ASCS MUN 2026

Background Guide
International Court of
Justice (ICJ)
Introduction
welcome from the secretary general
Esteemed Delegates, Advisors, and Organisers,

It is with great honor and privilege that I welcome you all to the fifth annual Al Salam
Community School Model United Nations (ASCS MUN) Conference. It is truly my distinct
pleasure to serve you as your Secretary-General of ASCS MUN 2026.

Having witnessed the inaugural ASCS MUN and actively followed its progression, I have
developed a profound appreciation not only for the dedication and effort invested in
actualising the conference, but also for the lasting impact it has on its participants -
broadening their perspectives, sharpening their skills, and inspiring them to become the
potential leaders of tomorrow. Along the way, I’ve come to truly appreciate the value of
diplomacy, a skill that has become an important part of who I am today.

Given the interconnected nature of the modern world, collaboration among nations is vital in
order to address global challenges. Our planet is made up of a multitude of nations, each with
its own strengths, challenges, and perspectives. Yet what truly sets us apart is the inability to
unite and take action against challenges we all face, frequently allowing them to be used as
tools of division and power rather than instruments of unity and peace. In light of this, we, as
emerging leaders, sustain the responsibility of addressing these flaws effective immediately,
and harness them as catalysts for constructive change, leading the way toward greater unity
and collective advancement.

ASCS MUN provides students with the chance to voice their opinions on global challenges
and hone their debating skills, whilst learning the intricacies of diplomacy from a
comprehensive outlook. ASCS MUN sincerely believes in what the new wave of future
young leaders can achieve and the contributions they can make to drive positive
transformation and unlock the true potential of our world. These values define the ethos of
our conference and represent our ability to collectively create an impact.

Therefore, it is with immense pleasure that I welcome you to the ASCS Model United
Nations 2026, a place to ‘make an impact, change a life’.

Yours sincerely,
Batool Enayat
Secretary General, ASCS MUN 2026

ii
 Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
SPECPOL

Overview of the Committee

Established in June of 1945, The International Court of Justice, also referred to as the World Court,
stands as the sole international court that handles disputes between nations. It is the principal
judiciary of the United Nations and the Court itself is located in The Hague, Netherlands.
Undoubtedly, this court has an unparalleled amount of significance as it affects the perception and
understanding of the legal world while simultaneously providing the legal frameworks that all other
committees rely on. By using an elective system, the court is composed of 15 judges who use
English and French in court as they are the official languages. The judges are elected by the United
Nations General Assembly and Security Council and each have 9 years in office. The duties of the
ICJ include settling the legal disputes (known as contentious cases) but also providing any advisory
opinions for legal questions which have been referred to it(referred to as advisory proceedings).

04
 Topic I

Application of the
Convention on the
Prevention and
Punishment of the
Crime of Genocide
(Bosnia and
Herzegovina v. Serbia
and Montenegro)

05
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ

Brief Overview
The topic at hand is the case between Bosnia and Herzegovina against Serbia and
Montenegro. In the years 1992-1995, there were several crimes which had targeted Bosnian
Muslims that were inflicted by Bosnian Serb forces, who had received substantial support
from Serbia during the conflict. This was brought to the Cour Internationale De Justice with
the allegations of violating the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime
of Genocide. Essentially, it was an allegation of acts of genocide upon the Bosnian muslims
during the armed conflict following Yugoslavia's division. This case is a highlight as it had
major impacts on the understanding of genocide cases brought upon the International Court
of Justice.

This case explores whether Serbia stood responsible for the Bosnian Serb forces who carried
out these acts, due to their relationship with the forces. The reason for a grey area within this
topic is due to the definiton of a genocide within the International Court of Justice. For
genocide to be proven as a crime internationally, it must meet the dolus specialis requirement
that genocide is defined under in international law; this is that genocide is the "only
reasonable inference" from the actions which had been carried out. According to the official
documentation from the International Court of Justice, the allegations were that The Federal
Replubic of Yugoslavia (now known as Serbia and Montenegro) had directly, or through the
use of surrogates carried out genocide by destroying in part, (and attempting to a destruction
in whole) the muslim population by killing members of the group, causing deliberate bodily
or mental harm to members of the group, and imposing measures intended to prevent births
within the group. The court carried out examinations and thorough reviews of years of
evidence for the case, including killings, mass displacement, and patterns of violence described
throughout the court case.

