Num momento de relembrar e analisar dados e textos, deparo-me com o voto que escrevi acerca do caso que analisamos na HICJ, qual seja o da Bosnia e Herzegovina vs. Servia e Montenegro no contexto da Guerra da Bosnia.Acaba sendo interessante, porque traz uma reflexao sobre o que e, hoje o Direito Internacional, e principalmente como trabalham as instancias diversas da ONU na questao de emergencias humanitarias. Normalmente pensariamos que uma emergencia humanitaria seria tratada como urgencia absoluta, nao? Pois ocorre que, mesmo com dezenas, centenas, milhares ou milhoes de vidas em jogo, ainda nossa tradicional burocracia persiste. Mais detalhes... Leiam abaixo.It was presented to me, during my duty as a Judge of the InternationalCourt of Justice, the drama of the Bosnian people at the episodes of war crimesduring the Bosnian War. As the facts analyzed by the Court, the crime ofgenocide was perpetrated against thousands of Bosnian Muslins by the Serbianforces and paramilitary forces allied with the Serbian troops. When discussingand voting the decisions of the Court, I was allowed to add to the draftsentence this Concurring Vote, with my personal thoughts as the grounds to myposition concerning what was discussed with the honorable Judges that composedthe analyzes of the Bosnia andHerzegovina vs. Serbia and Montenegro case.My personal point of view is based on the principle that, according tothe very own foundations of the International Law, every State is sovereign inits decisions and conducts. From the manifestations about one situation, to thearguments and signature to an international treaty, the State is responsiblefor its own acts, and respected the principle of the sovereignty, the positionand conducts of the States are responsibility of its own. In this point, theInternational Law has already consolidated the position that any sort ofviolation of the States sovereignty represents the presupposition of punishmentto this aggression, and the International Community is very clear about it inmany spheres, since the juridical one until the Economics and Political. Inthis sense, the Court affirmed, in the judgment of the case of Servellon Garcia et al. versus HondurasthatInternational responsibility may also be attributedeven in the absence of intention, and the acts that violate the Convention arethe States responsibility regardless of the fact that they are or not aconsequence of a deliberate state policy. (Paragraph 107)In regard of the opportunity to know that sovereignty is a protectedobject by the International Law, the merits of the present case were analyzedand the Court made a decision about it. Yet, there are points I think maybecan, in this case and in future (yet not desirable) similar situations, give usall a new perspective of the States stance face of instabilities and theinternational community. Srebrenica, 1992. The UnitedNations proclaim this city in Republika Srpska as a safe zone. Despite thisfact, in the same year, Serbian forces destroyed 296 Bosniak villages,murdering almost 3200 Bosniaks around Srebrenica. Not only this episodehappened, three years later the Serbian forces moved themselves towardsSrebenica, and killed circa 8.000 Bosnian muslins. In this period of time, seems to me that it is amazing that all legalinstances were almost fully exhausted by the Bosnian government about theepisode