Abstract
Abstract The idea of ‘crimes against humanity’ has been uniquely successful and constitutes an essential part of international criminal law. This article offers a novel explanation for this ideational potency. It is submitted that what we came to call crimes against humanity is, in fact, made possible by uniquely human features. Examining why, nevertheless, the conjunction ‘against’ has been far more dominant than the equally plausible ‘of’, the article reveals a psychological function of international criminal law: Construing mass atrocity as the antipode of humanity allows to escape the painful feeling of cognitive dissonance that arises when confronted with the fact that atrocious events remain an undeniable part of our world. Since using international criminal law as a defence mechanism comes with several undesirable side-effects, the article concludes by calling on the international law community to understand organized mass atrocity both as ‘crimes against humanity’ and as ‘crimes of humanity’.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
