There is certainly white on white racism and violence or White aboriginal vs. White aboriginal classism and religious conflicts. There could be a covert anti affirmative action campaign going on apparently to make up for the '70's programmes but it was a concept that only tried to add a hiring quotient to employment guidelines. The quotient was based on the evident high school graduation population numbers for all segments of the population. It could not have worked when most north American white people were told to drop out at grade 10 and get a half salaried automotive job or join the military if they could. Black people are encouraged by white people to graduate since what white person wants to spend time with a black person who is shouting about being ripped off at the gas station? White people are ripped off but they don't shout about it. They are twice as likely to get ripped off since they have, on average, less education than other groups in the population as based on white social conventions. in any event. Even if black people graduate from High School more often as they are encouraged to do so, these means black people are certainly not hired in the numbers indicated by the graduation numbers that are turned into quotas. It is 1/4 that number from what we see that is actually taking place in the hiring process. Most black people though were often under graded as affirmative action never assured the accuracy and fairness of the grading process. So, the anti affirmative action program is being pursued by unusual elements in the population who promote this plan to even things up mistakenly and covertly. The best way to deal with these emotions is just to provide every citizen with that universal unconditional income support at Vermont levels. Maybe no one gets a job like they used to after automation but everyone gets support. We kill them with kindness and shoot them when they act up for the slightest intersections with the authorities over stolen credit card use or drug possession. But, not for alleged fake bills when there is never any evidence that is corroborated. The store keepers present their own fake notes just to harass someone. They call the police and the customer is wrongly accused after buying his items. To avoid these accusations, use an EBT card for the small purchases or a pay as you go credit card that you can top up at the bank. Get your receipt. The spirit of the American people seen on its knees, above, is asking the American politician to remember their mutual friendship and just implement a national income support guideline and enforce a program to be run by every state that provides no less than $950.00 per week by EBT Card in addition to all the EBT shopping available at EBT/SNAP retailers in that state. This would also comply with International Law as seen in the UDHR 1948; Article 25. It would also stave off the economic genocide seen in the non compliance with genocide being defined as conditions of life that were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of that group, in whole or in part . As a national program, the intention is to make the cards work nationally and not just in the individual state where the card is assigned. They have a similar program in Manitoba and in Quebec as the funds are placed in the citizen's bank account. They can use the funds any where they want. The program in Otario pays only transgender people and individuals with disabilities. It does not pay non-transgender bodied people. It does not pay people without disabilities but it may if they make a special written request to the Governor General. Maybe you just write an email to the government email provided on the website. My cousin did. He's a Black guy that concluded his NHL, NBA AND LA LIGA contract and started a "youtube" channel called 8th Gear Automotive Channel with a rich white father that had the income support also because of a diagnosis involving Chiropody. His ex wife that was transgender also cut him up because he took too long at the hardware store in the pipe section but he was really at an apartment next door to the store where there were 10 Caribbean Bacchanal women in the ten apartments he owned where he was talking about the women's pipes and was certainly not lying about anything. He said he was a man and that she had to understand. He parked at the hardware store; oh gosh! Instead of writing an email, maybe you just sign up from Otario to join Quebec. They send you confirmation of your new Quebec citizenship and they deposit the support right into your account which is enough with good budgeting to rent an apartment in Quebec and make arrangements with a landlord before you take the 4 hour bus ride from Ajax, Otario or Markham. The intention is to enable the cards to work internationally at any Plus /Cirrus Bank machine any where in the world so that the American and soon the Canadian can pop it like its hot; like all the Asian people who have international money and mobility with the Way to Pay in any country. This is the reason for American angers that was once witnessed against the new looming presence of the Sony Radio and the Sony Television or Panasonic Television in the 1960's that gave way to Sony portable stereos that became just as ubiquitous as the Nike running shoe in American homes. Its' not Asia's fault. The economy is rather trigonometric with or without automation. But, whole chapters and discussions about labor have been thrown out involving the cost of labor which we now summarize as a fucking discussion on the cost of fucking production so now 300 full time employees at $70,000.00 per year have