute
- No provision of individual crim. responsibility shall affect state responsibility under IL
- Interplay SR & IR
- Reliance on facts established by ICTY
- Through attribution - Bosnian Serb forces complicity in gen
- Art. 16 draft articles on SR
- Organs unaware gen. about to be committed
- Bosnia v Serbia - relied on ICTY evidence
- Organs unaware gen. about to be committed
- Art. 16 draft articles on SR
- Through attribution - Bosnian Serb forces complicity in gen
- Reliance on facts established by ICTY
- Attribution
- 'effective control' (ICJ) v. 'overall control (ICTY) fragmentation?
- If state controls groups - US controls armed groups in Nicaragua - can US be held accountable?
- If test is met - conduct of some groups is attributable
- ICTY used own test
- No commission of genocide - no direct state responsibility
- Complicity?
- No commission of genocide - no direct state responsibility
- If state controls groups - US controls armed groups in Nicaragua - can US be held accountable?
- 'effective control' (ICJ) v. 'overall control (ICTY) fragmentation?
- Difference SR & ICR
- ICTY - test - determining nature of conflict
- ICTY - test - too broad for SR
- Obligations under GC
- Obligation to prevent - where the state has failed
- Serbia was responsible
- did not cooperate with ICTY
- Failure to prevent and punish - in brach of GC
- did not cooperate with ICTY
- Serbia was responsible
- Art. 6 - states have to be active, try or hand to int'l tribunal
- obligation to punish = dormant
- Obligation to prevent - where the state has failed
- Serbia
- Key differences between state responsibility & individual crim responsibility
- usual remedy for SR: reparation, restitution,compensation
- did not comply w GC
- Key differences between state responsibility & individual crim responsibility
- ICJ
Comments
No comments have yet been made