Crime Of Genocide Research Articles

НАСИЛЬСТВЕННОЕ ВОСПРЕПЯТСТВОВАНИЕ ДЕТОРОЖДЕНИЮ И ПРИНУДИТЕЛЬНАЯ ПЕРЕДАЧА ДЕТЕЙ В КОНТЕКСТЕ СОДЕРЖАНИЯ ОБЪЕКТИВНОЙ СТОРОНЫ ПРЕСТУПЛЕНИЯ «ГЕНОЦИД»

The article presents a criminal law analysis of the actions included in the objective side of the crime of genocide, including the forcible obstruction of childbearing and the forced transfer of children. The problems associated with the absence in international acts of reference to violence in preventing childbearing, in contrast to the domestic criminal law, are highlighted. It is stated that the danger of manifestation of genocide, expressed in the forced transfer of children, lies in the fact that, being brought up in a different demographic environment, with a different culture and traditions, the child loses touch with his roots, with the peculiarities of his national or ethnic identity. It is emphasized that the peculiarity of this sign is such a movement that is made not just to another locality or family, but purposefully to where there exists and is different from the one to which the child belongs, national, ethnic, racial or religious group. It is pointed out that the forced transfer of a child to special institutions should carry the desire to destroy the child’s cultural ties with their demographic group, i.e. in such institutions, an idea of religion, traditions, culture, nationalities, etc., different from the inherent child, should be promoted.

Features of the organization of interaction between the international criminal court and law enforcement structures of Ukraine regarding the investigation of crimes

The article examines the statistics of the Prosecutor General's Office, the Ukrainian Helsinki Union for Human Rights, and the Kharkiv Human Rights Group regarding the investigation of international war crimes. A sociological survey of NPU employees, the prosecutor's office, lawyers, and victims of war crimes was analyzed, and problematic issues that hinder the effective investigation of international crimes were outlined based on the results. It was found that the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court in relation to the investigation of the most serious international crimes is divided into: subject, territorial, universal, temporal and substantive. The subject jurisdiction of the ICC extends to crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and crimes of aggression. The national system of investigating crimes has been studied since 2014. It is theoretically justified that the key task at the moment is to document the consequences of an armed invasion - in an intensified mode, with the aim of providing both national and international judicial institutions with sufficient evidence, the Office of the General Prosecutor, the SBU, the NPU, the National Guard of Ukraine, other law enforcement structures. The problem of ensuring security during the collection of information by law enforcement officers, as well as other persons involved in the process of transferring information, evidence, testimony, etc., is outlined, because all these processes, as a rule, take place in the combat zone or in the adjacent territories. It was concluded that in order to improve the effectiveness of the investigation of international crimes in Ukraine, it is necessary to implement as soon as possible: a clear policy regarding the national system of prosecution for international crimes; effective coordination of both national and international bodies of pretrial investigation; quick exchange of information; a generalized electronic database of documentation with access to both prosecutors and investigators.

Grouphood Promotion v. Grouphood Destruction: China’s Regional Ethnic Autonomy as Antithesis to Genocidal Intent

Abstract China’s ethnic policy is characterized by a strong promotion of ethnic equality and unity and regional ethnic autonomy under the unified multi-ethnic State framework. With regional ethnic autonomy at its core, this is a policy of precision autonomy and grouphood promotion. On the other hand, genocide is a crime of grouphood destruction, committed with the specific intent (dolus specialis) to “destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”. An examination of the main tenets of China’s ethnic policy and the specific intent element of the crime of genocide makes it crystal clear that, instead of aiming to “destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”, China’s ethnic policy aims to do the opposite, i.e., to promote the perception of the grouphood, the wellbeing and flourishing of every ethnic group. China’s policy of ethnic equality and unity and regional ethnic autonomy under the unified multiethnic State framework is thus the antithesis to genocidal intent of grouphood destruction. The increase of the Uygur population from 2.2 million to 12 million and of the life expectancy of the group from 30 to 74.7 years in Xinjiang over the past 60 years and the idolization of Uygur actors and actresses across China and beyond put on conspicuous display the successful reality of this policy.

