Contextual element of genocide

Last updated

The contextual element of genocide is an ongoing issue in the jurisprudence of genocide. The question of whether a genocidal policy or plan is an element of the crime of genocide has implications for the rights of the accused, the right to have the law interpreted in their favor where it is ambiguous, and the risk of harm from a theory of culpability that could be satisfied by simple participation in any large-scale killing. [1]

Contents

By the legal definition of genocide, scholars mean the definition from article 2 of the Genocide Convention. The definition itself does not contain any contextual elements, nor does it not state a requirement for state or organizational involvement. [2] The US supported a strict requirement of state complicity but many countries opposed it. Arguments were made about failed states and weak states and their capability to prevent genocide from occurring. [3] Only one expert argued that "genocide should be restricted to the actions of rulers." [2]

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) interpreted the legal definition of genocide as not requiring collective involvement. According to the decisions of the ICTY, individuals acting on their own could be guilty of genocide. [2] Among scholars of genocide jurisprudence, William Schabas has opposed this interpretation, writing that it is "rather preposterous" based on historic precedent. [2] All recognized cases of genocide have been committed in "pursuit of a plan or policy of a State or state-like entity". [1]

Antonio Cassese does not consider a genocidal policy or campaign to be a legal requirement: [4]

It would be incorrect to conclude that the genocidal policy or campaign is one of the legal ingredients of genocide. Even admitting that historically genocide has been perpetrated within a genocidal context, still it is theoretically possible that a lone perpetrator may realistically aim at the destruction of a targeted group in the absence of such context.

A few months after the Trial Chamber decision in Jelisić convicted for genocide without evidence of a plan or policy, the ICC elements added a contextual element to avoid the inclusion of isolated hate crimes as genocide:

the conduct took place in the context of a manifest pattern of similar conduct directed against that group or was conduct that could itself effect such destruction

Previously, the United States had proposed the "widespread and systematic" language used for crimes against humanity. In early 2000, it was replaced by the "context of a manifest pattern" language. [5]

Inference of genocidal intent

Genocidal acts like murder, forcible transfer of children and forced sterilization are crimes themselves. What makes those crimes genocide is that they are committed with what has been called the "special intent." [6] The accused perpetrator must have the intent. Even if a great many people are killed as part of a genocidal plan, the mental state of the individual must be capable of being proven by the prosecution. The crime of genocide can not be proven by objectively identifiable conduct alone; it requires proof of the state of mind of the accused perpetrator.

Phillippe Larochelle, defense lawyer at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), has questioned the narratives of collective guilt advanced by prosecutors during their investigations and obtaining of witness statements: [7]

You are getting into the realms of holding people accountable by virtue of the fact they belonged to an organisation or collective or group which I think is a mistake, and it actually runs contrary to what the original resolution says which is if you want to find someone guilty, you have to demonstrate their own guilt, intent and acts. You cannot hold someone guilty by the fact that they belong to a government, a political party or an organisation.

Scholars[ who? ] have noted that perpetrators may seek to avoid legal consequences by claiming an absence of intent. If the intent requirement was knowledge based it would be easier to prove intent. All that would be required is an act that knowingly contributes to a genocidal campaign; under a knowledge based intent standard the requirement of a genocidal campaign would be implicit. [1] [2]

Cases

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Criminal Court</span> Intergovernmental organization and international tribunal

The International Criminal Court (ICC) is an intergovernmental organization and international tribunal seated in The Hague, Netherlands. It is the first and only permanent international court with jurisdiction to prosecute individuals for the international crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. The ICC is distinct from the International Court of Justice, an organ of the United Nations that hears disputes between states. Established in 2002 pursuant to the multilateral Rome Statute, the ICC is considered by its proponents to be a major step toward justice, and an innovation in international law and human rights.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crimes against humanity</span> Concept in international law

