DOCSLIB.ORG

Crime of ~Genocide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Crime of ~Genocide If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. S. HRG. 99-259 CRIME OF ~GENOCIDE HEARING BEFORE THE OO:MM1TTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-NINTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON THE PR1!:VENTION AND PUNISHMENT OF THE CRIME OF GENOCIDE MARCH 5, 1985 Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Relations U.s. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE WASHINGTON:... ,,-.,.. 1985 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS RICHARD G. LUGAR, Indiana, Chairman JESSE HELMS, North Carolina CLAIBORNE PELL, Rhode Island CHARLES MeC. MATHIAS, JR., Maryland JOSEPH R. BIDEN, JR., Delaware NANCY L. KASSEBAUM, Kansas PAUL S. SARBANES, Maryland RUDY BOSCHWITZ, Minnesota EDWARD ZORINSKY, Nebraska LARRY PRESSLER, South Dakota ALAN CRANSTON, California FRANK H. MURKOWSKI, Alaska CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut PAUL S. TRIBLE, JR., Virginia THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Missouri DANIEL J. EVANS, Washington JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts JEFFREY T. BERGNER, Staff Director GERYLD B. CHRISTIANSON, Minority Staff Director (III U.S. Department of Justice Nat/onallnstllute of Justice This document ha~ bee~ ~eproduced exactly as recoived from the person or organlzallon originating It. Points of view or opinions stated In this doeumen~ ~re tho~e of the authors and do not necessarily repr~sent the official position or policies of the National Institute of Justice. Permission to reproduce this c~d material has been granted by Public Domain United States 'Senate to the Nat/onal Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS). Further reprodu~tion outstde of the NCJRS system requires permis­ sion 01 the c~ owner. CONTENTS Hearing days: Page March 3, 1985 ....... ,................................................................................................... 1 Statements of: Abrams, Hon. Elliott, Assistant Secretary for Human Rights and Human- itarian Affairs, Department of State .............................................................. .. 4 Friedlander, Robert A., professor of law, Pettit College of Law, Ohio Northern University, Ada, OH ......................................................................... 71 Katson, Trisha, legislative director, Liberty Lobby, Washington, DC .......... 115 Moore, John Norton, Walter Brown, professor of law, University of Vir- ginia, Charlottesville, VA ................................................................................. .. 80 Phillips, Howard, Conservative Caucus, Vienna, VA ....................................... 106 Rees, Grover,_ III, professor, University of Texas Law School, Austin, TX .. 55 Robinson, Davis R., legal adviser, Department of State ................................. .. 7 Schlafly, Phyllis, Eagle Forum, Washington, DC .............................................. 101 Shepherd, John C., president, American Bar Association, accompanied by John Norton Moore, chairman, Standing Committee on Law and the National Security, the American Bar Association, and Walter Brown, professor of law, University of Virginia Law School, Charlottesville, VA 50 Shidler, Iris L., State Chairman of Women, Central Committee of Ameri­ can Independent Party, National Affiliate, PopUlist Party, Rialto, CA .... 112 Tarr, Ralph W., Acting Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Coun- sel, Department of Justice ................................................................................ .. 5 Wiesel, Hon. Elie, professor, Boston Univer~ity ............................................... .. 86 Insertions for the record: Helms Substitute for the Resolution of Ratification of the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Geno- cide ......................................................................................................................... 14 Situations where inflicting mental harm would be an offense under the Genocide Convention ......................................................................................... .. 31 Action taken by the Soviet Union, Eastern bloc countries, and Yugoslavia on legislation implementing the Genocide Convention ............................... .. 35 Excerpt from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on the Genocide Convention, 98th Congress, 2d session, September 12, 1984, S. Hrg. 98-962 .......................................................................................................... .. 47 Prepared statement of Grover Rees III .............................................................. .. 60 On the Prevention of Violence, by Robert A. Friedlander, from the Catho- lic Lawyer, vol. 25, No.2, Spring 1980 ............................................................ 73 Letter to Senator Lugar, from Senator Dodd, dated February 20, 1985 regarding Mr. Wiesel's appeai.'ance at the March 5 hearing ..................... .. 98 Excerpt from Committee on Foreign Relations Business Meeting, Septem- ber 19, 1984 .................................................................. ,... ,.................................... 