Editing Genocide Convention (section)

==Definition of genocide==
Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as:
{{blockquote|... any of the following acts committed with [[genocidal intent|intent to destroy]], [[Genocide#"In whole or in part"|in whole or in part]], a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
:(a) Killing members of the group;
:(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
:(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
:(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
:(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.|Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2<ref name="Convention-text" />}}

Article 3 defines the crimes that can be punished under the convention:
{{blockquote|
:    (a) Genocide;
:    (b) [[Conspiracy (criminal)|Conspiracy]] to commit genocide;
:    (c) [[Direct and public incitement to commit genocide]];
:    (d) Attempt to commit genocide;
:    (e) [[Complicity in genocide]].|Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 3<ref name="Convention-text" />}}

The convention was passed to outlaw actions similar to the [[Armenian genocide]] and [[the Holocaust]].<ref>The Armenian Genocide and International Law, Alfred de Zayas – "And yet there are those who claim that the Armenians have no justiciable rights, because the Genocide Convention was only adopted 1948, more than thirty years after the Armenian genocide, and because treaties are not normally applied retroactively. This, of course, is a fallacy, because the Genocide Convention was drafted and adopted precisely in the light of the Armenian genocide and in the light of the Holocaust."</ref>

The first draft of the Convention included political killing. The Convention initially voted to pass the inclusion of political groups into its definition of genocide,<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Van Schaack |first1=Beth |title=The crime of political genocide: Repairing the genocide convention's blind spot |journal=In Genocide and Human Rights |date=2017 |issue=Routledge |pages=145–177 |doi=10.4324/9781351157568-5 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/330175488_The_Crime_of_Political_Genocide_Repairing_the_Genocide_Convention's_Blind_Spot |access-date=2025-03-11}}</ref> but the [[Soviet Union|USSR]]<ref>{{cite book |first1=Robert |last1=Gellately |author1-link=Robert Gellately |first2=Ben |last2=Kiernan |author2-link=Ben Kiernan |title=The Specter of Genocide: Mass Murder in Historical Perspective |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |location=Cambridge, UK |year=2003 |isbn=0-521-52750-3 | pages= [https://archive.org/details/specterofgenocid00robe/page/267 267] |url=https://archive.org/details/specterofgenocid00robe |url-access=registration |quote=where Stalin was presumably anxious to avoid his purges being subjected to genocidal scrutiny.}}</ref> along with some other nations would not accept that actions against groups identified as holding similar political opinions or social status would constitute genocide.<ref>{{cite book |last=Staub |first=Ervin |author-link=Ervin Staub |title=The Roots of Evil: The Origins of Genocide and Other Group Violence |year=1989 |publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]] |location=Cambridge, UK |pages=8 |isbn=0-521-42214-0 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=29u-vt_KgGEC&q=genocide+political+economic+groups+soviet+union&pg=PA8}}</ref> Member states including Iran, Uruguay, and Egypt motioned to reopen the discussion in the convention.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Kuper |first1=Leo |title=Genocide: Its political use in the Twentieth Century |date=1981 |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0300031201 |page=29 |url=https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=bddOrSdwsb0C&oi=fnd&pg=PA9&dq=genocide+and+its+political+use+in+the+20th+century&ots=ZVVH-zaFWm&sig=W9u6KGxGg1azDmPAGvVLsXThMu0#v=onepage&q=genocide%20and%20its%20political%20use%20in%20the%2020th%20century&f=false}}</ref>  These groups reasoned that actions regarding political genocide did not meet criteria of genocide based on five arguments:<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Tefferi |first1=Yishak Kassa |title=The Genocide Convention and Protection of Political Groups against the Crime of Genocide |journal=Mekelle University Law Journal |date=2017 |volume=29 |page=38 |url=https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/mekeulj5&id=36&men_tab=srchresults}}</ref>

:    (a) Political groups are voluntary and therefore not homogenous

:    (b) It would discourage member states from participating in the Convention due to fear of external interference within member states
:    (c) Causes difficulties for member states to enact preventative measures against subversive groups
:    (d) The question of excluding political groups would lead to debates on other groups, including economic and professional groups
:    (e) The Declaration of Human Rights and national governments should protect and enforce the rights of all citizens, so protections from human rights violations should be encompassed within these jurisdictions instead of the UN’s definition of genocide.

