A Logical Approach to the Effect of Social Identity Motivation in Crimes Against Humanity

Öz

After World War II, crimes against humanity found application in the international and national level. If we look conceptually and terminologically, we encounter a process that goes back to World War II. It is possible to make a “definition” that refers to “humanity” for the actions that these crimes refer to, by testing them from various perspectives because a definition is a compulsory tool of logic to create and strengthen the concept. Crimes against humanity, both historically, theoretically, and in the context of judicial practices, point to an inconsistent concept. Indeed, this inconsistency was expressed by competent criminal law jurists in the sense that the definition of crimes against humanity has drawbacks. Based on this, the study is grounded on a set of principles that classical logic offers for definitions while analyzing the drawbacks of the concept. As a result of this analysis, the study found that there is a clear social identity motive in acts called crimes against humanity. The social identity approach recognizes that certain correlations can be established in the cognitive and behavioral states of individuals within a group. These correlations allow us to have an idea about the emergence and sustainability of group behavior, the needs of social groups, their relationship with individual identities and social cohesion. When crimes against humanity are simply reduced to the grounds of discrimination, and discrimination is expressed as social identity-based behavior, the importance of social groups will emerge. In other words, social groups, by constructing the social identities, determine the presumptions that are the reference of the perpetrator in crimes against humanity. The study identifies this context and reveals that the acts of crime against humanity are actually qualified forms of the relevant offenses that manifest the social identity motivation. Since states have specific construction processes of social identities, a normative and judicial system based on testable social psychology data is recommended at the national level.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Crimes against humanity
• international criminal law
• criminology
• the definition of crime
• qualified form
• the certainty of law
• social identity theory
• social psychology
• social identity motive
• constructivism
• dialectical logic

İnsanlığa Karşı Suçlarda Sosyal Kimlik Motivasyonu Üzerine Mantıksal Bir Yaklaşım

Öz

İnsanlığa karşı suçlar, II. Dünya Savaşı’ndan sonra uluslararası ve ulusal düzeyde uygulama alanı bulmuştur. Ancak kavramsal ve terimsel olarak bakıldığında, II. Dünya Savaşı öncesine uzanan bir süreçle karşılaşırız. Bu suçlarla tabir edilen fiiller için “insanlığı” referans alan bir tanımlama yapılması, kavramın çeşitli açılardan sınanması ile mümkündür. Çünkü tanım, kavramı oluşturmak ve güçlendirmek için zorunlu bir mantık aracıdır. Gerek tarihsel ve teorik açıdan, gerekse yargısal uygulamalar bağlamında insanlığa karşı suçlar, tutarsız bir kavrama işaret etmektedir. Aslında bu tutarsızlık, yetkin ceza hukuku yazarları tarafından insanlığa karşı suçların tanımı açısından sakıncalar barındırdığı yönüyle ifade edilmiştir. Çalışma, kavramdaki kusurları analiz ederken klasik mantığın tanımlar için sunduğu bir takım prensiplerden hareket etmektedir. Bu analizin sonucunda insanlığa karşı suçlar olarak tabir edilen fiillerde belirgin bir sosyal kimlik saiki bulunduğu tespit edilmiştir. Sosyal kimlik yaklaşımı, bireylerin grup içindeki bilişsel ve davranışsal durumlarında belirli korelasyonlar kurulabileceğini kabul eder. Bu korelasyonlar bize grup davranışının ortaya çıkışı ve sürdürülebilirliği, sosyal grupların ihtiyaçları, bireysel kimliklerle ve sosyal kohezyonla olan ilişkisi noktasında fikir yürütme imkânı tanır. İnsanlığa karşı suçlar basit anlamda ayrımcılık zeminine indirgendiğinde, ayrımcılık ise sosyal kimlik temelli davranışlar olarak ifade edildiğinde sosyal grupların önemi ortaya çıkacaktır. Başka bir anlatımla sosyal gruplar, sosyal kimlikleri inşa ederek insanlığa karşı suçlarda failin referansı olan ön kabulleri belirler. Çalışma bu bağlamı tespit ederek insanlığa karşı suç tabirindeki fiillerin, aslında ilgili suçlarda sosyal kimlik motivasyonu şeklinde tezahür eden nitelikli haller olduğunu ortaya koymaktadır. Sosyal kimlik inşasında devletlere özel inşa süreçleri söz konusu olduğundan, test edilebilir sosyal psikoloji verilerini referans alan ulusal düzeyde normatif ve yargısal bir sistem önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İnsanlığa karşı suçlar
• uluslararası ceza hukuku
• kriminoloji
• suç tanımı
• nitelikli hal
• hukuk güvenliği
• sosyal kimlik teorisi
• sosyal psikoloji
• sosyal kimlik saiki
• inşacılık
• diyalektik mantık

Kaynakça

