Hello all! I am trying to get a better understanding of the genocide convention and more specifically subsection C. It was fairly difficult to find discussions about it however these: Legal Standard for Genocide Intent: An Uphill Climb for Israel in Gaza Suit

AN INHERENT RIGHT TO HEALTH: REVIVING ARTICLE II(C) OF THE GENOCIDE CONVENTION

have helped form my current understanding of article 4(2)(c).

Just for the sake of explaining, article 4(2)(c) of the Statute provides that genocide can be committed by “deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part”.

Examples of such acts punishable under Article 4(2)(c) include (based on ICTR and the ICTY), inter alia, subjecting the group to a subsistence diet; failing to provide adequate medical care; systematically expelling members of the group from their homes; and generally creating circumstances that would lead to a slow death such as the lack of proper food, water, shelter, clothing, sanitation, or subjecting members of the group to excessive work or physical exertion.

Setting aside if one finds the comments made by some of Israeli leadership to be genocidal, based on the Rwanda tribunal that convicted Jean-Paul Akayesu of genocide, “Special intent,” as applied to the Genocide Convention means, “The offender is culpable because he knew or should have known that the act committed would destroy, in whole or in part, a group.” This means, and as I have seen specified elsewhere by the court, the “specific intent” can be “inferred” from the “general context” of the actions undertaken.

Actions like completely destroying ~50% of homes, destroying or damaging 84% of health facilities, shutting down the economy and education system, restricting aid while enforcing rapid evacuations that rob Palestinians of their means of subsistence, etc. all seemingly constitute actions that can have no other effect but cause irreparable harm to the Palestinian people even if one wants to argue the intent was to take out Hamas. It appears that as Israel has more or less full control over imports into Gaza and has a duty as the occupation force to maintain the territory, as such it is fully responsible for the ongoing famine, disease, dehydration, etc. that they have caused by withholding essential needs while destroying a large portion of vital infrastructure in Gaza.

This seems to cross the bar in regard to action and intent but perhaps I am missing something. I know there is not a lot of case law in regard to this particular statute and intent is rarely found but this seems to be correct.

Thanks for the help.

Hello! Since 2020, I've been applying for the scholarship to take be part of the courses in the Hague Academy on International Law. Everytime I got rejected xd, so I decided to pay full fee. In this sense, does someone know how much does it cost?

Also, does someone know which are the profiles they are searching for the people who get networking invitation? (See the last lines in the picture).

Thaaank uuu.

Like chemical weapons, Is it possible to ban autonomous weapons that might uses AI in future.

Is there any communication between ICC and ICJ? And is there any communication between UN investigators and ICC?

Besides the ones that already apply to everyone. Are there any international obligations to meet the specific needs of women.

From reprobation of liberty , I mean imprisonment or mention in war time or in peace time.

For example, if someone just took an MA in International Law without a law school background, is there any way for that person to practice international law? Like for example, international commercial arbitration?

If not, then what are the possible career paths for someone with an MA in International Law without the law school background and of course, license on their country of origin.

Hi everyone,

I really need your assistance, because I haven't found this info anywhere.

If I get a refusal on political asylum in one of the EU countries, can I apply for asylum in other EU country?

I would appreciate also the links to the official documents.

Thanks in advance! :)

For months I have been in a disagreement with a government office. Basically they say that an international treaty that allows me to do X is no longer in force. But when I ask for some sort of documentation which proves that the treaty was actually repealed, they say they have no documentation and I just should take their word for it. A FOIA request turned up empty.

I strongly suspect that the treaty was not officially suspended, and that they just want to ignore it. If I am correct they are in breach of not only the treaty but also the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

The question is, is there anything that I as an individual can do to force their hand? I don't have monetary damages, but my rights are being infringed upon.

I'm from a country that has ratified all core human rights treaties and which has a very large undertrial as well as convicted population (due to recent increase in crime and an understaffed judiciary) And the prisons are largely overcrowded and poorly managed leading to various violations.

Could this be a human rights violation in and of itself ?

Are there any actual international lawyers here that want to predict how the case will turn out? I’m not asking how you personally would decide it, but rather how the court will.

Or is it only binding on council of Europe / EU organs ? How would the broader provisions of this be implemented ?

Let’s say that I was some billionaire and I wanted to make my own private remote island, could I pile up a bunch of sand into the ocean until it was an island, then build a house on it? If not, then let’s say that I just made a massive floating concrete structure that wasn’t technically an island, but it’s just like a massive floating craft?

For international lawyers here, how likely do you think it is that the ICJ rules that Israel committed genocide? It seems as if Israel has drastically improved the aid entering Gaza the last couple months and has almost completely withdrawn its troops, so they are seemingly at least somewhat abiding by the provisional measures.

To my understanding, intent is very difficult to prove, and while some quotes mentioned by SA were pretty egregious, most were certainly taken out of context and refer to Hamas, not the Palestinian population generally.

Am I correct in assuming that the ICJ court will likely rule it’s not a genocide?

https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/some-us-officials-believe-israel-may-be-violating-international-law-in-gaza-memo/

I checked out the business and human rights convention and the crimes against humanity treaty that is currently in drafting stage. Are there any other human rights instruments in the works ?

Hi everyone, I'm looking for good book recommendations on international law. Preferably centred on case / instrument analysis etc but any recommendations are great!

I've almost finished law school and am considering a career in international law. Im really interested in reading more about it!