CYIL vol. 8 (2017)

TUOMAS HEIKKINEN – MARTIN FAIX CYIL 8 ȍ2017Ȏ fact that Common Article 1 is in fact a due diligence obligation. 65 The High Contracting Parties are not bound by the outcome of their actions but are obligated to try to achieve a goal, and failure to employ measures would be a violation of the due diligence obligation of Common Article 1. 66 However, it does not mean, unlike some claim, that High Contracting Parties are bound to “make every effort” to achieve the goal in every case. 67 Simply put, that would be unrealistic and too far-reaching obligation for High Contracting Parties to follow. Therefore, the standard must be lower, one of reasonable expectations and feasibleness. The ICJ adopted such an approach in the Bosnian Genocide Case 68 regarding the 1948 Genocide Convention, where the Court held that since Serbia had a special relationship with the perpetrators of the genocide and that increased capacity to influence the perpetrators must be taken into account when determining the scope of measures a State is obligated to take. 69 States are thus obliged to adopt measures, which appear reasonable to ensure respect. The reasonableness has to be measured by the capacity of the particular State. Moreover, to take “appropriate” measures to ensure respect of others should not mean to take measures that have no reasonable chance to achieve the goal, i.e. to change the behaviour of another State so that it fulfils its IHL obligations to the fullest extent possible. The ICJ highlighted in this regard the relevance of the specific relationship between Serbia and the Bosnian Serb forces for the Serbian obligation to stop the genocide in Bosnia. 70 The ICJ argued that “ responsibility is however incurred if the State manifestly failed to take all measures to prevent genocide which were within its power, and which might have contributed to preventing the genocide .” 71 The reference to a due diligence principle, where States are obligated to take measures that “ might have contributed to preventing the genocide ”, is fundamental here. In cases of Common Article 1, if TCSs states do not have the capacity to adopt measures that would contribute to ensuring respect of other States, they are not under an obligation to “make every effort”. However, the ICJ confirmed in its Bosnian Genocide Case that the due diligence obligations (i.e. in that case the obligation to prevent genocides) are not dependable to certainty or likelihood of success. 72 Certainly, the ICJ held that Serbia breached its obligation to prevent genocide because Serbia “did nothing to prevent” the genocide in question. 73 That could be understood as an argument for the general obligation to take all available measures to achieve the goal in every case. However, there must be a causal link between the failure to take measures and the harmful event in order for an entity to be breaching its due diligence obligations. 74 While there is no clearly defined legal standard of how likely the success must be it is clear that Common Article 1 does not obligate States to take measures beyond what appears reasonable (in the sense of exercising influence on the conduct of other States). 65 Ibidem p. 15, DÖRMANN, SERRALVO. op. cit., p. 724. 66 BOUTRUCHE, SASSÓLI. op. cit. , p. 15. 67 DÖRMANN, SERRALVO. op. cit., p. 724. 68 ICJ, Judgment of 26 February 2007, Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) (Bosnian Genocide Case), para. 430. 69 ICJ, Bosnian Genocide Case , para. 430; BREHM, Maya, The Arms Trade and States’ Duty to Ensure Respect for Humanitarian and Human Rights Law. Journal of Conflict & Security Law , 2008, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 374-375. 70 ICJ, Bosnian Genocide Case , para. 430; BREHM. op. cit., pp. 374-375. 71 ICJ, Bosnian Genocide Case , para. 430. 72 Ibidem, para. 461. 73 Ibidem, para. 438. 74 GATTINI, Andrea, Breach of Obligation to Prevent and Reparation Thereof in the ICJ’s Genocide Judgment. European Journal of International Law . 2007, Vol. 7, No. 4, p. 709.

330