Uluslararası Ceza Hukukunda zamanaşımı: Soykırım, insanlığa karşı suçlar ve savaş suçları

Statutory limitations always constitute an obstacle for international criminal law to fight impunity. Thus, many (inter)national judicial authorities have developed ways not to apply them on international crimes, by relying either on domestic provisions or directly on international law. To achieve imprescriptibility of international crimes, post-WWII era witnessed domestic experiments such as suspension of statutory limitations, extension of these time-limits, or abrogation of these statutes altogether. Accordingly, a considerably large number of criminal trials took place to convict their authors. For crimes committed during communist regimes or military juntas, the courts took the same approach. During the Cold War, international community agreed upon various documents which aimed the punishment of these criminals. Even though these instruments did not always provide imprescriptibility for their respective crimes, the (non-)judicial bodies ruling on these issues enlightened our topic. Human rights mechanisms also evolved into a "helping hand" for this aim. On the other hand, the conventions which were enacted to govern this area did not attract enough States to be parties to them. After an examination of these (inter)national documents and case-law, it is safe to deduce that (i) genocide has always been accepted to be imprescriptible, (ii) crimes against humanity has evolved to be so, and (iii) war crimes are still subject to domestic provisions. Therefore, in respect to criminal prosecutions, if the 1915 (alleged) Atrocities constitute (a) genocide, they cannot prescribe; (b) crimes against humanity, they had already become time-barred by the time such a rule has evolved; or (c) war crimes, such a prosecution would be subject to national laws.