The Genocidal Mens Rea Requirement of the Crime of Genocide under the Ethiopian Criminal Law: Domestic Practice Vis-À-Vis the International Jurisprudence

Abstract

Genocide is one of the most heinous crimes under international law, and it differs from other core crimes in that it requires the genocidal acts committed with intent to destroy‘ a protected group, in whole or in part. This article examines how Ethiopian courts have interpreted and proved the genocidal mens rea element in cases involving the crime of genocide, juxtaposing in light of international jurisprudence aimingto draw lessons from the approaches of the latter and have a critical understanding of the genocidal mens rea element of genocide. It examines the relevant legal provisions, cases, reports and academic literature on the subject, and compares them with the international practices using a doctrinal comparative legal research methodology. The research claims thatthe Ethiopian courts have treated genocide as a crime of plan‘ rather than a crime of specific intent‘. It also maintains that the Ethiopian courts have conducted unsubstantiated genocidal trials. Moreover, the research asserts that Ethiopian courts turned genocide into a crime of a general intent by failing to establish the nexus between the physical result of genocide and the psychological state of individual perpetrators; and overemphasizing the victims‘ membership to a protected group. To this effect, Ethiopian courts risk trivializing the crime of crimes‘ and casting a shadow over the stigma attached to genocide. Besides, the article points out that, Ethiopian courts wrongly assumed that a genocidal plan was a prerequisite to establishing the genocidal intent. Therefore, it recommends that Ethiopian courts address and resolve these problems in future genocide trials.