The ICJ’s Useless Witness Testimony

This interesting report on the results of the ICJ’s witness testimony confirms my suspicions about the inadequacy of the ICJ’s fact-gathering ability in this sort of case. The question here is whether to allocate state responsibility to Serbia for violations of the Genocide Convention. This requires evidence on, among other things, was there a genocide and was it sponsored by the government of Serbia, etc…



The witnesses presented didn’t bring anything to these weighty and difficult questions. Bosnia in particular produced nearly useless witness testimony proffering two witnesses: a British general who commanded troops in Bosnia during the time period and a Bosnian ethnographer. The British general didn’t actually have any new evidence to provide, and the ethnographer focused on the cultural effects of genocide.



The fault here is of the state parties because they are the ones who have to dig up witnesses. But the ICJ is not well positioned to get witnesses anyway, lacking subpoena power or anything like the investigative apparatus of other international tribunals. I would be surprised if the witness testimony changed any aspect of the ICJ’s ultimate opinion in this case.