جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « collective guilt » در نشریات گروه « فقه و حقوق »

International court of justice has declaredin the genocide case (Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Serbia and Montenegro) that the genocide convention involves the state obligation of non- commission of this crime as well as adoption of individual criminal responsibility. This finding has been criticised by many jurists. They consider such interpretation is indicator of state criminal responsibility and would prolong cycle of group hate and will make disturbance in realization of the transitional justice process . Traditional approach of transitional justice with an exclusively emphasize on the mechanism of the punishment of individual perpetrators of the international crimes as a heritage of Nuremberg trails marginalized others mechanisms including holding state responsibility due to absence of any clear distinction between collective guilt and collective responsibility. But state responsibility for commission of genocide not only in conflict with the goals of transitional justice but also it is contributing to realization of that process, because by recognition of civil responsibility of state on one side it would be compensate any the damages suffered to victims and on other side it imposing collective responsibility on all citizens of convicted state which is result of legal Responsibility for taking part or be silence in commission of crimes and by providing an unifiednarrative on committed crimes rectify weaknesses of the case by case trails byinternational Criminal courts.