Tuesday’s court’s ruling that the Dutch state would be held liable for the deaths of three Bosnian Muslim men in Srebrenica came as a surprise to all concerned. But how will the verdict affect the victims and future international missions?

Tweet

In the summer of 1995, UN electrician Rizo Mustafic and the relatives of UN interpreter Hasan Nuhanovic – all Muslim Bosnians – were forced to leave the Dutch-controlled UN compound in Srebrenica, even though it was known that Bosnian Serbs, led by General Ratko Mladic, were carrying out mass executions of Muslim men. Mustafic was killed along with Nuhanovic' father and brother after they left the compound. The next of kin filed a lawsuit against the Dutch state.

Massacre
Dion van den Berg from NGO Pax Christi – co-organiser of a Srebrenica memorial service on 11 July – says the ruling is the answer to a 16-year quest for recognition. Mr Van den Berg became closely involved with the victims and was present when the ruling was handed down. He says Mustafic’ relatives missed the verdict because they were preparing to bury the electrician’s body, together with 606 other victims of the massacre, whose bodies were identified this year.

“It is a terrible thing having to bury people. There are more than 600 in a single day, that is of course intensely sad. However, the court has now acknowledged that this never should have happened and that the Netherlands is liable, and that is an important step.”

Who’s to blame?
Lawyer Heikelien Verrijn Stuart has closely followed the case. She says the ruling finally answers the question: who is responsible? Until now, states deploying troops shifted the blame to the UN and vice versa.

“Now it has been clearly stated: nations which deploy troops also carry responsibility. It has been stated that within the line of command there is responsibility for a part: you have to watch what you know and what you do and what the consequences are. It has always been said that the Netherlands was not to blame for the massacre in Srebrenica. But the question is what the Dutch could have done. Could they have saved these people? The court has brought this back to the responsibility of the people on the ground.

“This is also the first step for other victims,” says Ms Verrijn Stuart. “The facts of every case have to be looked at, but you can imagine that after this ruling, the whole role of the Netherlands can be looked at more broadly.” Then there is the prosecution of individual soldiers, which is being investigated by the Dutch Public Prosecution Office.

Future missions
The court’s ruling will also have consequences for future missions, according to Ms Verrijn Stuart.

“This is exactly what the troop-contributing nations are afraid of, that they will go out on a mission, find themselves in a difficult situation and lose control. They’re afraid that this type of thing can happen and that they end up being held accountable. It could play a role in deliberations on the question: Should we send troops?

The government says it will study the ruling and decide on a possible appeal later.

(nc/ae)