The international community has been witnessing the first ever interpretation and application of the Genocide Convention through the practice of the ad hoc tribunals at the international level. The significance of the practice lies in the interpretation of the elements of the crime of genocide and in the clarification of its substantive content. In addition to the practice of the ad hoc tribunals, the International Court of justice (the ICJ) in its judgement in the Case Concerning the Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Genocide Case) had to, amongst other issues, deal with the requirements of the crime of genocide. However, the findings of both the ad hoc tribunals and the ICJ in proving ne existence of the genocidal intent and the attribution of responsibility are too different from one to other. Should such a situation be perceived as a confluence or conflict in international law?