ICMP: A stocktaking – Missing persons from the armed conflicts of the 1990s

The International Commission of Missing Persons (ICMP) summary report issued in 2014 is a useful tool for sorting out various Srebrenica issues, though it should be read carefully and critically. Information contained elsewhere on this website facilitates such an alert and critical study of this document. ICMP is a major player in creating and sustaining the Srebrenica narrative. At least three items in ICMP’s promotional brochure merit special attention.

First, on page 52, in Figure 2, there is a graphic representation of ICMP’s DNA identification activity before and after 2002. That is significant because it shows plainly that prior to 2002, while ICTY Prosecution forensic teams were still conducting exhumations using classical autopsy report methodology, ICMP’s DNA-based identification efforts were minimal. They became massive only after the departure of those forensic teams which in the period between 1996 and 2001 managed to exhume and document just under 2,000 Srebrenica-related deaths, about half of whom exhibited a pattern of injury consistent with combat activity and other causes unrelated to execution. This graph corroborates our contention that the motive for ICMP’s sudden preoccupation with DNA identification was the need which then arose to close the wide numerical gap between the actually recovered bodies and the mandated figure of 8,000 execution (and by extension, genocide) victims. This damage-control operation was conducted in complete disregard of the fact that, unlike autopsy reports, DNA matching does not yield information about the time or manner of death.

Secondly, on page 54 the claim is made that the degree of certainty in ICMP’s DNA identifications is 95,5%, or even higher. These percentages are fanciful and are asserted for the purpose of impressing the untutored public; they do not reflect scientific reality. Only identical twins exhibit close to 100% matching DNA profiles. Depending on the degree of kinship, the percentage by which the closeness of the unidentified person’s profile and the reference profile furnished by a relative is expressed will vary. For parents it may be in the upper 90 percentile range, but it keeps dropping as the degree of kinship with the reference profile relative (sibling, aunt, uncle, cousin, etc.) recedes. That is why for legal purposes in most Western countries an 80% to 90% percent profile match is regarded as sufficient for plausible identification. ICMP’s outlandish claim of 95,5% and higher levels of missing persons identification is a glaring example of reckless overkill that serves no apparent purpose other than enhancing its PR image. ICMP is a hermetically closed institution which does not allow independent verification of its supposed laboratory findings. Rather than impressing, such implausible claims only further damage its credibility.

Finally, on pages 110-111 there is a useful recapitulation of the background and principal conclusions of Republic of Srpska’s 2004 “Srebrenica Report” written under the duress of the then High Commissioner in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Jeremy Ashdown. The Report is cited and lauded by ICMP. It was deservedly annulled by the Republic of Srpska parliament in 2018.

ICMP Stocktaking: Missing Persons Report 2014