A Criticism of the International Harm Principle

Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (3):267-282 (2010)
According to the received view crimes like torture, rape, enslavement or enforced prostitution are domestic crimes if they are committed as isolated or sporadic events, but become crimes against humanity when they are committed as part of a ‘widespread or systematic attack’ against a civilian population. Only in the latter case can these crimes be prosecuted by the international community. One of the most influential accounts of this idea is Larry May’s International Harm Principle, which states that crimes against humanity are those that somehow ‘harm humanity.’ I argue that this principle is unable to provide an adequate account of crimes against humanity. Moreover, I argue that the principle fails to account for the idea that crimes against humanity are necessarily group based. I conclude by suggesting that the problem with May’s account is that it relies on a harm-based conception of crime which is very popular, but ultimately mistaken. I submit that in order to develop an adequate theory of crimes against humanity we need to abandon the harm-based model and replace it with an alternative conception of crime and criminal law, one based on the notion of accountability.
Keywords Accountability  Crimes against humanity  Harm  International criminal law  International harm principle  International justice  Larry May
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s11572-010-9098-1
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,488
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
John Gardner (2003). The Mark of Responsibility. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 23 (2):157-171.
Larry May (2006). Crimes Against Humanity. Ethics and International Affairs 20 (3):349–352.
John Oberdiek (2009). Towards a Right Against Risking. Law and Philosophy 28 (4):367 - 392.

View all 14 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Sally Scholz (2006). Just War Theory, Crimes of War, and War Rape. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 20 (1):143-157.
Nils Holtug (2002). The Harm Principle. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 5 (4):357-389.
Hamish Stewart (2010). The Limits of the Harm Principle. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4 (1):17-35.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

71 ( #68,723 of 1,925,792 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

3 ( #255,031 of 1,925,792 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.