Genocide Convention Research Articles

Securing the right to assimilate: How the drafting of the genocide convention helped undermine language rights

Securing the right to assimilate: How the drafting of the genocide convention helped undermine language rights

The Genocide Convention is “Our Cause”: International Women’s Advocacy for the Criminalization of Genocide, 1945–1952

Abstract In 1948, the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide was official recognized under international law. Few, however, understand the role of international women’s rights organizations in the politics of the convention, the ratification process, and its application in the immediate postwar era. Rooted in their knowledge of Nazi atrocities and wartime activism, women’s organizations supported Raphael Lemkin’s campaign, but also critiqued the convention’s failure to address sexual violence and political repression of certain vulnerable groups. This article explores how women’s rights leaders supported the Genocide Convention as a crucial mechanism for preventing a repetition of atrocities, how they committed early on to applying the law to intervene and protect human rights, and how fissures later emerged between these various international women’s rights groups in the Cold War era.

The Impact of Incitement by Public Officials in the Commission of Genocide: the Case of Ethnic Amharas in the Oromia Region

Abstract Insecurity has worsened in one of the eleven regions of Ethiopia, Oromiya, due to the killings of innocent Amharas. While there is increasing academic attention on the origins, causes, and nature of this threat, the role of the incitement of public officials in the commission of the killings and/or genocide in the region remains understudied. Accordingly, foregrounded by the need to unravel this gap, this qualitative study contributes to the literature through organised empirical research by examining Ethiopia’s public officials’ speeches and/or incitement, which might have helped in the commission of ethnic Amhara genocide in the Oromiya region since 2018. Three critical world events served as the main theoretical foundations for the analysis of incitement to genocide: the Nuremberg Prosecutions, the United Nations Genocide Convention, and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. It was found that both Prime Minister Abiy’s and Shimelis Abdisa’s speeches have mounted to qualify as incitements to genocide by being concomitant to the context, purpose, and causation. It is thus sufficient to remark that the speeches are used to further instigate genocide against ethnic Amharas. The study’s central argument holds that the causal link between the speech in question and the massacre in the region doubles the synthesis, although the UN Convention does not require a direct causal link.

Allegations of Genocide under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (Ukr. v. Russ.) (Judgment on Preliminary Objections) (I.C.J.)

On February 2, 2024, the International Court of Justice (the Court) delivered its preliminary objections judgment in the case brought by Ukraine against Russia under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (the Genocide Convention).

ADOPTING A STRICT LIABILITY APPROACH TOWARD GENOCIDE

The Genocide Convention lists intent as a critical element that must be proven to secure convictions for genocide. Many defendants have been acquitted or convicted of lesser crimes due to the difficulty in proving genocidal intent. The argument presented in this paper is that the large-scale negative impact of genocide on humanity should be considered when defining its scope in penal legislation. A fortiori, the crime of genocide should be given similar consideration to other crimes that have been classified as strict liability crimes due to their severity and cost to society. Intent as an element should, therefore, be deduced from the general purpose of the perpetrator’s acts. Although the strict legality principle is not perfect and has some flaws, it is still the most just, effective, coherent, persuasive, and proper reading of the genocide convention. The goal here is to contribute to the conversation on the limitations of genocidal intent to the effectiveness of the enforcement of the crime of genocide in international criminal law.

Legacy media outlets also stand in dock over Gaza: How RNZ, ABC and other Western media failed to challenge Israeli war narratives

As Israel faces charges at the International Court of Justice in The Hague of breaching the 1948 Genocide Convention, for many people Western media institutions also stand in the dock. Critics have pointed to a media failure to effectively challenge a narrative that framed Israel’s actions in terms of an erroneous claim to Israeli ‘self-defence’, a de facto diplomatic cover for war crimes, ethnic cleansing and probable acts of genocide. In the Pacific, news leaders at Radio New Zealand (RNZ) and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), by alleged omission, story framing, inaccuracies, passive editorial stances, including a refusal to adjudicate contentious claims when the evidence was available, fall into the category. Such failures call into question claims of due impartiality, a fundamental tenet media outlets use to anchor their credibility as trusted sources of news. Failure to adequately create awareness of Israeli crimes also raises questions over whether state-funded public broadcasters are fulfilling the informational needs of democratic citizenship and serving the public interest, or whether they are serving the interests of a Western power elite.