Based on these arguments, these stipulations were subsequently removed in a political and diplomatic compromise. However, debate within scholarly realms and activism have noted severe flaws that have resulted from the Convention’s intentional exclusion of political groups as victim groups.

Early drafts also included acts of cultural destruction in the concept of genocide, but these were opposed by former European colonial powers and some settler countries.<ref>{{cite web |last=Luck |first=Edward C. |year=2018 |title=Cultural Genocide and the Protection of Cultural Heritage. J. Paul Getty Trust Occasional Papers in Cultural Heritage Policy Number 2, 2018 |url=https://www.getty.edu/publications/pdfs/CulturalGenocide_Luck.pdf |website=J Paul Getty Trust |page=24 |quote="Current or former colonial powers—Belgium, Denmark, France, Netherlands, and the United Kingdom—opposed the retention of references to cultural genocide in the draft convention. So did settler countries that had displaced indigenous peoples but otherwise were champions of the development of international human rights standards, including the United States, Canada, Sweden, Brazil, New Zealand, and Australia."}}</ref> Such acts, which Lemkin saw as part and parcel of the concept of genocide, have since often been discussed as [[cultural genocide]] (a term also not enshrined in international law). In June 2021, the International Criminal Court issued new guidelines for how cultural destruction, when occurring alongside other recognized acts of genocide, can potentially be corroborating evidence for the intent of the crime of genocide.<ref>{{cite web |author1=International Criminal Court (ICC), Office of the Prosecutor. |title=Policy on Cultural Heritage |url=https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/20210614-otp-policy-cultural-heritage-eng.pdf |website=[[International Criminal Court]] |archive-url= |archive-date=}}</ref>

The Genocide Convention establishes five prohibited acts that, when committed with the requisite intent, amount to genocide. Genocide is not just defined as wide-scale massacre-style killings that are visible and well-documented. International law recognizes a broad range of forms of violence in which the crime of genocide can be enacted.<ref name="Ashraph">{{cite web |first=Sareta |last=Ashraph |url=https://wordpress-537312-2488108.cloudwaysapps.com/temp-uploads/2018/12/Gender-and-Genocide-Whitepaper-FINAL.pdf |title=Beyond Killing: Gender, Genocide, & Obligations Under International Law 3 |website=Global Justice Center 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240617004704/https://wordpress-537312-2488108.cloudwaysapps.com/temp-uploads/2018/12/Gender-and-Genocide-Whitepaper-FINAL.pdf |archive-date=17 June 2024}}</ref>

