A majority of those members are from the Third World, and the Court also includes members from Russia and China. For example, the Court found against the U.S. with respect to some of its actions in Nicaragua in the 1980s. So, while the judgements of the Court are oftentimes complicated, and each member tends to write his or her own opinion, I don't think we need to worry about political bias in this case. It's difficult to separate the bombing of the embassy from the overall bombing that's now been going on for over 2 months. War crimes are generally committed only when there's an intention to do something prohibited by the laws of war.
Mistakes unfortunately do happen during war time.
It would not be a war crime, for example, if a bomb fell on an army barracks and at the same time killed 2 civilians who happened to be working in the barracks at that time. This does not mean NATO can simply ignore civilians, and they must make every effort to avoid civilian casualties where that is possible. In the case of the Chinese embassy, unless it could be shown that NATO was somehow reckless or even intended to bomb the embassy, it's very possible this would not be considered a war crime under international law. At the same time, however, it's a tragic reminder of the consequences of any use of force and it is certainly appropriate that the U.S. and NATO offer their sincere condolences and even reparations to the Chinese government. Serbian civilians have also been killed, and their lives are worth no less than the lives of the 3 Chinese civilians.