The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: Organizational and Legal Foundations of its Activities

In the final period of its existence, the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia became a victim of the clash of the economic and political interests of the republics within it. The former constituent parts of the federation, no longer wishing to remain within a single state, sought to achieve independence by all available means. As a result, the Balkan «powder keg» ignited with renewed force: the Serbs defended the right to live together under one roof, the Croats sought to establish new arrangements in their own country, and the Bosnians found themselves divided among three quasi-state entities. The reaction of the international community was severe. On 23 May 1993, the United Nations Security Council adopted a resolution establishing an ad hoc international tribunal tasked with condemning those responsible for violations of international humanitarian law. Grandly proclaimed the «heir to Nuremberg», it was expected to adopt the principles of international criminal justice developed by its predecessor and to mark a new stage in the evolution of international tribunals. In practice, however, it became clear that the Tribunal had been created with numerous shortcomings: legal gaps emerged that the judges were forced to fill on their own; the proceedings lasted a total of 25 years and, in effect, continue to this day; and the legality of the Tribunal’s establishment appeared questionable in the eyes of many scholars. In this article, the author examines the historical and geopolitical circumstances in which the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia was created and attempts to offer independent answers to the controversial issues of international law involved.

1. Bildt K. Has Bosnia become a lesson for Europe?: Conclusions for European foreign policy. International Politik. 1997;7:7-13. (In Russ.).

2. Gruzdev IS. Prerequisites and reasons for the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Author’s Abstract. Cand. Sci. (History) Diss. Moscow: 2001. (In Russ.).

3. Guskova EYu. Slovenia. Path to self-reliance. Documents. Moacow: Indrik Publ.; 2001. (In Russ.).

4. Kostenko NI. Theoretical problems of the formation and development of international criminal justice. Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow; 2002. (In Russ.).

5. Lebedev VM. Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In 4 vols. Vol. 4. Special part. Sections X-XII. Moscow: Yurayt Publ.; 2025. (In Russ.).

6. Lukashuk II. International law. Special part. Moscow; 2001. (In Russ.).

7. Matveev GF, Nenasheva ZS, Prozorov VB. History of the Southern and Western Slavs. In 3 vols. Vol. 3: Recent times. 4th ed. Moscow: KDU Publ.; 2022. (In Russ.).

8. Mikhailov NG. International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia as an institution of international criminal justice. Dr. Sci. (Law) Diss. Moscow: 2006. (In Russ.).

9. Nikiforov KV. Yugoslavia in the XX century: essays on political history. Moscow: Indrik Publ.; 2011. (In Russ.).

10. Ponomareva EG. For whom does The Hague bell ring? Svobodnaya Mysl. 2011;4:27-42. (In Russ.).

11. Starikova NN. Slovenian writers and the «velvet revolution». Slavic Almanac. 2015;1-2:215- 224. (In Russ.).

12. Goati V. Partije Srbije i Crne Gora u političkim borbama od 1990. do 2000. Bar: Conteco Publ.; 2000.

13. Joviћ B. Follow the tribute of EMEs Ј: Notes from the Diary. Belgrad; 1996.

14. Klemenčić M. Territorial proposals for the settlement of the war in Bosnia-Hercegovina. International Boundaries Research Unit: Boundary and Territory Briefing. 1994;1(3):74.

15. Nizich I. War Crimes in Bosnia-Hercegovina, Vol. 2. Helsinki: Helsinki Watch; 1993.

16. Sekulić M. Jugoslaviju niko nije branio a vrhovna komanda je izdala. Belgrad; 1997.

17. Trbovich A. A Legal Geography of Yugoslavia’s Disintegration. Oxford: Oxford University Press Inc; 2008.