A Forgotten History: Forcible Transfers and Deportations in International Criminal Law

IF 0.9 Q3 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY
Victoria Colvin, Phil Orchard
{"title":"A Forgotten History: Forcible Transfers and Deportations in International Criminal Law","authors":"Victoria Colvin, Phil Orchard","doi":"10.1007/s10609-020-09409-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Forced transfers and deportations of civilian populations are a persistent theme in atrocity crimes. Criminalizing forced displacement not only responds to a major human rights and atrocities problem which is not directly covered by either refugee or international human rights law; it can also serve an important deterrent effect. And yet a critical and enduring question has been around the nature of the relationship between the two offenses of deportation, in which a border is crossed, and forcible transfers, in which a border is not. While both are recognized today as crimes against humanity, the conventional story is that deportations have a much longer and more enduring history than forcible transfers. We argue that this is wrong, and that practice from the Nineteenth century through Nuremberg viewed ‘deportation’ as encompassing both forms of crimes. The loss of this history, however, has meant that in recent times the ICTY, ECCC, and the ICC have had to in effect reinvent the wheel of how forcible transfers are understood and how they are differentiated from deportations as a distinct crime. While a clear conception of forcible transfers as a crime against humanity is now developing in international criminal law, this has limited the number of prosecutions in spite of the fact that this provides a critical accountability mechanism.</p>","PeriodicalId":43773,"journal":{"name":"Criminal Law Forum","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminal Law Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10609-020-09409-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Forced transfers and deportations of civilian populations are a persistent theme in atrocity crimes. Criminalizing forced displacement not only responds to a major human rights and atrocities problem which is not directly covered by either refugee or international human rights law; it can also serve an important deterrent effect. And yet a critical and enduring question has been around the nature of the relationship between the two offenses of deportation, in which a border is crossed, and forcible transfers, in which a border is not. While both are recognized today as crimes against humanity, the conventional story is that deportations have a much longer and more enduring history than forcible transfers. We argue that this is wrong, and that practice from the Nineteenth century through Nuremberg viewed ‘deportation’ as encompassing both forms of crimes. The loss of this history, however, has meant that in recent times the ICTY, ECCC, and the ICC have had to in effect reinvent the wheel of how forcible transfers are understood and how they are differentiated from deportations as a distinct crime. While a clear conception of forcible transfers as a crime against humanity is now developing in international criminal law, this has limited the number of prosecutions in spite of the fact that this provides a critical accountability mechanism.

被遗忘的历史:国际刑法中的强制转移和驱逐
强迫转移和驱逐平民是暴行犯罪的一贯主题。将强迫流离失所定为犯罪不仅是对难民法或国际人权法均未直接涉及的重大人权和暴行问题的回应;它还可以起到重要的威慑作用。然而,一个关键而持久的问题一直围绕着两种罪行之间的关系,一种是跨越边界的驱逐罪,另一种是不跨越边界的强制转移罪。虽然这两种罪行今天都被认为是危害人类罪,但传统的说法是,驱逐出境的历史比强制转移要长得多,也更持久。我们认为这是错误的,从19世纪到纽伦堡的实践将“驱逐出境”视为包括两种形式的犯罪。然而,这段历史的缺失意味着,在最近的时代,前南问题国际法庭、ECCC和国际刑事法院实际上不得不重新设计如何理解强制转移,以及如何将其与驱逐出境作为一种独特的犯罪区分开来。虽然目前国际刑法中正在形成一种将强迫转让视为危害人类罪的明确概念,但这限制了起诉的数量,尽管这提供了一个关键的问责机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Criminal Law Forum
Criminal Law Forum Multiple-
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Criminal Law Forum is a peer-review journal dedicated to the advancement of criminal law theory, practice, and reform throughout the world. Under the direction of an international editorial board, Criminal Law Forum serves the global community of criminal law scholars and practitioners through the publication of original contributions and the dissemination of noteworthy public documents. Criminal Law Forum is published pursuant to an agreement with the Society for the Reform of Criminal Law, based in Vancouver, British Columbia.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信