International Crime Or One Transnational Crime
Introduction
Over the years, there has been an increase in the number of people that have been subjected to international crimes. The reason for their plight has been mainly anchored on the interests of bigger players. The definition of international crimes has mainly been well documented in the Rome Statute with a special mention of Article 7 of this Statute. It is also clear that the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court with the aim of dealing with international crimes (Schabas, 2017). In line with the statute, it is clear that international crime is a systematic or widespread attack that is directed against the civilian population where they have a knowledge of the attack. There are ten key acts that are termed are international crime. Out of the ten, there are four that have been able to get a great mention in this statute. These three are torture, murder as well as enforced disappearance. It has been further being defined as an attack that as directed against any form of civilian population as a course of conduct that involves a number of multiple of commission acts.
The targeted people must be normal civil population and the acts of the international crime can be perpetuated by the government forces or it can be perpetrated by organized armed groups. It is therefore necessary not to confuse the crimes against humanity as being a large scale violence that is similar to the normal domestic crime. There is need to understand as well as examine systems as well as patterns in which the crime is done with an aim of ensuring that one is able to understand the origin of the crime. There is need to establish that there was an intention for the crimes to be done. It is necessary that there is some intention that is established. In that there is need to understand that there should have been a number of institutions that may have failed to take action to prevent the crime from taking place. This is the reason, there is need to for the international criminal law to be based on context, scale as well as patterns of violence.
Routine Activity Theory
Routine Activity Theory is a subsidiary of rational choice theory. It was developed by Cohen and Felson in the year 1979. This is a theory that is based on three key elements that have to be present for an international or any other crime to occur. The three elements are: a motivated offender that has criminal intentions as well as the ability to act on these inclinations. The second one is the existence of a suitable target or victim. The third one is the absence of a capable guardian who has the ability to prevent the crime from happening (Kleemans et al., 2012). For the crime to take place, there is need for the three factors to converge for there to exist the chance. The routine activities theory also provides a macro perspective on crime in that it is able to predict how a change in a single aspect of the social and economic conditions may be able to influence the overall crime as well as victimization rate.
Felson and Cohen further advanced their theory in 1980 whereby they managed to postulate as well as be able to state the criminal activities. It is necessary that there is need for structural as well as significant phenomenon this means that the violations are hardly trivial or even random. It is the routine of the activities of the people that they go through in the course of their daily lives in that some of the individuals are more susceptible to the fear that they may be seen as suitable candidates while others are certainly seen as being not so suitable targets. Crime is therefore treated as a normal activity that depends on the existence of opportunities (de Melo et., 2018). It is therefore necessary to mean that if the opportunities exist then there is a huge possibility that there will be a crime and if the opportunities hardly come by there will be less or no chances of a crime taking place. It is also clear that the existence of rewards as well as the existence of unprotected target mean that there will be enough motivation for the offender to commit the crime.
When it comes to the idea of suitability of targets, the choice of the target is influenced by the perception the offender has with the regards to vulnerability of the victim. The more one is suitable and be able to access the target the more the offender is likely to be able to commit the crime. The number of motivated criminals in the population usually affect the level of crime in that area. It is held that offenders are not likely to commit crimes if they are able to achieve personal goals as a way of ensuring that there is legitimate means (Hutchings & Hayes, 2009). It is therefore clear that the level of crime can be reduced if the criminal perceive or believe that there is an alternative to crime. If the perpetrators are people in government, if they believe there is a means to get their interests addressed without getting into the criminal activity. This implies that the criminal motivations can be reduced then it will be easy to ensure that things work out without any criminal activity.
The presence of capable guardians is also key thing that can be used to deter the crime from going on. This is usually the case when the offender is a private citizen and the capable guardian is the state. The physical security from the capable guardians is also a huge challenge. This is based on the fact that there is need to ensure that the number of offenders will be indeed be limited. It is only a challenge when the capable guardian ends up being the perpetrator of the crime since the guardian remains to be the international party such as the international criminal court. Such laws are very effective but mostly take action when the things have been done. It is clear that a huge number of people suffer most more so when the protector or the guardian has to come from the international base. This has been mainly backed by the fact that they usually take time before stepping in to help.