Acts Committed by Russian Citizens in Ukraine after 24 February 2022 that May Constitute the Crime Of Genocide

Russian military aggression against Ukraine is the most flagrant violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter in recent years. Crimes committed by the Russian armed forces on the territory of Ukraine constitute the most serious crimes of international concern, as confirmed by the ICC’s arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin and Maria Lvova-Belova in regard of particular acts identified by the ICC as war crimes. The crime of genocide requires a special means rea element to be met – an intent to destroy a protected group in whole or in part. The aim of this article is to analyze definition of genocide along with its elements established in the document “Elements of Crime” in the context of two forms of genocide that were committed by Russian armed forces – killing Ukrainians and forcible transfer of children of the group.

When Is Genocide a Crime of Genocide? The Holodomor and the Katyn Massacre as a Crime of Genocide

The Holodomor and Katyn Massacre are founding crimes of the USSR and the Eastern Bloc’s state. Their common feature was an attempt to annihilate nations and prevent them from achieving independence. Quite often, both crimes are called genocide, but their legal qualification from the perspective of the then international law is extremely difficult. However, there are solid grounds for qualifying both of these crimes, and particularly the Katyn Massacre, as genocide. As a result of the development of the law of armed conflicts in international law in the 1930s and 1940s, there was a ban on committing acts that the 1948 Convention defined as genocide.

Russian Genocide in Ukraine as an Attempt to Destroy the Ukrainian Nation

The article assesses the recent and ongoing criminal acts of the Russian Federation in terms of their compliance with existing international crimes, in particular with the crime of genocide, with the aim of correct criminal-law qualification. It provides an analysis of actus reus of genocide as an international crime under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (hereinafter: Convention). The illegal action of the Russian Federation is analysed in the context of the so-called “denazification,” as the main goal of the full-scale aggression of Ukraine. The author attempts to show the distinction between the groups protected by the aforementioned Convention and the term “Nation,” which seems to have much broader sense. The author also concludes that the actus reus of the Russian perpetrators is not aimed solely at the destruction of any of the groups of the Convention, but actually at the destruction of the Ukrainian nation, its culture, language, history and statehood. In this context, the views of Raphael Lemkin, the founder of the concept of genocide as an international crime, are analysed. The necessity of international legal qualification of the actions of the Russian Federation as a new international crime has been substantiated and its conditional name – “natiocide” is proposed.

MORAL AND ETHICAL COMPONENT OF SCIENCE IN TIMES OF WAR

MORAL AND ETHICAL COMPONENT OF SCIENCE IN TIMES OF WAR

Retroactivity in the law of treaties

Problem setting. One of the most ambiguous issues in the law of treaties is retroactivity of international treaties. The principle of non-retroactivity of legal norms is recognized both in national legal systems and in international law. This principle is codified in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which states that a treaty, unless a different intention appears from the treaty or is otherwise established, does not have retroactive effect. The dispositive nature of this norm causes difficulties, which makes it necessary to study this issue in order to determine the prerequisites for the retroactivity of international treaties and to analyze practice in this area. Analysis of recent researches and publications. Scholars such as O.V. Pushnyak, I.I. Lukashuk, R.A. Kalamkaryan have studied this issue. However, there is the need for further study of this issue due to the dispositive nature of the provisions on the non-retroactivity of an international treaties, which gives states the right to act at their own discretion, thereby causing uncertainty in this matter. Purpose of research is to determine the grounds in the presence of which international treaty may have retroactive effect; examine the practice of international tribunals on this matter. Article`s main body. This study examines history of the principle of non-retroactivity of legal norms and its codification in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Provisions of article 28 of forecited Convention are precisely analyzed. Meaning of the terms “act”, “fact” and “situation” is set. Three main grounds in the presence of which Attention is given to the examination of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide and its retroactivity. Practice of international tribunals on this matter is examined. Conclusions and prospects for the development. According to the general rule, which is codified in the provisions of article 28 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, treaties do not have retroactive effect. However, given the dispositive nature of this norm, issue of the retroactivity of this or that international treaty should be studied separately. For this purpose tribunal must in each case analyze in detail both the action/fact/situation to which treaty should be applied, as well as the treaty itself, in order to decide whether the retroactivity of the treaty is expressly formulated in its provisions, results from the interpretation of a treaty or emanates from the nature of the treaty

