Reviving the Genocide Convention’s Preventive Purpose

The contemporary discourse on genocide is dominated by international criminal law, designed to punish individuals after the fact. This article proposes a legal framework derived from Public International Law and the Genocide Convention’s original purpose to prevent genocide. We clarify the conceptual and practical differences between individual criminal responsibility for the crime of genocide and State responsibility for breaches of the Genocide Convention, including distinct standards of proof and indicia of intent. We propose correctives to prevailing errors. We argue for a more appropriate and flexible standard of proof for State breaches of the Genocide Convention. We further outline a novel method for inferring genocidal intent from systematic genocidal acts targeting a protected group, as indicia of genocidal intent. Finally, we urge States to domesticate the duty to prevent in law and policy, offering broad recommendations for the establishment of atrocity prevention institutions to better implement the duty to prevent and responsibility to protect populations at risk of mass atrocities worldwide.

Publication Details

Journal
Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)
Published
2024-12-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5038/1911-9933.18.2.1984</p&gt
Primary Topic
Libraries and Information Services
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reviving the Genocide Convention’s Preventive Purpose

Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)
Libraries and Information Services
article

Reviving the Genocide Convention’s Preventive Purpose

article en

Abstract

The contemporary discourse on genocide is dominated by international criminal law, designed to punish individuals after the fact. This article proposes a legal framework derived from Public International Law and the Genocide Convention’s original purpose to prevent genocide. We clarify the conceptual and practical differences between individual criminal responsibility for the crime of genocide and State responsibility for breaches of the Genocide Convention, including distinct standards of proof and indicia of intent. We propose correctives to prevailing errors. We argue for a more appropriate and flexible standard of proof for State breaches of the Genocide Convention. We further outline a novel method for inferring genocidal intent from systematic genocidal acts targeting a protected group, as indicia of genocidal intent. Finally, we urge States to domesticate the duty to prevent in law and policy, offering broad recommendations for the establishment of atrocity prevention institutions to better implement the duty to prevent and responsibility to protect populations at risk of mass atrocities worldwide.

Digital Commons - University of South Florida (University of South Florida)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 37%
Libraries and Information Services
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.