99 Reso~ution urging the Senate to act on .the Genocide Convention prior tq adJournnlent .................................. ~ ..•. ?., .............................................................. 100 Executive Resolution expressing t~e'sense o~~e~n~.£<l sUp'~ort of the principles contained in the Convlmtion ag t~n" .. ~ ............... .. 100 Rollcall vote on S. Res. 478, from the Con e· sional ec ro,""O'ctober 11, 1984 ........................................................................................................................ 100 Artic1e-by-artic1e explanation of the Genocide Treaty ......................................' 105 Prepared statement of Trisha Katson (with a£t'Mll.me~ ... t9-a@ ................ .. 119 State and Justice Department's responses to"lfcfdt\;io~e'questlOns submit- ted for the record ........................... ;..................................................................... 166 State Department's responses to ajiditional questions submitted by Sena- St~~~ ~~~aJ~~·ti~~·D~p·~~·t~~;;:ti~·~~~p~~~·g·~~~~Jilit1:!t~~\'\·~;;;J't: 179 ted by Senator Pell .............................................................................................. 182 (III) IV Insertions for the record-Continued Page State and Justice Department's response to an additional question sub- mitted by Senator Dodd ...................................................................................... 184 State and Justice Department's responses to additional questions submit- ted by Senator Kerry ........................................................................................... 185 APPENDIX Letters to Senator Lugar from: Deukmejian, George, Governor, State of California, dated March 8, 1985... 189 Goldberg, Arthur J., dated February 28, 1985.................................................... 189 Levine, Jacqueline K., Chair, National Jewish Community Relations Ad- visory Council, New York, NY, dated March 4, 1985.................................... 190 Statement of the American Jewish Committee and Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith ............................................................................................................... 190 Statement of the American Jewish Con/Fess............................................................. 191 Statement of Gerald Kraft, president, B nai B'rith................................................... 192 Statement of David R. Hawk......................................................................................... 194 Statement afthe American National Committee of America................................. 199 St~tement of Ross Vartian, executive director, Armenian Assembly of Amer- lca.................................................................................................................................... 200 The Armenian Case, from Senator Helms' "Additional Views," September 24. 1984................................................................................................................................. 202 Let~er to Senator Percy from Governor George Deukmejian, State of Califor- nla................................................................................................................................... 203 Quotations by Raphael Lemkin regarding the Armenian Genocide...................... 203 Statement of A. Clifford Barker, chairman, the John Birch Society, Belmont, MA.................................................................................................................................. 204 Letter to Senator Lugar from William L. Ball, III, Assistant Secretary, Legis­ lative and Intergovernmental Affairs, Department of State, dated May 21, 1985 (with attachment)................................................................................................ 205 CRIME OF GENOCIDE TUESDAY, MARCH 5, 1985 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room SD-419, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Richard G. Lugar (chairman of the committee) presiding. Present: Senators Lugar, Helms, Mathias, Boschwitz, Pressler, Murkowski, Trible, Evans, Pell, Zorinsky, Cranston, Dodd, and Kerry. The CHAIRMAN. This hearing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is called to order. Today the Committee on Foreign Relations will receive testimo­ ny on the question of whether the Senate should give its consent to the ratification of the International Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. The
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Statement by Denmark on Behalf of Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark
