Although in the last minute, the decision to start the revision has been made and this is the victory of all those who were in favor of it, said Nevenka Tromp Vrkic, who was a member of the research team at the ICTY from 2000 to 2012.
She says that there are new evidence, hundreds of them, and it is important to use them, because if it is not done now, this topic will go to the archive, said Tromp Vrkic.
“The legal process is measured by success or failure. In my career at the tribunal, there were times when I thought this was an absolute failure, it is horrible and nothing works, but in the end the judgment was fantastic. So, it is too early for any assessment of this team. I would welcome the initiative of Bakir Izetbegovic to perform the revision. I think that it is a major shift in the political context at this point. When it comes to the fate, I cannot say that the Court will even accept the revision, but it is important that there is a willingness to go to the revision.”
Nevenka Tromp noted that there is a large number of available evidence, and although she has no insight into the content of the revision, she believes in the team working on the revision because, according to her, they are great experts who will provide evidence for acceptance of the revision.
Asked whether BiH can get a judgment in favor due to the fact that no one in Serbia has not been convicted of genocide, nor was trialed for genocide in BiH, Tromp Vrkic said:
“The answer is – absolutely yes. The International Court of Justice is not a criminal court and the manner in which it estimates judgments that already exist is through the evidence presented inside of the case. They will look at the enormous amount of new evidence. And thanks to new evidence, BH legal team has the advantage in relation to the evidence that was available before 2007. Whatever new we make, whatever new is put in a legal narrative of this team, it will be qualitatively better than what we had. That is why I welcome this initiative, which is happening now. ”
“Regardless of the division, judgment and public debate on this issue are very much needed. I think it would be tragic if the revision was not submitted and if people wondered why nothing was made. In this case, a failure is more acceptable than if nothing was attempted,” concluded Tromp Vrkic.