Content area
Full Text
Abstract
Several countries touched by the scourge of genocide have responded by criminalizing the denial of this fact. The motivations for outlawing genocide denial are varied and the legislation coverage differs from state to state. Some nations are quite narrow in what behavior is criminalized and others are much broader in their coverage of activity. Since a key function of the law is to provide adequate notice to individuals it is important to understand what behavior is prohibited and in which location it is forbidden. One state's illegal denial behavior may be legal in another country. The scope of denial legislation is often related to the rationale behind the law connecting intent and action. These laws may also serve as guides for other countries desiring to prohibit denial thus creating more continuity among international criminal laws. This article is an attempt to understand genocide denial legislation.
Keywords: Genocide, Genocide Denial, Negationism, Denial Legislation, Denialism.
Introduction
Genocide is often considered to be the worst of crimes that humanity can inflict on one another. But when thinking of the harm caused by genocide there is one aspect that is sometimes overlooked. A genocide survivor may find that they are re-victimized when they hear someone deny their experience. Genocide denial can have a drastic negative effect upon survivors and others touched by the crime of genocide.
There are multiple dangers attached to genocide denial. In many ways denial is an attempt to kill the truth (Charney, 2000). Denying the truth can have ripple effects including impunity for the perpetrators and lack of awareness to recognize the reemergence of threatening behavior (Charney, 2000). In fact, Gregory Stanton has made denial the final stage of genocide in his ten stages. Denial following genocide is one of the "surest indicators of further genocidal massacres" (Stanton, 2016).
Denial can take many forms. When genocide is negated, the victims of that genocide are also being rejected. They are denied their status as a victim. Doing so could make it easier for future re-victimization (Etlis, 2008). Victim denial can also have the effect of shifting blame from the perpetrators to the victims. If the victims deserved what happened to them, then they are not truly victims but instead instigators and agitators (Alvarez, 1997)....