In their declaration of intervention in Gambia v. Myanmar, Canada, France, Denmark, NL & UK have made important statements about the meaning of "genocide" under the Genocide Convention, some v relevant to S. Africa's case v Israel. This 🧵quotes some of them 1/n @ClaysonMonyela
2/n "There is no hierarchy amongst the underlying acts of genocide and the legal relevance of all acts targeting a protected group must be emphasized."
3/n "A narrow construction of underlying acts of
genocide obscures how killings and other underlying acts can be waged together in a coordinated
strategy aimed at destroying a protected group."
genocide obscures how killings and other underlying acts can be waged together in a coordinated
strategy aimed at destroying a protected group."
4/n "Given their ordinary meaning, the words “physical destruction” in Article 11(c) are not limited to cases where members of the group immediately die as a result of the “conditions of life” inflicted on the group."
5/n "there is a lower threshold for “serious bodily or
mental harm” when the victim is a child. ... acts which ... may not be regarded as contributing to the physical or biological destruction of the group when done to adults, might be regarded as meeting those thresholds when done to children."
mental harm” when the victim is a child. ... acts which ... may not be regarded as contributing to the physical or biological destruction of the group when done to adults, might be regarded as meeting those thresholds when done to children."
6/n "It is important to adopt a construction which recognizes that what it means for a child to
suffer “grave and long-term disadvantage to [their] ability to lead a normal and constructive life” [fn omitted] may be different than for an adult."
suffer “grave and long-term disadvantage to [their] ability to lead a normal and constructive life” [fn omitted] may be different than for an adult."
7/n "The Court has already recognized that “Article 11(c) of the Convention, covers methods of
physical destruction, other than killing, whereby the perpetrator ultimately seeks the death of the
members of the group.” [fn omitted]
physical destruction, other than killing, whereby the perpetrator ultimately seeks the death of the
members of the group.” [fn omitted]
8/n "Examples of such conduct recognized by the ICTR include “subjecting a group of people to a subsistence diet, systematic expulsion from homes and the induction of essential medical services below minimum requirement.”
9/n "When considering the deprivation of food or the imposition of a subsistence diet, it would be relevant to consider that the amount of food that would ultimately lead to the death of an adult is different than that which would lead to the death of a child. Similarly, the medical needs of children are different than those of adults, and account needs to be taken of those differences in considering whether the absence of particular medical services amounts to the imposition of conditions of life that would bring about the destruction of specific members of the
group."
43.
group."
43.
10/n "The circumstances of forced displacement could be such that it becomes evident that it will, and is calculated, to bring about the death & physical destruction of members of the group, even if such displacement did not bring about the death of adults. A situation in which children are unable to survive might
additionally lead to the inability of the group as a whole to regenerate itself,..."
additionally lead to the inability of the group as a whole to regenerate itself,..."
11/n "circumstantial evidence will typically be highly significant in drawing inferences of specific intent. This must be borne in mind by intl courts & tribunals when assessing allegations of genocide & should inform their approach to the standards governing the assessment of evidence."
12/n "Beyond killing, evidence of other acts
committed against a targeted group can be equally relevant to the determination of specific intent.
Moreover, the presence of several underlying acts of genocide can also be indicative of genocidal
intent."
committed against a targeted group can be equally relevant to the determination of specific intent.
Moreover, the presence of several underlying acts of genocide can also be indicative of genocidal
intent."
13/n "The Genocide Convention does not require that in the determination of the specific intent to
destroy, there should be a focus on the numbers of victims killed, nor has this factor been
determinative in international criminal tribunals. Indeed, circumstances may be such that the
perpetrator cannot, or decides not to, avail itself of the fastest or most direct means to accomplish
the physical or biological destruction of the protected group."
destroy, there should be a focus on the numbers of victims killed, nor has this factor been
determinative in international criminal tribunals. Indeed, circumstances may be such that the
perpetrator cannot, or decides not to, avail itself of the fastest or most direct means to accomplish
the physical or biological destruction of the protected group."
14/n "another reason not to focus on numbers of victims killed to determine specific intent
is that the figures may be deceptive as they most likely would not take into account the long-term
deaths that may result in the destruction of a group, nor would they necessarily account for the biological destruction of the group. It is noteworthy that the scope of the Genocide Convention covers not only physical but also biological destruction of a targeted group, as further elaborated upon below."
is that the figures may be deceptive as they most likely would not take into account the long-term
deaths that may result in the destruction of a group, nor would they necessarily account for the biological destruction of the group. It is noteworthy that the scope of the Genocide Convention covers not only physical but also biological destruction of a targeted group, as further elaborated upon below."
15/n "the targeting of children may assist in demonstrating that the members of the group
were targeted because of their membership of the protected group. Evidence that children have
been targeted on a significant scale would be likely to preclude a defense that members of a
protected group were targeted solely for certain other reasons, such as that they posed a security
threat."
were targeted because of their membership of the protected group. Evidence that children have
been targeted on a significant scale would be likely to preclude a defense that members of a
protected group were targeted solely for certain other reasons, such as that they posed a security
threat."
16/n "where children are targeted through underlying acts of genocide, this may assist in demonstrating the existence of the requisite intent. Given the significance of children to the survival
of all groups, evidence of harm to children may contribute to an inference that the perpetrators
intended to destroy a substantial part of the protected group."
of all groups, evidence of harm to children may contribute to an inference that the perpetrators
intended to destroy a substantial part of the protected group."
17/17 "In Akayesu, for example, the ICTR emphasized that evidence demonstrating that “even newborn babies were not spared” demonstrated the perpetrators’ “intention to wipe out the Tutsi group in its entirety.”
Loading suggestions...