1. Adams D (ed), Seville Statement on Violence: Preparing the Ground for the Constructing of Peace (UNESCO 1991).
2. Al- Mashhadani MMJ, Uluslararası Hukukta İnsanlığa Karşı Suçlar (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2017).
3. Allport FH, Social Psychology (Houghton Mifflin Company 1924).
4. Allport GW, The Nature of Prejudice (Addison-Wesley Publishing 1954).
5. Alpkaya G, Eski Yugoslavya için Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesi (Turhan Yayınevi 2002).
6. Arkonaç SA, Sosyal Psikolojide İnsanları Anlamak (Nobel 2008).
7. Arendt H, Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil (Viking 1965).
8. Arendt H, Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy (University of Chicago Press 1992).

9. Aslan MY, Teoride ve Uygulamada Savaş Suçları (Bilge Yayınevi 2006).
10. Atadjanov R, Humanness as a Protected Legal Interest of Crimes Against Humanity Conceptual and Normative Aspects (International Criminal Justice Series 22, Asser Press 2019).
11. Bartov O, “Introduction” in Eshet D (ed) Totally Unofficial: Raphael Lemkin and the Genocide Convention (Facing History and Ourselves 2007).
12. Bassiouni MC, The Legislative History of the ICC (Transnational Publications 2005).
13. Bassiouni MC, Crimes Against Humanity: Historical Evolution and Contemporary Application (Cambridge University Press 2011).
14. Başkaracaoğlu E, Uluslararası Hukukta İnsanlığa Karşı Suçların Tanımlanması (Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2004).
15. Bauman Z, Postmodernlik ve Hoşnutsuzlukları (Türkmen İ Trans, Ayrıntı 2000).
16. Bergande W, "The Creative Destruction of the Total Work of Art: From Hegel to Wagner and beyond" in Ruhl C, Dähne C and Hoekstra R (eds) The Death and Life of the Total Work of Art (Jovis 2014) 128- 145.
17. Brewer M, “Superordinate Goals Versus Superordinate Identity as Bases of Intergroup Cooperation” in Capozza D and Brown R (eds) Social Identity Process (Sage 2000).
18. Cassese A, International Criminal Law (Oxford University Press 2003).
19. Cassese A, “Crimes Against Humanity: Comments on Some Problematical Aspects” in Gaeta P and Zappala S (eds) The Human Dimension of International Law (Oxford University Press 2008).
20. Chaney D, Yaşam Tarzları (Kutluk İ Trans, Dost 1999).
21. Churchill W, Never Give In! The Best of Winston Churchill’s Speeches (New York: Hyperion 2003) 297300.
22. Cooley CH, “The Looking-Glass Self.” in Lemert C (ed), Social Theory: The Multicultural Readings (Westview Press 2010).
23. Dadak E, Sosyal Kimlik Kuramı Bağlamında Bireylerin Kimlik ve Aidiyet Tanımlamaları: Kocaeli Kafkas Kültür Derneği Örneği (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2018).
24. Deaux K, “Theoritical Perspectives, Models, Meanings and Motivations” in Capozza D and Brown R (eds) Social Identity Process (Sage 2000).
25. Deschamps JC and Doise W, “Crossed Category Memberships in Intergroup Relations” in Tajfel H (ed), Differentiation between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Academic Press 1978).
