Modern genocide: part of national aggressive policies. Undefined definition

In the modern world, unfortunately, the use of aggressive violent instruments is becoming increasingly common. One of these tools is genocide. This crime stands out among all others because it is the most dangerous and destructive. In addition, its increased danger is also due to the fact that in the vast majority of cases it is committed by organised and strong societies. After all, the author hypothesises that there is a link between the so-called disciplinary society and genocide. At the same time, bringing to justice for genocide is an extremely difficult task, which, as judicial practice shows, faces many obstacles in practice. The author sees one of these obstacles in the concept of genocide as defined in international legal documents. The article provides arguments to substantiate that the content of such an element of the concept of genocide as a protected group is incomplete and sometimes uncertain. The author points to the lack of clarity of such an element of the concept as the term extermination. In particular, it does not allow to unambiguously determine whether it is physical destruction or the creation of conditions that destroy the group as such. The author notes that the construction of the concept of genocide is also inadequate because it does not actually define the content of this phenomenon through the description of its attributive, stable features, but only lists some forms of genocide. It is emphasised that under such conditions, this concept remains undefined, which entails that when courts and tribunals consider episodes in which genocide is suspected, they replace the proof of genocide in the actions of the accused with the interpretation of certain events in terms of their attribution or non-attribution to genocide. After all, judges do not work with facts, but with interpretations of these facts. This gives rise to a variety of judicial practice and creates the basis for the politicisation of genocide trials. In conclusion, the author summarises the shortcomings of the definition and argues that the phenomenon of genocide needs to be studied with due regard for the experience of legal application of the concept of genocide and such improvement of this concept which will enable lawyers to assess facts and acts and establish their compliance with the legal definition of genocide

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Theory and practice of jurisprudence
Published
2025-09-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21564/2225-6555.2025.27.329331
Primary Topic
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Modern genocide: part of national aggressive policies. Undefined definition

М. В. Романов
Theory and practice of jurisprudence
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
article

Modern genocide: part of national aggressive policies. Undefined definition

М. В. Романов
article en

Abstract

In the modern world, unfortunately, the use of aggressive violent instruments is becoming increasingly common. One of these tools is genocide. This crime stands out among all others because it is the most dangerous and destructive. In addition, its increased danger is also due to the fact that in the vast majority of cases it is committed by organised and strong societies. After all, the author hypothesises that there is a link between the so-called disciplinary society and genocide. At the same time, bringing to justice for genocide is an extremely difficult task, which, as judicial practice shows, faces many obstacles in practice. The author sees one of these obstacles in the concept of genocide as defined in international legal documents. The article provides arguments to substantiate that the content of such an element of the concept of genocide as a protected group is incomplete and sometimes uncertain. The author points to the lack of clarity of such an element of the concept as the term extermination. In particular, it does not allow to unambiguously determine whether it is physical destruction or the creation of conditions that destroy the group as such. The author notes that the construction of the concept of genocide is also inadequate because it does not actually define the content of this phenomenon through the description of its attributive, stable features, but only lists some forms of genocide. It is emphasised that under such conditions, this concept remains undefined, which entails that when courts and tribunals consider episodes in which genocide is suspected, they replace the proof of genocide in the actions of the accused with the interpretation of certain events in terms of their attribution or non-attribution to genocide. After all, judges do not work with facts, but with interpretations of these facts. This gives rise to a variety of judicial practice and creates the basis for the politicisation of genocide trials. In conclusion, the author summarises the shortcomings of the definition and argues that the phenomenon of genocide needs to be studied with due regard for the experience of legal application of the concept of genocide and such improvement of this concept which will enable lawyers to assess facts and acts and establish their compliance with the legal definition of genocide

Theory and practice of jurisprudenceVol. 1(27)
Yaroslav Mudryi National Law University (UA)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Global Peace and Security Dynamics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.