    Statement by Denmark on behalf of Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark 75th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations Debate in the General Assembly Agenda item 74: Report of the International Court of Justice Delivered by: Counsellor Rasmus Jensen, Denmark New York 2 November 2020 Check against delivery E-mail: [email protected] http://fnnewyork.um.dk 1 M(r/s) Chair, I have the honour to speak on behalf of Finland, , Iceland, Norway, Sweden - and my own country - Denmark. The Nordic countries would like to thank the President of the International Court of Justice for his report on the Court’s work over the past year (A/75/4) and for his presentation today. The big amount of cases indicate the trust and confidence States place in the Court by referring disputes to it for resolution. The Nordic countries would in particular like to note the case filed by The Gambia against Myanmar regarding application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, where the Court indicated provisional measures on January 23rd. In addition to being important for the gravity of the issues The Gambia’s application seeks to address, the case is also an opportunity for the Court to develop its jurisprudence regarding obligations erga omnes and erga omnes partes. All States parties share an interest in compliance with the obligations under the Genocide Convention by all States parties. We applaud the Court and its personnel for continuing to discharge its judicial functions as described by the President in his report, despite the difficult circumstances following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Legal Response to Propaganda Broadcasts Related to Crisis in and Around Ukraine, 2014–2015
    International Journal of Communication 9(2015), Feature 3125–3145 1932–8036/2015FEA0002 Legal Response to Propaganda Broadcasts Related to Crisis in and Around Ukraine, 2014–2015 ANDREI G. RICHTER1 Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Keywords: freedom of expression, freedom of the media, propaganda for war, incitement to hatred, international standards, rule of law, national regulators, Russia, Ukraine, UK, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova The conflict in and around Ukraine in 2014–2015 has brought about the spread of propaganda for war and hatred, especially on television and on the Internet. Research on the national laws and resolutions made by courts and independent media regulators that adjudicated complaints on Russian TV propaganda in Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, the UK, and Ukraine shows that the national courts and regulators made few references to international norms, resting, rather, on domestically developed standards. As a result, there was a lack of solid grounds for stopping, blocking, and banning programs emanating from Russian media. In particular, there was no clear line between propaganda for war and hatred, proscribed under international norms, and legally protected Kremlin interpretation of the events in Ukraine. The comparative analysis of case law attempts to provide a modern rationale for regulation of propaganda for war and hatred and through it to offer relevant recommendations. Introduction The year 2014 marked the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I. It is worthwhile to recall that the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum to Serbia, which precipitated the start of the hostilities, included a major demand to stop nationalistic propaganda, as it flared the existing controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix File Anes 1988‐1992 Merged Senate File
    Version 03 Codebook ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ CODEBOOK APPENDIX FILE ANES 1988‐1992 MERGED SENATE FILE USER NOTE: Much of his file has been converted to electronic format via OCR scanning. As a result, the user is advised that some errors in character recognition may have resulted within the text. MASTER CODES: The following master codes follow in this order: PARTY‐CANDIDATE MASTER CODE CAMPAIGN ISSUES MASTER CODES CONGRESSIONAL LEADERSHIP CODE ELECTIVE OFFICE CODE RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE MASTER CODE SENATOR NAMES CODES CAMPAIGN MANAGERS AND POLLSTERS CAMPAIGN CONTENT CODES HOUSE CANDIDATES CANDIDATE CODES >> VII. MASTER CODES ‐ Survey Variables >> VII.A. Party/Candidate ('Likes/Dislikes') ? PARTY‐CANDIDATE MASTER CODE PARTY ONLY ‐‐ PEOPLE WITHIN PARTY 0001 Johnson 0002 Kennedy, John; JFK 0003 Kennedy, Robert; RFK 0004 Kennedy, Edward; "Ted" 0005 Kennedy, NA which 0006 Truman 0007 Roosevelt; "FDR" 0008 McGovern 0009 Carter 0010 Mondale 0011 McCarthy, Eugene 0012 Humphrey 0013 Muskie 0014 Dukakis, Michael 0015 Wallace 0016 Jackson, Jesse 0017 Clinton, Bill 0031 Eisenhower; Ike 0032 Nixon 0034 Rockefeller 0035 Reagan 0036 Ford 0037 Bush 0038 Connally 0039 Kissinger 0040 McCarthy, Joseph 0041 Buchanan, Pat 0051 Other national party figures (Senators, Congressman, etc.) 0052 Local party figures (city, state, etc.) 0053 Good/Young/Experienced leaders; like whole ticket 0054 Bad/Old/Inexperienced leaders; dislike whole ticket 0055 Reference to vice‐presidential candidate ? Make 0097 Other people within party reasons Card PARTY ONLY ‐‐ PARTY CHARACTERISTICS 0101 Traditional Democratic voter: always been a Democrat; just a Democrat; never been a Republican; just couldn't vote Republican 0102 Traditional Republican voter: always been a Republican; just a Republican; never been a Democrat; just couldn't vote Democratic 0111 Positive, personal, affective terms applied to party‐‐good/nice people; patriotic; etc.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran Hostage Crisis National Security Council, 1979 !
