Using case study of Srebrenica, evaluate the effectiveness of international and domestic legal
System in dealing with crimes against the community.

There have been numerous domestic and international mechanisms instilled within the Australian jurisdiction in effectively dealing with crimes against the community, however through thematic evaluation; the legal system has proven to be limited in its effectiveness to varying degree. Crimes against the international community is one of the main categories of international crime; covering offences against international ethical and moral standards, including crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. This essay will thematically explore the effectiveness of domestic and international legal systems in dealing with crimes against the community, with specific reference to the case study Srebrenica.

The international laws established by the United Nations have proven be effective in reflecting moral and ethical standards, however limited in its efficiency due to state sovereignty. “International crime” is a broad term that could cover any crime with international origin or consequences. Established in 1948, the United Nations was created with aim to promote peace and security and form a universal jurisdiction to demise international crime under the laws of any state or nation. Subsequently, the establishment of a permanent court “International Criminal Court (ICC)” in 2002 had significantly reflected the role of law reform in the legal justice system in relation to crimes against the international community. The introduction of the Rome Statute of international criminal court (2002) denounced the power to exercise its jurisdiction over persons for the most serious crimes of international concern, only if the selected country has consented to ratify and enforce the statue within their domestic legal system. Although the United Nations has established a treaty to cease and extradite offenders, state sovereignty has prohibited any encroachment into state jurisdiction and laws. This limitation is thematically explored throughout the article published in the Sydney Morning Herald 2012 titled “The impact of State sovereignty” where only 121 member nations, excluding United States have agreed to ratify the Rome Statute and become state parties to the ICC. Although the Rome Statute gives the ICC jurisdiction over three broad categories of international crime, its main limitation continues to be lack of enforceability of the law within domestic legal systems as the United Nations can only influence law reform however not enforce a change.

Similarly, establishment of the International criminal tribunal former Yugoslavia 2001 (ICTY) following the attempted genocide and war crimes that took place in Srebrenica has proven to be a successful international legal measure in achieving justice for victims and society. Although there were countless mechanisms undertaken by the United Nations to demise the “ethnical cleansing of all non-Serbian inhabitants from Bosnia” including the Security Council’s adopted resolution 819 declaring a “cease-fire” subsequent to the massacre, in which through thematic examination has proven to be ineffective in relation to issues of compliance to the law. The neglection and the insufficient peacekeepers that were mandated to protect the safe area within Bosnia drastically decreased the effectiveness of the United Nations in achieving justice and preventing crimes against the international community within the Srebrenica Massacre as over thousands of men were tortured and murdered. On the other hand, since the commencement of the ICTY in 2001 international legal systems had illustrated to be highly efficient in prosecuting all offenders who had violated the human rights during the massacre.

According to the statistics exemplified within the “ICTY website” it has gradually indicted 161 persons, referred 13 individuals to national jurisdictions due to