Sie befinden Sich nicht im Netzwerk der Universität Paderborn. Der Zugriff auf elektronische Ressourcen ist gegebenenfalls nur via VPN oder Shibboleth (DFN-AAI) möglich. mehr Informationen...
Atrocities against an identifiable group may qualify as genocide even though most members of the group take flight and the group survives the campaign against it. This type of scenario, widely known as "ethnic cleansing," may lead to an inference of genocidal intent because of the atrocities themselves, statements reflecting religious or ethnonational hatred, disruption of family and communal life, and other patterns involving the targeting of group members and discrimination against them. Drawing on political philosophy as well as seventy-five years of domestic and foreign jurisprudence, this article proposes a "lifeworld"-based approach to genocidal intent. This approach explains and justifies the outcome in several decisions over the past decade involving prominent accusations of genocide, namely in Darfur, Srebrenica, the municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Cambodia. A lifeworld-based approach asks whether an ethnic cleansing campaign left the targeted group without a viable homeland in which to exist and thrive. If the accused's actions are consistent with depriving the group of the means to perpetuate itself in the relevant locality, courts infer genocidal intent even if the entire group was not killed as soon as practicable, and even if a major component of the group was not killed.