Starvation (crime)

Last updated
Starving woman during the blockade of Biafra, an event that contributed significantly to the criminalization of starvation Starving-woman-africa-biafra-nigeria-conflict-famine.jpg
Starving woman during the blockade of Biafra, an event that contributed significantly to the criminalization of starvation

Starvation of a civilian population is a war crime, a crime against humanity, and an act of genocide according to modern international criminal law. [1] [2] [3] Starvation has not always been illegal according to international law; the starvation of civilians during the siege of Leningrad was ruled to be not criminal by a United States military court, and the 1949 Geneva Convention, though imposing limits, "accepted the legality of starvation as a weapon of war in principle". [4] Historically, the development of laws against starvation has been hampered by the Western powers who wish to use blockades against their enemies; however, it was banned in 1977 by Protocol I and Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions and criminalized by the Rome Statute. Prosecutions for starvation have been rare.

Contents

Purpose and causes

Bridget Conley and Alex de Waal enumerate several reasons why a perpetrator might choose to employ starvation: "(i) extermination or genocide; (ii) control through weakening a population; (iii) gaining territorial control; (iv) flushing out a population; (v) punishment; (vi) material extraction or theft; (vii) extreme exploitation; (viii) war provisioning; and (ix) comprehensive societal transformation". [3] There are no systematic studies of the perpetration of starvation crimes. [5]

Victims

Emaciated man at Trnopolje camp in Bosnia. In 1992, the United Nations Security Council condemned "the deliberate impeding of the delivery of food and medical supplies to the civilian population of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina" and called for the prosecution of those responsible. Trnopolje Camp.jpg
Emaciated man at Trnopolje camp in Bosnia. In 1992, the United Nations Security Council condemned "the deliberate impeding of the delivery of food and medical supplies to the civilian population of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina" and called for the prosecution of those responsible.

During starvation events, most deaths occur to young children and the elderly, as well as pregnant and lactating mothers. Survivors can face lifelong health impairments. [3]

War crime

Starvation has been extensively used as a method of warfare throughout history and into the twenty-first century. For most of this time, it was not considered a criminal act. [7] [8] From the mid-nineteenth century to World War I, legal attempts to limit blockades were largely successful at preventing starvation in European wars, but not famine in colonial empires. [9] Historians Nicholas Mulder and Boyd van Dijk argue that it took a long time for starvation to be recognized as criminal because it is important to blockade tactics implemented in war, widely employed by the Western powers such as the United Kingdom and France that played a major role in the development of international law. [10]

Starvation was employed by the Allies during and after World War I, [11] by all powers during World War II, [12] and was not prohibited by the 1948 Genocide Convention or the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. [13] While the Soviet Union and Switzerland tried to limit the use of blockade in the 1949 Geneva Convention, the NATO block watered these provisions down because it wanted to preserve blockade as a weapon against communism. The final draft "accepted the legality of starvation as a weapon of war in principle". [4]

The blockade of Biafra during the Nigerian Civil War was the most well-known example during the next decades of starvation employed during a war. [14] The International Committee of the Red Cross recognized that the failure of its relief effort was due in part to the blockade law endorsed by the Western powers, and increased its efforts to secure stronger legal protections for civilians. [15] According to the 1977 Protocol II, "objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population" are protected and attacks against them are prohibited. [3]

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court includes starvation as a war crime when committed within an international armed conflict. In 2018, Switzerland proposed extending this provision to non-international armed conflict (NIAC). [6] This proposal was accepted by all of the states parties to the Rome Statute and ratified by eleven states. [16] Nevertheless, many experts argue that starvation in NIAC is already criminalized in international customary law, and prosecutions have already taken place. [6]

Legal scholar Tom Dannenbaum argues that blockade-induced starvation should be considered a form of torture and prohibited on this basis. [17]