06
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ

Timeline
1992 ; the beginning of the conflict:
After the declaration of Bosnia's independence the conflict had broken out. Armed violent
conflict had begun through killings, forced displacement and mistreatment of the Bosnian
muslim civilians. The ICJ had found that Bosnian Serb forces had taken control of regions
within Bosnia such as: the Drina Valley, Prijedor, Foča, Brčko and Sarajevo. Violence included:
arrests, camp detentions, cultural destruction, as well as sexual violence. The was debates on
whether the sexual violence constituted as a part of the genocide or rather crimes that were
committed on all sides of the conflict, without any specific intent.
Throughout the year, many government municipalities had been seized into Bosnian Serb
control, and civilians were subjected to many atrocities; such as" serious bodily and mental
harm, destruction of cultural and religious properties, forced terrible conditions of life which
intended to force displacement and/or eliminate the Bosnian muslims (referred to as Bosniaks)
and targeted killings. These things were used in court later as factual evidence which was
examined.

1993: the filing of the application to the International Court of Justice.

On the 20th of March, 1993,while the conflict was ongoing, the application was filed to the ICJ
which initiated proceedings against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (referred to in this guide
as Serbia and Montenegro). In later months of April and September 1993 Bosnia had requested
provisional measures for the safety of the people, which led to the ICH ordering both parties to
refrain from acts falling under the scope of the Genocide Convention.

1992-1995:
The atrocities intensified within these years, which ultimately led up to one of the milestone
crimes of the case, which was the July 1995 Srebrenica massacre, in which thousands of
Bosniak men and boys had been executed. This area had been deemed a "safe area" (as referred
to in court documents) but had been overrun by Bosnian Serb forces and made this the central
atrocity of the case.

1997-2001: procedural complications:

The case encountered multiple procedural complications due to Serbia filing counter-claims and
then withdrawing them later on. This led to parties discussing the relevance of the more
recently submitted documents. Serbia then tried to challenge jurisdiction by requesting a
revision of 1996 judgements, which was ultimately rejected.

07
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ

Notable Treaties and Legal Frameworks

The key legal framework that this case is centered upon is the Convention on the
Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948). This treaty defines what
genocide means in a legal and international standpoint, which is described as the killing or
infliction of serious bodily and psychological harm in order to destroy (in part or in whole)
religious, national or ethnic groups within the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina in this
particular case.

Another major legal source that is vital to this case is the Statute of the International Court of
Justice. Specifically when looking at article 36; describing the Court's jurisdiction and
Article 41, which allows the Court to order provisional measures to protect people and/or
rights at risk during conflicts and disputes. In this particular case, it was Article IX of the
Genocide Convention that the court relied on and it was used to give the court the
authority listen to disputes between states concerning how the Convention was applied or
interpreted.

Finally, the Court used evidence and legal standards that were in the International Criminal
Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), which had factual findings, such as information
regarding the Srebrenica massacre) that informed parts of the case. This was not fully used
however because there is a distinction between individual criminal responsibility and state
responsibility. The ICJ's focus is State responsibility which was not what the ICTY handled.
Key international law instruments and resources such as the UN Charter and the Geneva
Conventions were also used in the court proceedings but the Court was strictly under the
Genocide Convention.

08
 Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ, Page 1

Roles of Each Individual

Applicants:
The applicant for this case are Bosnia and Herzegovina. The applicant is the state that presents
the case to the International Court of Justice. The applicant's role is to argue why the court has
jurisdiction and is responsible for presenting facts and legal reasons behind the case presented
by them. In this particular scenario, it would be to provide legal arguments and evidence that
shows that genocidal acts had occurred within the conflict and that the Respondents bear State
Responsibility under the Genocide Convention.

Applicants Advocates:
In this case, they are: The United States of America, The Netherlands, France and The United
Kingdom. These are the individual, official representatives for each state who speak and act for
each state in the case. Their responsibility is to present speeches and rebuttal the other side's
arguments in an attempt to defend their countries stance and have the case ruled in their
favour. For this specific case, they have to support Bosnia and Herzegovina through these
arguments and explain their country's support for the Applicant within the case.

