Editing Crimes against humanity (section)

==Origins of the term==
The term "crimes against humanity" is potentially [[ambiguous]] because of the ambiguity of the word "humanity", which originally meant the [[humanity (virtue)|quality of being human]] (first recorded in 1384) but more recently (in 1450) additionally took on another meaning as a synonym of [[mankind]].<ref name="OED humanity">{{Citation |author= |title=Oxford English Dictionary |publisher=Oxford University Press |doi=10.1093/OED/2854821022 |url=https://doi.org/10.1093/OED/2854821022|postscript=|access-date= 15 August 2023}}</ref> The context of the term in documents related to the Nuremberg trials shows that the original sense is intended.<ref>{{cite journal |first=David |last=Luban |title=A Theory of Crimes Against Humanity |url=http://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/146/ |journal=[[The Yale Journal of International Law]] |volume=29 |number=1 |date=2004 |pages=85–167}}</ref>
[[File:Leopold ii garter knight.jpg|thumb|[[Leopold II of Belgium|Leopold II]], King of the Belgians and ''de facto'' owner of the [[Congo Free State]], whose agents were accused of crimes against humanity]]

The term "crimes against humanity" was used by [[George Washington Williams]],<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=C0U74u6SyRwC|title=Confronting Genocide |date=2010|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media |isbn=978-9048198405 |editor-last=Provost |editor-first=René |page=33 |editor-last2=Akhavan |editor-first2=Payam}}</ref> an American minister, politician and historian, in a letter he wrote to the [[United States Secretary of State]] describing the [[Atrocities in the Congo Free State|atrocities]] committed by [[Leopold II of Belgium]]'s administration in the [[Congo Free State]] in 1890.<ref>Hochschild, A. ''King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror and Heroism in Colonial Africa''. Houghton Mifflin, 1999. pp. 111–112.</ref> This was an early but not, as is often claimed, the first use of the term in its modern sense in the English language. In his first annual message in December 1889, U.S. President [[Benjamin Harrison]] spoke about the slave trade in Africa as a "crime against humanity". Already in 1883, Williams had used the same term in his reflections about slavery in the United States.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Lösing|first=Felix|url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1182579739|title=A 'Crisis of Whiteness' in the 'Heart of Darkness'. Racism and the Congo Reform Movement|publisher=transcript|year=2020|isbn=978-3-8376-5498-1|edition=|location=Bielefeld|page=80|oclc=1182579739}}</ref>

In treaty law, the term originated in the Second [[Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907|Hague Convention]] of 1899 preamble and was expanded in the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907 preamble and their respective regulations, which were concerned with the codification of new rules of [[international humanitarian law]]. The preamble of the two Conventions referenced the "laws of humanity" as an expression of underlying inarticulated humanistic values.<ref>Cherif Bassiouni, M. ''Crimes against Humanity: Historical Evolution and Contemporary Application''. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011. p. 86</ref> The term is part of what is known as the [[Martens Clause]].

On May 24, 1915, the [[Allies of World War I|Allied Powers]], Britain, France, and Russia, [[May 1915 Triple Entente declaration|jointly issued a statement]] explicitly and for the first time ever charging another government with committing "a crime against humanity". An excerpt from this joint statement reads:

{{blockquote|In view of these new crimes of [[Ottoman Empire|Turkey]] against humanity and civilization, the Allied Governments announce publicly to the [[Sublime Porte]] that they will hold personally responsible for these crimes all members of the [[Young Turks|Ottoman Government]], as well as those of their agents who are implicated in such massacres.<ref>1915 declaration
*[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr933&dbname=106& Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160414183759/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/cpquery/T?&report=hr933&dbname=106& |date=2016-04-14 }} 106th Congress,2nd Session, House of Representatives 
*[http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.RES.316: Affirmation of the United States Record on the Armenian Genocide Resolution (Introduced in House of Representatives)] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160703194652/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.RES.316: |date=2016-07-03 }} 109th Congress, 1st Session, [http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HE00316: H.RES.316] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160703194650/http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:HE00316: |date=2016-07-03 }}, June 14, 2005. 15 September 2005 House Committee/Subcommittee:International Relations actions. Status: Ordered to be Reported by the Yeas and Nays: 40–7.
* "Crimes Against Humanity", 23 British Yearbook of International Law (1946) p. 181
* Schabas [[#References|References]] pp. 16–17
* [http://www.armenian-genocide.org/Affirmation.160/current_category.7/affirmation_detail.html Original source of the telegram sent by the Department of State, Washington containing the French, British and Russian joint declaration]</ref>}}