26. Dinstein Y, “Crimes Against Humanity” in Makarczyk J (ed), Theory of International Law at the Threshold of the 21st Century: Essays in Honour of Krzysztof Skubiszewski (Kluwer Law International 1996) 891– 908.
27. Dollard J et al, Frustration and Aggression (Yale University Press 1939).
28. Drucker PF, Kapitalist Ötesi Toplum (Çorakçı B Trans, İnkılap 1997).
29. Dubler SC R and Kalyk M, Crimes against Humanity in the 21st Century: Law, Practice and Threats to International Peace and Security (Brill Nijhoff 2018).
30. Dunbar R, Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language (Faber and Faber Limited 1996).
31. Durkheim E, Sosyolojik Methodun Kuralları (Aytekin E Trans, 2nd edn, Sosyal Yayınlar 1994).
32. Edelman M, The Need for Enemies (The Sixth Annual Meeting of International Society of Political Psychology 1983).
33. Eichmann Case (Attorney-General of the Government of Israel v Eichmann) (Israel Sup. Ct.) (1962) 36 ILR 277 (English translation).
34. Ekşi CA, Uluslararası Ceza Mahkemesinin İnsanlığa Karşı Suçlar Üzerindeki Yargı Yetkisi (Seçkin Yayıncılık 2004).
35. Erem F, İnsanlığa Karşı Cürümler (Genocide) (Ankara Üniversitesi Matbaası 1948).
36. Ferstman C, Goetz M and Stephens A (eds), Reparations for Victims of Genocide, War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity (Martinus Nijhoff 2009).
37. Forsyth DR, Group Dynamics (6th edn, Wadsworth Cengage Learning 2014).
38. Franzoi SL, Social Psychology (2nd ed, Mc Graw- Hill 2000).
39. Fromm E, Yeni Bir İnsan, Yeni Bir Toplum (Arat N Trans, Say 1996).
40. Gadamer HG, “The Problem of Historical Consciousness” in Rabinow P and Sullivan WM (eds) Interpretive Social Science: A Second Look (University of California Press, 1979) 82- 140.
41. Gaeta P and Zappala S (eds), The Human Dimension of International Law (Oxford University Press 2008).
42. Gemalmaz MS, Ulusalüstü İnsan Hakları Hukukunun Genel Teorisine Giriş (Legal 2010).
43. Geras N, Crimes Against Humanity: Birth of A Concept (Mancherster University Press 2011).
44. Giddens A, Modernite ve Bireysel- Kimlik: Geç Modern Çağda Benlik ve Toplum (Tatlıcan Ü Trans, Say 2010).
45. Günal H, Hannah Arendt Düşüncesinde İnsanlığa Karşı Suçların Temellendirilmesi (Doktora Tezi 2013).
46. Güriz A, Faydacı Teoriye Göre Ahlak ve Hukuk (Ankara Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Yayınları 1963).
47. Hall CK, “Universal Jurisdiction: New Uses for an Old Tool”, in Lattimer M and Sands P (eds), Justice for Crimes Against Humanity (Hart Publishing 2003).
48. Hegel GWF, Hukuk Felsefesinin Prensipleri (Cenap Karakaya Trans, 2nd edn, Sümer Yayıncılık 2015).
49. Hesiodos, Theogonia- İşler ve Günler (Eyüboğlu S and Erat A Trans, İş Bankası 2016).
50. Hiebert MS, Constructing Genocide and Mass Violence: Society, Crisis and Identity (Routledge 2017).
51. Hogg MA and Abrams D, Social Identifications: A Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations and Group Processes (Routledge 1988).
52. Hogg MA and Vaughan GM, Sosyal Psikoloji (Yıldız İ and Gelmez A Trans, İmge 2007).
53. Hogg MA, “Social Identity Theory” in McKeown S, Haji R and Ferguson N (eds) Understanding Peace and Conflict Through Social Identity Theory (Springer 2016).
