Rethinking Genocidal Intent: An Interpretation under the International Law and the Jurisprudence of International Criminal Tribunals
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58829/lp.9.1.2022.58-78Keywords:
Genocidal intent, Genocide Convention, Particular group, International criminal law, DestructionAbstract
Many criminal lawyers and scholars of criminal law have applied an analytical method to examine the elements of crime, and such elements are comprised of subjective elements (mens rea) and objective elements (actus reus). According to this, a crime is either an act or omission with a psychological bond relating to the physical act of the criminal. Regarding the crime of genocide, its elements are derived from the definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute. The Genocide Convention defines genocide as the commission of an act with the intent to destroy, either wholly or partly, a national, racial, ethnical, or religious group. However, the ‘genocidal intent’ or mental element to commit the crime of genocide was not considered in the military trials of Nuremberg and Tokyo. This ‘genocidal intent’ received its very first attention during the trials of two ad hoc international tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. This paper attempts to discuss the definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute. This paper, then, focuses on the mental element of genocide and the approach of the international criminal courts during the trial of genocide.
Abstrak
Banyak ahli hukum pidana dan sarjana hukum pidana telah menerapkan metode analisis untuk mengkaji unsur-unsur kejahatan dan unsur-unsur tersebut terdiri dari unsur subyektif (mens rea) dan unsur obyektif (actus reus). Menurut ini, kejahatan adalah perbuatan atau kelalaian dengan ikatan psikologis yang berkaitan dengan perbuatan fisik pelaku kejahatan. Mengenai kejahatan genosida, unsur-unsurnya diturunkan dari pengertian genosida di bawah Konvensi Genosida dan Statuta Roma. Konvensi Genosida mendefinisikan genosida sebagai tindakan yang bertujuan untuk menghancurkan baik seluruhnya atau sebagian, kelompok bangsa, ras, etnis atau agama. Namun, ‘niat genosida’ atau unsur mental untuk melakukan kejahatan genosida tidak dipertimbangkan dalam pengadilan militer di Nuremberg dan Tokyo. ‘Niat genosida’ ini mendapat perhatian pertama selama persidangan dua pengadilan internasional ad hoc untuk Bekas Yugoslavia dan Rwanda. Tulisan ini mencoba untuk membahas definisi genosida di bawah Konvensi Genosida dan Statuta Roma. Artikel tersebut kemudian berfokus pada unsur mental genosida dan pendekatan pengadilan pidana internasional selama persidangan genosida.
Kata kunci: niat genosida, konvensi genosida, kelompok tertentu, hukum pidana internasional, penghancuran
References
Ambos, Kai. “What does ‘intent to destroy’in genocide mean?.” International Review of the Red Cross 91, no. 876 (2009): 833-858.
Aptel, Cécile. “The Intent to Commit Genocide in the Case Law of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda.” Criminal Law Forum 13, no. 3 (2002): 273-291.
Arnold, Roberta. “The Mens Rea of Genocide under the Statute of the International Criminal Court.” Criminal Law Forum 14, no. 2 (2003): 127-151.
Aydin, Devrim. “The interpretation of genocidal intent under the genocide convention and the jurisprudence of international courts.” The Journal of Criminal Law 78, no. 5 (2014): 423-441.
Bartov, Omer. “Seeking the roots of modern genocide: On the macro-and microhistory of mass murder. In The Specter of Genocide: Mass murder in historical perspective, edited by Robert Gellately and Ben Kiernan.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2003): 75-96.
Billah, Maruf. “Prosecuting Crimes against Humanity and Genocide at the International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh: An Approach to International Criminal Law Standards.” Laws 10, no. 4 (2021): 1-34.
Fletcher, George P., and Jens David Ohlin. “Reclaiming fundamental principles of criminal law in the Darfur case.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 3, no. 3 (2005): 539-561.
Gelardi, Michelle. il Dolo Specifico. Padova: CEDAM Editrice, 1996.
Greenawalt, Alexander KA. “Rethinking genocidal intent: the case for a knowledge-based interpretation.” Columbia Law Review 99, no. 8 (1999): 2259-2294. doi:10.2307/1123611.
Jefferson, Michael. Criminal Law. The Foundation Studies in Law Series. Pearson Education UK, 2006.
Jescheck, Hans-Heinrich. “The General Principles of International Criminal Law Set Out in Nuremberg, as Mirrored in the ICC Statute.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 2, no. 1 (2004): 38-38.
Lemkin, Raphael. “Genocide as a crime under international law.” American Journal of International Law 41, no. 1 (1947): 145-151.
Martinez, Jenny S. “Understanding Mens Rea in Command Responsibility: From Yamashita to Blaskic and Beyond.” Journal of International Criminal Justice 5, no. 3 (2007): 638-638.
Melson, Robert. Revolution and genocide: On the origins of the Armenian genocide and the Holocaust. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Nersessian, David L. “The contours of genocidal intent: Troubling jurisprudence from the international criminal tribunals.” Texas International Law Journal 37, no. 2 (2002): 231-275.
O’Brian, W. International Crimes in D. L. Sills and R. K. Merton (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences, vol. VII. New York: MacMillan, 1968.
Pisani, N. "The Mental Element in International Crime in F. Lattanzi et W. Schabas." Essays on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Aquila: il Serente Edittrice, 2004.
Ronzitti, N. "Genocidio." Enciclopedia del diritto 17. Milano: Giuffre Editrice, 1969.
Schabas, William A. “Was genocide committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina? first judgments of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia.” Fordham International Law Journal 25, no. 1 (2001): 23-53.
Smith, John Cyril. and Hogan, Brian. Criminal Law. London: Butterworths, 1999.
Stone, Dan. “Raphael Lemkin on the Holocaust.” Journal of Genocide Research 7, no. 4 (2005): 539-550.
Triffterer, Otto. “Genocide, its particular intent to destroy in whole or in part the group as such.” Leiden Journal of International Law 14, no. 2 (2001): 399-408.
Vest, Hans. “A structure-based concept of genocidal intent.” Journal of international criminal justice 5, no. 4 (2007): 781-797.
Cases
Judgment on the Appeal of the Prosecutor against the ‘Decision on the Prosecution’s Application for a Warrant of Arrest against Omar Hassan Ahmad Al Bashir’, 3 February 2010, available at http://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/doc/doc817795.pdf, accessed 3 November 2022.
Karadzic and Mladic, ICTY-95-5-R61 and IT-95-18-R 61 Judgment, 11 July 1996.
Legality of Use of Force (Yugoslavia v United States of America and others), 2 June 1999, available at http://www.haguejusticeportal.net/index.php?id=6211, accessed 3 November 2022.
Prosecutor vs. Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 2 September 1998.
Prosecutor vs. Jelisic, IT-95-10-A, Judgment, 5 July 2001.
Prosecutor vs. Kambanda, Case No. ICTR 97-23-S, Judgment and Sentence, 4 December 1998.
Prosecutor vs. Krstic, Case No. IT-98-33-T, Judgment, 2 August 2001.
Prosecutor vs. Musema, Case No. ICTR-96-13-A, Judgment, 27 January 2000.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Author(s)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
