Belgrade’s representatives use the fact that Belgrade continued to pay Republika Srpska Army officers seven years after the peace accords as evidence that even before Dayton they had not been paid to fight the war

In their efforts to challenge the allegations made by the BH party on Belgrade's responsibility for the crimes committed by the Red Berets, Arkan’s men, Seselj’s men and Scorpions, SaM representatives use arguments used by Milosevic in his trial before the ICTY to defend himself against the same charges

While she did not deny that “there were crimes and serious violations of international norms” in BH, Belgrade’s legal representative Faveau-Ivanovic denied the existence of genocidal intent and plan as the second round of SaM arguments before the International Court of Justice continued. Her argument was that the crimes did not target other ethnic groups but political opponents of the Bosnian Serbs

Bosnia and Herzegovina has failed to present any evidence to prove the existence of a "genocidal pattern", Serbia and Montenegro representatives claim before the International Court of Justice. The pattern of many "isolated crimes that are not tantamount to genocide" cannot, Belgrade contends, be taken as "confirmation that genocide was committed". Belgrade cannot disclose to the other party and the court unredacted documents originating from the Supreme Defense Council

Belgrade's representatives urged the judges to dismiss all Sarajevo demands, as the nine-week hearings before the International Court of Justice in the BH vs. SaM case drew to a close. The judges will first deliberate whether they have jurisdiction to adjudicate in the case; if they decide they do, they will then decide on the merits of the case: whether genocide was committed in BH and whether the then FRY – now SaM – is responsible for it

On Monday 26 February 2007, the International Court of Justice will deliver its judgment on whether the former FRY or the former SaM is responsible for genocide in Bosnia Herzegovina. The judgment comes fourteen years after the legal suit was filed and a year after the start of hearings on the merits

The judgment delivered by the International Court of Justice today confirmed that the Bosnian Serb forces committed the genocide in Srebrenica in July 1995. Serbia, in the first place, failed to prevent it, and afterwards failed to punish the perpetrators – first and foremost Ratko Mladic - and surrender them to the Tribunal. BH’s claim for reparation was dismissed by the ICJ

What is the meaning and the import of the judgment delivered by the International Court of Justice in the Bosnia-Herzegovina vs. Serbia and Montenegro case? Serbia continuously breaches the Genocide Convention. Did the outcome of the 14-year long legal suit come too early for Bosnia Herzegovina?