This academic article on the important issue of whether or not state policy is an inherent element of genocide was published by Prof. Schabas in 2008. It is an implicit response to ICTY Appelate Chamber’s finding in Krstić that “the existence of a plan or policy is not a legal ingrediaent of of the crime of genocide” (Krstić Appellate Judgment, Par. 225). In the Trial Judgment in the same case, the Krstić Chamber enunciated the strikingly loose position that it “draws upon a mosaic of evidence that combines to paint a picture of what happened during those few days in July 1995” (Par. 4). Such an approach to genocide by ICTY chambers not only is counter-intuitive but suggests also an effort on their part to whittle down legal requirements for genocide in order to facilitate making a finding that in Srebrenica one actually took place. Prof. Schabas argues that “this has led to a distortion in the law, partially explained by a focus on low-level perpetrators in early trials of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, but also by mistaken analysis of previous authority.” He therefore “argues for revival of state policy as an element of such crimes.” We recommend to our readers to assess the merits of Prof. Schabas’ provocative essay, originally published in The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Vol. 98, Issue 3, 2008.