Russia's Abduction of Children in Ukraine War and Applicability of UN Genocide Convention

The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether Russia's abduction of Ukrainian children falls under the provisions of genocide under international law and to suggest the political implications of Russia's abduction of Ukrainian children. Through this paper, it was pointed out that Russia's policy to annihilate Ukraine's identity in occupied areas before the invasion of Ukraine in 2022, that is, after Russia's occupation of Crimea in 2014, has been continuously implemented, and has been rationalized domestically through the Russian media. The policy of kidnapping Ukrainian children to erase their memories of their homeland and change their mother language to Russia is not just a cultural assimilation policy, but a international crime that is equivalent to “genocide” that forcibly transforms the ethnic character of a group. Today, there is little disagreement on the fact that the prohibition of serious, continuous and systematic human rights violations by the state and the prohibition of genocide have developed into norms under common international law. However, it can be said to be exceptional in that there is no precedent for an international court trial on child abduction after World War II, and there has been no opportunity to recognize its seriousness. Nevertheless, the international community should realize the seriousness of the crime of child abduction in the wake of the Ukraine war and not neglect to hold the kidnappers accountable.

Authority of the International Court of Justice in Islamic Jurisprudence

This article explores how the authority of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is perceived in fatwas on genocide and war crimes committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the 1992-1995 war. Sources include the ICJ’s judgement in Bosnia and Herzegovina v. the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia and Montenegro); verdicts of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia; two fatwas from the Islamic Community in Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Council of Muftis on war crimes against the Bosniak populations of Srebrenica, Žepa, Prijedor and the Sana Valley; and preparatory materials written by expert groups that preceded the fatwas’ issuance. Despite initial criticism of the localisation of genocide in the ICJ’s judgement, the fatwas recognise its authority in cases that apply the Genocide Convention. The argumentation of these fatwas is based on the higher objectives of Islamic law (maqasid al-Sharia), in accordance with the role of Islamic normativity in a secular state.

State Crime

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s historic judgment in the Akayesu Judgment established that rape and other forms of sexual violence can be an actus reus of genocide as defined by the United Nations Convention on Genocide Article II. The Akayesu Judgment therefore provides a logical framework to analyze a hidden episode of extreme post-colonial state violence in the newly independent Zimbabwe, namely a state policy of mass atrocities in Matabeleland and parts of the Midlands, targeting the minority Ndebele ethnic group during Operation Gukurahundi. The specific foci of this study are the patterns of mass rape and sexual violence in the military operation between 1983 and 1984 in Matabeleland. Drawing on 36 in-depth interviews with survivors from throughout Matabeleland, this study provides a critical new lens on Operation Gukurahundi through its identification of uniform systematic patterns of rape and other forms of sexual violence across Matabeleland. The article concludes that the patterns of rape and other forms of sexual violence identified in this study are indicative of a state policy of systematic genocidal rape between 1983 and 1984, deployed with the intent and effect to destroy, in part, a specific ethnic group, namely the minority Ndebele of Zimbabwe, thereby fulfilling every condition of the Genocide Convention principles of genocide.

Operation Gukurahundi: A Policy of Genocidal Rape and Sexual Violence in Zimbabwe, 1983–1984

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda’s historic judgment in the Akayesu Judgment established that rape and other forms of sexual violence can be an actus reus of genocide as defined by the United Nations Convention on Genocide Article II. The Akayesu Judgment therefore provides a logical framework to analyze a hidden episode of extreme post-colonial state violence in the newly independent Zimbabwe, namely a state policy of mass atrocities in Matabeleland and parts of the Midlands, targeting the minority Ndebele ethnic group during Operation Gukurahundi. The specific foci of this study are the patterns of mass rape and sexual violence in the military operation between 1983 and 1984 in Matabeleland. Drawing on 36 in-depth interviews with survivors from throughout Matabeleland, this study provides a critical new lens on Operation Gukurahundi through its identification of uniform systematic patterns of rape and other forms of sexual violence across Matabeleland. The article concludes that the patterns of rape and other forms of sexual violence identified in this study are indicative of a state policy of systematic genocidal rape between 1983 and 1984, deployed with the intent and effect to destroy, in part, a specific ethnic group, namely the minority Ndebele of Zimbabwe, thereby fulfilling every condition of the Genocide Convention principles of genocide.