=== Killing members of the group ''Article II(a)'' ===
While mass killing is not necessary for genocide to have been committed, it has been present in almost all [[List of genocides by death toll|recognized genocides]]. In certain instances, men and adolescent boys are singled out for murder in the early stages, such as in the [[Genocide of Yazidis by ISIL|genocide of the Yazidis by Daesh]],{{sfn|OHCHR|2016|loc=paras. [32–41]}} the [[Armenian genocide|Ottoman Turks' attack on the Armenians]],<ref>{{Cite journal |first=Vahakn |last=Dadrian |author-link=Vahakn Dadrian |title=The Secret Young Turk Ittihadist Conference and the Decision for World War I Genocide of the Armenians |journal=[[Holocaust and Genocide Studies]] |volume=7 |issue=2 |page=173, at [164] |date=1994 |doi=10.1093/hgs/7.2.173 |issn=1476-7937}}</ref> and the [[Rohingya genocide|Burmese security forces' attacks on the Rohingya]].<ref>{{cite report |author=[[Amnesty International]] |title='We Will Destroy Everything:' Military Responsibility for Crimes Against Humanity in Rakhine State, Myanmar |date=June 2018}}; {{cite report |author1=Fortify Rights |author2=[[US Holocaust Memorial Museum]] |title='They Tried to Kill Us All' Atrocity Crimes against Rohingya Muslims in Rakhine State, Myanmar |date=November 2017}}</ref> Men and boys are typically subject to "fast" killings, such as by gunshot.<ref>Prosecutor v. Karadžić, Case No. IT-95-5/18-T, Trial Judgment, Int'l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia, 24 March 2016</ref> Women and girls are more likely to die slower deaths by slashing, burning, or as a result of sexual violence.<ref>{{cite report |author=[[Human Rights Watch]] |date=1 March 1999 |title=Leave None to Tell the Story: Genocide in Rwanda |page=215 |url=https://www.hrw.org/report/1999/03/01/leave-none-tell-story/genocide-rwanda |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240518155833/https://www.hrw.org/report/1999/03/01/leave-none-tell-story/genocide-rwanda |archive-date=18 May 2024}}; {{cite report |author=[[Human Rights Watch]] |date=24 September 1996 |title=Shattered Lives: Sexual Violence during the Rwandan Genocide and its Aftermath |page=39 |url=https://www.hrw.org/report/1996/09/24/shattered-lives/sexual-violence-during-rwandan-genocide-and-its-aftermath |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240513001929/https://www.hrw.org/report/1996/09/24/shattered-lives/sexual-violence-during-rwandan-genocide-and-its-aftermath |archive-date=13 May 2024}}</ref> The jurisprudence of the [[International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda]] (ICTR), among others, shows that both the initial executions and those that quickly follow other acts of extreme violence, such as [[rape]] and [[torture]], are recognized as falling under the first prohibited act.<ref>Prosecutor v. Semanza, Case No. ICTR-97-20-T, Trial Judgment, para. [320], 15 May 2003; Prosecutor v. Ntagerura, Case No. ICTR-99-46-T, Trial Judgment, para. [664], 24 February 2004,</ref>

A less settled discussion is whether deaths that are further removed from the initial acts of violence can be addressed under this provision of the Genocide Convention. Legal scholars have posited, for example, that deaths resulting from other genocidal acts, including causing serious bodily or mental harm or the successful deliberate infliction of conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction, should be considered genocidal killings.<ref name="Ashraph" />

=== Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group ''Article II(b)'' ===
This second prohibited act can encompass a wide range of non-fatal genocidal acts.<ref>{{cite book |quote=Direct Killing is Not the Only Way to Commit Genocide ... '': Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group''...The drafters appreciated that there is more than one way (i.e. killing) to perpetuate genocide. |pages=37–68 (45–46) |first1=Samuel |last1=Totten |first2=Henry |last2=Theriault |chapter=The Complexities Inherent in the UNCG |title=The United Nations Genocide Convention: An Introduction |location=Toronto |publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] |date=2019 |isbn=978-1487524081}} In practice, this could include deaths from the deliberate infection of Tutsi women with [[HIV/AIDS]] through rape in the [[Rwandan genocide]] or from the abuse and denial of food [[Genocide of Yazidis by ISIL|inflicted by ISIL]] on [[Yazidis|Yazidi]] sex slaves by [[Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant|ISIL]]'s [[Genocide of Yazidis by ISIL#Slave market process|use of sexual slavery]]. To date, neither has been prosecuted as such.</ref> The ICTR and [[International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia]] (ICTY) have held that rape and sexual violence may constitute the second prohibited act of genocide by causing both physical and mental harm. In its landmark [[Jean-Paul Akayesu|Akayesu]] decision, the ICTR held that rapes and sexual violence resulted in "physical and psychological destruction".<ref>Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 731.</ref> Sexual violence is a hallmark of genocidal violence, with most genocidal campaigns explicitly or implicitly sanctioning it.<ref name="Ashraph" /> It is estimated that 250,000 to 500,000 women were raped in the three months of the Rwandan genocide, many of whom were subjected to multiple rapes or [[gang rape]].<ref>{{cite journal |first=Stephanie K. |last=Wood |title=A Woman Scorned for the "Least Condemned" War Crime: Precedent and Problems with Prosecuting Rape as a Serious Crime in the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda |volume=13 |number=274 |journal=[[Columbia Journal of Gender & Law]] |pages=299–301 |date=2004}}</ref> In Darfur, a systemic campaign of rape and often sexual mutilation was carried out,<ref>{{cite report |publisher=[[Human Rights Watch]] |title=Darfur in Flames: Atrocities in Western Sudan |pages=26–29 |date=2004}}</ref> and in Burma, public mass rapes and gang rapes were inflicted on the Rohingya by Burmese security forces.<ref>{{cite web |first1=Grant |last1=Shubin |first2=Elena |last2=Sarver |first3=Kristin |last3=Smith |title=Discrimination to Destruction: A Legal Analysis of Gender Crimes Against the Rohingya |publisher=[[Global Justice Center]] |date=2018 |url=http://globaljusticecenter.net/blog/20-publications/briefs-and-white-papers/953-discrimination-to-destruction-a-legal-analysis-of-gender-crimes-against-the-rohingya |access-date=28 August 2021 |archive-url= |archive-date=}}</ref> [[Sexual slavery]] was documented in the Armenian genocide by the Ottoman Turks and Daesh's genocide of the Yazidi.{{sfn|OHCHR|2016|loc=paras. 32–41}}

Torture and other cruel, [[inhuman, or degrading treatment]] or punishment, when committed with the requisite intent, are also genocide by causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group. The ICTY found that both experiencing a failed execution and watching the murder of one's family members may constitute torture.<ref>Prosecutor v. Karadžić, Case No. IT-95-5/18-T, Trial Judgment, para. [545], Int’l Crim. Trib. for the Former Yugoslavia, 24 March 2016, para. 5664; Patricia Viseur Sellers, "Genocide Gendered: The Srebrenica Cases", The Fifth Annual Katherine B. Fite Lecture, Proceedings of the Ninth International Humanitarian Law Dialogs, 30 Aug. – 1 September 2015.</ref> The [[Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic|Syrian Commission of Inquiry (COI)]] also found that enslavement, removal of one's children into indoctrination or sexual slavery, and acts of physical and sexual violence rise to the level of torture as well. While it was subject to some debate, the ICTY and later the Syrian COI held that under some circumstances deportation and forcible transfer may also cause serious bodily or mental harm.<ref>Popović, Case No. IT-05-88-T, para. [846]; Tolimir, IT-05-88/2-A, para. [209]; Karadžić, IT-95-5/18-T, para. [545]; {{harvnb|OHCHR|2016|loc=32–41}}</ref>

=== Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction ''Article II(c)'' ===
[[File:"Trail of the hide hunters." Buffalo lying dead in snow, 1872 - NARA - 520094.jpg|thumb|During the [[American Indian Wars|Indian wars]], the U.S. federal government promoted [[American bison|bison]] hunting for various reasons, including as a way of destroying the means of survival of [[Plains Indians]] to pressure them to remain on [[Indian reservation]]s. This has been cited by experts as an example of [[Native American genocide in the United States|genocide]] that involves removing the means of survival.<ref name=Hinton/>]]
The third prohibited act is distinguished from the genocidal act of killing because the deaths are not immediate (or may not even come to pass), but rather create circumstances that do not support prolonged life.<ref name=":0" /> Due to the longer period of time before the actual destruction would be achieved, the ICTR held that courts must consider the duration of time the conditions are imposed as an element of the act.<ref name=":4">''Kayishema and Ruzindana,'' (Trial Chamber), 21 May 1999, para. 548</ref> In the 19th century the United States federal government supported the [[bison hunting|extermination of bison]], which [[Native Americans in the United States|Native American]]s in the [[Great Plains]] relied on as a source of food. This was done for various reasons, primarily to pressure them onto reservations during times of conflict. Some genocide experts describe this as an example of genocide that involves removing the means of survival.<ref name=Hinton>{{Cite book |publisher=[[Duke University Press]] |isbn=9780822376149 |title=Colonial Genocide in Indigenous North America |year=2014 |last1=Hinton |first1=Alexander |last2=Woolford |first2=Andrew |last3=Benvenuto |first3=Jeff |page=292 |quote=}}</ref>

