The Genocide Convention was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948. The effectiveness of this resolution has been encumbered by debates on its actual definition. The generally accepted meaning of "intent," within the Genocide Convention, refers to a specific type of intent. However, as new trials that further our understanding of genocide occur, the linking of specific intent with the original, widely accepted definition has been frequently examined.

The term genocide was first coined by Raphael Lernkin in 1944. During World War II, Lernkin had documented the actions of the Nazi Party in occupied Europe and lobbied for the U.S. to get involved in the war. At the time, the situation did not have an official name. Upon realizing this, Lernkin worked to create a term and published Axis Rule in Occupied Europe: Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress. This book contained the word Lemkin had created to describe the atrocities that were being committed: genocide. Genocide was the combination of the Greek word genos, which meant race or tribe, and the Latin word for killing, cide. According to Lemkin, the term referred to the "destruction of a nation or of an ethnic group."

After World War II, Nazi atrocities were fully revealed, and the Allies had to determine appropriate punishments for these crimes. However, the Nuremberg Trials only had jurisdiction over three categories of crime. The Nazi party was officially convicted of"crimes against humanity." After the trials, many became concerned that the law was lacking the ability to prosecute the actions taken by the Nazis before the war occurred. Lemkin increased his efforts and lobbied at the UN to make genocide a crime under international law. Eventually, the convention was adopted, and the definition of genocide was published as "Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial, or religious group." Since the adoption of the Convention, the UN has been troubled with legal debates on what the definition truly means and if certain acts are considered genocide or not.

The purpose of the Genocide Convention is to prevent and punish the crime of genocide. However, many crimes occur before (legally defined) genocide. Some bystanders have used this as an excuse for their lack of involvement in stopping the atrocities. Consequently, preventative action is seldom discussed until mass violence has already commenced. It is imperative that preventive action have priority over general conversations about genocide. Legal debates would be significantly reduced if the definition of genocide were clearer. However, one of the major difficulties with the definition revolves around the element of"intent."

"Specific intent" is a term that refers to the way perpetrators of genocide seek to destroy a group. One of the arguments that arises often stems from "specific intent" and the role it plays in determining if an act is genocide or a crime against humanity. It is sometimes difficult to produce evidence of the perpetrator's intentions. This interferes with the prevention of atrocities and lets perpetrators work around the law. Although it is important to make the distinction between different types of "intent" to confirm if something is genocide, "specific intent" has allowed many to escape conviction for their crimes. For these reasons, intent has been heavily debated and a more knowledge-based approach has been taken towards determining what is considered genocide. Attempts have been made to make the definition of intent closer to what was originally proposed by early drafters like Raphael Lemkin. This is important because it brings back the focus on protecting groups and stopping atrocities before they can occur.

Text by Jasmine Arce