UN Human Rights Council Topic 2

Reexamination of the 1948 Genocide Convention

On December 9, 1948, the UN General Assembly passed the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which entered into force as international law on January 12, 1951. As of July 29, 2024, 153 member states have ratified the Convention. The international community recognized the death and destruction that could be inflicted by genocide, having observed it just years prior in the Second World War, and desired not to see it happen again. Article II defines genocide as “any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, 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.”

Article I states “that genocide, whether committed in time of peace or in time of war, is a crime under international law which they undertake to prevent and to punish.” The international community has defined genocide and agreed that the world must work together to prevent and punish it–states have an obligation to stop a genocide once a situation has been labeled as such.

Unfortunately, several instances of genocide and accusations of genocide have occurred since 1948. From April to July of 1994, the Tutsis, an ethnic minority, were systematically massacred in Rwanda, with 800,000 being killed in approximately one hundred days (Heinze 2007). The international community failed to act in Rwanda and it is largely viewed as a catastrophic failure in the mission to prevent and punish genocide. The United States, under the Clinton Administration, refused to label the crisis in Rwanda as “genocide” fearing they would then be under a legal and moral obligation to act to stop it, something they did not want after Americans were killed in Somalia just the year prior (Heinze 2007). Although the crisis in Rwanda is now an example of genocide that is cited widely around the world, there were serious political considerations, particularly the desire to not want to be under an obligation to stop it after declaring it genocide, that prevented the international community from declaring the crisis a genocide. Rwanda raises an important question as to how to ensure instances of genocide can be swiftly identified and stopped even if a large portion of the international community refuses to do so.

Another problematic example can be in Darfur, Sudan. Between 2003 and 2005, over 300,000 people were killed and millions displaced in Darfur, the Western region of Sudan, when rebel groups took up arms against the Sudanese government, protesting what they saw as an oppressive rule by the Islamist government (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum 2023; Heinze 2007). A UN Inquiry in January of 2005 had come to the conclusion that genocide had not taken place and instead labeled the situation as a grave humanitarian crisis with evidence of mass murder and possible crimes against humanity because the Sudanese government sought to eliminate the rebels, not a specific identity group (Heinze 2007).

The crisis in Darfur showcased how the definition of genocide can hinder effective identification and intervention because states often do not agree on what is genocide of a specific identity group, and what is simply mass murder. In particular, Darfur raises an important question as to whether or not crimes against humanity and mass murder should be enough to declare a genocide. Furthermore, the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip has again showcased the difficulty in getting the international community to agree on what is genocide and what is not; specifically, many middle Eastern states have labeled the war as a genocide while other states have not.

Despite the fact that there is a definition of genocide along with a clear obligation of states to prevent and punish it, genocide has and continues to occur and often goes unpunished. Furthermore, there are ongoing debates as to what situations constitute genocide and what situations are only mass murder. Unfortunately, there is no shortage of examples. In addition to the cases listed above, one might also consider the recent examples of the Rohingya in Myanmar, Uighurs in China, and Russian attacks on Ukrainians.

Your task is to decide whether or not the language in the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide needs to be updated to more effectively provide clear guidance on how to define, prevent, and punish genocide, and if so, decide on what changes to make.

Questions to Consider:

1. Does your state believe the current definition of genocide is sufficient? Is there anything missing?
2. Is your state a member of the Convention?
3. How has your state assisted with international efforts to prevent and punish genocide?
4. Has your state carried out genocide, whether proclaimed as such or not?
5. How does preventing and punishing genocide conflict with respecting state sovereignty?
6. Has the international community, under the current language, been able to effectively prevent and punish genocide?

Resources to Consider:

General Assembly Resolution 260 A (III). 1948. “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.” OHCHR. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-prevention-and-punishment-crime-genocide

Heinze, Eric A. 2007. “The Rhetoric of Genocide in U.S. Foreign Policy: Rwanda and Darfur Compared.” Political Science Quarterly 122(3): 359–83.

United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect. “Prevention of Genocide and Related Crimes.” www.un.org. https://www.un.org/en/genocideprevention/prevention.shtml#:~:text=Preventing%20genocide%2C%20war%20crimes%2C%20and%20crimes%20against%20humanity

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 2023. “Darfur.” Ushmm.org. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/darfur.

Sources Cited

General Assembly Resolution 260 A (III). 1948. “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.” OHCHR. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-prevention-and-punishment-crime-genocide.

Heinze, Eric A. 2007. “The Rhetoric of Genocide in U.S. Foreign Policy: Rwanda and Darfur Compared.” Political Science Quarterly 122(3): 359–83.

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. 2023. “Darfur.” Ushmm.org. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/darfur.