Efeitos da decisão da corte de apelações holandesa (2017) sobre o massacre de Srebrenica (1995) no engajamento nas operações de paz da ONU

Abstract

This work analyzes the impacts of the Dutch Court of Appeals` (2017) decision about the Srebrenica Massacre in Bosnia (1995) for UN Peacekeeping Operations. The sentence condemned the Dutch State to indemnify victims’ relatives of the massacre that occurred during the Bosnian War (1992-1995), due to the participation of Dutch soldiers in the UN peace operation that acted in conflict mediation, United Nations Protection Force (UNPROFOR). The need to analyze the described panorama results from the precedent of a State condemnation for the participation of its envoys to a UN peacekeeping operation, whose immunity from jurisdiction guarantees the removal of legal proceedings from those who collaborate in the undertaking of the peacekeeping operation under the UN protection. Based on it, the research aims to identify the impacts of this condemnation on UN peacekeeping operations, applying, as a method, the stress of the fact (condemnation) by the model of Bellamy and Williams (2013), which stipulates that the engagement of States in UN peace operations is shaped through five logical matrices, called rationales, each containing reasons that motivate or inhibit a State's engagement in UN peacekeeping operations. The results infer that, in all rationales, condemnation has an inhibiting character to the engagement of a State in peace operations. Lastly, the research addresses the legal issues affected by the decision in the Netherlands, that had the effective control over the actions that resulted in civil Bosnians’ deaths, and, therefore, it could not be extended to the State the immunity from jurisdiction conferred by the UN.