    CRISIS COMMITTEES | 2014e IRAN HOSTAGE CRISIS NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL, 1979 ! Dear Delegates, We are in the midst of the Iran Hostage Crisis, and there is no time to spare. Our situation is grave and desperate, and together we will find a solution into dealing with the recent events regarding the kidnapping of 52 Americans from the United States embassy in Tehran on November 4, 1979. Indeed there are many sides to this issue, and debates will be tense. The dichotomy between the many people being represented in this committee will surely lead to many disputes and tough agreements. Can the situation remain diplomatic? Or will it lead to something else? It shall remain up to you. It is with great pleasure, as director of this committee, to welcome you to our 2014 UTMUN conference. My name is Stanley Treivus, and alongside our Crisis manager Meerah Haq, we look forward to this thrilling weekend of debate that awaits us. We are both first year students studying Political Science and International relations and this will be our first time being involved in UTMUN. This conference will appeal to all delegates, experienced or novice. And our hope is that you will leave this committee with not only profound knowledge on the subject, but with a better sense of communication and improved debating skills than you had before. The issues we will be discussing will surround the many topics that relate directly to the Iran Hostage Crisis. We will look at foreign relations between the United States and Iran shortly before and during the crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptualising Historical Crimes
    Should crimes committed in the course of Conceptualising history that are comparable to genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes be Historical Crimes referred to as such, whatever the label used at the time?180 This is the question I want to examine below. Let us compare the prob- lems of labelling historical crimes with his- torical and recent concepts, respectively.181 Historical concepts for historical crimes “Historical concepts” are terms used to de- scribe practices by the contemporaries of these practices. Scholars can defend the use of historical concepts with the argu- ment that many practices deemed inadmis- sible today (such as slavery, human sacri- fice, heritage destruction, racism, censor- ship, etc.) were accepted as rather normal and sometimes even as morally and legally right in some periods of the past. Arguably, then, it would be unfaithful to the sources, misleading and even anachronistic to use Antoon De Baets the present, accusatory labels to describe University of Groningen them. This would mean, for example, that one should not call the crimes committed during the Crusades crimes against hu- manity (even if a present observer would have good reason to qualify some of these crimes as such), for such a concept was nonexistent at the time. A radical variant of the latter is the view that not only recent la- bels should be avoided but even any moral judgments of past crimes. This argument, however, can be coun- tered with several objections. First, diverg- ing judgments. It is well known that parties V HISTOREIN OLU M E 11 (2011) involved in violent conflicts label these conflicts differently.
    [Show full text]
  • History Brief: Timeline of US-Iran Relations Until the Obama
    MIT International Review | web.mit.edu/mitir 1 of 5 HISTORY BRIEF: TIMELINE OF US‐IRAN RELATIONS UNTIL THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION Key Facts & Catalysts By Sam Sasan Shoamanesh Looking back at key events in this US‐Iran chronicle is helpful in understanding some of the traditional causes of friction and mistrust between Tehran and Washington. A reference to the annals of US‐Iran relations will also be valuable in appreciating that the policies of the past sixty years have not been advantageous to US interests and on the contrary, have resulted in blowbacks, which still vex the relations to this day. 1856: Genesis of Formal Relations | Diplomatic relations between Iran and the United States began in 1856. 1909: American Lafayette in Iran | In 1909, Howard Baskerville, an American teacher and Princeton graduate on a Presbyterian mission in Tabriz, Iran, instantly becomes an Iranian national hero where after joining the Constitutionalists during the Constitutional Revolution of 1905‐1911, loses his young life while fighting the Royalists and the forces of the Qajar king, Mohmmad Ali Shah’s elite Cossack brigade. He is remembered as saying: ʺ[t]he only difference between me and these people is my place of birth, and this is not a big difference.ʺ To this day he is revered by Iranians. Second World War | Until the second World War, the US had no interest or an active policy vis‐à‐vis Iran and relations remained cordial. 1953 C.I.A. Coup | In 1951, Prime Minister Mossadegh and his National Front party (“Jebhe Melli”), a socio‐democratic, liberal‐secular nationalist party in Iran, nationalize the country’s oil industry.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Mail Logs for the President (1)” of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R
    The original documents are located in Box 8, folder “Congress - Congressional Mail Logs for the President (1)” of the John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Copyright Notice The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections. Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. r Digitized from Box 8 of The John Marsh Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library Presi dent's Mail - May 11, 1976 House 1. Augustus Hawkins Writes irr regard to his continuing · terest in meeting with the President to discuss the· tuation at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission prior to the appoint­ ment of a successor to Chairman owell W. Perry. 2. Larry Pressler Says he will vote to sustain e veto of the foreign military assistance se he believes the $3.2 billion should be u ed for nior citizens here at horne. 3. Gus Yatron Writes on behalf of Mrs. adys S. Margolis concerning the plight of Mr. Mi ail ozanevich and his family in the Soviet Union. 4. Guy Vander Jagt Endorses request of the TARs to meet with the President during their convention in June.