Respondents:
The respondents are Serbia and Montenegro for this case. The respondent is a state that has
been accused and challenged within a case. They hold the duty to then respond to these claims
to defend its state from the allegations. They may also raise objections or defenses throughout
the case. Serbia and Montenegro defend their countries through denying the claims and
arguing that the genocidal intent was not there or not proven.

Respondent Advocates:
The respondent advocates have the same duties and responsibilities as the advocates for the
applicant. These duties are to present speeches and rebuttal the other side's arguments in an
attempt to defend their countries stance and have the case ruled in their favour. They will
support Serbia and Montenegro's legal objections and reinforce any arguments that are made
by them. They use their country's stances and legal understandings to support the Respondents
and their claims in the court proceedings. For this case they are: Russia, China, Greece and
India.

09
 Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ, Page 2

Roles of Each Individual

Judges:
The judges are responsible for ensuring that the case and its proceedings are dealt with and
handled in a fair, just manner as well being in accordance with international law. The judges must
work in complete independence meaning they cannot act as applicants, respondents or advocates
at any point in the case. The role of the judge is to listen to both sides, ask questions, examine
evidence and then make them decide the legal issues. For the chosen case the judges are: Jordan,
Slovakia, Japan, Sierra Leone and Madagascar. Judges are the ultimate authority and decision
makers which makes their integrity utterly vital to the case. Their decision-making and
evaluation skills are vital in order to infer which side has the most just and reasonable arguments
in consideration of the Genocide Convention.

10
 Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ. Page 3

Roles of Each Individual

Objections on the table:
1. Objection to Jurisdiction:
This refers to respondents being able to argue that the court has no jurisdiction due to the parties
not consenting to the jurisdiction or a treaty not granting jurisdiction. Jurisdiction is a term used
to describe the right to judge a case.
1. Objection to Admissibility:
A state can argue that the application is inadmissible - which means that the ICJ will not
consider or continue onwards with the case. This is because there is something inaccurate with
the method that the case was brought forward. For example, necessary legal procedures were not
followed or the application was not complete.
1. Objection Due To a Lack of Standing (Locus Standi)
This is where a respondent could argue that the applicant has no standing to bring the case
forward. When these terms are used, it means that the applicant is not the correct state to bring
the dispute to the ICJ.
1. Temporal Objections (Ratione Temporis)
This is when a state could argue that the Court cannot rule on events before the relevant treaty
obligations existed. This would be used if a state was not bound by a certain treaty at the time of
the events' transpiration.
1. Subject Matter Objection (ratione materiae):
This objection is used when a respondent wishes to argue that the dispute does not fall within
the subject matter covered by the treaty clause that was invoked. This would mean that the
applicant is filing disputes which have a subject matter not related to the clause they claim was
violated.
1. Personal Jurisdiction Objection(Ratione Personae):
Here, a state could argue that the Court cannot judge certain parties for different reasons. Some
of which could be because they were not a state or not a party in the treaty. For example, within
this case, the ICJ examines whether Serbia was legally a party.
1. Objection to Evidence/ Standard of Proof:
Here, a respondent would be able to object that the Applicant did not meet a required standard
of proof and that the evidence provided is insufficient or unreliable. This would mean that the
claims do not have evidentiary support thus making them have little to no legal standing in the
ICJ.
1. Abuse of Process Objection:
A state is able to claim that the Applicant is misusing the court or bringing a case in bad faith and
with a possible malicious intent. This would mean that the Court is being used for an improper
purpose and not to solve an urgent and serious legal dispute.

11
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ, Page 1

Rules Of Procedure
Documents that are submitted:
Memorials:
Memorials serve as the International Court of Justice's equivalent to a delegation's position paper.
The role of a memorial is to provide the basis for each advocate's legal arguments. Memorials
highlight the case's facts and points from each party's perspective, presenting a clear and
organised explanation of their claims, supporting evidence and legal reasoning.

Compendium of Evidence:
This is a document which contains treaties, court precedents, reports, maps, statistics, and factual
evidence. This document is given to judges. They are given because it allows the advocates to
focus their arguments and allow judges to see their most important issues and reasonings
provided. This allows for the hearing to remain streamlined and focused on the topic. It is also
useful so that judges can refer back to the evidence that advocates may mention during their
arguments.

