why researchers may conclude a genocide is taking place in Gaza even before the court passes its judgment:
https://x.com/tparsi/status/2110032100891963423
Very important piece by on why researchers may conclude a genocide is taking place in Gaza even before the court passes its judgment:
“Genocide is not merely a legal concept; it is also a social and historical phenomenon studied within the social sciences and humanities.
The court and the researcher ask different questions. The court examines whether a particular state (the International Court of Justice, ICJ) or individual (the International Criminal Court, ICC) bears responsibility. The International Court of Justice then requires that the intent to destroy be the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from what has happened, with that intent being inferred from a pattern of actions.
Historians and social scientists ask what happens to a group and why. The social science definition places equal emphasis on the consequences of a particular policy. In this way, it is closer to Lemkin’s original idea, that genocide is the destruction of what a group needs to survive.
Researchers do not disregard intent – but it is rarely fully formed when the process leading to genocide begins. It emerges during the course of this nightmarish journey and can be inferred from the pattern of actions and their foreseeable consequences.
Therefore, a researcher may conclude that genocide has taken place before a court has passed judgement, and even if the legal proceedings were never to suffice.”
substack.com/home/post/p-17
posted by Satish Sharma at
06:53
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home