Crimes against humanity are certain serious crimes committed as part of a large-scale attack against civilians. Unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity can be committed during both peace and war and against a state's own nationals as well as foreign nationals. Together with war crimes, genocide, and the crime of aggression, crimes against humanity are one of the core crimes of international criminal law and, like other crimes against international law, have no temporal or jurisdictional limitations on prosecution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Rome Statute</span> 1998 international treaty establishing the International Criminal Court

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court is the treaty that established the International Criminal Court (ICC). It was adopted at a diplomatic conference in Rome, Italy on 17 July 1998 and it entered into force on 1 July 2002. As of January 2025, 125 states are party to the statute. Among other things, it establishes court function, jurisdiction and structure.

The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or the Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to pursue the enforcement of its prohibition. It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime, and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, on 9 December 1948, during the third session of the United Nations General Assembly. The Convention entered into force on 12 January 1951 and has 153 state parties as of June 2024.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Srebrenica massacre</span> 1995 mass murder by the Bosnian Serb Army

The Srebrenica massacre, also known as the Srebrenica genocide, was the July 1995 genocidal killing of more than 8,000 Bosniak Muslim men and boys in and around the town of Srebrenica during the Bosnian War. It was mainly perpetrated by units of the Bosnian Serb Army of Republika Srpska under Ratko Mladić, though the Serb paramilitary unit Scorpions also participated. The massacre was the first legally recognised genocide in Europe since the end of World War II.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bosnian genocide</span> Murder of Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats during the Bosnian War

The Bosnian genocide took place during the Bosnian War of 1992–1995 and included both the Srebrenica massacre and the wider crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing campaign perpetrated throughout areas controlled by the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS). The events in Srebrenica in 1995 included the killing of more than 8,000 Bosniak men and boys, as well as the mass expulsion of another 2500030000 Bosniak civilians by VRS units under the command of General Ratko Mladić.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International criminal law</span> Public international law

International criminal law (ICL) is a body of public international law designed to prohibit certain categories of conduct commonly viewed as serious atrocities and to make perpetrators of such conduct criminally accountable for their perpetration. The core crimes under international law are genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the crime of aggression.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Command responsibility</span> Doctrine of hierarchical accountability

In the practice of international law, command responsibility is the legal doctrine of hierarchical accountability for war crimes, whereby a commanding officer (military) and a superior officer (civil) is legally responsible for the war crimes and the crimes against humanity committed by his subordinates; thus, a commanding officer always is accountable for the acts of commission and the acts of omission of his soldiers.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bosnian genocide case</span> 2007 International Court of Justice decision

The Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide [2007] ICJ 2, commonly known as the Bosnian Genocide Case, is a public international law case decided by the International Court of Justice.

Complicity in criminal law refers to the participation in a completed criminal act of an accomplice, a partner in the crime who aids or encourages (abets) other perpetrators of that crime, and who shared with them an intent to act to complete the crime. A person is an accomplice of another person in the commission of a crime if they purpose the completion of a crime, and toward that end, if that person solicits or encourages the other person, or aids or attempts to aid in planning or committing the crime, or has legal duty to prevent that crime but fails to make an effort to prevent it properly.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joint criminal enterprise</span> Concept in international criminal law

Joint criminal enterprise (JCE) is a legal doctrine used during war crimes tribunals to allow the prosecution of members of a group for the actions of the group. This doctrine considers each member of an organized group individually responsible for crimes committed by the group within its common plan or purpose. It specifically arose through the application of the idea of common purpose and has been applied by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) to prosecute political and military leaders for mass war crimes, including genocide, committed during the Yugoslav Wars from 1991 to 1999.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Schabas</span> Canadian academic (born 1950)

William Anthony Schabas, OC is a Canadian academic specialising in international criminal and human rights law. He is professor of international law at Middlesex University in the United Kingdom, professor of international human law and human rights at Leiden University in the Netherlands, and an internationally respected expert on human rights law, genocide and the death penalty.