At the conclusion of the war, the Allied [[Commission of Responsibilities]] recommended the creation of a [[tribunal]] to try "violations of the laws of humanity" because the law of war did not cover atrocities committed by a state against its own nationals or allied persons.<ref name="JFS">{{cite web|url=https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/426221#page=8|title=THE ORIGINS OF CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY: FROM NUREMBERG TO ROME|author=Hakemli Makale, Sümeyra Tekin|pages=156–157|publisher=DergiPark}}</ref> However, the US representative objected to references to the "law of humanity" as being imprecise and insufficiently developed at that time, and the concept was not pursued.<ref>{{cite book|last=Cryer|first=Robert|title=An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure|url=https://archive.org/details/introductiontoin00crye|url-access=limited|year=2007|publisher=Cambridge University Press|pages=[https://archive.org/details/introductiontoin00crye/page/n234 188]|author2=Hakan Friman |author3=Darryl Robinson |author4=Elizabeth Wilmshurst }}</ref>

Nonetheless, a UN report in 1948 referred to the usage of the term "crimes against humanity" regarding the [[Armenian genocide]] as a precedent to the [[Nuremberg trials|Nuremberg]] and [[International Military Tribunal for the Far East|Tokyo trials]]. On May 15, 1948, the [[United Nations Economic and Social Council|Economic and Social Council]] presented a 384-page report prepared by the [[United Nations War Crimes Commission]] (UNWCC),<ref name="W.19">{{cite web|title=E/CN.4/W.19|url= http://undocs.org/E/CN.4/W.19 | publisher=UN.org}}</ref> set up in London (October 1943) to collect and collate information on war crimes and war criminals.<ref name="Avedian2018" /> {{rp|129}} The report was in compliance with the request by the UN Secretary-General to make arrangements for "the collection and publication of information concerning human rights arising from trials of war criminals, quislings, and traitors, and in particular from the Nuremberg trials and Tokyo Trials." The report had been prepared by members of the Legal Staff of the commission. The report is highly topical regarding the Armenian Genocide, not only because it uses the 1915 events as a historic example but also as a precedent to Articles 6 (c) and 5 (c) of the [[Nuremberg Charter|Nuremberg]] and [[Tokyo Charter]]s, and thereby as a precursor to the then newly adopted UN [[Genocide Convention]], differentiating between war crimes and crimes against humanity. By referring to the information collected during WWI and put forward by the 1919 [[Commission of Responsibilities]], the report titled "Information Concerning Human Rights Arising from Trials of War Criminals" used the Armenian case as a vivid example of crimes committed by a state against its own citizens. The report also noted that while the [[Paris Peace Conference, 1919|Paris Peace Treaties]] with Germany, Austria, Hungary and Bulgaria did not include any reference to "laws of humanity", instead basing the charges on violations of "laws and customs of war", the [[Treaty of Sèvres|Sèvres Peace Treaty]] with Turkey did so. In addition to the Articles 226–228, concerning customs of war (corresponding to Articles 228–230 of the [[Treaty of Versailles]]), the Sèvres Treaty also contained an additional Article 230, in compliance with the Allied ultimatum of May 24, 1915 regarding "crimes against humanity and civilization".<ref name="Avedian2018">{{cite book | last=Avedian | first=Vahagn | title=Knowledge and Acknowledgement in the Politics of Memory of the Armenian Genocide | url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Tv7iuQEACAAJ | year=2018|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-13-831885-4|pages=}}</ref>{{rp|130}}

===Nuremberg trials===
{{Main article|Nuremberg trials}}
[[File:Defendants in the dock at the Nuremberg Trials.jpg|thumb|right|300px|Nuremberg Trials. The defendants are in the dock. The main target of the prosecution was [[Hermann Göring]] (at the left edge on the first row of benches), considered to be the most important surviving official in the [[Nazi Germany|Third ''Reich'']] after [[Adolf Hitler|Hitler's]] death.]]

After the Second World War, the [[Nuremberg Charter]] set down the laws and procedures by which the Nuremberg trials were to be conducted. The drafters of this document were faced with the problem of how to charge the men at the Nuremberg Trial with committing [[the Holocaust]] and other state-sanctioned atrocities committed in Germany and German-allied states by the [[Nazi regime]]. As far as German law was concerned the men had committed no crime, but only followed orders. Not following orders however, in Nazi Germany, was a horribly punished crime. The problem in trying the individuals responsible for the German atrocities lay in the fact that, like in World War I, a traditional understanding of war crimes gave no provision for atrocities committed by a state on its own citizens or its allies.<ref name="JFS"/> Therefore, to solve this problem and close the loophole, Article 6 of the Charter was drafted to include not only traditional war crimes and [[crime against peace|crimes against peace]], but also ''crimes against humanity'', defined as:
{{blockquote|[[Murder]], extermination, [[Slavery|enslavement]], [[deportation]], and other [[wikt:inhumane|inhumane]] acts committed against any [[civilian]] population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.<ref>{{cite web |title=Nuremberg War Crimes Trial: The Charter Provisions|url=http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judprov.asp |website=avalon.law.yale.edu}}</ref><ref name="black book">Nicolas Werth, Karel Bartošek, Jean-Louis Panné, Jean-Louis Margolin, Andrzej Paczkowski, [[Stéphane Courtois]], ''[[The Black Book of Communism]]: Crimes, Terror, Repression'', [[Harvard University Press]], 858 pages, {{ISBN|0-674-07608-7}}, p. 6.</ref>}}