Legal nature of the concept of genocide: international and national experience

Purpose. The purpose of our research is to characterize and compare the main approaches to the interpretation of the content of the concept of genocide in international and national law. Method. The methodology includes the complex use of scientific approaches and principles, as well as general scientific, philosophical and special scientific methods. Results. It has been established that Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and atrocities against the civilian population are an example of the fact that the crime of genocide, as a form of individual and collective responsibility of the aggressor state against a sovereign state and its population, requires a thorough legal justification, both within the international and within the limits of national law. Actually, the signs of genocide remain debatable in international law, because the planned physical destruction of a separate ethnic group or people is often interpreted as "ethnic cleansing" and at the same time the concept of "genocide" is used in order to draw attention to individual actions or inactions of the state. In the national legislation, the concept of genocide is used in accordance with the interpretation of the Holodomor of 1932-1933 and the actual events of the full-scale invasion. However, if in the case of the Holodomor, one can only monitor the preservation of historical memory, because it is impossible to bring to justice the perpetrators of the genocide against Ukrainians in the 1930s, then the modern crimes of Russians must be clearly recorded and brought to justice both in the military and above military and political leadership of the aggressor state. Scientific novelty. An analysis of the main aspects of international and national legislation defining the crime of genocide was carried out. Practical significance. The results of the research can be used in further historical and legal studies, preparation of special courses.

ZLOČIN GENOCIDA U PRAVU O ODGOVORNOSTI / THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE IN LAW OF RESPONSIBILITY

The paper deals with the issue of the responsibility of the main subjects of international law for grave breaches of obligations arising from the imperative norms of general international law in relation to the commission of the crime of genocide. The focus of this paper is in certain aspects of the relationship between individual criminal responsibility and the international responsibility of States and international organizations, which should be interpreted as two separate systems of responsibility in international law. Each system has its own special fundaments, features and characteristics. Consequently, the starting point is that the responsibility of States for genocide does not depend on the responsibility of individuals for the crime, although the International Court of Justice has made extensive use of the conclusions of the chambers of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. (Judgment from 2007). The paper therefore analyzes the question of the existence of a theoretical legal possibility for the so-called indirectly proving the responsibility of States (and international organizations) for genocide through a prior examination of the criminal responsibility of leaders, but also through proving a joint criminal enterprise for the purposes of committing the crime, or do these conceptions represent a starting point for the responsibility of the main subjects of international law or they are simply "proof" of the attribution of the act to a State? In this paper, we examine whether a joint criminal enterprise could be a reflection of a State plan and/or policy for committing the crime of genocide and how a collective plan or policy for committing that crime could be interpreted. After all, are they actually a dolus specialis of this crime, that is, whether a genocidal intent is manifested in a State precisely in a plan or policy?

Definition of the crime against the security of humanity (genocide) in international criminal law and the obligation to punish it

The relevance of this research topic in today's conditions is of great interest and lies in the fact that genocide is one of the most serious crimes against humanity, and although responsibility for it is officially established, this does not prevent new manifestations of genocide.
 In this scientific article, the author made another attempt to consider the theoretical basis of the emergence of the term "genocide" in international law. It is noted that despite the rather long existence of genocide in the world, it was only after the Second World War that genocide was qualified as the most serious crime against humanity. It was analyzed that despite the fact that the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was signed, its adopted norms could not prevent a new manifestation of this crime. The article gives known historical examples of terrible genocides. It was determined that responsibility for genocide is stipulated by the UN Convention of 1948 "On the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide and its Punishment", which formulates the composition of the crime and its forms. It was also found that the Convention does not directly refer to the responsibility of states, but only indirectly.
 The concept of international criminal respon­sibility of the state for genocide is revealed and conclusions are drawn that this concept is controversial.
 The judicial practice of the states regarding prosecution for the crime of genocide in accordance with the UN Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide has been analyzed. Conclusions were made about the application by national courts of the Genocide Convention itself, or the national legislation, which contained the definition of the crime of genocide in accordance with the Convention.
 The article also reveals current events, namely that the crimes committed by the Russians during the full-scale aggression fall under the articles of the 1948 Genocide Convention, and Ukraine is working to bring Russian criminals to justice for the genocide of the Ukrainian people.
 It was concluded that the crimes of the Russians in Ukraine are genocide by all indications and that Russia should bear responsibility for the genocide of the Ukrainian people.

Convention on International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of the Crime of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes, and other International Crimes: the focus of the provisions and challenges

The article is devoted to the analysis of the provisions of the 2023 Convention on International Cooperation in the Investigation and Prosecution of the Crime of Genocide, Crimes against Humanity, War Crimes, and other International Crimes. The analysis of the provisions of the Convention is important for assessing the capacity of existing mechanisms to respond to international crimes committed in Ukraine. Therefore, the purpose of the article was to assess the provisions of the Convention, its correlation with the legislation of Ukraine, in the aspect of prosecution those guilty of international crimes against Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.
 The article examines in detail: the scope and purpose of the Convention; obligations of criminalization; obligation to establish jurisdiction; principle «aut dedere aut judicare»; areas of mutual legal assistance; provisions regarding victims.
 It is indicated that the Convention is an important step in the development of prosecution mechanisms for war crimes. Its unique feature is the presence of norms of international criminal law, despite the name, which concerns only international cooperation, which is not at all characteristic of other conventions on mutual legal assistance. Unfortunately, however, some war crimes and crime of aggression will require additional notification of the application of the Convention, which again reduces its potential positive impact on prosecutions for international crimes.
 The analysis of the provisions of the Convention allows us to reasonably assume that in the event of its ratification: there will be a need to improve the norms of the Criminal Code of Ukraine regarding the effect of the criminal law on persons and universal jurisdiction; will require updating the norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding the provision of international legal assistance; additions to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine regarding extradition in aspects of the «aut dedere aut judicare» principle will be required; will require verification on the issue of compliance of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine with the Convention regarding the participation of victims in criminal proceedings. In addition, the issue of regulation of restitution, compensation and rehabilitation and other forms of compensation for victims of international crimes will need to be resolved.

Tinjauan Yuridis Proses Alih Status Pegawai Komisi Pemberantasan Korupsi

Human rights and democracy are concepts of communion and social relations that were born from the history of human culture. Therefore, the notion of Indonesia being a rule of law is related to the concepts of human rights and democracy, and in fact what governs is the law, not the people. The MPR also established a legal umbrella for human rights with number XVII/MPR/1998. Based on this, a legal regulation was issued, namely Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights (UU HAM), which has a vital capacity related to the most common ways of human rights in Indonesia. Recently, there was a case where there was an alleged act that was contrary to human rights, this involved KPK employees carrying out the National Insights Test (TWK) with the aim of changing the status of the previous status only as KPK but had to be transferred as a State Civil Apparatus. (ASN). The transfer of status of KPK Employees to ASN Employees with the TWK method as mandated by Perkom KPK Number 1 of 2021 is not fundamental to the regulations above, namely PP Number 41 of 2020 because the PP does not imply the existence of TWK implementation, and relates to the questions given during the TWK assessment with the interview method indicates human rights violations as regards the rights that have been violated that have been guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution and the Human Rights Law. With regard to Komnas HAM's authority to carry out investigations, it can only be carried out in cases of Serious Human Rights Violations (Crime of Genocide and Crimes against Humanity) while in cases of transferring the status of KPK employees it does not include Serious Human Rights Violations, as well as regarding the strength of recommendations that are non-binding and do not have sanctions in them, so that Komnas HAM's recommendations are relatively weak.

Darfur Model, Rwanda, and the ICTR: John Hagan’s Sociology of Genocide Continued

AbstractCore contributions from John Hagan’s scholarship on genocide are at stake in this article. First, this article examines, for the Rwandan genocide, the applicability of Hagan and Wenona Rymond-Richmond’s multi-level causal model of genocide, developed in Darfur and the Crime of Genocide. Asking how causal factors and processes highlighted in that model play out in scholarship on the Rwandan genocide, it moves toward answering the question of external validity versus historical specificity. Second, the article examines, again with a focus on Rwanda, the relationship between social scientific explanation and judicial thought. While it highlights—in line with the first author’s previous work—how judicial narratives address or select out core factors highlighted in the Darfur model, the article focuses—in line with Hagan’s Justice in the Balkans—on the question of what knowledge social science can nevertheless gain from court proceedings. An analysis of a sample of cases processed by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda identifies overlaps with social science analyses, but it also highlights distinctions.

