Extermination (crime)

Last updated

Extermination is a crime against humanity that consists of "the act of killing on a large scale". [1] To be convicted of this crime, someone must play a role in a sufficiently-large scale killing of civilians, including those carried out by "the intentional infliction of conditions of life... calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population". [2] It was first prosecuted at the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, and was included in the enumerated crimes against humanity in the Rome Statute.

Contents

History

Extermination was listed as a crime against humanity in the Nuremberg charter (as well as the charter for the Tokyo trial) and was first tried at the International Military Tribunal in 1945. [3] [4] Czech jurist Egon Schwelb argued that the purpose of its inclusion, alongside murder, was to enable the prosecution of perpetrators too remote from the act of killing to be charged as murder. [5] [4] Following these prosecutions, it was generally accepted to have become part of customary international law. [6] It was codified into the Rome Statute in 1998. [1]

Elements

Like other crimes against humanity, extermination must be "committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population", but can occur in peacetime as well as wartime (unlike war crimes). [7] [8] Similar to other international crimes, extermination includes both an actus reus (an act of large-scale killing) and mens rea (the intent to participate in this action). [9] The definition of the crime according to the Rome Statute is mostly aligned with that of customary international law. According to William Schabas and other jurists, the only difference from customary international law was to specify that the crime of extermination includes [1] "the intentional infliction of conditions of life, inter alia the deprivation of access to food and medicine, calculated to bring about the destruction of part of a population" [2] —phrasing that Schabas argues was inspired by one of the elements of the crime of genocide, [1] "deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part." [10]

Actus reus

The perpetrator's action must have composed part of a large-scale killing, whether one that took place at one time or one location, or a series of incidents that accumulate to sufficient massiveness. [11] A plan or policy is not necessary. [9] Separate incidents must be sufficiently connected to each other to be understood as one operation. [12] There is no minimum size threshold for the crime; it is assessed based on the circumstances, although case law has recognized incidents ranging from dozens to thousands of victims. [13] The collective nature of the crime is satisfied by being of sufficient scale. The victims may be targeted as individuals, and it is not required that the crime target a particular group of civilians or aim at the extermination of part of this group. [14] (Similar acts not connected to large-scale killing are likely to count as the crime against humanity of murder instead). [15] Playing a role in the part of killing at least one person as part of a mass killing event is sufficient, [16] although the prosecution does not need to prove that the accused caused the death of any particular person. The accused's role might be commission, omission, or a combination of both; encouragement, assistance, or indirect planning. [17] The method of killing is not relevant; it could be carried out indirectly, for example depriving civilians of food or medicine, "creating a humanitarian crisis", blocking aid delivery, forcing people on a death march, or refusing shelter. [2]

Mens rea

The accused must have intended to engage in large scale killings, or to subject a large number of people to conditions that would be likely to cause their deaths. [18] It is not required that the accused personally intended to kill on a large scale if it can be proven that their action was committed with the knowledge that it formed part of a sufficiently large-scale killing event. [19] This might be proved by various means, such as large-scale logistics needed for certain types of killing. [20] The motives for committing the crime are irrelevant; [21] unlike persecution, discriminatory intent is not required. [22]

Comparison with other international crimes

Extermination (as well as the crime against humanity of murder) is similar to genocide, and could cover the same events. [23] [24] Unlike genocide, extermination as a crime against humanity is not required to be committed with intent to destroy an ethnic, religious, or national group. [25] [24] Extermination is a crime committed against individuals, although on a large scale. [26]

The same underlying events might support a prosecution for extermination as well as the war crime of starvation. [8]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genocide</span> Intentional destruction of a people

Genocide is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nuremberg trials</span> Series of military trials at the end of World War II

The Nuremberg trials were held by the Allies against representatives of the defeated Nazi Germany for plotting and carrying out invasions of other countries and atrocities against their citizens in World War II.