been vacated by one fucking machine; may a KUBA robot that costs $70,000.00 to purchase that will last 50 years. The problem was to look at how this new phenomenon impinges on the sale of the products in the economy when its not just 300 employees but maybe 3,000,000 employees in every state every year that are removed, displaced by the $70,000.00 machine. The problem is that you don't have 3,000,000 buyers with $70,000.00 per year who could finance $17,000.00-$100,000.00 vehicles over a four year period. So then, the machine takes the demand for goods away, takes the economy way and the market away and the point of the universal income support provided to each citizen is to ensure there is a point to the machines doing the work with more durability, reliability and dependability. The problem with the robot is not cost of production as maximum efficiency is achieved with one machine replacing 300 people with machine being 300 times more efficient in terms of cost and energy. The problem is demand for the multiple goods made by the machine in the same time as 300 people where there is no point if there is no demand for the goods so that there are sales and there will be no sales unless the purpose of the machine is supported financially. The purpose of the machine is the human endeavor. This is an emotional discussion since it should not have taken so long to understand and accept this reality in North America while the White aboriginal is tired of being moved, removed, asked to changed and just get out of Algonquin Park because of the black whore girl pretending she can explain what are the Deoxyribonucleic phenomenon in the economy. __________________________________________________________________ See https://www.casematrixnetwork.org/#6 for more. 6. The conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of that group, in whole or in part.4 4. The term ‘conditions of life’ may include, but is not necessarily restricted to, deliberate deprivation of resources indispensable for survival, such as food or medical services, or systematic expulsion from homes. P.25. Evidence of objective probability that the conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group. P.25.1. Evidence of the nature of the conditions of life imposed. P.25.2. Evidence of the length of time for which the conditions of life were imposed. P.25.3. Evidence of the characteristics of the members of the targeted group. P.26. Not required: Direct evidence that the conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group. P.27. Not required: Evidence of the actual physical destruction of the group. P.28. Not sufficient: Evidence that the conditions of life were intended to cause the dissolution of the group. Element: 6. The conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of that group, in whole or in part.4 A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 692: "692. The group upon which these conditions are inflicted must be a protected group under the terms of the Genocide Convention. Such conditions must be calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the targeted group in whole or in part and must be inflicted on it deliberately." Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, para. 518: "518. The words "calculated to bring about its physical destruction" replaced the phrase "aimed at causing death" proposed by Belgium in the UN General Assembly’s Sixth (Legal) Committee.1094 The Trial Chamber in Akayesu held that the expression "should be construed as the methods of destruction by which the perpetrator does not immediately kill the members of the group, but which, ultimately, seek their physical destruction".1095 The element of physical destruction is inherent in the word genocide itself, which is derived from the Greek "genos" meaning race or tribe and the Latin "caedere" meaning to kill. It must also be remembered that cultural genocide, as distinct from physical and biological genocide, was specifically excluded from the Convention against Genocide. The International Law Commission has commented: 519. It does not suffice to deport a group or a part of a group. A clear distinction must be drawn between physical destruction and mere dissolution of a group. The expulsion of a group or part of a group does not in itself suffice for genocide.1097 As Kreß has stated, "[t]his is true even if the expulsion can be characterised as a tendency to the dissolution of the group, taking the form of its fragmentation or assimilation. This is because the dissolution of the group is not to be equated with physical destruction".1098 In this context the Chamber recalls that a proposal by Syria in the Sixth Committee to include "[i]mposing measures intended to oblige members of a group to abandon their homes in order to escape the threat of subsequent ill-treatment" as a separate sub-paragraph of Article II of the Convention against Genocide was rejected by twenty-nine votes to five, with eight abstentions.1099" "1094. UN Doc. A/C.6/217 (Belgian proposal); UN Doc. A/C.6/SR.82 (Soviet amendment). 1095. Akayesu Trial Judgement, para. 505. 1096. Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-eighth Session, 6 May- 26 July 1996, UN Doc. A/51/10, pp. 90-91. 1097. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003), W. A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 200. The German courts have found that the expulsion of Bosnian Muslims from the areas in which they lived did not constitute genocide. See BGH v. 21.2.2001 – 3 StR 244/00, NJW 2001, 2732 (2733). 1098. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003). 