Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T03:25:20.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conference Report – “The Genocide Convention” International Conference: Commemorating its 60th Anniversary (4 – 6 December 2008 Marburg, Germany)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Robin Hofmann

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In 1944 Raphael Lemkin wrote in his book titled Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: “By Genocide we mean the destruction of a nation or an ethnic group.” Four years later, on 9 December 1948 the term “genocide” coined by Lemkin simply by merging the Greek word “genos” (people) and the Latin word “caedere” (to kill) was adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations in the Genocide Convention. Now, six decades later an international conference on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the Genocide Convention took place from the 4th – 6th December in Marburg and the city of Frankfurt in Hesse/Germany sponsored mainly by the German Foreign Office and the Fritz-Thyssen Foundation. The main purpose was to discuss the implications of the genocide convention from 1948 on an international platform with scholars from different countries and disciplines.

Type
Developments
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 10 , Issue 5 , 01 May 2009 , pp. 621 - 628
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 Raphael Lemkin, Axis Rule In Occupied Europe: Laws Of Occupation, Analysis Of Government, Proposals For Redress (Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Division of International Law 1944).Google Scholar

2 See Satzger, Helmut, Internationales und Europäisches Strafrecht 193 (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft 2005).Google Scholar

3 Jackson, Robert H., Opening Statement before the International Military Tribunal, available at http://www.roberthjackson.org/Man/theman2-7-8-1/.Google Scholar

4 See Harris, Whitney R., Tyranny on Trial - The Trial of the Major German War Criminals at the End of World War II at Nuremberg, Germany, 1945–1946 (Southern Methodist University Press 1999). In German: Tyrannen vor Gericht: Das Verfahren gegen die deutschen Hauptkriegsverbrecher nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg in Nürnberg 1945–1946 (Juristische Zeitgeschichte, Abt. 4, Band 11 Berliner Wissenschaftsverlag 2008).Google Scholar

5 See BGHSt 45, 64 (80); BVerfG NJW 2001, 1848 (1850); Safferling JuS 2001, 738. No violation of Art. 7 § 1 ECHR could be found, see Jorgic v. Germany, 2007 Eur. Ct. H.R. ¶¶ 113 et subs (July 12).Google Scholar

6 See Prosecutor v. Krstic, Case No. IT-98-33, ¶ 580 (Aug. 2, 2001); see also Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro (“Case concerning the application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”), ¶ 190, 2007 I.C.J. (Feb. 26).Google Scholar

7 See Bosn. & Herz. v. Serb. & Mont., 2007 I.C.J. (Feb. 26).Google Scholar

8 See Gaeta, Paola, On What Conditions Can a State Be Held Responsible for Genocide, 18 Eur. J. Int'l L. 631–648 (2007).Google Scholar

9 See id. Google Scholar