초록 열기/닫기 버튼
This article studies the jurisprudence of the UN Ad HocTribunals on Mens Reafor the crime ofgenocide, one of jurisdictional crimes of the Tribunals. Concerning genocide, Article 4 (2) of the ICTYStatute, and Article 2 (2) of the ICTR Statute define any of the enumerated acts in Article 4 of theICTY Statute (Article 2 of the ICTR Statute)committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, anational, ethnical, racial or religious groups, as such. However, it is not clear the meaning of each sub-element by only reading the expression inprovisions of the ICTY Statute, and the ICTR Statute. For example, what kind intent is necessary toconstitute genocide?, Is it enough for a perpetrator has douls eventualisto constitute crime ofgenocide?", "What the expression destroy means?, Only physical destroy or not?, Howcharacterize a certain group as national, racial, ethnical, or religious? To give the answer to suchquestions, it seems inevitable to scrutinize case law of the ICTY and the ICTR. Considering the expression in Article 4(2) of the ICTY Statute and the ICTR Statute, it is possible to analysis sub-elements of Men Rea for genocide as (1) intent (to) (2) destroy, (3) in whole or in part, (4) a national, ethnical, racial, or religious groups, (5) as such. Therefore, this article deals with each sub-element one by one with analysis of the case law of the UN Ad Hoc Tribunals.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
Genocide, Specific Intent, Douls Specialis, Protected Groups, The International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslaiva, The International Tribunal for Rwanda.