54. Hortaçsu N, Ben, Siz, Biz, Hepimiz: Toplumsal Kimlik ve Gruplar Arası İlişkiler (İmge 2007).
55. Hortaçsu N, En Güzel Psikoloji Sosyal Psikoloji (İmge 2012).
56. Huntington SP, Medeniyetler Çatışması mı? (Çalık M Trans, Vadi 1995).
57. Ibn Haldun, Mukaddime- I (Süleyman Uludağ (ed), Dergâh 1982).
58. Johnson DW and Johnson FP, Joining Together Group Theory and Group Skills (7th edn, Pearson Allyn and Bacon 1997).
59. Jung KG, Collected Works v.9.1 (2nd edn, Princeton University Press 1968).
60. Kant I, Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals (3rd edn, Hackett Publishing 1993).
61. Kaya O, Tehdit Algısı ve Sosyal Kimliğin Kolektif eylem ile Algılanan Ayrımcılık üzerine Etkisi (Doktora Tezi 2019).
62. Kaya T, Öz- Farkındalık, Bireysel Kimlik ve Toplumsal Kimliğin Holiganizm Üzerine Etkisi (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2019).
63. Kessler T and Mumandey A, “Prejudice and Intergroup Relations” in Hewstone M, Stroebe W and Jonas K (eds), Introduction to Social Psychology: A European Perspective (Blackwell Publishing 2008).
64. Kramer SN, History Begins at Sumer (3rd edn, University of Pennsylvania Press 1981)
65. Krawiec R, “Asceticism” in Hunter DG and Harvey SA, The Oxford Handbook of Early Christian Studies (Oxford University Press 2008).
66. Lewellen TC, The Anthropology of Globalization: Cultural Anthropology Entersthe 21st Century (Bergin & Garvey 2002).
67. Lewin K, Resolving Social Conflicts: Selected Papers on Group Dynamics (Harper 1958).
68. Lütem İ, Harp Suçları ve Devletlerarası Hukuk (Güney Matbaacılık ve Gazetecilik 1951).
69. May L, Crimes Against Humanity: A Normative Account (University of Cambridge 2005).
70. Marshall G, Sosyoloji Sözlüğü (Akınhaya O and Kömürcü D Trans, Bilim ve Sanat 1999).
71. McDavid JW and Harari H, Social Psychology: Individuals, Groups, Societies (Harper & Row Publishers 1968).
72. Mead GH, Mind, Self, and Society from the Standpoint of a Social Behaviorist (University of Chicago Press 1934).
73. Meray SL, Devletler Hukukuna Giriş- II (Ankara Üniversitesi Matbaası, 1959).
74. Meşe G, Sosyal Kimlik ve Yaşam Stilleri (Doktora Tezi 1999).
75. Monroe KR, “Explanation” in Shelton D ed, Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity- I (MacMillan 2005) 327- 330.
76. Montes JF, Perceived Discrimination Among Indigenous and Non- Indigenous Mexican- Americans Living in The United States (Doktora Tezi 2010).
77. Nacar A, Sürdürülebilir Kalkınmaya Yönelik Kazanımlar ve Uluslararası Hukuki Uyuşmazlıklar (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2018).
78. Ntoubandi FZ, Amnesty for Crimes against Humanity under International Law (Martinus Nijhoff 2007).
79. Onuf N, “Constructivism: A User’s Manual” in Kubalkova V, Onuf N, and Kowert P (eds) International Relations in A Constructed World (Routledge 1998).
80. Oppenheim LFL and Lauterpacht H, International Law, A Treatise- II: Disputes, War and Neutrality (7th edn, Longsman, Green 1955).
81. Öner Mİ, Sosyal Kimlik Bakış Açısıyla Grup Temelli Duyguların Farklı Boyutlarda İncelenmesi (Doktora Tezi 2015).
82. Özyılmaz Kiraz B, Dış Politika Yapımında Geniş Grup Kimliğinin ve Sosyal Kimliğin Etkisi: Türk Dış Politikası Örneği (Doktora Tezi 2018).
83. Rabinow P and Sullivan WM, “Introduction: An Interpretve Turn” in Rabinow P and Sullivan WM (eds), Interpretive Social Science: A Reader (University of California Press 1979).
84. Ratner SR and Abrams JS, Accountability for Human Rights Atrocities in International Law: Beyond the Nuremberg Legacy (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2001).
