More recently, in the case of Darfur, we have seen that debates about whether a particular situation constitutes genocide can seem to translate over into an argument about how terrible the events in question really are. We should be careful not to lose our sense of perspective about the relative gravity of genocide and other crimes, and to make genocide alone the trigger for the highest level of international concern. The exceptional moral force that the notion of genocide has acquired should not lead us to forget that it is in legal terms a precisely defined and limited crime and that atrocities that do not satisfy its criteria may still challenge the conscience of humanity.
Full Article
Posts
1 comment:
You are on to a very important point here. The whole debate about whether the crimes are genocide or some other crime is a distraction. As much as I like to make fun of lawyers (I only do it out of love...) this is one case where the technical discussion has taken over the real one. If the purpose of criminal law is to control crime, then long discussions over the definitions of words only do any good if they advance that purpose.
Post a Comment