UNITED NATIONS Case No.: IT-96-21-A Date: 20 February ... - ICTY

acted as de facto organs of another State, the FRY, 79 it set forth a clear statement of the law as
to the applicable criteria to determine the nationality of the victims for the purposes of the
Geneva Conventions. The Appeals Chamber is satisfied that this statement of the applicable
law, which was endorsed by the Appeals Chamber in Aleksovski, falls within the scope of the
Aleksovski statement in relation to the practice of following previous decisions of the Appeals
Chamber.
64. The Appeals Chamber now turns to the main arguments relied upon by the appellants,
namely that the Appeals Chamber’s interpretation of the nationality requirement is wrong as it
is (1) contrary to the “traditional rules of treaty interpretation”; and (2) inconsistent with the
national laws of Bosnia and Herzegovina on citizenship.
65. The appellants submit that “the traditional rules of treaty interpretation” should be
applied to interpret strictly the nationality requirement set out in Article 4 of Geneva
Convention IV. 80 The word “national” should therefore be interpreted according to its natural
and ordinary meaning. 81 The appellants submit in addition that if the Geneva Conventions are
now obsolete and need to be updated to take into consideration a “new reality”, a diplomatic
conference should be convened to revise them. 82
66. The Prosecution on the other hand contends that the Vienna Convention on the Law of
Treaties of 1969 83 provides that the ordinary meaning is the meaning to be given to the terms of
the treaty in their context and in the light of their object and purpose. 84 It is submitted that the
Appeals Chamber in Tadi} found that the legal bond of nationality was not regarded as crucial
in 1949, i.e., that there was no intention at the time to determine that nationality was the sole
criteria. 85 In addition, adopting the appellants’ position would result in the removal of
protections from the Geneva Conventions contrary to their very object and purpose. 86
67. The argument of the appellants relates to the interpretative approach to be applied to the
concept of nationality in Geneva Convention IV. The appellants and the Prosecution both rely
78
Prosecution Response to Supplementary Brief, pp 8-9.
79
Tadi} Appeal Judgement, para 167.
80
Appeal Transcript, p 401. Counsel for Delali} presented the arguments on behalf of all appellants.
81
Appeal Transcript, p 394.
82
Appeal Transcript, p 400.
83
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 23 May 1969, 1155 United Nations Treaty Series 331 (“the Vienna
Convention”).
84 Appeal Transcript, p 426.
85 Appeal Transcript, p 427.
86 Appeal Transcript, p 429.
19
Case No.: IT-96-21-A 20 February 2001