An atrocity crime is a violation of international criminal law that falls under the historically three legally defined international crimes of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Ethnic cleansing is widely regarded as a fourth mass atrocity crime by legal scholars and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the field, despite not yet being recognized as an independent crime under international law.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trial of Slobodan Milošević</span> UN Criminal Tribunals trial of Yugoslavias dictator during the Yugoslav Wars

The war crimes trial of Slobodan Milošević, the former President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) lasted for just over four years from 2002 until his death in 2006. Milošević faced 66 counts of crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes committed during the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s. He pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

Prosecution of gender-targeted crimes is the legal proceedings to prosecute crimes such as rape and domestic violence. The earliest documented prosecution of gender-based/targeted crimes is from 1474 when Sir Peter von Hagenbach was convicted for rapes committed by his troops. However, the trial was only successful in indicting Sir von Hagenbach with the charge of rape because the war in which the rapes occurred was "undeclared" and thus the rapes were considered illegal only because of this. Gender-targeted crimes continued to be prosecuted, but it was not until after World War II when an international criminal tribunal – the International Military Tribunal for the Far East – were officers charged for being responsible of the gender-targeted crimes and other crimes against humanity. Despite the various rape charges, the Charter of the Tokyo Tribunal did not make references to rape, and rape was considered as subordinate to other war crimes. This is also the situation for other tribunals that followed, but with the establishments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), there was more attention to the prosecution of gender-targeted crimes with each of the statutes explicitly referring to rape and other forms of gender-targeted violence.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Bosnian genocide denial</span> Denial of Bosnian genocide

Bosnian genocide denial is the act of denying the occurrence of the systematic genocide against the Bosniak Muslim population of Bosnia and Herzegovina, or asserting it did not occur in the manner or to the extent that has been established by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) through proceedings and judgments, and described by comprehensive scholarship.

Genocidal intent is the specific mental element, or mens rea, required to classify an act as genocide under international law, particularly the 1948 Genocide Convention. To establish genocide, perpetrators must be shown to have had the dolus specialis, or specific intent, to destroy a particular national, ethnic, racial, or religious group, in whole or in part. Unlike broader war crimes or crimes against humanity, genocidal intent necessitates a deliberate aim to eliminate the targeted group rather than merely displace or harm its members.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genocides in history</span>

Genocide is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part. The term was coined in 1944 by Raphael Lemkin. It is defined in Article 2 of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG) of 1948 as "any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group, as such: killing members of the group; causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; deliberately inflicting on the group's conditions of life, calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; [and] forcibly transferring children of the group to another group."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Extermination (crime)</span> The act of killing on a large scale

Extermination is a crime against humanity that consists of "the act of killing on a large scale". To be convicted of this crime, someone must play a role in a sufficiently-large scale killing of civilians, including those carried out by "the intentional infliction of conditions of life... calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population". It was first prosecuted at the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, and was included in the enumerated crimes against humanity in the Rome Statute.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Koursami, Nasour (2018). The 'Contextual Elements' of the Crime of Genocide. Berlin, Germany: Springer. pp. 157–158.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 Rodenhäuser, Tilman (2018). Organizing Rebellion: Non-State Armed Groups Under International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights Law, and International Criminal Law. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. pp. 283–286.
  3. United Nations Economic and Social Council, Ad Hoc Committee on Genocide: Summary Record of the Fourth Meeting, 1948, E/AC.25/SR.4, 3 quoted in Rodenhäuser, p. 286
  4. Rodenhäuser, Tilman (2018). Organizing Rebellion: Non-State Armed Groups Under International Humanitarian Law, Human Rights Law, and International Criminal Law. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. p. 290.
  5. Schabas, William (2010). The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press. p. 124.
  6. Gallagher, Adrian (2013). Genocide and its Threat to Contemporary International Order. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan.
  7. Thorne, Benjamin (2002). The Figure of the Witness in International Criminal Tribunals: Memory, Atrocities and Transitional Justice. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis.