Intent to Destroy

Abstract

This paper will outline the debate that has arisen in international law due to the requirement for an action to have been “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a... group, as such” to be considered an act of genocide. It seeks to summarize and define the usage of ‘intent’ as it relates to the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide and determine how international courts can adequately determine the intention of accused genocidaires. An examination of the two principal approaches to establishing intent, as required in the prosecution of these cases, will be conducted. The structure-based and knowledge-based approaches to understanding genocidal intent will be evaluated, with the preference given to the latter as it allows for an increased ability for courts to determine the culpability of the accused and a more effective prosecution of genocidaires. The United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (UNCG) sought to prevent a repetition of the atrocities which took place during World War II by defining and codifying and defining the crime of genocide in international law. From the early biblical era to modern-day Sudan, this heinous crime has plagued the world for centuries in almost every corner of the globe. After much debate and discourse, the then-newly formed institution of the United Nations agreed to a workable definition of 1 Marcus: Intent to Destroy Published by Scholarship@Western, 2012