Understanding Russia’s Actions in Ukraine as the Crime of Genocide (Translation into Ukrainian by Denys Azarov)

This is the Ukrainian-language version of the article previously published in the Journal of International Criminal Justice (Denys Azarov, Dmytro Koval, Gaiane Nuridzhanian, Volodymyr Venher, Understanding Russia’s Actions in Ukraine as the Crime of Genocide, Journal of International Criminal Justice, Volume 21, Issue 2, May 2023, Pages 233–264, https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqad018) by Oxford University Press. The translation is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0. Abstract from an English edition. The new wave of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine that began on 24 February 2022, and the intensification of the armed conflict accompanied by grave breaches of international humanitarian law, has received significant scholarly attention. Many academic interventions have examined the developments in Ukraine through the frameworks of jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Some, however, have applied a genocide lens to make sense of reported numerous and widespread violations of international humanitarian and human rights law. This article contributes to the latter stream of scholarship by contextualizing the arguments for the existence of genocidal intent behind the seemingly unrelated crimes committed by the armed forces of the Russian Federation all over Ukraine. The authors pay particular attention to the language and pseudo-historical references used by Russia’s leaders as a justification for the invasion of Ukraine and argue that these statements and expressions indicate the existence of genocidal intent. This article also reflects on the issue of the systematic destruction of cultural heritage of Ukraine as further evidence of the intent to destroy the Ukrainian nation understood as a protected national group under the Genocide Convention, at least in part. Finally, the authors analyse the genocidal acts that have apparently been committed, including killings; the causing of serious bodily or mental harm; the forcible transfer of Ukrainian children to Russia, and the deliberate infliction of conditions of life aimed at the physical destruction of the Ukrainian nation. It is stressed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the destruction of the Ukrainian nation by Russia has been pursued through commission of these prohibited acts. Their nature and large-scale character serve as further evidence of genocidal intent to destroy the Ukrainian nation.

The Hegemony of a Ruling Party as a Common Element in the Armenian Genocide, the Holodomor and the Holocaust

With the development of comparative genocide as the second generation of genocide studies over the last decades it became important to examine the Holodomor as a crime of genocide committed by the Communist party of the Soviet Union in comparative perspective with other genocides. In this article, the author offers a comparative analysis of the Holodomor with cases of genocide in the first half of the 20th century – namely, the Armenian genocide of the Ottoman Empire and the Holocaust of Nazi Germany – from the perspective of perpetrators (organizers). The author compares the three genocides as crimes under international law in terms of one of the mental elements of genocide that characterizes each of them, noting the similarities in ruling political parties as organizers of those crimes who exercised the collective intent in each of the case of genocide under analyses. The author argues that hegemony of a ruling party: the Ittihadists, the Communists, and the Nazis which substituted the state organization was a common element in the genocides perpetrated in the Ottoman Empire, the Soviet Union, and the Third Reich. Moreover, in the ongoing Russian genocide against the Ukrainian nation with culmination since 24 February 2022, it is again the ruling party – Yedinaya Rosiya (Single Russia) which is the foundation of Russian totalitarian regime that organized this crime of genocide.

Norms of international law regarding the prevention of crimes of genocide committed by the Russian Federation in the war against Ukraine

The article examines the norms of international law regarding the prevention of crimes of genocide committed by the Russian Federation in the war against Ukraine. The essence and specifics of ensuring the implementation of current provisions and norms of international criminal law regarding criminal prosecution for the commission of crimes of genocide against Russia as an aggressor state, a sponsor of terrorism, its top political and military leadership and the military, who directly commit these crimes in the beginning of February 24, 2022, were considered. full-scale war against Ukraine. It is established that the crimes of genocide are crimes against the security of humanity committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, any national, ethnic, racial or religious group as such by: a) killing members of such a group; b) causing serious bodily injury or mental disorder to members of such a group; c) deliberate creation of living conditions for such a group, designed to bring it to its complete or partial physical destruction; d) implementation of measures aimed at preventing childbirth within such a group; e) forcible transfer of children of this group to another group. The scientific developments and provisions of the current legal norms of the International Convention on the Prevention of the Crime of Genocide and its Punishment, the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, as well as the criminal law of Ukraine were studied with the aim of the need for the immediate ratification by the Parliament of Ukraine of the legal norms of the International Criminal Court and their implementation into the criminal legislation of Ukraine and Law of Ukraine “On the Judiciary and the Status of Judges” in English”.
 The author formulated reasonable proposals for improving the criminal legislation of Ukraine in accordance with the norms of international criminal law, as well as the criminal prosecution and punishment of the highest political and military leadership and the military of the Russian Federation, who directly commit crimes of genocide in the war against Ukraine.