1099. A/C.6/234, see UN GAOR, 3rd Session, Sixth Committee, Summary Records of Meetings, 21 September to 10 December 1948, p. 176 and 186. For further details see K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 53-57, 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003)." B. Evidentiary comment: The passage of the ICTY Trial Chamber in Stakić (para. 519) seems to blur the line between the nature of the acts (in particular whether they are such as to actually bring about the physical destruction of the group) and the state of mind of the perpetrator (whether the conditions were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group) and to introduce a requirement that the acts must be objectively capable of bringing about the destruction of the group. This also seems implicit in the approach of the ICTR Trial Chamber in Kayishema (para. 116, above), where it states that the conditions of life in question could include "rape, the starving of a group of people, reducing required medical services below a minimum, and withholding sufficient living accommodation for a reasonable period, provided the above would lead to the destruction of the group in whole or in part." (emphasis added). Such a position is, however, to contrasted with the holding by the ICTY Appeals Chamber in Krstić (para. 32) concerning the general requirement of genocidal intent, that: One way to reconcile these apparently conflicting views would be to read the specific requirement in paragraph (c) – that the living conditions be "calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group" – as a more specific and perhaps more stringent requirement than the general requirement for genocidal intent under article 6. (It might indeed be argued that if this were not the case the requirement would be redundant.) This would imply the requirement that the conditions of life be capable of physically destroying the group. There is nothing, however, in the text of article 6(c) or its drafting history that would support such interpretation. The question thus remains open as to what this element adds to the common element of genocide that the perpetrator "intended to destroy, in whole or in part, [the protected] group, as such". It may be argued that the requirement that a specific conduct be "calculated" to cause a certain outcome is different from requiring that the conduct be accompanied by the "intent" to cause that result: this, however, has yet to be established by a national court or international tribunal. Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadžić, Case No. IT-95-5/18-T, Public Redacted Version of Judgement Issued on 24 March 2016 – Volume I of IV (TC), 24 March 2016, para 2586: ''2586. However, the Chamber recalls that the “actus reus of Article 4(2)(c) of the Statute ‘covers methods of physical destruction, other than killing, whereby the perpetrator ultimately seeks the death of the members of the group’”. While Article 4(2)(a) and (b) in that Article 4(2)(a) and (b) proscribes acts causing a specific result, i.e.: death and serious bodily or mental harm, respectively, Article 4(2)(c) concerns “those methods of destruction that do not immediately kill the members of the groups, but which, ultimately, seek their physical destruction”, i.e.: slow death.'' P.25. Evidence of objective probability that the conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906: "906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted." "2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment, para. 37(3). 2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York, 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"." P.25.1. Evidence of the nature of the conditions of life imposed. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906: "906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted." "2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3). 2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"." P.25.2. Evidence of the length of time for which the conditions of life were imposed. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906: "906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted." "2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3). 2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"." P.25.3. Evidence of the characteristics of the members of the targeted group. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906: "906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted." "2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3). 2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"." P.26. Not required: Direct evidence that the conditions of life were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906: "906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted." "2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3). 2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"." P.27. Not required: Evidence of the actual physical destruction of the group. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 691: "691. "Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part" under sub-paragraph (c) does not require proof of the physical destruction in whole or in part of the targeted group.1705 […]" Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, para. 517: "517. "Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part" under sub-paragraph (c) does not require proof of a result. […]" P.28. Not sufficient: Evidence that the conditions of life were intended to cause the dissolution of the group. A. Legal source/authority and evidence: Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, para. 519: "519. It does not suffice to deport a group or a part of a group. A clear distinction must be drawn between physical destruction and mere dissolution of a group. The expulsion of a group or part of a group does not in itself suffice for genocide.1097 As Kreß has stated, "[t]his is true even if the expulsion can be characterised as a tendency to the dissolution of the group, taking the form of its fragmentation or assimilation. This is because the dissolution of the group is not to be equated with physical destruction".1098 In this context the Chamber recalls that a proposal by Syria in the Sixth Committee to include "[i]mposing measures intended to oblige members of a group to abandon their homes in order to escape the threat of subsequent ill-treatment" as a separate sub-paragraph of Article II of the Convention against Genocide was rejected by twenty -nine votes to five, with eight abstentions.1099" "1094. UN Doc. A/C.6/217 (Belgian proposal); UN Doc. A/C.6/SR.82 (Soviet amendment). 1095. Akayesu Trial Judgement, para. 505. 1096. Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-eighth Session, 6 May- 26 July 1996, UN Doc. A/51/10, pp. 90-91. 1097. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003), W. A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 200. The German courts have found that the expulsion of Bosnian Muslims from the areas in which they lived did not constitute genocide. See BGH v. 21.2.2001 – 3 StR 244/00, NJW 2001, 2732 (2733). 1098. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003). 1099. A/C.6/234, see UN GAOR, 3rd Session, Sixth Committee, Summary Records of Meetings, 21 September to 10 December 1948, p. 176 and 186. For further details see K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 53-57, 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003)." "557. For the same reasons, the Trial Chamber finds that the dolus specialis has not been proved in relation to "deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part." The Trial Chamber recalls in this context that deporting a group or part of a group is insufficient if it is not accompanied by methods seeking the physical destruction of the group." B. Evidentiary comment: The ICTY Trial Chamber in Stakić appears to have taken the position that forced deportations are not covered by article 6(c) (or at least not in themselves), apparently on the basis that they could not be calculated to destroy the group, but only to dissolve it. (On this point see the evidentiary under element 5 above.) In Brđanin the Prosecution sought to argue that forced deportations constituted conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of the group under article 6(c). The Trial Chamber ruled this argument impermissible on the basis that it had not been raised in pleadings (but did not state whether it would in any event necessarily fail on the grounds discussed in Stakić). _______________________________________________________ Angel Ronan Lex Scripta; For Real Dog!!!
__________________________________________________________________
See https://www.casematrixnetwork.org/#6 for more.
P.25.1. Evidence of the nature of the conditions of life imposed.
P.25.2. Evidence of the length of time for which the conditions of life were imposed.
P.25.3. Evidence of the characteristics of the members of the targeted group.
P.27. Not required: Evidence of the actual physical destruction of the group.
Element:
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 692:
"692. The group upon which these conditions are inflicted must be a protected group under the terms of the Genocide Convention. Such conditions must be calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the targeted group in whole or in part and must be inflicted on it deliberately."
Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, para. 518:
"518. The words "calculated to bring about its physical destruction" replaced the phrase "aimed at causing death" proposed by Belgium in the UN General Assembly’s Sixth (Legal) Committee.1094 The Trial Chamber in Akayesu held that the expression "should be construed as the methods of destruction by which the perpetrator does not immediately kill the members of the group, but which, ultimately, seek their physical destruction".1095 The element of physical destruction is inherent in the word genocide itself, which is derived from the Greek "genos" meaning race or tribe and the Latin "caedere" meaning to kill. It must also be remembered that cultural genocide, as distinct from physical and biological genocide, was specifically excluded from the Convention against Genocide. The International Law Commission has commented:
519. It does not suffice to deport a group or a part of a group. A clear distinction must be drawn between physical destruction and mere dissolution of a group. The expulsion of a group or part of a group does not in itself suffice for genocide.1097 As Kreß has stated, "[t]his is true even if the expulsion can be characterised as a tendency to the dissolution of the group, taking the form of its fragmentation or assimilation. This is because the dissolution of the group is not to be equated with physical destruction".1098 In this context the Chamber recalls that a proposal by Syria in the Sixth Committee to include "[i]mposing measures intended to oblige members of a group to abandon their homes in order to escape the threat of subsequent ill-treatment" as a separate sub-paragraph of Article II of the Convention against Genocide was rejected by twenty-nine votes to five, with eight abstentions.1099"
"1094. UN Doc. A/C.6/217 (Belgian proposal); UN Doc. A/C.6/SR.82 (Soviet amendment).
