The International Tribunal for the Former YugoslaviaOn 25 May 1993, United Nations Security Council Resolution 827 established an international tribunal charged with prosecuting violations of international law arising from armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia. Not since the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials after World War II has an international court tried individuals accused of crimes against humanity, war crimes and genocide. The International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTFY), established in The Hague, Netherlands, is widely seen as an important step towards deterring crimes, establishing firm governance of international law and promoting peace in the world. Yet, since its inception, the court has generated controversy among supporters and detractors. Among those who believe that the idea of ​​the tribunal is valid, the main concerns are that such an institution is established on a sound legal basis, that it adheres to acceptably high standards of due process, that it administers fair and impartial justice, and that it is perceived by nations and individuals as legitimate, just and effective. Unfortunately, the court of Yugoslavia has not yet met all these standards and may never be able to meet them all in the full sense of the term. A discussion of some of the realities facing the ICTFY demonstrates why the task of running the court is so difficult – and why it is vital that it gets done. None of the four requirements that the court must meet are easily achievable, and, in some cases, success seems unlikely. Many supporters of international humanitarian law, however, are convinced that, as long as the Court does no harm, it must continue to pursue its original objectives. This position supports the general idea of ​​the rule of law, without reference to the circumstances. Normally, of course, justice is supposed to be above the particularities of each case. However, the nature of the circumstances in the case of the former Yugoslavia could undermine the credibility of the ICTFY and make it ineffective in achieving justice and promoting the concept of international humanitarian law. Justice must be based on detachment and impartiality. But the ICTFY is essentially a first attempt to administer such justice, and the peculiarities of the test case must be prevented from contaminating the process. The... middle of paper... way and international law. " Eastern European Constitutional Journal 5, No. 4 (1996): 75-79. Dimitrijevic, Vojin. "The War Crimes Tribunal in the Yugoslav Context." Eastern European Constitutional Journal 5, No. 4 (1996 ): 85-92. Dworkin, Anthony. "The World in Judgment." Index on Censorship 5 (1996): 137-144. Guest, Iain. "The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: A Preliminary Evaluation in Implementation of the Helsinki Accords". War Crimes Trials in the Former Yugoslavia: Prospects and Problems, Briefing of the Committee on Security and Co-operation in Europe, Washington DC, 28 May 1996, 75-84 Washington, DC: Committee on Security and Cooperation in Europe, 1996. Niarchos, Catherine N. “Women, War and Rape: Challenges Facing the International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Human Rights Quarterly 17 (1995): 649-690. Teitel, Ruti. "Sentence in The Hague." Eastern European Constitutional Review 5, no. 4 (1996): 80-85.Thornberry, Cedric. “Save the War Crimes Tribunal.” Foreign Policy n. 104 (Fall 1996): 72-85. Walsh, Brian. “Resolving the Human Rights Violations of a Previous Regime.” World Affairs 158 (Winter 1996): 111-121.