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Eye, Summer 2010
    Right-Wing Co-Opts Civil Rights Movement History, p. 3 TheA PUBLICATION OF POLITICAL R PublicEyeESEARCH ASSOCIATES Summer 2010 • Volume XXV, No.2 Basta Dobbs! Last year, a coalition of Latino/a groups suc - cessfully fought to remove anti-immigrant pundit Lou Dobbs from CNN. Political Research Associates Executive DirectorTarso Luís Ramos spoke to Presente.org co-founder Roberto Lovato to find out how they did it. Tarso Luís Ramos: Tell me about your organization, Presente.org. Roberto Lovato: Presente.org, founded in MaY 2009, is the preeminent online Latino adVocacY organiZation. It’s kind of like a MoVeOn.org for Latinos: its goal is to build Latino poWer through online and offline organiZing. Presente started With a campaign to persuade GoVernor EdWard Rendell of PennsYlVania to take a stand against the Verdict in the case of Luis RamíreZ, an undocumented immigrant t t e Who Was killed in Shenandoah, PennsYl - k n u l Vania, and Whose assailants Were acquitted P k c a J bY an all-White jurY. We also ran a campaign / o t o to support the nomination of Sonia h P P SotomaYor to the Supreme Court—We A Students rally at a State Board of Education meeting, Austin, Texas, March 10, 2010 produced an “I Stand With SotomaYor” logo and poster that people could displaY at Work or in their neighborhoods and post on their Facebook pages—and a feW addi - From Schoolhouse to Statehouse tional, smaller campaigns, but reallY the Curriculum from a Christian Nationalist Worldview Basta Dobbs! continues on page 12 By Rachel Tabachnick TheTexas Curriculum IN THIS ISSUE Controversy objectiVe is present—a Christian land goV - 1 Editorial .
    [Show full text]
  • June, 2010 PROSECUTING INTERNATIONAL CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN: the LEGAL FRAMEWORK IWP 2010-13
    UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre Innocenti Working Paper PROSECUTING INTERNATIONAL CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN: THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK Christine Bakker IWP 2010-13 June, 2010 Innocenti Working Papers UNICEF Innocenti Working Papers are intended to disseminate initial research contributions within the Centre‟s programme of work, addressing social, economic and institutional aspects of the realisation of the human rights of children. The findings, interpretations and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or the views of UNICEF. The designations employed in this publication and the presentation of the material do not imply on the part of UNICEF the expression of any opinion whatsoever concerning the legal status of any country or territory, or of its authorities, or the delimitation of its frontiers. Extracts from this publication may be freely reproduced with due acknowledgement. © 2010 United Nations Children‟s Fund (UNICEF) ISSN: 1014-7837 This paper presents an analysis of the evolving international legal norms related to the prosecution of international crimes against children, and addresses some questions on the criminal responsibility of children themselves who, in particular as child soldiers, were forced to participate in the commission of such crimes. This research paper was funded by the Government of France. For readers wishing to cite this document, we suggest the following form Bakker, Christine (2010), „Prosecuting International Crimes against Children: the Legal Framework‟, Innocenti Working Paper No. 2010-13. Florence, UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre. ii The UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre The UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre in Florence, Italy, was established in 1988 to strengthen the research capability of the United Nations Children‟s Fund and to support its advocacy for children worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Genocide and Belonging: Processes of Imagining Communities