Self-Defence As Remedial Self-Determination: Continuity in Russian Narratives to Justify Imperialism and the Use of Force

The principle of self-determination is at the centre of the Russian Federation’s (Russia’s) ‘justifications’ for using force against Ukraine and supporting the separatist entities in its eastern provinces, as demonstrated by official statements of Russia’s representatives and the oral and written submissions to the inter-state proceedings on the application of the Genocide Convention before the International Court of Justice (Ukraine v. Russia). In particular, Russia construes self-defence as an exercise of remedial self-determination, supporting territorial separation and the creation of satellite states or their annexation by the Federation. This is in continuity with Russia’s policies and argumentations utilised in other contexts such as Crimea, Abkhazia and South Ossetia. These cases differ in their context and history but share the same remedial approach to external self-determination as a purported justification to use force. This is also in partial continuity with the tradition of Soviet approaches to self-determination. Like other states’ self-indulgent ‘exceptionalism’ in international law, Russia’s cherry-picking application of self-determination reveals its instrumental usage to camouflage imperialistic aggression and expansionistic ambitions.

The Scandinavian Countries and the UN Genocide Convention, 1946–58: Constructive Pragmatism of the “Lesser” Democracies

ABSTRACT This article examines the position that three Scandinavian countries – Sweden, Norway, and Denmark – had assumed on the newly proposed crime of genocide and an international convention that addressed it. While the Great Powers’ politics vis-à-vis the draft Genocide Convention have been examined in detail, points of contestation and major concerns of so-called lesser democracies remain largely unexplored. Within the context of the UN Genocide Convention, the Scandinavian countries lived up to their reputation of democracies guided by the rule of law, yet with a caveat. The tenor of the interoffice discussions in the respective ministries in Copenhagen, Stockholm, and Oslo somewhat differed from the official statements of the representatives of Denmark, Sweden, and Norway in the United Nations. In aligning the provisions of the draft convention with the domestic legislation, the Scandinavian governments displayed the manifest lack of idealism. They regarded the passing of the Genocide Convention as an important milestone, though not at any cost. When it comes to evaluating the overall performance of each of the three Scandinavian countries, Denmark largely remained on sidelines. Norway approached the drafting of the Genocide Convention from a perspective of the national law. On the skepticism curve, Denmark (alongside Belgium and the United Kingdom) scored the highest. Norway was not far behind, though publicly it positioned itself as a principled supporter of the Genocide Convention (not unlike the United States). Sweden, then, belonged among the undecided. Significantly, due to the adopted policy of sustaining international cooperation, the Scandinavian countries did not follow the great powers in openly voicing their skepticism toward the Genocide Convention. Of the three Scandinavian delegations, the Norwegian had most consistently taken the middle road in order to ensure the broadest possible support for the Genocide Convention.

The Forcible Transfer of Children from Ukraine as Genocide

Abstract On 17 March 2023, Pre-Trial Chamber ii of the International Criminal Court (icc) issued secret warrants of arrest for President Putin and the Commissioner for Children’s Rights in the Office of the President of the Russian Federation, Ms. Lvova-Belova, for the commission of the war crime of forcible transfer of children. This article argues that there are “reasonable grounds to believe”, as the icc Statute requires for the arrest warrant stage, that both Putin and Lvova-Belova bear individual criminal responsibility for the forcible transfer of Ukrainian children as a crime of genocide; however, two types of considerations – general and particular – prevented the issuing of arrest warrants for genocide crimes. In Section 2, after a short historical-legal review of the formulation of Article 2(e) of the Genocide Convention (gc), the article notes that despite the significant number of cases of children being transferred and removed from their families that have taken place since the gc was adopted, the provision has been dormant and considered anachronistic and was rarely applied by an international or a local court. Section 3 proceeds with a legal analysis of the elements of the crime of the forced transfer of children and the genocidal special intent. Section 4 parses the case study of the forcible transfer of children from Ukraine as a crime of genocide. Section 5 analyses the litigation of the crime of genocide in the icc through the only case of genocide the court has addressed so far: the arrest warrant for Sudan’s former president, Omar al-Bashir. Section 6 concludes with a forecast that despite the sufficient legal basis for issuing arrest warrants for Putin and Lvova-Belova, practical and political considerations would impede the icc from doing so.

