Reconciling Complicity in Genocide and Aiding and Abetting Genocide in the Jurisprudence of the United Nations Ad Hoc Tribunals
![handle is hein.journals/hhrj21 and id is 245 raw text is: Reconciling Complicity in Genocide and
Aiding and Abetting Genocide in the
Jurisprudence of the United Nations
Ad Hoc Tribunals
Grant Dawson*
Rachel Boynton**
Ne coupez pas ce que vous pouvez dinouer.
-Joseph Joubert
I. INTRODUCTION
The relationship between aiding and abetting genocide and complicity
in genocide has generated debate in the jurisprudence of the United Na-
tions' two ad hoc tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunals for the
former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Despite the exploration of this issue by
various Chambers of the ad hoc tribunals, case law on the issue remains
unsettled in the area of liability for complicity in genocide and aiding and
abetting genocide. This issue is all the more significant when both modes
of liability for genocide are included in an indictment. Although the KrstiW
Appeals Chamber hypothesized that complicity in genocide could encom-
pass broader conduct than aiding and abetting,' aiding and abetting has
been the only culpable conduct that the tribunals have considered in rela-
tion to complicity in genocide. It is perhaps for this reason, in part, that the
distinction between complicity in genocide and aiding and abetting geno-
cide is worthy of debate and clarification.
In order to assist in the comparison between aiding and abetting geno-
cide and complicity in genocide, section II of this article briefly explores
* J.D., Georgetown University Law Center, Washington, D.C.; B.A., Columbia College, New
York; Legal Officer and member of the Secretariat of the Rules Committee, International Criminal
Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The views expressed herein are those of the author alone and do not
necessarily reflect the views of the ICTY or the United Nations in general.
** J.D., Harvard Law School, Cambridge, MA, 2008; B.A. Doane College, Crete, NE, 1999;
former Legal Intern, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The authors would like
to express their gratitude to Catherine Marchi-Uhel, Joakim Dungel, and Frederic Bostedt for their
insightful comments on this article.
1. Prosecutor v. Krsti6, Case No. IT-98-33-A, Judgment, 139 (Apr. 19, 2004) [hereinafter Krsi
Appeal Judgment].](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/hhrj21&div=17&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most