Specific International Crime
There have been state numerous mass killings of people by the former president of Sudan, Omar al Bashir. This is based on the fact that he is currently indicted in the International Criminal Court that is based in The Hague, Netherlands. The main international crime that he indicted with was the crime of murder and rape that was matted to the people of Sudan for a long period of time that is certainly longer than five years (Nouwen & Werner, 2010). It was established that from March 2003 to about July 2008, there was a protracted arms deals that was not in line with international character that was in place between Government of Sudan and a number of organized armed groups. One of the main groups that participated in the process with the Sudanese Liberation Movement/ Army (SLM/A) as well as the Justice and Equality Movement.
It was clear that one of the main aspect of the campaign was to attack the civilian population mostly those that were located in Darfur based on the fact that they were opposed to his bid. It is clear that there was tribal inclination in that the people that were attacked by the organized militia were mainly from the major tribes that were not comfortable with his leadership. Some of these tribes included, the Fur, Zaghawa as well as Masalit groups that were equally close to the organized groups that were against the government. This is to mean the attacks were not simply random but instead they were very organized. The government forces were the ones in charge of the brutal campaign. It is clear that the Sudanese Armed Forces as well as their allies such as the Janjaweed militia managed to terrorize the people and harass them so badly.
There were numerous acts of murder and extermination that were aimed at the said groups. This is anchored on the understanding that it was mainly a government operation against the people that were totally opposed to their agenda. It is necessary to understand that the government was expected to protect the people but instead it was the same government that opted to oppose the people in question which was indeed a huge challenge to them. It is necessary that people in question played a key role in killing and exterminating the people in Darfur that opposed the government agenda so that they can be able to retain power. The killings were done in a well fashion system in that the Janjaweed were the ones that were at the forefront of doing the killings. Even though to some it may have appeared as though the government was being absolved form the acts of criminal expedience (Simpson, 2007). It is necessary that the acts were well calculated and there was an elaborate scheme aimed at promoting the government at the expense of those that were indeed struggling to make things work out. Over the years, there has been a huge number of people who have remained in the dark over the issue due to the fact that the scheme was well executed and hardly did many people manage to know about the issue.
It is necessary to state that the acts were well distributed across the region and the targets were well identified. It is clear that the people who were interested in having a dissenting voice heard were the same people that ended up being killed all in the name of ensuring that the then president managed to get the hold of the political power (Marecha & Chigora, 2011). The military that is supposed to protect the people was the same that was busy handing over the military weapons to the Janjaweed. This was a huge challenge and indeed a betrayal to the people based on the fact that the government simply took advantage of the fact that they had the weapons and the people had no one to control them. It is necessary that the fact that the army would have been the one to protect the people from being attacked but in this case they were the ones who took control the killings thereby betraying their own positions as well as mandate.
Application of the Theory Omar Al Bashir’s Darfur Killings
It is clear that a huge number of people expected the government to protect them in the event there was an insurgence in the country. This was the correct position that many hoped for but hardly materialized for the case of the persons who lost their lives in the Darfur massacre. It is clear that the three elements of this theory were present. The three elements are: a motivated offender that has criminal intentions as well as the ability to act on these inclinations. The second one is the existence of a suitable target or victim. The third one is the absence of a capable guardian who has the ability to prevent the crime from happening (Udombana, 2005). In this case the government was the motivated offender and through the likes of Janjaweed managed to kill the people and was motivated by a number of reasons. Some of these reasons included the fact that they were obsessed with the power and the need to retain it. They were afraid that the victims stood in their way as the stumbling block to their success. It was necessary to ensure that the government was able to deliver the victory by hook or crook hence the reason there was no hesitation in killing those that were perceived to be opposed to the government as well as silencing those that seemed to opposing the government agenda.