1095. Akayesu Trial Judgement, para. 505.
1096. Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-eighth Session, 6 May- 26 July 1996, UN Doc. A/51/10, pp. 90-91.
1097. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003), W. A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 200. The German courts have found that the expulsion of Bosnian Muslims from the areas in which they lived did not constitute genocide. See BGH v. 21.2.2001 – 3 StR 244/00, NJW 2001, 2732 (2733).
1098. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003).
1099. A/C.6/234, see UN GAOR, 3rd Session, Sixth Committee, Summary Records of Meetings, 21 September to 10 December 1948, p. 176 and 186. For further details see K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 53-57, 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003)."
B. Evidentiary comment:
The passage of the ICTY Trial Chamber in Stakić (para. 519) seems to blur the line between the nature of the acts (in particular whether they are such as to actually bring about the physical destruction of the group) and the state of mind of the perpetrator (whether the conditions were calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group) and to introduce a requirement that the acts must be objectively capable of bringing about the destruction of the group. This also seems implicit in the approach of the ICTR Trial Chamber in Kayishema (para. 116, above), where it states that the conditions of life in question could include "rape, the starving of a group of people, reducing required medical services below a minimum, and withholding sufficient living accommodation for a reasonable period, provided the above would lead to the destruction of the group in whole or in part." (emphasis added). Such a position is, however, to contrasted with the holding by the ICTY Appeals Chamber in Krstić (para. 32) concerning the general requirement of genocidal intent, that:
One way to reconcile these apparently conflicting views would be to read the specific requirement in paragraph (c) – that the living conditions be "calculated to bring about the physical destruction of the group" – as a more specific and perhaps more stringent requirement than the general requirement for genocidal intent under article 6. (It might indeed be argued that if this were not the case the requirement would be redundant.) This would imply the requirement that the conditions of life be capable of physically destroying the group. There is nothing, however, in the text of article 6(c) or its drafting history that would support such interpretation.
The question thus remains open as to what this element adds to the common element of genocide that the perpetrator "intended to destroy, in whole or in part, [the protected] group, as such". It may be argued that the requirement that a specific conduct be "calculated" to cause a certain outcome is different from requiring that the conduct be accompanied by the "intent" to cause that result: this, however, has yet to be established by a national court or international tribunal.
''2586. However, the Chamber recalls that the “actus reus of Article 4(2)(c) of the Statute ‘covers methods of physical destruction, other than killing, whereby the perpetrator ultimately seeks the death of the members of the group’”. While Article 4(2)(a) and (b) in that Article 4(2)(a) and (b) proscribes acts causing a specific result, i.e.: death and serious bodily or mental harm, respectively, Article 4(2)(c) concerns “those methods of destruction that do not immediately kill the members of the groups, but which, ultimately, seek their physical destruction”, i.e.: slow death.''
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906:
"906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted."
"2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment, para. 37(3).
2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York, 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"."
P.25.1. Evidence of the nature of the conditions of life imposed.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906:
"906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted."
"2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3).
2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"."
P.25.2. Evidence of the length of time for which the conditions of life were imposed.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906:
"906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted."
"2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3).
2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"."
P.25.3. Evidence of the characteristics of the members of the targeted group.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906:
"906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted."
"2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3).
2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"."