85. Romano CPR, Nollkaemper A, and Kleffner JK (eds) Internationalized Criminal Courts: Sierra Leone, East Timor, Kosovo, and Cambodia (Oxford 2009).
86. Russell B, Batı Felsefesi Tarihi- I (Sencer M Trans, Say 1996).
87. Sabah RL, Uluslararası Hukukta İnsanlığa Karşı Suçların Tanımlanması (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2019).
88. Sageman M, Leaderless Jihad: Terror Networks in the Twenty-First Century (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press 2008).
89. San C, İnsanlık Aleyhine Suçlar ve Genocide Sözleşmesi (Ankara Yarı Açık Cezaevi Matbaası 1966).
90. Schabas WA, The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute (Oxford University Press 2010).
91. Schmitt C, The Concept of the Political (Schwab G Trans, University of Chicago Press 1996).
92. Schulz F, Principles of Roman Law (Clarendon Press 1956).
93. Shaw MN, Uluslararası Hukuk (Kaya İ et al Trans, 8th edn, Tüba 2018).
94. Sheehy P, The Reality of Social Groups (Ashgate 2006).
95. Sherif M, The Psychology of Social Norms (Harper 1936).
96. Sherif M et al, Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation. The Robbers Cave Experiment (Institute of Group Relations 1961).
97. Sherif M, In Common Predicament: Social Psychology of Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation (Houghton-Mifflin 1966) 544- 545.
98. Sidanius J, “The Psychology of Conflict and the Dynamics of Oppression: A Social Dominance Perspective” in Shanto Iyengar (ed), Exploration in Political Psychology (Duke University Press 1993).
99. Sidanius J and Pratto F, Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression (Cambridge University Press 1999).
100. Sidanius J and Pratto F, “Social Dominance Theory: A New Synthesis” in Jost JT and Sidanius J (eds), Political Psychology (Psychology Press 2004).
101. Smith RW, “Perpetrators” in Shelton D (ed), Encyclopedia of Genocide and Crimes Against Humanity- II (MacMillan 2005) 790- 794.
102. Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (2007) Erişim Tarihi: 20.04.2020.
103. Stets JE and Burke PJ, “New Directions in Identity Control Theory” in Thye SR and Lawler EJ (eds), Social Identification in Groups- 22 (Emerald Group Publishing 2005).
104. Şen E, Etnik Gruplarda Sosyal Kimlik ve Algılanan Ayrımcılık: Türk ve Kürt Etnik Grupları Üzerine Bir Çalışma (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2014).
105. Şenel A, Siyasal Düşünceler Tarihi (Ankara Üniversitesi Matbaası 1982).
106. Tajfel H, “Social Categorization, Social Identity and Social Comparison” in Tajfel H (ed), Differentiation Between Social Groups: Studies in the Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations (Academic Press 1978).
107. Tajfel H and Turner JC, “An Integrative Theory of Inter-Group Conflict” in Austin WG and Worchel S (eds), The Social Psychology of Inter-Group Relations (Brooks/ Cole 1979) 33- 47.
108. Taylor DM and Moghaddam FM, Theories of Intergroup Relations: International Social Psychological Perspectives (2nd edn, Praeger Publishers 1994).
109. The King James Version of the Holy Bible (2014).
110. Uçar M, Değişen Bilim Anlayışında Yöntem (Hermeneutik) ve Toplumsal Kimlik Sorunu (Yüksek Lisans Tezi 2002).
111. Worchel S. et al, “A Multidimensional Model of Identity: Relating Individual and Group Identities to Intergroup Behaviour” in Capozza D and Brown R (eds), Social Identity Process (Sage 2000).
112. Wright SC and Tropp LR, “Collective Action in Response to Disadvantage: Intergroup Perceptions, Social Identification, and Social Change” in Walker I and Smith HJ (eds), Relative Deprivation: Specification, Development, and Integration (Cambridge University Press 2002).