The International Criminal Court’s Opportunity to Correct the Erroneous Interpretation of the Mens Rea for Genocide

ABSTRACT: The destruction of a group by a process of forced conversion or assimilation, wherein the identity of a protected group, be it national, ethnic, racial, or religious, is eradicated and replaced with another identity is not covered by the prevailing definition of the mens rea of the crime of genocide, which requires that a perpetrator intend the physical or biological destruction of a protected group. This article argues that genocide has been inaccurately applied by international courts, based on an incorrect interpretation of the Genocide Convention that has dominated international law for twenty years, and discusses what non-physical/biological destruction of a group looks like in practice. The article proposes that events in Ukraine give the International Criminal Court, which has yet to definitively interpret the crime of genocide, an opportunity to correct this legal error and thereby ensure that genocide offers better protection to groups from destruction.

INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE BOYCOTT PRODUCTS SUSPECTED OF SUPPORTING GENOCIDE

This jurnal explores the significance of boycotting products suspected of supporting genocide within the framework of international law. The complex relationship between human rights, state responsibility to prevent genocide, and the international community's response to violations of international norms is at the heart of this investigation. The study defines boycott as a form of isolation undertaken by individuals or groups against an entity, encompassing actions like blacklisting, embargoes, and blockades, targeting various products from consumer goods to academic and sports products. Governments, either individually or collectively, issue boycott resolutions, as exemplified by Arab countries' historic boycott against Israel. The paper also introduces other forms of boycotts, such as investment withdrawal, divestment, and sanctions, citing examples like Sudan. Framing the discussion within the context of the United Nations Genocide Convention, the jurnal argues that product boycotts can serve as tools for enforcing compliance with the convention, holding states accountable for preventing genocide. Moreover, product boycotts play a vital role in the international public sphere, mobilizing global public opinion and exerting social, economic, and political pressure on perpetrators of genocide. The study addresses critical questions, focusing on the role of product boycotts as sanctions in international law and their impact on garnering global support and pressuring perpetrators, while providing a voice to victims. The research methodology employed is normative legal research, relying on literature review and secondary legal sources, including journals, articles, and news related to the international legal analysis of the boycott of products suspected of supporting genocide. The jurnal concludes by emphasizing the importance of boycotting products suspected of supporting genocide within the international legal framework, not only as a form of protest but as a

Interpretation and Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the Recent Practice of the International Court of Justice

The article “Interpretation and application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide in the recent practice of the International Court of Justice”, written by Iryna Hrebenets and Anhelina Rozhets, summarize the recent practice of genocide cases of ICJ, find its main points and how it reflects in international law system. It was defined that the topic of genocide can not be discussed without an emotional approach to it, paying attention to the substance of the Genocide Convention – its universality of participation, binding states and not individuals. It was defined the main aim of the Convention – prevention of genocide, stopping of committing it, and punishment for guilty parties. In that point of view, it could not be placed any reservations in practice, as they would contradict the aims of the Convention. The peculiarity of punishing the state for genocide actions is the obligation to prove the connection between individuals who committed genocide and state’s financial involvement or awareness of committed actions with the specific intent to destroy in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. The interpretations of the Convention proved the possibility of the effective fulfilment of erga omnes obligations, related to the prevention of genocide by the third and not directly related states. As the ICJ is the only legal forum that has the opportunity to interpret the Genocide Convention, thus, how it applies and interprets the Genocide Convention – shows how international law reflects the changes in the world order. Today it can be seen the results of it in the ongoing case Ukraine v. Russia, where the last acquisitions are applied in practice.