The ICTR provided guidance into what constitutes a violation of the third act. In Akayesu, it identified "subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the reduction of essential medical services below minimum requirement"<ref>Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 506.</ref> as rising to genocide. In Kayishema and Ruzindana, it extended the list to include "lack of proper housing, clothing, hygiene and medical care or excessive work or physical exertion" among the conditions.<ref name=":4" /> It further noted that, in addition to deprivation of necessary resources, rape could also fit within this prohibited act.<ref name=":4" /> In August 2023, founding chief prosecutor of the [[International Criminal Court]] (ICC) [[Luis Moreno Ocampo]] published a report presenting evidence that [[Azerbaijan]] was committing genocide against the ethnic Armenians of [[Republic of Artsakh|Artsakh]] [[Nagorno-Karabakh]] under Article II(c) of the Genocide Convention by placing their historic land under a comprehensive [[blockade]], cutting all access to food, medical supplies, electricity, gas, internet, and stopping all movement of people to and from Armenia.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://luismorenoocampo.com/lmo_en/report-armenia/ |title=REPORT ARMENIA – Luis Moreno Ocampo}}</ref>

=== Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group ''Article II(d)'' ===
{{See also|Compulsory sterilization}}
The fourth prohibited act is aimed at preventing the protected group from regenerating through [[Human reproduction|reproduction]]. It encompasses acts affecting reproduction and intimate relationships, such as [[involuntary sterilization]], [[forced abortion]], the prohibition of marriage, and long-term separation of men and women intended to prevent procreation.<ref name=":0">{{cite web |last=Stanton |first=Gregory H. |title=What is genocide? |url=http://genocidewatch.net/genocide-2/what-is-genocide/ |publisher=[[Genocide Watch]] |author-link=Gregory Stanton |access-date=12 April 2016 |archive-date=15 March 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220315170823/http://genocidewatch.net/genocide-2/what-is-genocide/ |url-status=dead}}</ref> Rape has been found to violate the fourth prohibited act on two bases: where the rape was committed with the intent to impregnate a woman and thereby force her to carry a child of another group (in societies where group identity is determined by [[Patrilineality|patrilineal]] identity) and where the person raped subsequently refuses to procreate as a result of the trauma.<ref>Prosecutor v. Akayesu, Case No. ICTR-96-4-T, Judgment, 2 September 1998, para. 507.</ref> Accordingly, it can take into account both physical and mental measures imposed by the perpetrators.

=== Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group ''Article II(e)'' ===
{{See also|Forced assimilation}}
The final prohibited act is the only prohibited act that does not lead to physical or biological destruction, but rather to the destruction of the group as a cultural and social unit.<ref name="Ashraph" /> It occurs when children of the protected group are transferred to the perpetrator group. Boys are typically taken into the group by changing their names to those common of the perpetrator group, converting their religion, and using them for labor or as soldiers.<ref>{{cite book |first=Antonie |last=Holslag |chapter=Exposed Bodies: A Conceptual Approach to Sexual Violence during the Armenian Genocide |title=Genocide and Gender in the Twentieth Century: A Comparative Study |pages=96–97 |publisher=Bloomsbury |date=2015}}</ref> Girls who are transferred are not generally converted to the perpetrator group, but instead treated as [[Chattel Slavery|chattel]], as played out in both the Yazidi and Armenian genocides.<ref name="Ashraph" />