gunduz-aktan-kitap-soyledikleri-ve-yazdiklari

SÖYLEDİKLERİ VE YAZDIKLARI
and genocide. After all, genocide was, basically, the killing of
individuals. Genocide caused the loss of the cultural and other
kinds of contributions these groups of people would be making to
humanity. Thus, the cultural genocide concept, to which Lemkin
attached importance, came to be indirectly included in the
resolution. The groups that could be subjected to genocide were
cited as “racial, religious, political and other” groups. That was an
admission of the possibility that virtually any group of people could
become genocide victims. The term also meant, not only
extermination of a group as a whole, but also in part.
Probably the most important aspect of the resolution is that
genocide was considered a crime according to international law. This
deliberation aimed at preventing genocide in a country from being
considered that country’s domestic affairs on account of the principle
of state sovereignty and also to prevent the culprits from evading
international penal procedures. The principle thus introduced was
that those who committed the crime of genocide should be punished,
regardless of their being private citizens or public servants or
statesmen. Since the genocide law had not yet developed, adequately
as a source, however, the sponsors stressed instead its violation of
the ‘moral laws’. In this vein, civilized states were denouncing
genocide. The resolution listed “religious, racial, political or any other”
reasons as grounds on which genocide could be committed, in
association with the groups of people subjected to genocide. In this
respect, with the addition of the words “other reasons”, it expanded
further the scope of the definition given in the Nuremberg principles
(6/c), which pertains to the crimes against humanity.
The preamble of the resolution stated that ‘political groups’
could be the victim of genocide. If the civilians who were part of
groups engaged in political struggle (for example, resorting to arms
with leftist revolutionary ideological aims or waging a struggle for
independence) came to be massacred even in part (not as the entire
group but in significant numbers) that alternative would still be
considered genocide. The concept of genocide embodied in this
resolution became almost totally identical with the concept of
crimes against humanity, as defined in the Nuremberg Principles
while severing the link between genocide and war. In other words,
it admitted that genocide could take place in times of peace as weft.
It acknowledged also that genocide could be committed, not only in
the territories a given country occupies in war, but also within the
national borders of that country itself.
Gündüz Aktan
235