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 906:
"906. In the absence of direct evidence, in inferring whether the "conditions of life" imposed on Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat detainees amounted to conditions calculated to bring about their physical destruction in part,2256 the Trial Chamber has focused on the objective probability of these conditions leading to the physical destruction of the group in part.2257 In evaluating this objective probability, the Trial Chamber has focused on the actual nature of the "conditions of life" and on the length of time that members of the group were subjected to them. It has also been guided, when available, by factors such as the characteristics of the members of the group upon which they were inflicted."
"2256. The Indictment alleges that Bosnian Muslim and Bosnian Croat non-combatants were detained under conditions calculated to bring about the physical destruction of a part of those groups: Indictment , para. 37(3).
2257. See N. Robinson, The Genocide Convention: a Commentary (Institute of Jewish Affairs, New York , 1960), p. 64: "[i]t is impossible to enumerate in advance the 'conditions of life' that would come within the prohibition of Article II; the intent and probability of the final aim alone can determine in each separate case whether an act of Genocide has been committed (or attempted) or not"."
P.27. Not required: Evidence of the actual physical destruction of the group.
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin, Case No. IT-99-36-T, Judgement (TC), 1 September 2004, para. 691:
"691. "Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part" under sub-paragraph (c) does not require proof of the physical destruction in whole or in part of the targeted group.1705 […]"
Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, para. 517:
"517. "Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part" under sub-paragraph (c) does not require proof of a result. […]"
A. Legal source/authority and evidence:
Prosecutor v. Milomir Stakić, Case No. IT-97-24-T, Judgment (TC), 31 July 2003, para. 519:
"519. It does not suffice to deport a group or a part of a group. A clear distinction must be drawn between physical destruction and mere dissolution of a group. The expulsion of a group or part of a group does not in itself suffice for genocide.1097 As Kreß has stated, "[t]his is true even if the expulsion can be characterised as a tendency to the dissolution of the group, taking the form of its fragmentation or assimilation. This is because the dissolution of the group is not to be equated with physical destruction".1098 In this context the Chamber recalls that a proposal by Syria in the Sixth Committee to include "[i]mposing measures intended to oblige members of a group to abandon their homes in order to escape the threat of subsequent ill-treatment" as a separate sub-paragraph of Article II of the Convention against Genocide was rejected by twenty -nine votes to five, with eight abstentions.1099"
"1094. UN Doc. A/C.6/217 (Belgian proposal); UN Doc. A/C.6/SR.82 (Soviet amendment).
1095. Akayesu Trial Judgement, para. 505.
1096. Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Forty-eighth Session, 6 May- 26 July 1996, UN Doc. A/51/10, pp. 90-91.
1097. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003), W. A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2000), p. 200. The German courts have found that the expulsion of Bosnian Muslims from the areas in which they lived did not constitute genocide. See BGH v. 21.2.2001 – 3 StR 244/00, NJW 2001, 2732 (2733).
1098. K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003).
1099. A/C.6/234, see UN GAOR, 3rd Session, Sixth Committee, Summary Records of Meetings, 21 September to 10 December 1948, p. 176 and 186. For further details see K. Kreß, Münchner Kommentar zum StGB, Rn 53-57, 57, §6 VStGB, (Munich 2003)."
"557. For the same reasons, the Trial Chamber finds that the dolus specialis has not been proved in relation to "deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part." The Trial Chamber recalls in this context that deporting a group or part of a group is insufficient if it is not accompanied by methods seeking the physical destruction of the group."
B. Evidentiary comment:
The ICTY Trial Chamber in Stakić appears to have taken the position that forced deportations are not covered by article 6(c) (or at least not in themselves), apparently on the basis that they could not be calculated to destroy the group, but only to dissolve it. (On this point see the evidentiary under element 5 above.)
In Brđanin the Prosecution sought to argue that forced deportations constituted conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of the group under article 6(c). The Trial Chamber ruled this argument impermissible on the basis that it had not been raised in pleadings (but did not state whether it would in any event necessarily fail on the grounds discussed in Stakić).
_______________________________________________________
Angel Ronan Lex Scripta; For Real Dog!!!
Comments
Post a Comment