113. Başgil AF, “Millet, Milliyet, Milliyetçilik” (1959) 271 Türk Yurdu, 3- 5.
114. Bechara A, Damasio H, Damasio AR, “Emotion, Decision Making and the Orbitofrontal Cortex” (2000) 10(3) Cerebral Cortex, 295- 307.
115. Bilsky L and Klagsbrun R, “The Return of Cultural Genocide?” (2018) 29(2) The European Journal of International Law, 373- 396.
116. Bowles S, “Being human: Conflict: Altruism's Midwife” (2008) 456 Natute, 326- 327.
117. Branscombe NR, Schmitt MT and Harvey RD “Perceiving Pervasive Discrimination among African- Americans: Implications for Group Identification and Well-being” (1999) 77 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 135- 149.
118. Brewer M and Miller N, “Beyond the Contact Hypothesis: Theoretical Perspectives on Desegregation” (1984) Groups in Contact: The Psychology of Desegregation, 281- 302.
119. Brewer M et al, “Social Identity and Social Distance among Hong Kong Schoolchildren” (1987) 13(2) Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 156- 165.
120. Burke P, “The Fabrication of Louis XIV” (1992) 42(2) History Today, 24- 30.
121. Commins B and Lockwood J, “The Effects on Intergroup Relations of Mixing Roman Catholics and Protestants: An Experimental Investigation” (1978) 8(3) European Journal of Social Psychology, 383- 386.
122. Coombs RH, “Value Consensus and Partner Satisfaction Among Dating Couples” (1966) 28 (2) Journal of Marriage and The Family, 166- 173.
123. Doosje B et al, “Guilty by Association: When One's Group Has A Negative History” (1998) 75(4) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 872- 886.
124. Drury J and Reicher S, “Explaining Enduring Empowerment: A Comparative Study of Collective Action and Psychological Outcomes” (2005) 35(1) European Journal of Social Psychology, 35- 58.
125. Ellemers N, Spears R and Doosje B, “Sticking Together or Falling Apart: In-group Identification as a Psychological Determinant of Group Commitment Versus Individual Mobility” (1997) 72 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 617- 626.
126. Gaertner SL et al, “The Contact Hypothesis: The Role of a Common Ingroup Identity on Reducing Intergroup Bias” (1994) 25(2) Small Group Research, 224- 249.
127. Herzfeld M, “The Horns of the Mediterraneanist Dilemma” (1984) 11(3) American Ethnologist, 439- 454.
128. Hogg MA et al, “Uncertainty, Entitativity and Group Identification” (2007) 43 Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 135- 142.
129. Hwang P, “Defining Crimes Against Humanity in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court” (1998) 22 Fordham International Law Journal, 457– 504.
130. Jalloh CC, “What Makes a Crime Against Humanity A Crime Against Humanity” (2013) 28(2) American University International Law Review, 381- 441.
131. Kaufmann W, “The Origin of Justice” (1969) 23(2) The Review of Metaphysics, 209- 239.
132. Klandermans B, “How Group Identification Helps to Overcome the Dilemma of Collective Action” (2002) 45(5) American Behavioral Scientist, 887- 900.
133. Love JL, “Raul Prebisch and the Origins of the Doctrine of Unequal Exchange” (1980) 15(3) Latin American Research Review, 45- 72.
134. Luban D, “A Theory of Crimes Against Humanity” (2004) 29 The Yale Journal of International Law, 85- 167.
135. Millgram E, “John Stuart Mill, Determinism, and the Problem of Induction” (2009) 87(2) Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 183- 199.
136. Mullen B, Brown R and Smith C, “Ingroup Bias as a Function of Salience, Relevance, and Status: An Integration” (1992) 22(2) European Journal of Social Psychology, 103– 122.
137. Mummendey A et al, “Strategies to Cope with Negative Social Identity: Predictions by Social Identity Theory and Relative Deprivation Theory” (1999) 76 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 229- 245.
138. Notton D and Stringer C, “Who is the type of Homo Sapiens?” (2010) International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature.
139. Reicher SD, “The Battle of Westminster’: Developing the Social Identity Model of Crowd Behaviour in order to Explain the Initiation and Development of Collective Conflict” (1996) 26(1) European Journal of Social Psychology, 115- 134.
