"Not much room for ambiguity for ICJ"

International law professor Tibor Varadi says the ICJ has not been given have much room to produce an ambiguous ruling in the Kosovo case. The top UN court is expected to give its advisory opinion on the legality under international law of the Kosovo Albanian unilateral independence declaration made in February 2008. "Not much room for ambiguity for ICJ" In an interview for Belgrade daily Politika, Varadi said that it was the question itself, to which the court would have to give an answer, that left little room for ambiguity. Varadi reminded on the fact that the UN General Assembly asked its judicial organ, the ICJ, if the unilateral declaration of independence by the provisional institutions of self-government of Kosovo was in accordance with international law. Politika writes that it learned the ICJ would make its ruling known "almost certainly" at the end of July. Court officials would neither deny nor confirm that the advisory opinion would be given on July 22. Asked about the consequences of a positive answer for Serbia, which rejects the declaration, Varadi said that it would implicitly mean that Kosovo belongs to Serbia, Politika writes. "If the court said this, it would certainly give Serbia a major political argument to reopen talks," Varadi noted. Varadi also noted that unlike the case between Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina before the same court, this time the ICJ will be issuing an advisory opinion rather than a ruling. "Even though an opinion holds less weight than a ruling, if the court stated that the declaration violates international law, this would be a major political trump card for Serbia," he pointed out. The professor who represented Serbia in other cases before the court noticed however that “very often some shades are found which are not visible at first sight”, when it comes to the ruling. He added that no country could be held responsible for recognizing Kosovo “because it is a political decision”. The daily reported Varadi’s opinion that if the court ascertains that the declaration was in accordance with international law, "it would be very hard to continue the fight for Kosovo”. The professor also noticed that the “paper” itself which would confirm Serbia’s right to Kosovo would carry great political weight, but that Serbia would not be able to make requests to countries or international bodies based on it. However, a ruling that said the unilateral declaration was not in line with international law, Varadi said, would "significantly increases Serbia's argumentation and political position to put this issue on the UN agenda once again and reopen negotiations, because it would be very hard to reject initiatives after such opinion."

"Not much room for ambiguity for ICJ"

In an interview for Belgrade daily Politika, Varadi said that it was the question itself, to which the court would have to give an answer, that left little room for ambiguity.

Varadi reminded on the fact that the UN General Assembly asked its judicial organ, the ICJ, if the unilateral declaration of independence by the provisional institutions of self-government of Kosovo was in accordance with international law.

Politika writes that it learned the ICJ would make its ruling known "almost certainly" at the end of July.

Court officials would neither deny nor confirm that the advisory opinion would be given on July 22.

Asked about the consequences of a positive answer for Serbia, which rejects the declaration, Varadi said that it would implicitly mean that Kosovo belongs to Serbia, Politika writes.

"If the court said this, it would certainly give Serbia a major political argument to reopen talks," Varadi noted.

Varadi also noted that unlike the case between Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina before the same court, this time the ICJ will be issuing an advisory opinion rather than a ruling.

"Even though an opinion holds less weight than a ruling, if the court stated that the declaration violates international law, this would be a major political trump card for Serbia," he pointed out.

The professor who represented Serbia in other cases before the court noticed however that “very often some shades are found which are not visible at first sight”, when it comes to the ruling.

He added that no country could be held responsible for recognizing Kosovo “because it is a political decision”.

The daily reported Varadi’s opinion that if the court ascertains that the declaration was in accordance with international law, "it would be very hard to continue the fight for Kosovo”.

The professor also noticed that the “paper” itself which would confirm Serbia’s right to Kosovo would carry great political weight, but that Serbia would not be able to make requests to countries or international bodies based on it.

However, a ruling that said the unilateral declaration was not in line with international law, Varadi said, would "significantly increases Serbia's argumentation and political position to put this issue on the UN agenda once again and reopen negotiations, because it would be very hard to reject initiatives after such opinion."