Documenta on Revision: Reconsidering Crimes is Important to Avoid Oblivion

The Association Documenta - Center for Dealing with the Past welcomes the announced submission of a request for revision of the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the lawsuit in which Bosnia and Herzegovina charged the former SR Yugoslavia, i.e., present-day Serbia, with aggression and genocide, and emphasizes that civil society considers the manner in which this is being discussed unacceptable, as stated by this association, reports Patria.

"For civil society throughout the former Yugoslavia, the way in which attempts to revise the judgment of the International Court of Justice in The Hague regarding the genocide lawsuit filed by Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia are being discussed is completely unacceptable. Only the Court, in any eventual proceedings, will assess whether the conditions for revision of the judgment have been met," Documenta points out.

However, for post-Yugoslav societies, the following preliminarily appears significant: Reactions to the attempt to revise the judgment start from the assumption that a new court proceeding would necessarily "lead to a deterioration of current inter-ethnic and interstate relations," and it is particularly concerning that some authorized representatives of the "international community" have joined such views, showing that even external factors are no longer able to maintain objectivity in approaching the situation in Southeast Europe, but are instead focusing on mere day-to-day political tactics.

So far, there have been no public reactions that, regardless of pragmatic considerations of who politically benefits or is harmed by the revision process, would indicate that reconsidering war crimes is important in order to avoid the worst that can happen after a war: its mystification, embellishment, along with the oblivion of crimes and, especially, victims, the Association's statement highlights.