What is a crime against humanity?
Crimes against humanity refer to certain crimes committed as part of widespread or systematic attacks against a civilian population. They shock the conscience of humanity itself. The first prosecution using the term occurred when Nazi leaders were tried at Nuremberg last century, in response to the horrors of the Holocaust.
Such crimes include, but are not limited to:
- Murder
- Torture
- Enslavement
- Rape and other forms of sexual violence
- Persecution
- Enforced disappearance
- Apartheid
Unlike war crimes, they can occur during peace or wartime. Some likely recent examples include:
- Afghanistan: In 2023, Amnesty reported on the Taliban’s severe restrictions and unlawful crackdown on women and girls’ rights. The organization called for these draconian measures, together with imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture and other ill-treatment, to be investigated as the crime against humanity of gender persecution.
- Ethiopia: In 2023, Eritrean soldiers committed crimes under international law in the Tigray region of Ethiopia. The crimes included rape and sexual slavery of women and the extrajudicial execution of civilians, potentially amounting to crimes against humanity.
- Iran: In 1988, Iranian authorities forcibly disappeared and extrajudicially executed thousands of imprisoned political dissidents in secret, before dumping their bodies mostly in unmarked mass graves. No official has ever been brought to justice. Since then, enforced disappearances and the torture and ill-treatment of victims’ families effectively means crimes against humanity continue.
These are just some examples of crimes against humanity, but there are many others that are equally egregious. In the past decade alone, Amnesty International has found cases of such atrocities in at least 18 countries across the world. No region of the world is free from crimes against humanity.
What legal mechanisms already exist to combat crimes against humanity?
Currently, a number of legal mechanisms are specifically designed to tackle these crimes, such as the Rome Statute of the ICC and, more recently, the Ljubljana-Hague Convention.
The Rome Statute is aimed at prosecuting individuals for their personal criminal responsibility. It was adopted as a means to establish the International Criminal Court in The Hague. In most cases, however, the court only has jurisdiction when a state is a member. Even then, the court can only act if that state is unable or unwilling to investigate and prosecute cases itself.
Some countries have also criminalized crimes against humanity themselves without being party to the Rome Statute, such as the Philippines and Indonesia.
National courts can, and in some circumstances must, prosecute individuals for crimes against humanity committed wherever they happen. This is because such crimes concern the international community as a whole and every state should act to protect people against them.
Why do we need a new convention if we already have existing mechanisms in place?
The above examples are important legal instruments and they do share some overlap. However, fundamental differences exist in their respective scope and functions. Unlike other crimes under international law, crimes against humanity lack a specific, standalone convention.
The new draft convention seeks to close this impunity gap and harmonize approaches. It offers a chance to remedy some of the compromises made in Rome over 25 years ago. It would also help to incorporate the progression of international law since. The latter is especially important regarding gender equality and protection against gender-based crimes.
Newer initiatives that seek to strengthen the international justice system alongside existing mechanisms are not in competition — they are complementary. They will help us seek and deliver justice, truth and reparation for victims and survivors of crimes under international law.
How would a new convention on crimes against humanity help?
A new convention would oblige states to ensure that such crimes are investigated and prosecuted, even if this means investigating their own actions. Furthermore, it would compel states to not only punish crimes against humanity but also to prevent them (as is similarly required under the Genocide Convention). It would also foster cooperation with other states, for example through mutual legal assistance.
The convention would offer new pathways for victims of crimes against humanity and provide a comprehensive framework for countries to incorporate these crimes into their national legal systems. This step alone would hugely reduce the ability of perpetrators to evade justice.
Victims and survivors would be the ultimate beneficiaries. Humanity needs to be able to seek justice and accountability when crimes against humanity are committed, and a new convention could help us do that.
Case Study: Venezuela
Since 2017, Venezuelans have faced mass extrajudicial executions and arbitrary detentions, as well as excessive use of force by police during protests. There is a systematic policy of repression against political opponents and people who may be perceived as such. These abuses may constitute crimes against humanity and the perpetrators should be brought to international justice.
Many organizations, including Amnesty, called on the UN to act by renewing the mandate of its Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Venezuela. In 2021 the ICC also finally recognized the need to investigate the potential crimes documented in Venezuela.
But other states can also help. A court in Argentina is presently considering a lawsuit brought by victims of crimes against humanity in Venezuela. Amnesty asserts that Argentine courts are fully competent to investigate, prosecute and criminally punish the perpetrators of crimes against humanity committed outside of Argentina. When authorities in a state where such crimes happen are unable or unwilling to enact genuine investigations and prosecutions, another state could enable the pursuit of justice.
The convention would not replace the actions of the UN or ICC, but function in parallel with them. Crimes against humanity are of concern to everyone. Concerted efforts are needed to combat them effectively. A new convention would give states a common global framework to tackle crimes against humanity, which would enable them to carry out investigations and prosecutions, foster mutual cooperation, and maintain fair trial procedures. It would also preserve the basic rights of victims and witnesses.
What is Amnesty doing?
The convention project has been in the making for more than 10 years. In October and November 2024, the UNGA Sixth Committee will again discuss this topic. This presents a unique opportunity for states to demand that the UN begin the formal process of adopting this convention.
Amnesty asks all UN member states to support the adoption of a resolution that would initiate negotiations for a Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Humanity to begin. We urge governments to endorse the draft resolution currently being circulated prior to the October session.
In the past two years, a global majority of states have expressed general support for the project. If the UN does not move the draft text to formal negotiations, it may not be presented for discussion again for many years. As it stands, the need for an international treaty offering new possibilities for both preventing crimes against humanity and ensuring justice, truth and reparation remains as urgent as ever.