Under this definition, crimes against humanity could be punished only insofar as they could be connected somehow to war crimes or crimes against peace.<ref name=Hilberg1145/> The jurisdictional limitation was explained by the American chief representative to the London Conference, [[Robert H. Jackson]], who pointed out that it "has been a general principle from time immemorial that the internal affairs of another government are not ordinarily our business". Thus, "it is justifiable that we interfere or attempt to bring retribution to individuals or to states only because the concentration camps and the deportations were in pursuance of a common plan or enterprise of making an unjust war".<ref name=Hilberg1145>{{cite book|last1=Hilberg|first1=Raul|title=The Destruction of the European Jews|date=2003|publisher=Yale University Press|location=New Haven, CT|isbn=978-0300095579|edition=3rd|pages=1145–1147}}</ref> The judgement of the first Nuremberg trial found that "the policy of persecution, repression and murder of civilians" and persecution of Jews within Germany before the outbreak of war in 1939 were not crimes against humanity, because as "revolting and horrible as many of these crimes were, it has not been satisfactorily proved that they were done in execution of, or in connection with", war crimes or crimes against peace.<ref>"[http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judlawre.asp Judgement : The Law Relating to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity]" contained in the [[Avalon Project]] archive at [[Yale Law School]].</ref> The [[subsequent Nuremberg trials]] were conducted under Control Council Law No. 10 which included a revised definition of crimes against humanity with a wider scope.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wolfe |first1=Robert |title=Flaws in the Nuremberg Legacy: An Impediment to International War Crimes Tribunals' Prosecution of Crimes Against Humanity |journal=Holocaust and Genocide Studies |date=1 January 1998 |volume=12 |issue=3 |pages=443–444 |doi=10.1093/hgs/12.3.434}}</ref>

===Tokyo trial===
{{See also|International Military Tribunal for the Far East}}

[[File:IMTFE defendants.jpg|thumb|300px|The defendants at the Tokyo International Tribunal. General [[Hideki Tojo]] was one of the main defendants and is in the centre of the middle row.]]

The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), also known as the Tokyo trial, was convened to [[criminal procedure|try]] the leaders of the [[Empire of Japan]] for three types of crimes: "Class A" ([[crimes against peace]]), "Class B" ([[war crime]]s), and "Class C" (crimes against humanity), committed during the Second World War.

The legal basis for the trial was established by the [[Tokyo Charter|Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (CIMTFE)]] that was proclaimed on 19 January 1946. The tribunal convened on May 3, 1946, and was adjourned on November 12, 1948.

In the Tokyo Trial, Crimes against Humanity (Class C) was not applied for any suspect.<ref>{{cite book|first=Yoshinobu|last=Higurashi|script-title=ja:東京裁判|title=Tokyo Saiban|
language=ja|trans-title=The Tokyo Trial|publisher=Kodansha|year=2008|isbn=978-4062879248|pages=26, 116–119}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first=Hirofumi|last=Hayashi|authorlink=Hirofumi Hayashi|title=BC-kyū Senpan Saiban|script-title=ja:BC級戦犯裁判|language=ja|trans-title=The Class B & C War Criminal Trials|publisher=Iwanami Shoten Publishers|year=2005|isbn=978-4004309529|page=33}}</ref>{{Additional citation needed|date=April 2016}}  Prosecutions related to the [[Nanking Massacre]] were categorised as infringements upon the [[Laws of War]].{{sfn|Higurashi|2008|pp=116–119}}{{Additional citation needed|date=April 2016}}

A panel of eleven [[judge]]s presided over the IMTFE, one each from victorious Allied powers ([[United States]], [[Republic of China (1912–1949)|Republic of China]], [[Soviet Union]], [[United Kingdom]], the [[Netherlands]], [[Provisional Government of the French Republic]], [[Australia]], [[New Zealand]], [[Canada]], [[British India]], and the [[Commonwealth of the Philippines|Philippines]]).