Сучасний геноцид – частина національних агресивних політик. Невизначене визначення

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