140. Renzo M, “Crimes Against Humanity and the Limits of International Crminal Law” (2012) 31 Law and Philosophy, 443– 476.
141. Roberts C, “On The Definition of Crimes Against Humanity and Other Widespread or Systematic Human Rights Violations” (2017) 20 (1) Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change, 1- 27.
142. Roger N and Smith DA, "International Trade and World-System Structure: A Multiple Network Analysis” (1985) 8(4) Review (Fernand Braudel Center), 517- 560.
143. Rubin M and Hewstone M, “Social Identity, System Justification, and Social Dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al” (2004) 25 (6) Political Psychology, 823– 844.
144. Rubin M, Badea C and Jetten J, “Low Status Groups Show In-Group Favoritism to Compensate for Their Low Status and to Compete for Higher Status” (2014) 17(5) Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 563– 576.
145. Samuels A, “The Eiusdem Generis Rule in Statutory Interpretation” (1984) 5(1) Statute Law Review, 180- 183.
146. Schwelb E, “Crimes Against Humanity” (1946) 23 British Year Book of International Law, 178- 226.
147. Sherif M, “A Study of Some Social Factors in Perception” (1935) 187 Columbia University Archives of Psychology, 1- 60.
148. Simon B et al, “Collective Identification and Social Movement Participation” (1998) 74(3) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 646- 658.
149. Smith B, “Social Situation, Social Behavior, Social Group” (1945) 52(4) Psychological Review, 224- 229.
150. Smith TB and Silva L, “Ethnic Identity and Personal Well-being of People of Color: A Meta- Analysis” (2011) 58(1) Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42- 60.
151. Swanson GE, “On Explanations of Social Interaction” (1965) 28 (2) Sociometry, 101- 123.
152. Tajfel H et al, “Social Categorization and Intergroup Behavior” (1971) European Journal of Social Psychology, 149- 177.
153. Tajfel H, “Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations” (1982) 33 Annual Review of Psychology, 1- 39.
154. Toi M and Batson DC, “More Evidence that Empathy is a Source of Altruistic Motivation” (1982) 43 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 281- 292.
155. Tosun Ö, “İnsanlık Aleyhine Suçlar” (1954) 4 Adalet Dergisi, 404- 437.
156. Vanbeselaere N, “The Effects of Dichotomous and Crossed Social Categorizations upon Intergroup Discrimination” (1987) 17(2) European Journal of Social Psychology, 143- 156.
157. van Schaack B, “The Definition of Crimes Against Humanity: Resolving the Incoherence” (1999) 37 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, 787- 850.
158. van Zomeren M, Postmes T and Spears R “Toward an Integrative Social Identity Model of Collective Action: A Quantitative Research Synthesis of Three Socio-Psychological Perspectives” (2008) 134(4) Psychological Bulletin, 504- 535.
159. Verkuyten M, “Ethnic Group Identification and Group Evaluation among Minority and Majority Groups: Testing the Multiculturalism Hypothesis” (2008) 88(1) Journal of Personality and Social Psycholgy, 121- 138.
160. Wilder DA, “Reduction of Intergroup Discrimination Through Individuation of the Out-Group” (1978) 36 Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1361- 1374.
161. Wright SC, Taylor DM and Moghaddam FM “Responding to Membership in A Disadvantaged Group: From Acceptance to Collective Protest” (1990) 58(6) Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 994- 1003.
162. Bernard TJ, “Criminology” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 18.10.2019) Erişim Tarihi: 15.12.2020.
163. Cambridge Dictionary Erişim Tarihi: 02.06.2020.
164. Case Concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11.04.2000 (Democratic Republic of Congo v Belgium) (Judgement) [2002] ICJ Rep 3 Erişim Tarihi: 29.05.2020.
165. Convention on Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (adopted 09.12.1948 entered into force 12.01.1951) 78 UNTS 277 Erişim Tarihi: 13.04.2020.
166. Dönmez İK, “Maslahat” (Türkiye Diyanet Vakfı İslam Ansiklopedisi 2003) Erişim Tarihi: 08.12.2020.
167. Ellemers N, “Social Identity Theory” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 04.01.2019) Erişim Tarihi: 18.05.2020.
