Difficulties with Proving The Crime of Genocide on Example of The Case Vasiliauskas. V. Lithuania

Introduction

In our unstable world, a multitude of crimes are committed on the grounds of discrimination. Among these, the crime of genocide stands out as the most violent and the most challenging to prove. This heinous act is characterized by a specific intent to annihilate, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. This may be executed through the killing of its members or by inflicting serious bodily or mental harm, deliberately imposing living conditions calculated to lead to the group's destruction, preventing births within the group, or forcibly transferring children to another group (United Nations, 1948).

Difficulties with Proving The Crime of Genocide: The Case of Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania

There are instances where states deny the occurrence of genocide, or insufficient evidence exists to substantiate such claims, or other criminal acts are mistakenly categorized as genocide. A pertinent example is the case of Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania in the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). This case illustrates the complexity of proving genocide in legal terms.

The Historical Context

In 1949, during the period when Lithuania was part of the USSR, a partisan organization striving for Lithuanian independence was formed. By 1951, Mr. Vasiliauskas had become an operative agent of the KGB within the Lithuanian SSR. On January 2, 1953, he participated in an operation against two Lithuanian partisans, J.A. and A.A., who were subsequently killed. In 2001, Vasiliauskas and a co-defendant were charged with genocide against these partisans as representatives of a political group under Article 71(2) of the Lithuanian Criminal Code (Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania, 2015).

The Legal Proceedings

In 2004, the Trial Court in Lithuania convicted Vasiliauskas for genocide against political, national, and ethnic groups under Article 99 of the amended 1998 Criminal Code, sentencing him to six years in prison. The Supreme Court later affirmed that the 1998 amendments to the Criminal Code incorporated elements of genocide, extending to acts targeting the physical extermination of social or political group members. This definition remained in Article 99 of the Criminal Code (European Court of Human Rights, 2015).

The ECHR Ruling

The ECHR examined whether there was a clear legal basis in 1953 under Article 7(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights for Vasiliauskas’ conviction. The court evaluated whether the domestic conviction matched the genocide offense and whether Vasiliauskas was aware of the genocide definition during the 1953 operation. The ECHR ruled in Vasiliauskas' favor, finding a violation of Article 7, which states that no one shall be held guilty of a criminal offense that did not constitute such under national or international law at the time (European Convention on Human Rights, 1950).

Arguments and Counterarguments

Mr. Vasiliauskas argued that the broad interpretation of genocide by Lithuanian courts had no basis in public international law. Article 99 of the Lithuanian Criminal Code defines genocide as actions aimed at physically destroying some or all members of national, ethnic, racial, religious, social, or political groups (Lithuanian Criminal Code, 1998). The State contended that the partisans were members of protected national and ethnic groups under the Genocide Convention, as the Soviet regime aimed to eradicate Lithuanian culture, religion, language, politics, and identity.

Conclusion

The ECHR found that Vasiliauskas' conviction was based on legal provisions not in force in 1953, as Lithuania was not independent then. Nevertheless, the USSR's membership in the Genocide Convention meant that genocide was recognized as an international crime in 1953. The ECHR concluded that it was improbable Vasiliauskas would have anticipated his actions constituting genocide. Consequently, Article 7.1 of the ECHR was violated, entitling him to damages of €10,072 plus legal fees (Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania, 2015).

Reflective Insights

This case exemplifies the formidable challenge of proving genocide. Given its grave nature, the evidence and legal grounds must be robust. While difficult, it is crucial for international bodies and national courts to master the intricacies of prosecuting genocide to protect individuals from inhumane treatment worldwide.

References

European Court of Human Rights. (2015). Vasiliauskas v. Lithuania.

European Convention on Human Rights. (1950). Article 7.

Lithuanian Criminal Code. (1998). Article 99.

United Nations. (1948). Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.