Review of Open Gaza: Architectures of Hope

At a time when Gaza is subjected to an unrelenting Israeli military campaign and forced starvation, and when the International Court of Justice has ruled Israel’s war aims violate Palestinian rights under the Genocide Convention, you would be forgiven for not turning to a book on architecture to learn about Gaza. Still, I recommend Open Gaza to JAE readers as a means of considering the role of architecture and design professionals relative to these events and their aftermaths. Borne out of the editors’ anguish during another major assault—the horrific events of Operation Protective Edge in 2014, itself just one of several such assaults in past decades—this volume offers a powerful and engaging, yet approachable, entry point into the subject, especially for students.

Eliminating the Criterion of Intent (mens rea, dolus specialis) for Proof of Genocide is Essential to a New Jus Gentium: Israel’s Military Operations in Gaza 2023-2024

For proof of genocide, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (1948) stipulates that a manifested or reasonably inferred intent (mens rea, dolus specialis) to destroy a group as such is essential. In the absence of proof of intent, any atrocities committed in armed conflict can be deemed, at most, crimes against humanity or war crimes. Despite technological enhancements of military operations that have altered the destructive capacity of armed forces, the criterion of intent remains a high bar to speedy judicial review and judgment in both the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC). In consequence, wanton death and destruction continue unabated in armed conflicts. Furthermore, all too often there is no mitigating intervention authorized by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in situations of alleged genocide, usually because of the exercise of the veto from a permanent member (the USA, Russian Federation, China, the UK, and France). The question arises, therefore, whether it is not past time to revise the Convention for the express purpose of eliminating the criterion of intent entirely. Eliminating the criterion of mens rea would allow petitioners to the Courts to submit only the evidence of genocidal acts (actus reus). It is argued here that this revision is in the interest of international peace and security and, thereby, international justice, i.e., a new jus gentium (law of nations, law of peoples). Keywords: Genocide Convention; mens rea; Kantian deontology; universal law; jus gentium; Israeli-Palestinian conflict

Review of Open Gaza: Architectures of Hope

At a time when Gaza is subjected to an unrelenting Israeli military campaign and forced starvation, and when the International Court of Justice has ruled Israel’s war aims violate Palestinian rights under the Genocide Convention, you would be forgiven for not turning to a book on architecture to learn about Gaza. Still, I recommend Open Gaza to JAE readers as a means of considering the role of architecture and design professionals relative to these events and their aftermaths. Borne out of the editors’ anguish during another major assault—the horrific events of Operation Protective Edge in 2014, itself just one of several such assaults in past decades—this volume offers a powerful and engaging, yet approachable, entry point into the subject, especially for students.

The application of retroactive force of the criminal law in relation to the crime of genocide: international and national aspects

The subject of this study is genocide as a crime against the peace and security of mankind. The author raises the problem of the possibility of applying the retroactive force of the criminal law to an act of this kind, despite the absence of such a provision in article 10 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Special attention is paid to issues of international law, as well as judicial precedents related to the consideration of disputes on this issue. Considering the latter, the author subjects them to a deep systematic analysis for the possibility of initiating criminal proceedings and investigating crimes subject to qualification as genocide within the framework of the current criminal legislation of the Russian Federation. The role of the International Military Tribunal for War Criminals of the European Axis Countries (Nuremberg Tribunal) in the formulation and subsequent consolidation of the norm of genocide is emphasized. In his research, the author uses such methods as historical, systemic, formal legal, comparative, as well as methods of analysis, deduction and formal logic. The author's special contribution to the consideration of this issue is the study of the historical and philosophical foundations, the moral and ethical side of giving retroactive force to the norms on genocide both from the point of view of international and from the point of view of national criminal law. The main result of the study is the author's conclusion about the possibility of applying the Genocide Convention retrospectively, as well as the need to consolidate in the legislation of the Russian Federation the provision on the need to make the criminal law retroactive in relation to crimes against the peace and security of mankind by amending part 2 of Article 10 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Expanding the definition of this norm would also simplify criminal procedural activities in the context of initiating criminal cases on these circumstances and their investigation.