Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T05:47:13.834Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Supreme Court of the Netherlands: Mothers of Srebrenica Association et al. v. the Netherlands

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Thomas Henquet
Thomas Henquet*
Affiliation:
International Law Division of the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, University of Leiden
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
International Legal Documents
Information
International Legal Materials , Volume 51 , Issue 6 , December 2012 , pp. 1322 - 1363
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Endnotes

1 Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosn. & Herz. v. Serb. & Montenegro), Judgment, 2007 I.C.J. 43 (Feb. 26).

2 Netherlands Institute for War Documentation, Srebrenica: A “SAFE” Area (2002), available at http://www.srebrenica.nl/Pages/OOR/23/379.bGFuZzlOTA.html.

3 See van Dam, Cees, The Netherlands Found Liable for Srebrenica Deaths, ASIL Insights (Sept. 19, 2011), available at http://www.asil.org/pdfs/insights/insightl10919.pdf.Google Scholar

4 HR 13 April 2012, Case No. 10/04437(Neth.) (English translation) [hereinafter Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment]; Hof’s-Gravenhage, 30 March 2010, Case No. 200.022.151/ 01(Neth.) (English translation) [hereinafter Srebrenica Court of Appeal Judgment]; see Johnson, Larry D., Introductory Note to Netherlands Appellate Court: Brzak v. United Nations (2d Cir.) & Mothers of Srebrenica v. Netherlands & United Nations, 49 I.L.M. 1011–28 (2010)Google Scholar.

5 Rechtbank’s-Gravenhage, 10 July 2008, Case No. 295247/HA ZA 07-2973 (Neth.) (English translation), [hereinafter Srebrenica District Court Judgment]; Conclusie van Advocaat-Generaal Mr. P. Vlas, 27 January 2012, Case No. 10/04437 HR, (Neth.) (no translation available) [hereinafter Srebrenica Advocate-General’s Opinion].

6 U.N. Secretary-General, Rep. of the Secretary-General Pursuant to General Assembly Resolution, ¶ 5, U.N. Doc. A/54/ 549 (Nov. 15, 1999).

7 Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 4.2.

8 Waite & Kennedy v. Germany, App. No. 26083/94 (Eur. Ct. H.R. Feb. 18,1999) [hereinafter Waite & Kennedy Judgment].

9 Id. ¶ 59.

10 Srebrenica Court of Appeal Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 5.6.

11 Id. ¶ 5.7.

12 Srebrenica Advocate-General’s Opinion, supra note 5, ¶ 2.21, 2.24.

13 The reference is to Waite & Kennedy Judgment, supra note 8, ¶ 67 (emphasis added): “The Court is of the opinion that where States establish international organisations in order to pursue or strengthen their cooperation in certain fields of activities, and where they attribute to these organisations certain competences and accord them immunities, there may be implications as to the protection of fundamental rights.”

14 Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 4.3.3.

15 Behrami v. France, App. Nos. 71412/01 &78166/01 (Eur. Ct. H.R May 2,2007) [hereinafter Behrami & Saramati Decision].

16 Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 4.3.4.

17 Behrami & Saramati Decision, supra note 15, ¶ 27, 147.

18 Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 4, ¶¶ 2, 4.3.1.

19 Srebrenica Court of Appeal Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 5.5.

20 Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom, 34 Eur. Ct. H.R. 11 (2002).

21 Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Ger. v. Italy), Judgment (Feb. 3, 2012), http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/143/16883.pdf [hereinafter Jurisdictional Immunities of the State]; see Chimène I. Keitner, Germany v. Italy: The International Court of Justice Affirms Principles of State Immunity, ASIL Insight (Feb. 14, 2012), available at http://www.asil.org/insightsl20214.cfm.

22 Jurisdictional Immunities of the State, supra note 21, ¶ 91.

23 Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 3.3.3.

24 Id. ¶ 4.3.13.

25 Jurisdictional Immunities of the State, supra note 21, ¶ 101.

26 An example of a judgment by a lower Dutch court is Pichon-Duverger v. Permanent Court of Arbitration, 27 June 2002, Cause List no. 262987/02-3417 (Neth.) (District Court of The Hague (sub-district section)), Judgment in the Incidental Proceedings. For references to judgments of the Belgian Supreme Court, see Ige F. Dekker & Cedric Ryngaert, Immunity of International Organizations: Balancing the Organisation’s Functional Autonomy and the Fundamental Rights of Individuals, in A. van Hoek, Making Choices in Public and Private International Immunity Law 103 ff. (2011).

27 Waite & Kennedy Judgment, supra note 8, ¶ 68.

28 Id. ¶ 69.

29 Srebrenica Supreme Court Judgment, supra note 4, ¶ 4.3.3.

30 See also Henquet, Thomas, International Organisations in the Netherlands: Immunity from the Jurisdiction of the Dutch Courts, 57 Neth. Int’l L. Rev. 293 (2010).Google Scholar

31 Petition for Relief (Nov. 3, 2011), available at http://ijdh.org/archives/22916.

32 Id. ¶¶ 84, 102. The status-of-forces-agreement referred to is the Agreement Between the United Nations and the Government of Haiti Concerning the Status of the United Nations Operation in Haiti, Port-au-Prince, July 9, 2004, 2004 U.N. Jurid. Y.B. 28-41 [hereinafter MINUSTAH SOFA]. On February 21, 2013, the “United Nations advised the claimants’ representatives that the claims are not receivable, pursuant to Section 29 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.” See Press Release, United Nations (Feb. 21, 2013), available at http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/sgsm14828.doc.htm.

33 Petition for Relief, supra note 31, ? 92, 95.

34 MINUSTAH SOFA, supra note 32, arts. VII-VIII.

35 U.N. Secretary General, Financing of the United Nations Protection Force, the United Nations Confidence Restoration Operation in Croatia, the United Nations Preventive Deployment Force and the United Nations Peace Forces Headquarters Administrative and Budgetary Aspects of the Financing of the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Financing of the United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Rep. of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A/51/389 (Sept. 20, 1996) & U.N. Doc. A/51/903 (May 21, 1997); A/RES/52/247 (July 17, 1998); see also U.N. Secretary General, Review of the Efficiency of the Administrative and Financial Functioning of the United Nations: Rep. of the Secretary-General, U.N. Doc. A/C.5/49/65 (Apr. 24, 1995).

35 This text was reproduced and reformatted from the text available at the Supreme Court of the Netherlands website (visited September 15, 2012) Part 1: http://zoeken.rechtspraak.nl/DetailPage.aspx.