University of Tuzla, Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Presudom Međunarodnog suda u Haagu u slučaju Bosne i Hercegovine
protiv Srbije i Crne Gore ustanovljeno je da je Srbija odgovorna za nesprečavanje
i nekažnjavanje zločina genocida učinjenog u Bosni i Hercegovini, tačnije u i oko
Srebrenice. Nakon donošenja presude, unutar šire javnosti pokrenuta je rasprava
o mogućem pokretanju revizije presude. U radu se razmatra da li je Bosna i
Hercegovina raspolagala s novim dokazima od „odlučujućeg” značaja za
pokretanje postupka revizije presude. Autor u tom smislu analizira presudu u
slučaju Bosna i Hercegovina protiv Srbije i Crne Gore. Također, autor navodi šta
je mogao biti cilj revizije presude, i koji „novi” dokazi su Bosni i Hercegovini
stojali na raspolaganju. Na kraju, autor zaključuje da Bosna i Hercegovina nije
raspolagala s činjenicom od „odlučujućeg” značaja za pokretanje postupka
revizije presude.
The Judgment of the International Court of Justice in The Hague in the
case of Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia and Montenegro established that
Serbia is responsible for non-preventing and not punishing the crime of genocide
committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina, more precisely in and around Srebrenica.
Following the Judgment, a discussion was launched within the general public on
the possible initiation of a revision of the Judgment. The paper discusses whether
Bosnia and Herzegovina had new evidence of “decisive” importance for
initiating a revision of the Judgment. In that sense, the author analyzes the
Judgment in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro. In
that sense, the author states what could have been the goal of the revision of the
Judgment, and what “new” evidence was available to Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Finally, the author concludes that Bosnia and Herzegovina did not have evidence
of “decisive” importance for initiating the revision of the Judgment.
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.