Crimes against humanity

According to the Rome Statute, crimes against humanity does not have an explicit provision for starvation, however, starvation would satisfy the requirements of some of the enumerated crimes against humanity. One of these provisions is "other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health". [1] [18] This provision does not require deliberate intent to cause starvation, only "knowledge of the likelihood of the relevant injury". [1] Starvation could also be prosecuted as torture, although depending on the legal forum, prosecutors might need to prove a specific purpose of the starvation or that the victims were under the control of the perpetrator. [1] If the starvation results in death, murder is also a crime against humanity. In the Karadžić case, the ICTY convicted Radovan Karadžić of the crime against humanity of murder for the starvation of prisoners. For murder to be charged, the accused's act or omission must have been made with intent to kill, inflict grievous bodily harm, or knowledge that death would occur. [1] The crime against humanity of extermination includes "the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population". [18] Unlike murder, it excludes dolus eventualis , and according to Ventura, "the accused must act with the intent to kill on a massive scale or to systematically subject a large number of people to conditions that would lead to their death." [1]

Genocide

If committed with the intent to fully or partly destroy a protected group, starvation could be prosecuted as an act of genocide. [1]

International human rights law

Starvation also violates the right to food. [3]

Case law

Unlike direct killing, there is a degree of distance between the perpetrator's actions in a starvation crime and the resulting effect on the victims. This aspect makes it more difficult to prosecute. [3] [19] Historically, prosecutions for starvation have been rare. [7]

The judges at the High Command trial—a United States military court convened to judge German war crimes—the judge ruled that "the cutting off every source of sustenance from without is deemed legitimate. ... We might wish the law were otherwise, but we must administer it as we find it". [7] [20] Even such actions as killing civilians fleeing a siege was ruled to be legal during the trial. [14] Blockade causing starvation—including the siege of Leningrad where it killed hundreds of thousands of Soviet civilians—was deemed legal by Allied judges. [5]

See also

Related Research Articles

Universal jurisdiction is a legal principle that allows states or international organizations to prosecute individuals for serious crimes, such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, regardless of where the crime was committed and irrespective of the accused's nationality or residence. Rooted in the belief that certain offenses are so heinous that they threaten the international community as a whole, universal jurisdiction holds that such acts are beyond the scope of any single nation's laws. Instead, these crimes are considered to violate norms owed to the global community and fundamental principles of international law, making them prosecutable in any court that invokes this principle.

<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 October 2024, 125 states are party to the statute. Among other things, it establishes court function, jurisdiction and structure.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Blockade</span> Prevention of trade or movement by force

A blockade is the act of actively preventing a country or region from receiving or sending out food, supplies, weapons, or communications, and sometimes people, by military force. A blockade differs from an embargo or sanction, which are legal barriers to trade rather than physical barriers. It is also distinct from a siege in that a blockade is usually directed at an entire country or region, rather than a fortress or city and the objective may not always be to conquer the area.

<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">Crime of aggression</span> Aggressive use of state military force that violates the Charter of the United Nations

A crime of aggression or crime against peace is the planning, initiation, or execution of a large-scale and serious act of aggression using state military force. The definition and scope of the crime is controversial. The Rome Statute contains an exhaustive list of acts of aggression that can give rise to individual criminal responsibility, which include invasion, military occupation, annexation by the use of force, bombardment, and military blockade of ports. In general, committing an act of aggression is a leadership crime that can only be committed by those with the power to shape a state's policy of aggression, as opposed to those who discharge it.

Impunity is the ability to act with exemption from punishments, losses, or other negative consequences. In the international law of human rights, impunity is failure to bring perpetrators of human rights violations to justice and, as such, itself constitutes a denial of the victims' right to justice and redress. Impunity is especially common in countries which lack the tradition of rule of law, or suffer from pervasive corruption, or contain entrenched systems of patronage, or where the judiciary is weak or members of the security forces are protected by special jurisdictions or immunities. Impunity is sometimes considered a form of denialism of historical crimes.

The International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur was established pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1564 (2004), adopted on 18 September 2004. The resolution, passed under Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter, urged the Secretary-General to set up an international commission to investigate human rights violations committed in Darfur. The following month, the Secretary-General appointed a five-member panel of highly regarded legal experts: chairperson Antonio Cassese, Mohammed Fayek, Hina Jilani, Dumisa Ntsebeza and Thérèse Striggner Scott.

<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 group within the common plan or purpose. It 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 1991–1999.

The Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act is a statute of the Parliament of Canada. The Act implements Canada's obligations under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. In passing the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act on 24 June 2000 and having royal assent given on 29 June 2000, Canada became the first country in the world to incorporate the obligations of the Rome Statute into its domestic laws. It replaced earlier 1987 legislation targeting Nazi war criminals passed in the immediate wake of the Deschênes Commission.