168. The Case of the SS Lotus, (France v Turkey) (Collection of Judgement) PCIJ Rep Series A No 10 Erişim Tarihi: 21.06.2020.
169. Grudin R, “Humanism” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 22.10.2020) Erişim Tarihi: 15.12.2020.
170. Hosch JA, “More About the IMTFE” (University of Georgia, 02.04.2019) Erişim Tarihi: 18.04.2020.
171. ICC Erişim Tarihi: 29.04.2020.
172. ILC, “Principles of International Law recognized in the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and in the Judgement of the Tribunal” (1950) II YILC 374 Erişim Tarihi: 14.04.2020.
173. ILC, “Report of the International Law Commission covering the work of its third session 1951” (1957) II YILC 1 Erişim Tarihi: 04.06.2020.
174. ILC, “Report of the International Law Commission covering the work of its sixth session” (1954) II YILC 140 Erişim Tarihi: 04.06.2020.
175. ILC, “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its thirty-eighth session” (1986) II(2) YILC 5 Erişim Tarihi: 04.06.2020.
176. ILC, “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its forty-third session” (1991) II(2) YILC 9 Erişim Tarihi: 04.06.2020.
177. ILC, “Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its seventy-first session” (2019) II YILC 10 Erişim Tarihi: 04.06.2020.
178. International Military Tribunal, “Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal” (1947) I Secretariat of the Tribunal 254 Erişim Tarihi: 15.04.2020.
179. Morrissey M, “Confessionalism and Conversion in the Reformation” (Oxford Handbooks Online 2015) Erişim Tarihi: 18.12.2020.
180. Oxford Dictionary Erişim Tarihi: 02.06.2020.
181. Prosecutor v Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi (Judgement and Sentence) ICC-01/12-01/15, T Ch VIII (27.09.2016) Erişim Tarihi: 07.06.2020.
182. Prosecutor v Akayesu (Judgement) ICTR-96-4-T, Ch I (02.09.1998) Erişim Tarihi: 31.05.2020.
183. Prosecutor v Jean Kambanda (Judgement and Sentence) ICTR-97-23-S, Ch I (04.09.1998) Erişim Tarihi: 09.12.2020.
184. Prosecutor v Kunarac and others (Judgement) IT-96-23 & 23/1-A, A Ch (12.06.2002) Erişim Tarihi: 31.05.2020.
185. Prosecutor v Tadic (Judgement) IT-94-1-T, T Ch (07.05.1997) Erişim Tarihi: 07.06.2020.
186. Prosecutor v Tadic (Brief of Argument of the Prosecution- Cross-Appellant) IT-94-I-T, A Ch (12.01.1998).
187. Prosecutor v Tadic (Judgement) IT-94-I-T, A Ch (15.07.1999) Erişim Tarihi: 29.05.2020.
188. René L, “The State of Research” (25.06.2018) Erişim Tarihi: 20.04.2020.
189. Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (adopted 17.07.1998, entered into force 01.07.2002) 2187 UNTS 4 Erişim Tarihi: 20.04.2020.
190. The Avalon Project, “Judgement : The Law Relating to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity” Erişim Tarihi: 19.04.2020.
191. The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica, “Emanationism” (Encyclopaedia Britannica 20.07.1998) Erişim Tarihi: 16.05.2020.
192. Türk Ceza Kanunu, Kanun Numarası. : 5237. Kabul Tarihi. : 26/9/2004. Yayımlandığı Resmi Gazete Tarihi: 12/10/2004 Sayı: 25611. Erişim Tarihi: 08.06.2020.
193. UNSC Res 827 (25.05.1993) UN Doc S/RES/827 Erişim Tarihi: 20.04.2020.
194. UNWCC “Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals” (1949) IX UNWCC 1 Erişim Tarihi: 08.06.2020.
195. Updated Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal fort he Former Yugoslavia (adopted 25.05.1993 amended 07.07.2009) UN Doc RES/1877 Erişim Tarihi: 20.04.2020.