    GENOCIDE AND BELONGING: PROCESSES OF IMAGINING COMMUNITIES ADENO ADDIS* ABSTRACT Genocide is often referred to as “the crime of crimes.” It is a crime that is very high on the nastiness scale. The purpose of the genocidaire is of course to destroy a community—a community that he regards as a threat to his own community, whether the threat is perceived as physical, economic or cultural. The way this takes place and the complicity of law in this process has been extensively explored by scholars. But the process of destroying a community is perversely often simultaneously an “exercise in community build- ing,” a process through which intra-communal bonds and belong- ing are sought to be strengthened. This aspect of genocide has been entirely neglected by scholars, especially the role of law in that pro- cess. This article makes and defends two claims about communities and belonging in relation to genocide. First, it argues that as per- verse as it sounds, genocide is in fact an exercise in community building and law is highly implicated in that process. It defends the thesis with arguments that are conceptual as well as empirical. The second, and more hopeful, claim is that the international response * W. R. Irby Chair and W. Ray Forrester Professor of Public and Constitutional Law, Tulane University School of Law. Previous drafts of the paper were presented at an international conference at the Guanghua Law School of Zhejiang University (China) and at Tulane Law School faculty symposium. I thank participants at those meetings for the many helpful questions and comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Details of Files for This Subgroup
    Fonds UNHCR Fonds 11 Records of the Central Registry Series Series 2 Classified Subject Files 1971-1984 Subgroup Non-Governmental Organisations Registry Code 400.GEN – 430.SSF Scope This subgroup documents the UNHCR’s relations with Non-Governmental Organisations. It contains information relating to operational cooperation and financial interaction with national and international NGOs, including correspondence, bills, budgets, reports prepared by NGOs. Details of Files for this Subgroup Registry Code Title Dates Box ID 400.ANG Non-Governmental Organisations - Angola 1975/1975 11.02.BOX.0634 400.ARE Non-Governmental Organisations - Arab Republic of Egypt 1972/1984 11.02.BOX.0634 400.ARG Non-Governmental Organisations - Argentina 1977/1984 11.02.BOX.0634 400.AUL Non-Governmental Organisations - Australia [Volume 1] 1973/1983 11.02.BOX.0634 400.AUL Non-Governmental Organisations - Australia [Volume 2] 1983/1985 11.02.BOX.0635 400.AUS Non-Governmental Organisations - Austria [Volume 1] 1972/1981 11.02.BOX.0635 400.AUS Non-Governmental Organisations - Austria [Volume 2] 1981/1984 11.02.BOX.0635 400.BEL Non-Governmental Organisations - Belgium [Volume 1] 1973/1978 11.02.BOX.0635 400.BEL Non-Governmental Organisations - Belgium [Volume 2] 1979/1982 11.02.BOX.0635 400.BEL Non-Governmental Organisations - Belgium [Volume 3] 1982/1983 11.02.BOX.0636 400.BEL Non-Governmental Organisations - Belgium [Volume 4] 1983/1984 11.02.BOX.0636 400.BEL Non-Governmental Organisations - Belgium [Volume 5] 1984/1984 11.02.BOX.0636 400.BOT Non-Governmental Organisations
    [Show full text]
  • Genocide Convention Act 1949
    Genocide Convention Act 1949 Act No. 27 of 1949 as amended This compilation was prepared on 27 November 2000 Prepared by the Office of Legislative Drafting, Attorney-General’s Department, Canberra Contents 1 Short title [see Note 1] .......................................................................4 2 Commencement [see Note 1] .............................................................4 3 Interpretation......................................................................................4 4 Approval of ratification......................................................................4 5 Approval of extension to Territories ..................................................4 The Schedule Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide 5 Notes 11 Genocide Convention Act 1949 iii An Act to approve of Ratification by Australia of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, and for other purposes 1 Short title [see Note 1] This Act may be cited as the Genocide Convention Act 1949. 2 Commencement [see Note 1] This Act shall come into operation on the day on which it receives the Royal Assent. 3 Interpretation In this Act: the Genocide Convention means the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations at Paris on the ninth day of December, One thousand nine hundred and forty-eight, the text of which convention in the English language is set out in the Schedule to this Act. 4 Approval of ratification Approval is hereby given to the depositing with the Secretary- General of the United Nations of an instrument of ratification of the Genocide Convention by Australia. 5 Approval of extension to Territories Approval is hereby given to the depositing with the Secretary- General of the United Nations of a notification by Australia, in accordance with Article twelve of the Genocide Convention, extending the application of the Genocide Convention to all the territories for the conduct of whose foreign relations Australia is responsible.
    [Show full text]