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.

<i>Southern African Litigation Centre v National Director of Public Prosecutions</i> South African court case

Southern African Litigation Centre and Another v National Director of Public Prosecutions and Others was decided in the North Gauteng High Court on 8 May 2012. It concerned South Africa's obligations under international law and, in particular, under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court Act.

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">Incitement to genocide</span> Crime under international law

Incitement to genocide is a crime under international law which prohibits inciting (encouraging) the commission of genocide. An extreme form of hate speech, incitement to genocide is an inchoate offense and is theoretically subject to prosecution even if genocide does not occur, although charges have never been brought in an international court without mass violence having occurred. "Direct and public incitement to commit genocide" was forbidden by the Genocide Convention in 1948. Incitement to genocide is often cloaked in metaphor and euphemism and may take many forms beyond direct advocacy, including dehumanization and accusation in a mirror.

Gregory S. Gordon is an American professor and scholar of international law and former Legal Officer for the Office of the Prosecutor of the ICTR. Gordon is known for his academic work calling for the criminalization under international law of a broader category of speech likely to cause and/or fuel mass atrocities, and his book Atrocity Speech Law: Foundation, Fragmentation, Fruition in which he advances this argument.

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.

Universal jurisdiction investigations of war crimes in Ukraine are investigations of war crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine carried out under the legal systems of individual states under the universal jurisdiction principle of international humanitarian law. States that started investigations included Germany, Lithuania, Spain and Sweden.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Blockade of Biafra</span> 1967–70 event in the Nigerian Civil War

The blockade of Biafra by the Nigerian federal government during the Nigerian Civil War (1967–1970) resulted in a famine that ultimately cost at least a million lives and ended with the capitulation of the secessionist state of Biafra.

<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 4 5 6 7 Ventura, Manuel JB (2019). "Prosecuting Starvation under International Criminal Law". Journal of International Criminal Justice. 17 (4): 781–814. doi:10.1093/jicj/mqz043.
  2. ↑ Luciano, Simone Antonio (2023). "Starvation at the International Criminal Court: Reflections on the Available Options for the Prosecution of the Crime of Starvation". International Criminal Law Review. 23 (2): 284–320. doi: 10.1163/15718123-bja10149 . ISSN   1571-8123.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Conley, Bridget; de Waal, Alex (2019). "The Purposes of Starvation". Journal of International Criminal Justice. 17 (4): 699–722. doi: 10.1093/jicj/mqz054 .
  4. 1 2 Mulder & van Dijk 2021, pp. 383–384.
  5. 1 2 Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 371.
  6. 1 2 3 D’Alessandra, Federica; Gillett, Matthew (2019). "The War Crime of Starvation in Non-International Armed Conflict". Journal of International Criminal Justice. 17 (4): 815–847. doi:10.1093/jicj/mqz042.
  7. 1 2 3 Jordash, Wayne; Murdoch, Catriona; Holmes, Joe (1 September 2019). "Strategies for Prosecuting Mass Starvation". Journal of International Criminal Justice. 17 (4): 849–879. doi:10.1093/jicj/mqz044.
  8. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 370.
  9. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 372.
  10. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, pp. 370–371.
  11. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 374.
  12. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 377.
  13. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 378.
  14. 1 2 Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 384.
  15. ↑ Mulder & van Dijk 2021, p. 385.
  16. ↑ Kersten, Mark (16 January 2023). "Fair Labelling the Crime of Starvation: Why Ratifying the War Crime of Starvation Matters". Justice in Conflict. Retrieved 3 November 2023.
  17. ↑ Dannenbaum, Tom (2021–2022). "Siege Starvation: A War Crime of Societal Torture". Chicago Journal of International Law. 22: 368.
  18. 1 2 Rome Statute article 7
  19. ↑ Dannenbaum, Tom (2022). "Criminalizing Starvation in an Age of Mass Deprivation in War: Intent, Method, Form, and Consequence". Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law. 55: 681.
  20. ↑ Marcus, David (2003). "Famine Crimes in International Law". The American Journal of International Law. 97 (2): 245–281. doi:10.2307/3100102. ISSN   0002-9300.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.