31 Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions, which in the Court’s view applied to all conflicts in Nicaragua, thus obviating the need for the Court to decide which body of law was applicable in that case. 71. The Prosecution submits that the Trial Chamber erred by not applying the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and general principles of international humanitarian law to determine individual criminal responsibility for grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions. In the Prosecution’s submission, these sources require that there be a “demonstrable link” between the perpetrator and a Party to an international armed conflict of which the victim is not a national. 72. The Prosecution submits that the “demonstrable link” test is satisfied on the facts of the case at hand. In its view, the Army of the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina/Republika Srpska (“VRS”) had a “demonstrable link” with the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro) (“FRY”) and the Army of the FRY (“VJ”); it was not a situation of mere logistical support by the FRY to the VRS. 73. In addition, the Prosecution submits that the Trial Chamber erred in finding that the only test relied upon in Nicaragua was the “effective control” test. The Court in Nicaragua also applied an “agency” test which, the Prosecution submits, is a more appropriate standard for determining the applicability of the grave breach provisions. 74. Were either the “effective control” test or the “agency” test to be adopted by the Appeals Chamber, the Prosecution submits that in any event both tests would be satisfied on the facts of this case. To support this contention, the Prosecution looks to the fact, inter alia, that after 19 May 1992, when the Yugoslav People’s Army (“JNA”) formally withdrew from Bosnia and Herzegovina, VRS soldiers continued to receive their salaries from the government of the FRY which also funded the pensions of retired VJ soldiers who had been serving with the VRS. The Prosecution looks to a number of additional factors in support of its contention that there was more than mere logistical support by the FRY after 19 May 1992. These factors include the structures and ranks of the VRS and VJ being identical, as well as the supervision of the VRS by the FRY after that date. From those 98 Military and Paramilitary Activities in and Against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America) (Merits), Judgment, ICJ Reports (1986), p. 14 (“Nicaragua”). Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999