Focusing on the intersection of race and international criminal law, this comprehensive study delves into the theoretical foundations of genocide, apartheid, and persecution. It examines pertinent legal instruments, relevant case law, and existing scholarship, providing an in-depth analysis of how race influences these grave crimes. The book aims to enhance understanding of the legal frameworks surrounding race-related offenses on an international scale.
This volume commemorates the 75th anniversary of the 1948 Hostage Case, where a US military tribunal acquitted General Lothar Rendulic for devastating Northern Norway due to an honest factual error. It critically reassesses the legal and factual foundations of his trial, the no second-guessing rule in customary international humanitarian law (IHL) named after him, and modern battlefield decision-making. Utilizing newly uncovered documents, the book raises significant doubts about Rendulic’s assertion that the region's total destruction and forced evacuation were necessary for military purposes. The analysis of court records reveals the tribunal's failure to scrutinize relevant facts or clarify the legal origins of the Rendulic Rule. This anthology argues that, despite the ambiguity of the Hostage Case, objective reasonableness is integral to the reasonable commander test under IHL and the mistake of fact defense in international criminal law (ICL). It also highlights characteristics of modern warfare—such as human judgment and institutional bias—that complicate the assessment of errors as honest and reasonable. While the Rendulic Rule warns against hindsight judgments of battlefield decisions, it emerged from a case ill-suited for its application, posing ongoing legal and ethical challenges. This comprehensive study appeals to researchers and practitioners in IHL and ICL, military historians, and ethicists, offering groundbrea
