ctrlnum slims-11920
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?> <dc schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><title>Atrocity Speech Law: Foundation, Fragmentation, Fruition</title><creator>Gregory S. Gordon</creator><subject>Genosida</subject><subject>Kejahatan Terhadap Kemanusiaan</subject><subject>Persecution</subject><subject>Hate propaganda</subject><subject>Persekusi</subject><subject>Crimes against humanity</subject><subject>Propaganda kebencian</subject><subject>Ujaran kebencian</subject><subject>Hate speech</subject><subject>Genocide</subject><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><date>2017</date><language>eng</language><type>Book:Book</type><identifier>http://perpustakaan.komnasham.go.id/opackomnas/index.php?p=show_detail&amp;id=11920</identifier><identifier>9780190612689</identifier><description>The law governing the relationship between speech and core international crimes a key component in atrocity prevention is broken. Incitement to genocide has not been adequately defined. The law on hate speech as persecution is split between the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Instigation is confused with incitement and ordering's scope is too circumscribed. At the same time, each of these modalities does not function properly in relation to the others, yielding a misshapen body of law riddled with gaps. Existing scholarship has suggested discrete fixes to individual parts, but no work has stepped back and considered holistic solutions. This book does. To understand how the law became so fragmented, it returns to its roots to explain how it was formulated. From there, it proposes a set of nostrums to deal with the individual deficiencies. Its analysis then culminates in a more comprehensive proposal: a Unified Liability Theory, which would systematically link the core crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes with the four illicit speech modalities. The latter would be placed in one statutory provision criminalizing the following types of speech: (1) incitement (speech seeking but not resulting in atrocity); (2) speech abetting (non-catalytic speech synchronous with atrocity commission); (3) instigation (speech seeking and resulting in atrocity); and (4) ordering (instigation/incitement within a superior-subordinate relationship). Apart from its fragmentation, this body of law lacks a proper name as Incitement Law or International Hate Speech Law, labels often used, fail to capture its breadth or relationship to mass violence. So this book proposes a new and fitting appellation: atrocity speech law.</description><geographic>New York</geographic><identifier>http://perpustakaan.komnasham.go.id/opackomnas/lib/phpthumb/phpThumb.php?src=../../images/docs/8688.jpg.jpg</identifier><description>xxviii, 436 pages; 25 x 17 cm.</description><subject>INT IV.23</subject><recordID>slims-11920</recordID></dc>
language eng
format Book:Book
Book
author Gregory S. Gordon
title Atrocity Speech Law: Foundation, Fragmentation, Fruition
publisher Oxford University Press
publishDate 2017
isbn 9780190612689
topic Genosida
Kejahatan Terhadap Kemanusiaan
Persecution
Hate propaganda
Persekusi
Crimes against humanity
Propaganda kebencian
Ujaran kebencian
Hate speech
Genocide
INT IV.23
url http://perpustakaan.komnasham.go.id/opackomnas/index.php?p=show_detail&id=11920
http://perpustakaan.komnasham.go.id/opackomnas/lib/phpthumb/phpThumb.php?src=../../images/docs/8688.jpg.jpg
contents The law governing the relationship between speech and core international crimes a key component in atrocity prevention is broken. Incitement to genocide has not been adequately defined. The law on hate speech as persecution is split between the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). Instigation is confused with incitement and ordering's scope is too circumscribed. At the same time, each of these modalities does not function properly in relation to the others, yielding a misshapen body of law riddled with gaps. Existing scholarship has suggested discrete fixes to individual parts, but no work has stepped back and considered holistic solutions. This book does. To understand how the law became so fragmented, it returns to its roots to explain how it was formulated. From there, it proposes a set of nostrums to deal with the individual deficiencies. Its analysis then culminates in a more comprehensive proposal: a Unified Liability Theory, which would systematically link the core crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes with the four illicit speech modalities. The latter would be placed in one statutory provision criminalizing the following types of speech: (1) incitement (speech seeking but not resulting in atrocity); (2) speech abetting (non-catalytic speech synchronous with atrocity commission); (3) instigation (speech seeking and resulting in atrocity); and (4) ordering (instigation/incitement within a superior-subordinate relationship). Apart from its fragmentation, this body of law lacks a proper name as Incitement Law or International Hate Speech Law, labels often used, fail to capture its breadth or relationship to mass violence. So this book proposes a new and fitting appellation: atrocity speech law.
xxviii, 436 pages; 25 x 17 cm.
id IOS16498.slims-11920
institution Komnas HAM
institution_id 6872
institution_type library:special
library
library Perpustakaan Komnas HAM
library_id 5031
collection OPAC Komnas HAM
repository_id 16498
subject_area Human Rights/Hak Asasi Manusia, HAM
Law and Bases of Morality/Hukum dan Moral Dasar
city JAKARTA PUSAT
province DKI JAKARTA
repoId IOS16498
first_indexed 2022-01-12T10:39:42Z
last_indexed 2022-01-12T10:39:42Z
recordtype dc
_version_ 1721747074609840128
score 17.61047