Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Does international criminal law still require a...

Research

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’?: a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Published

Standard

Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’? a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity. / Murray, Alex.
In: Goettingen Journal of International Law, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2011, p. 589-615.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review

Harvard

Murray, A 2011, 'Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’? a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity', Goettingen Journal of International Law, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 589-615. https://doi.org/10.3249/1868-1581-3-2-murray

APA

Murray, A. (2011). Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’? a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity. Goettingen Journal of International Law, 3(2), 589-615. https://doi.org/10.3249/1868-1581-3-2-murray

Vancouver

Murray A. Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’? a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity. Goettingen Journal of International Law. 2011;3(2):589-615. doi: 10.3249/1868-1581-3-2-murray

Author

Murray, Alex. / Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’? a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity. In: Goettingen Journal of International Law. 2011 ; Vol. 3, No. 2. pp. 589-615.

Bibtex

@article{5a4f28b523f94cfc9ce2e82eb2c867d2,
title = "Does international criminal law still require a {\textquoteleft}crime of crimes{\textquoteright}?: a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity",
abstract = "This article argues that the crime of genocide is now a redundant crime in international law given the advances that have been made in the case law and application of crimes against humanity. It does this by providing an historical analysis of the two crimes before going on to consider four separate crimes against humanity and corresponding acts of genocide. The primary argument leveled against genocide is the difficulties that stem from proving the intent in the mind of the perpetrator to destroy a particular group in contrast to the less demanding category of crimes against humanity. It argues for a pragmatic rather than philosophical approach to international justice for the benefit of the victims and the prevention of criminal acts in the future.",
author = "Alex Murray",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.3249/1868-1581-3-2-murray",
language = "English",
volume = "3",
pages = "589--615",
journal = "Goettingen Journal of International Law",
issn = "1868-1581",
publisher = "Universit{\"a}tsverlag G{\"o}ttingen (Goettingen University Press)",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does international criminal law still require a ‘crime of crimes’?

T2 - a comparative review of genocide and crimes against humanity

AU - Murray, Alex

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - This article argues that the crime of genocide is now a redundant crime in international law given the advances that have been made in the case law and application of crimes against humanity. It does this by providing an historical analysis of the two crimes before going on to consider four separate crimes against humanity and corresponding acts of genocide. The primary argument leveled against genocide is the difficulties that stem from proving the intent in the mind of the perpetrator to destroy a particular group in contrast to the less demanding category of crimes against humanity. It argues for a pragmatic rather than philosophical approach to international justice for the benefit of the victims and the prevention of criminal acts in the future.

AB - This article argues that the crime of genocide is now a redundant crime in international law given the advances that have been made in the case law and application of crimes against humanity. It does this by providing an historical analysis of the two crimes before going on to consider four separate crimes against humanity and corresponding acts of genocide. The primary argument leveled against genocide is the difficulties that stem from proving the intent in the mind of the perpetrator to destroy a particular group in contrast to the less demanding category of crimes against humanity. It argues for a pragmatic rather than philosophical approach to international justice for the benefit of the victims and the prevention of criminal acts in the future.

U2 - 10.3249/1868-1581-3-2-murray

DO - 10.3249/1868-1581-3-2-murray

M3 - Journal article

VL - 3

SP - 589

EP - 615

JO - Goettingen Journal of International Law

JF - Goettingen Journal of International Law

SN - 1868-1581

IS - 2

ER -