WHY WAS SERBIA ACQUITTED?

27/11/2016



The International Justice Court has decided that the Serbs could not be held responsible fort he massacre of Bosnia. The International Justice Court in The Hague, the greatest judicial organ of the United Nations stated that the Serbs could not be held responsible for the genocide committed during the war and killed at least 250 000 Bosnians systematically in Bosnia in 1990s. Judge Rosalyn Higgins, the Head of Justice Court concluded that especially what happened in Srebrenica was “genocide”, however stated that Serbia can not be held responsible for committing or contributing the genocide. Bosnia and Herzegovina was accusing Serbia for ethnic cleansing, by breaching the Geneva Conventions and killing its citizens. The Srebrenica Massacre that took place in 1995 was presented as evidence for the accusations. The United Nation had previously recognised the incidence during which the Serbian troops captured an area that was declared as a safe zone and killed eight thousand Muslims as genocide. According to the court council, Serbia breached the international law by not preventing the Srebrenica incidence, but it should not be sentenced for this. The judges said the Serbian leaders did not use their influences on the Serbian Army in Bosnia and rejected the defence that the leaders did not have such influence. The court knew Serbia could have prevented the genocide and it included this in their decision. But the power of the court was not enough to sentence Serbia. It was also stated that the Belgrade administration committed a crime by not punishing the criminals. It was a crime not to punish criminals, but Serbia should not be convicted although it committed a crime by supporting the criminals and by not stopping them intentionally. Judge Higgins and her commission confirmed that the Bosnians were killed systematically in some other places rather than Srebrenica too, but decided that those other incidents could not be qualified as genocide. According to the court, “they could not be absolutely sure that the perpetrators had an intention in that direction”. Now, let us take a look at the article 6 in which the definition of genocide is made according to Rome Statute of International Criminal Court: Genocide means to destroy, in whole or in part of a group or group’s members that could be identified different with their race, political views, religion, social statuses or any other identifying characteristic in large numbers and systematically for the interest of the destroyers. Rome Statute of International Criminal Court defines genocide in article 6. For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. According to the United Nations’ 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, an act should have the intention of destroying an identified group of people because of their nationality, race, ethnicity or religion. Didn’t those happen in Bosnia? What did the Serbian soldiers and militia who massacred civil Bosnians, burnt the villages to the ground, bombed the cities, raped women, killed children, set up concentration camps and received orders from Belgrade in a military order have in mind? The court was not sure about this. Maybe they were not thinking of committing genocide. The court is not sure. This decision should humiliate those who are Bosnians or Westerners. But the court knew that Bosnia was right and Serbia was not. Bosnia had accused Serbia with making ethnic cleansing plans for Muslim and Croatian populations in the region and Bosnia had evidence. There were witnesses and accused as well. There are legal issues that make the court’s business harder. Serbia was denying the genocide allegations. The bloodthirsty murderers of Slobodan Milosevic maybe commuted some crimes but what ever happened in Bosnia had nowhere near what the Nazis did during the World War II. What happened was a part of a civil war. Bosnia, who resisted the Serbian artillery with its heart due to an international weapon embargo, won the war anyway. Bosnia and Serbia would be accepted in the European Union one by one in the fyture and the incidents would be forgotten. The decision of the court maybe puzzled minds, but in fact, the court’s own mind was puzzled. If Serbia was sentenced, it would have to pay billions of dollars to Bosnia as compensation. If Serbia was sentenced, nationalists in government would get tougher and nobody would like to see that. If Belgrade lost its limited interest on the European Union, it would not be good at all. If Serbia was sentenced, most of the European Union members would refuse the accession of a nation and state that had committed crimes against humanity. The already limping enlargement wave should not face up with a new crisis. If Serbia was sentenced, the resistance in Kosovo could be strengthened. Belgrade needed to see a gesture from Brussels. Belgrade should be calm on this issue that is important for the future of the European Union but a sentence could shatter everything. Probably, only Kosovo itself was enough for such a decision. None of the designs on Iraq, Montenegro or Turkey would go on track without Kosovo. That is why, according to the court, there maybe was genocide but it took place in a single region. What happened in other regions was not genocide because nobody had asked the murderers what their intention was. There might have been genocide but the responsible ones were not around. How could those responsible ones hide then? Perhaps, not only Bosnians were terminated. The genocide did not target the law, either, because when the judges were giving their decisions, they neit5her thought about the Bosnians or the law. We are going through the most unfortunate era of the world history. The highest level court of the globe has taken such a decision in an era in which the civilisations are forced clashes and a global polarisation based on religion and ethnicity is experienced, on the anniversary of Hodjali Massacre.
porno izlegaziantep escort bayanbrazzers