Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948

Subject – IR

Context – In the last few weeks, incendiary speeches by YatiNarsinghanand at a religious assembly have reignited discussion regarding hate speech, and the limits of the law. The speeches made include calls for the genocide of Muslims in India.

Concept –

• Raphael Lemkin is credited with the use of the term ‘genocide’ and campaigned relentlessly for it to become an international treaty.
• In 1946, Cuba, India and Panama co-sponsored General Assembly Resolution 96(I), which affirmed genocide as a ‘crime under international law’.
• The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (CPPCG), or Genocide Convention, is an international treaty that criminalizes genocide and obligates state parties to enforce its prohibition.
  • It was the first legal instrument to codify genocide as a crime, and the first human rights treaty unanimously adopted by the United Nations General Assembly, on 9 December 1948.
• As a result of this resolution, a convention on the prohibition of genocide was drafted, which was passed by the General Assembly in 1948 and came into effect in 1951, with more than 150 states party to the convention presently.
• The Genocide Convention has as its objective the prevention of genocide as well as the punishment of the crime.
• Legal obligations on states that are party to the convention include
  • the obligation not to commit genocide, to prevent genocide, and to punish genocide(Article I),
  • to enact legislation to give effect to the provisions of the convention (Article V);
  • to provide for effective penalties for those found guilty of criminal conduct (Article V);
  • the obligation to try those charged with genocide in a competent tribunal (Article VI).
• The ICJ, relying on a previous case of Belgium v. Senegal, stated, “It follows that any State party to the Genocide Convention, and not only a specially affected State, may invoke the responsibility of another State party with a view to ascertaining the alleged failure to comply with its obligations ergaomnespartes, and to bring that failure to an end.”
  • Even a state that may not be specially affected can still raise a legal claim on the basis of being part of the community of states.
• Disputes between the Contracting Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the present Convention, including those relating to the responsibility of a State for genocide or for any of the other acts enumerated in article III, shall be submitted to the International Court of Justice at the request of any of the parties to the dispute.

Laws in India

• Since signing the Genocide Convention and ratifying it, to date India has not enacted any legislation in accordance with Article VI of the Genocide Convention.
• Indian Penal Code provisions relating to rioting, unlawful assembly and ‘promoting enmity between different groups’ do not embody the basic elements of the crime of genocide, which is against a collectivity or a group, with the specific intent to cause its destruction.