Universal jurisdiction is a legal principle that allows states or international organizations to claim criminal jurisdiction over an accused person regardless of where the alleged crime was committed, and regardless of the accused's nationality, country of residence, or any other relation to the prosecuting entity. Crimes prosecuted under universal jurisdiction are considered crimes against all, too serious to tolerate jurisdictional arbitrage. The concept of universal jurisdiction is therefore closely linked to the idea that some international norms are erga omnes, or owed to the entire world community, as well as to the concept of jus cogens – that certain international law obligations are binding on all states.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crimes against humanity</span> Serious crimes committed as part of a large-scale attack against civilians

Crimes against humanity are certain serious crimes committed as part of a large-scale attack against civilians. Unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity can be committed during both peace and war and against a state's own nationals as well as foreign nationals. Together with war crimes, genocide, and the crime of aggression, crimes against humanity are one of the core crimes of international criminal law, and like other crimes against international law have no temporal or jurisdictional limitations on prosecution.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda</span> 1994 court of the United Nations Security Council

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda was an international court established in November 1994 by the United Nations Security Council in Resolution 955 in order to adjudicate people charged for the Rwandan genocide and other serious violations of international law in Rwanda, or by Rwandan citizens in nearby states, between 1 January and 31 December 1994. The court eventually convicted 61 individuals and acquitted 14.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Genocidal massacre</span> Small-scale massacres with genocidal component

The term genocidal massacre was introduced by Leo Kuper (1908–1994) to describe incidents which have a genocidal component but are committed on a smaller scale when they are compared to genocides such as the Rwandan genocide. Others such as Robert Melson, who also makes a similar differentiation, class genocidal massacres as "partial genocide".

<i>Einsatzgruppen</i> trial Ninth of the 12 trials for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the Nazis

The Einsatzgruppen trial was the ninth of the twelve trials for war crimes and crimes against humanity that the US authorities held in their occupation zone in Germany in Nuremberg after the end of World War II. These twelve trials were all held before US military courts, not before the International Military Tribunal. They took place in the same rooms at the Palace of Justice. The twelve US trials are collectively known as the "Subsequent Nuremberg trials" or, more formally, as the "Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals" (NMT).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Crime of aggression</span> Aggressive use of state military force that violates the Charter of the United Nations

A crime of aggression or crime against peace is the planning, initiation, or execution of a large-scale and serious act of aggression using state military force. The definition and scope of the crime is controversial. The Rome Statute contains an exhaustive list of acts of aggression that can give rise to individual criminal responsibility, which include invasion, military occupation, annexation by the use of force, bombardment, and military blockade of ports. In general, committing an act of aggression is a leadership crime that can only be committed by those with the power to shape a state's policy of aggression, as opposed to those who discharge it.

A war crimes trial is the trial of persons charged with criminal violation of the laws and customs of war and related principles of international law committed during armed conflict.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joint criminal enterprise</span> Concept in international criminal law

Joint criminal enterprise (JCE) is a legal doctrine used during war crimes tribunals to allow the prosecution of members of a group for the actions of the group. This doctrine considers each member of an organized group individually responsible for crimes committed by group within the common plan or purpose. It arose through the application of the idea of common purpose and has been applied by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia to prosecute political and military leaders for mass war crimes, including genocide, committed during the Yugoslav Wars 1991–1999.

Callixte Mbarushimana is a Hutu Rwandan and former United Nations employee (1992–2001) who is alleged to have participated in the Rwandan genocide of 1994. On 28 September 2010, Mbarushimana was indicted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague for crimes against humanity and war crimes allegedly committed in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in 2009. He was arrested in France in October 2010 and extradited to the ICC on 25 January 2011. However, he was released on 23 December 2011 as the ICC found there was insufficient evidence for prosecuting him.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">William Schabas</span> Canadian academic (born 1950)

William Anthony Schabas, OC is a Canadian academic specialising in international criminal and human rights law. He is professor of international law at Middlesex University in the United Kingdom, professor of international human law and human rights at Leiden University in the Netherlands, and an internationally respected expert on human rights law, genocide and the death penalty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eichmann trial</span> 1961 trial of Adolf Eichmann

The Eichmann trial was the 1961 trial in Israel of major Holocaust perpetrator Adolf Eichmann who was captured in Argentina by Israeli agents and brought to Israel to stand trial. The capturing of Eichmann was criticized by the United Nations, calling it a "violation of the sovereignty of a Member State". His trial, which opened on 11 April 1961, was televised and broadcast internationally, intended to educate about the crimes committed against Jews by Nazi Germany, which had been secondary to the Nuremberg trials which addressed other war crimes of the Nazi regime. Prosecutor and Attorney General Gideon Hausner also tried to challenge the portrayal of Jewish functionaries that had emerged in the earlier trials, showing them at worst as victims forced to carry out Nazi decrees while minimizing the "gray zone" of morally questionable behavior. Hausner later wrote that available archival documents "would have sufficed to get Eichmann sentenced ten times over"; nevertheless, he summoned more than 100 witnesses, most of whom had never met the defendant, for didactic purposes. Defense attorney Robert Servatius refused the offers of twelve survivors who agreed to testify for the defense, exposing what they considered immoral behavior by other Jews. Political philosopher Hannah Arendt reported on the trial in her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. The book had enormous impact in popular culture, but its ideas have become increasingly controversial.

