Everything is the same, only he is gone

Ten years ago, the judgment of the International Court of Justice was delivered on the lawsuit of Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia for genocide.

Tomislav Nikolić and Aleksandar Vučić, the current president and prime minister of Serbia, were above besieged Sarajevo. They were in positions from which Sarajevans were killed and disabled in their homes and on the streets. People who threatened Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992 are still threatening a quarter of a century later. The question is, how did they get elected again and are ruling Serbia again? Is this the final truth about reconciliation and justice?

Vojislav Šešelj shot at Sarajevo. Karadžić brought the Russian poet Eduard Limonov above Sarajevo, whose shooting at the city and civilians the whole world could see. Vojislav Koštunica, a Serbian democrat, posed for photos above the besieged city with a machine gun in his hands. Ivica Dačić, Milošević's wartime chief of staff, is a partner of Nikolić and Vučić in the current government of the Republic of Serbia. Everything is the same, only he is gone.

Cadets of the Army of Serbia were brought above Sarajevo and trained artillery fire on the city there. The goal was to hit a specific window, to destroy someone's home. This was done as a demonstration exercise and for a school grade on an exam. Zoran Đinđić also came above besieged Sarajevo and turned a bull on a spit with the war criminal Karadžić. The problem was his statements above the battered and destroyed city. Đinđić was killed by the same hand that shot and killed in Sarajevo.

Milošević was tried, and officers of the Yugoslav Army, more precisely Serbia, were tried and convicted. The entire military and political leadership of the Republika Srpska was tried at the Tribunal in The Hague.

Krajišnik and Plavšić were convicted, with the latter admitting to the crimes, as were Karadžić, Brđanin, General Mladić, and his entire staff. A quarter of a century later, they are receiving awards for achievements in crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide. A monument is being erected to Niko Koljević. Did the judgment of the International Court of Justice bring justice and reconciliation to these areas, or is it treated as an irrelevant fact?

In July 2015, the Russian Federation vetoed the United Kingdom's Resolution in the UN Security Council, preventing a judicial ruling with a political act. Could they have done that according to human and divine laws? How is a political veto possible over a 'ius cogens' norm, which relates to genocide and is above all UN conventions and all law? Article 60 of the Statute states that "the judgments of the ICJ are final and without appeal." How, then, was a UN veto on the judgments of the "supreme court of the UN" possible? Due to the absolute disrespect of the 2007 judgment, is this revision of the judgment of the International Court of Justice more necessary today for Bosnia and Herzegovina?

We have seen how in the USA the Court and the law stand inviolably above the presidential decision. Where the law reigns, there is no room for politics. There was something unsustainable in that Russian denial of the World Court of Justice's decision. Should the Court of Justice have reacted to the UN Security Council at that time in the same way as American courts and judges reacted to their president's decision?

These days, the Ambassador of the Russian Federation to BiH, Petar Ivancov, convened a session of the PIC due to violations of the Constitution and the revision of the judgment. The Constitution of BiH and procedures have suddenly become more important than the judgment of the World Court of Justice. Was the Russian veto on the British Resolution on Srebrenica, which devalued the ICJ's Judgment, a destructive political decision and a disrespect and destruction of the "world's supreme court" and earthly law?

Has Republika Srpska, in any way, become a legal part of BiH in this quarter-century of peace? Or is it still just a place of one-national goals and one-national exclusivity. A place where the rights of others and different people are almost not respected. Where for years political leaders talk about secession, deny the existence of the state, and threaten conflicts.

Everyone refers to Article 61 of the Statute of the Court of Justice when they talk about the impossibility of revision, but no one mentions paragraph 3 of that article, according to which "the Court may make the opening of revision proceedings conditional on the execution of the judgment beforehand." This claim will be interpreted differently, but in no segment has that judgment been implemented, and today it is as if it does not exist. As if it is in some darkness and under dust, like judgments in the drawers of corrupt countries' courts.

Everything is the same, only he is gone.