The ICTY case Prosecutor v. Gotovina et al. remains a defining example of how courtrooms shape - but can’t settle - collective memory. After Croatia’s 1995 Operation Oluja, the Tribunal examined whether senior commanders were responsible for crimes and whether a coordinated plan drove the displacement of Serb civilians from Krajina. In 2012, the Appeals Chamber overturned the convictions, closing the case in legal terms.

But the historical debate stayed open. In Serbia, the acquittal is often read as proof of selective justice and a failure to recognize Serb suffering; in Croatia, it is seen as confirmation of a legitimate military operation and the limits of individual criminal liability. This excerpt explores why legal truth and historical truth often diverge - and why that gap still shapes tensions in the region today.

After admitting participation in the Srebrenica killings, Dražen Erdemović argued he acted under duress: refuse and die. The Appeals Chamber split 3–2, holding duress may reduce punishment but cannot fully excuse crimes against humanity—raising the uneasy question of whether the law can demand “heroism” when resistance won’t save victims.

For decades, international law framed wartime sexual violence as an “attack on honour,” leaving victims without clear pathways to prosecution or recognition. This post traces how the ICTY—through cases such as Tadić, Čelebići, Furundžija, and Kunarac—helped redefine sexual violence as a grave international crime rooted in bodily autonomy and sexual self-determination. It then follows the uneven domestic translation of these advances in Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, where legal classifications, evidentiary practices, and victim status still diverge sharply.

Created in 1993 by the United Nations Security Council, the Tribunal helped turn international criminal law into functioning institutions - prosecuting senior leaders and rejecting official status as a shield. From Article 7(2) to the 1999 indictment of Slobodan Milošević, its legacy shows how accountability can operate even during conflict- and why today’s crises, including Gaza, expose the cost of weak or absent enforcement.