An atrocity crime is a violation of international criminal law that falls under the historically three legally defined international crimes of genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. Ethnic cleansing is widely regarded as a fourth mass atrocity crime by legal scholars and international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) working in the field, despite not yet being recognized as an independent crime under international law.

Hate media is media that contributes to the demonization and stigmatization of people who belong to different groups. It has played an influential role in the incitement to genocide, with notable examples of it being Radio Televizija Srbije during the wars in Yugoslavia, Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines (RTLM) during the Rwandan genocide, and Nazi Germany's Der Stürmer newspaper.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Trial of Slobodan Milošević</span> UN Criminal Tribunals trial of Yugoslavias dictator during the Yugoslav Wars

The war crimes trial of Slobodan Milošević, the former President of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) lasted for just over four years from 2002 until his death in 2006. Milošević faced 66 counts of crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes committed during the Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s. He pleaded not guilty to all the charges.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Incitement to genocide</span> Crime under international law

Incitement to genocide is a crime under international law which prohibits inciting (encouraging) the commission of genocide. An extreme form of hate speech, incitement to genocide is an inchoate offense and is theoretically subject to prosecution even if genocide does not occur, although charges have never been brought in an international court without mass violence having occurred. "Direct and public incitement to commit genocide" was forbidden by the Genocide Convention in 1948. Incitement to genocide is often cloaked in metaphor and euphemism and may take many forms beyond direct advocacy, including dehumanization and accusation in a mirror.

The contextual element of genocide is an ongoing issue in the jurisprudence of genocide; the question of whether a genocidal policy or plan is an element of the crime of genocide has implications for the rights of the accused, the right to have the law interpreted in their favor where it is ambiguous, and the risk of harm from a theory of culpability that could be satisfied by simple participation in any large-scale killing.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Starvation (crime)</span> Treatment of starvation as a crime under international law

Starvation of a civilian population is a war crime, a crime against humanity, or an act of genocide according to modern international criminal law. Starvation has not always been illegal according to international law; the starvation of civilians during the siege of Leningrad was ruled to be not criminal by a United States military court, and the 1949 Geneva Convention, though imposing limits, "accepted the legality of starvation as a weapon of war in principle". Historically, the development of laws against starvation has been hampered by the Western powers who wish to use blockades against their enemies; however, it was banned in the 1977 by Protocol I and Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions and criminalized by the Rome Statute. Prosecutions for starvation have been rare.

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 Mettraux 2020, p. 388.
  2. 1 2 3 Mettraux 2020, p. 402.
  3. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 383.
  4. 1 2 Schwelb, Egon (1946). "Crimes against Humanity". British Year Book of International Law. 23: 178.
  5. ↑ Mettraux 2020, pp. 383–384.
  6. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 384.
  7. ↑ "United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect". www.un.org. Retrieved 12 February 2024.
  8. 1 2 Mettraux 2020, p. 411.
  9. 1 2 Mettraux 2020, p. 386.
  10. ↑ Drumbl, Mark A. (2011). "The crime of genocide". Research Handbook on International Criminal Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. ISBN   978-0-85793-322-5.
  11. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 391.
  12. ↑ Mettraux 2020, pp. 391–394.
  13. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 390.
  14. ↑ Mettraux 2020, pp. 395–396.
  15. ↑ Murray 2011, p. 600.
  16. ↑ Mettraux 2020, pp. 398–399.
  17. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 400.
  18. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 404.
  19. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 405.
  20. ↑ Mettraux 2020, pp. 402, 408.
  21. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 408.
  22. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 407.
  23. ↑ Mettraux 2020, pp. 403, 409.
  24. 1 2 Murray, Alexandar R. J. (2011). "Does International Criminal Law Still Require a Crime of Crimes: A Comparative Review of Genocide and Crimes against Humanity". Goettingen Journal of International Law. 3: 600–602.
  25. ↑ Ratner, Steven R. (2007). "Can We Compare Evils - The Enduring Debate of Genocide and Crimes against Humanity". Washington University Global Studies Law Review. 6: 583.
  26. ↑ Mettraux 2020, p. 409.

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.