Examinations and objections:

An examination in court is a process in which a witness is questioned by the advocates to present
evidence for the trial or to challenge credibility of a statement/argument. There are direct
examinations (which is the advocate examining a witness that they presented to the Court) and
cross witness examinations (in which the opposing side's advocates examine the witness that was
produced). An objection is when a formal challenge/protest is raised by an advocate to a question
during examination because it is improper or because it violates rules set regarding evidence that
appears in court. Below are some of the examples of objections that are used in Cross Witness
Examination

12
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ, Page 2

Rules Of Procedure
Documents that are submitted:
Memorials:
Memorials serve as the International Court of Justice's equivalent to a delegation's position paper.
The role of a memorial is to provide the basis for each advocate's legal arguments. Memorials
highlight the case's facts and points from each party's perspective, presenting a clear and
organised explanation of their claims, supporting evidence and legal reasoning.

Compendium of Evidence:
This is a document which contains treaties, court precedents, reports, maps, statistics, and factual
evidence. This document is given to judges. They are given because it allows the advocates to
focus their arguments and allow judges to see their most important issues and reasonings
provided. This allows for the hearing to remain streamlined and focused on the topic. It is also
useful so that judges can refer back to the evidence that advocates may mention during their
arguments.

Examinations and objections:

An examination in court is a process in which a witness is questioned by the advocates to present
evidence for the trial or to challenge credibility of a statement/argument. There are direct
examinations (which is the advocate examining a witness that they presented to the Court) and
cross witness examinations (in which the opposing side's advocates examine the witness that was
produced). An objection is when a formal challenge/protest is raised by an advocate to a question
during examination because it is improper or because it violates rules set regarding evidence that
appears in court. Below are some of the examples of objections that are used in Cross Witness
Examination

13
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ, Page 3

Rules of Procedure
Objections which are used in Cross Witness Examinations:
1. Leading question: A question which is suggesting an answer. They are allowed in cross
witness examination when it is in the aspect of cross-examining a witness from the
opposing side. They are now allowed with direct examination of a witness (examination of
a witness from the same side as the advocate).
2. RelevanceL The question asked is not relevant to the case.
3. Speculation:This is when witnesses are asked to predict an outcome which is information
that can not be confirmed.
4. Hearsay: This is regarding a witness repeating something someone else said; thus being
information that is not their own knowledge
5. Asked and Answered: Objection due to the same question having been asked earlier
6. Badgering the witness: An objection to an advocate being aggressive, argumentative or
hostile.
7. Opinion: A witness is giving personal opinions instead of fact which can be reason for
objection (this does not apply to expert witnesses such as medical professionals)
8. Character Evidence: This is an objection to an advocate using one's general personality as
an attack instead of the usage of facts. This could be in situations such as using a witness'
previous tendencies and personality traits to make them appear as a "bad person" which
could sway the jury's opinion and ignore evidential factors.
9. Competence: This is where a question is asked that requires knowledge that the witness
couldn't possess.

Summary of procedure:
The session starts with the opening of court where the Judges and Advocates take attendance.
This is followed by the opening statements where the applicants present their opening
arguments and the respondents present theirs. The committee then proceeds to witness
examinations where there are direct examinations and cross examinations. Judges may ask
clarifying questions at any time. The main oral pleadings then commence where each side
presents legal arguments using facts, treaties, conventions and past ICJ rulings. This is then
followed by rebuttals where applicants rebut respondents and vice versa. Each side then
presents closing statements where they summarise their case and states what judgment they
want. The advocates then leave for judicial deliberation where judges discuss, debate and vote.
The final decision is then presented where the court reads out its decision.

14
Background Guide ASCS MUN 2026
ICJ

Guiding your Research

Links for Further Research
Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of
Genocide (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro)
REPORTS OF JUDGMENTS, ADVISORY OPINIONS AND ORDERS
Statute of the International Court of Justice
Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

Refrences
[Link]
[Link]

15
thank you.
We look forward to seeing you participate in ASCS MUN 2026 and
demonstrate the skills of a future global leader.

Authored by: Yasna Fatemy

Contact Us
info@[Link]
[Link]