The target was indeed suitable offender. The fact Fur, Zaghawa as well as Masalit groups were all living around one place and certainly opposed to the government made it easy for the government of Sudan under the leadership of Bashir to identify them as the target. This is anchored on the understanding there was need for the government to use a systematic way of getting rid of them. The way was indeed possible since they were all living around a single place therefore the execution of the dreadful plan was much simpler than if they were living far apart. It is also necessary to understand that a huge number of people did not expect such to happen based on the fact that it was the first time this was happening in the history of the country. The victims put a resilient battle against bad leadership for they thought that was the best they could have done and hardly looked at the many challenges that they were likely to be faced with.
The third was the absence of a capable guardian. In most cases when it comes to the issue of internal security then the country leadership is what usually holds things together. The fact that the government was the one capable of protecting the people but in this case was the one that ended up being the aggressor taking advantage of the people’s vulnerability (Cryer, 2006). This was a huge challenge in that the only alternative that people had was the United Nations but based on the case of Somalia, the UN peace mission failed to step in on time and this meant that the people were being exposed and they hardly had much to lean on but accepting their fate and losing their lives. It is necessary to state that the people played a key role in creating awareness but the lack of absence of a capable guardian to protect them against the insurgence created by the government itself left them exposed and certainly one of the reason the government engaged in the evil affair without appreciating the fact that there was need stop and prevent further killings. The president took advantage of his position in ensuring that things work out for him and his mission was achieved.
Limitations
It is clear that a huge number of things in this case were subject to the existence of a capable guardian that would have protected the people but its absence means that this would not have been the case. Even this is a valid case, it is evident that it is more of subjective than it is objective. There are many factors that cause wars or mass killings of people. There are cases where the parties may be in a good condition to defend oneself but this may not be case all because of the structural limitations. In the case of Rwanda where there were such atrocities that led to the deaths of people totaling up to a million people, the Kagame brigade was able to stop the killings but it was quite late. Another limitation is that the approach is narrow minded only believing that the elements are only three but in reality the existence of a good environment to support a crime may also be necessary but such is not even included in such a case.
Policy Implications
There is need for checks and balances in that the international body should perform checks and balances on the behalf of the people so that they do not have to suffer the fate that the people of Sudan went through in the hands of the killer in the name of Al Bashir. There is also the need to get rid of the immunity issue so that the United Nations be able to get hold of such people and even arrest them and not case of evil people that have committed such crimes hiding under the veil of their positions and only being held accountable when out of office. This is a challenge in that when one is in office forever then it becomes an issue since they cannot be able to be answerable for the crimes they committed.
Conclusion
It is clear that there is need to promote peace and good relations among people in that the use of crime may not really add much value to the people. There are always cases of victims, the aggressors with intentions to benefit and the number of capable guardians are also few hence one of the reasons people are mishandled as result of their religion among many other aspects.
References:
Cryer, R. (2006). Sudan, Resolution 1593, and International Criminal Justice. Leiden Journal of International Law, 19(1), 195-222.
de Melo, S. N., Pereira, D. V., Andresen, M. A., & Matias, L. F. (2018). Spatial/temporal variations of crime: a routine activity theory perspective. International journal of offender therapy and comparative criminology, 62(7), 1967-1991.
Hutchings, A., & Hayes, H. (2009). Routine activity theory and phishing victimisation: Who gets caught in the ‘Net’?. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 20(3), 433-452.
Kleemans, E. R., Soudijn, M. R., & Weenink, A. W. (2012). Organized crime, situational crime prevention and routine activity theory. Trends in Organized Crime, 15(2-3), 87-92.
Marecha, K., & Chigora, P. (2011). The Sudanese Conflict: War Crimes and International Criminal Court. Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations, 10(4).
Nouwen, S. M., & Werner, W. G. (2010). Doing justice to the political: The international criminal court in Uganda and Sudan. European Journal of International Law, 21(4), 941-965.
Schabas, W. A. (2017). The international criminal court: a commentary on the Rome Statute. Oxford University Press.
Simpson, G. J. (2007). Law, war and crime: war crimes, trials and the reinvention of international law. Polity.
Udombana, N. J. (2005). Pay Back Time in Sudan-Darfur in the International Criminal Court. Tulsa J. Comp. & Int’l L., 13, 1.