Regarding the issue of international cooperation in against genocide (on the example of crimes committed by the russia against the ukrainian people)

In this scientific work, the authors made another attempt to consider the issue of genocide in international law. At the same time, today the issue of consideration of genocide on the territory of an independent, legal, democratic, social state with a market economy – Ukraine, which continues to be committed by the Russian Federation on the sovereign territories of the state, is quite relevant. Due to Russian aggression, the civilian population is dying on the territory of Ukraine. Every day, the Russian army attacks the critical infrastructure of Ukraine, which is damaged, leaving a large area without gas, heat, light, water, etc.
 In the scientific article, an attempt was made to consider the prospects for the prevention and countermeasures of genocide, the main influencing factors.
 In today’s conditions, the authors considered a number of international legal frameworks, in particular, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948, the Statute of the International Military Tribunal, the Geneva Conventions and Protocols adopted in 1977, 2005, etc., it can be confidently stated that the actions of the aggressor state can be qualified as committing genocide against the Ukrainian people.
 The scientific article states that institutions of international responsibility were created to prevent crimes of genocide: the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the International Tribunal in The Hague. The United Nations system as a whole, including all departments and specialized agencies, such as the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Office of Legal Affairs, the Department of Political Affairs, the Department of Public Information, is expected to play an important role in preventing genocide, Department of Peacekeeping, Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and some others.
 Let’s pay attention to the methods of recognition and identification of genocide, based on the above- mentioned institutions, and another attempt was made to consider in detail the legal definition of genocide as an international crime, the perspectives and at the same time the most problematic areas of genocide regulation were considered. We should also not forget about the official data on the number of victims due to aggression by the russia.

LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST CORRUPTION ERADICATION COMMISSION BASED ON LAW NO 19/2019

Efforts to eradicate corruption have been carried out for a long time using various methods, sanctions against perpetrators of corruption have been intensified, but almost every day we still read or hear news about corruption. The dangers of corruption in Indonesia are equated with other extraordinary crimes, namely terrorism, drug abuse, or serious environmental damage. In fact, corruption with this status is on a par with extraordinary crimes based on the Rome Statute, namely crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and crimes of aggression. This study aims to analyze the role of the Corruption Eradication Commission in law enforcement against Corruption Crimes in Indonesia Based on Law no. 19 of 2019 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission and efforts to overcome the occurrence of corruption in Indonesia. This study uses a normative juridical method, namely by referring to legal norms contained in laws and regulations and court decisions as well as legal norms that exist in society. The results of the study show that in seeking to eradicate corruption, there are several aspects that need to be addressed, namely the mentality and character of civil servants, policy makers, law enforcers and members of the public. In addition, law enforcers are required to implement a good control system and management system.

The crime of genocide, the stages of its implementation and prevention of the genocide of Anfal and the Yazidi Kurds, for example

This research entitled (Genocide, Stages of Implementation and Prevention. Genocide of Anfal and Yazidi Kurds as Examples), attempts to present the concept of genocide as one of the most serious crimes against humanity, committed by oppressive regimes and extremist parties with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group. This paper presents the process of genocide and its stages of implementation based on the theory of international genocide expert Gregory H. Stanton and shows the most important policies and mechanisms of genocide against the Kurdish people in Iraqi Kurdistan and in the region. This paper also attempts to discuss the international efforts to combat the crime of genocide, especially by the United Nations, as well as the most important mechanisms and measures that can be followed to prevent the occurrence or repetition of genocide. This study examines two examples of genocide against the Kurdish people, namely the Anfal genocide against the Kurdish people in 1988 in Iraqi Kurdistan by the Baath regime and the genocide of the Yezidi Kurds in Sinjar in 2014 by of the Islamic State