M. Caslini (2025), How Does the State’s Obligation to Prevent Genocide Overlap with and Differ from that of Offering Guarantees of Its Non-Recurrence?
October 09th, 2025
What happens when a state fails to prevent genocide? Such a violation raises profound legal questions that strike at the heart of international responsibility. One of the less explored aspects is the duty of the responsible State to provide guarantees of non-repetition of the crime of genocide, and how this obligation overlaps with – and at the same time differs from – the duty to prevent genocide.
Martina Caslini's article “How Does the State’s Obligation to Prevent Genocide Overlap with and Differ from that of Offering Guarantees of Its Non-Recurrence?” aims to clarify the characteristics of these two obligations by examining five key issues in post-genocide contexts: (1) their legal classification as primary or secondary rules; (2) their characterisation as obligations of conduct or of result; (3) the overlap and divergence in their ratione materiae scope; (4) their temporal alignment; and (5) the practical implementation of measures under both obligations.
The topics addressed are particularly timely, as both obligations have been invoked in several cases pending before the International Court of Justice, brought under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.
The study argues that, in post-genocide contexts, the obligation to prevent the crime of genocide and the obligation to guarantee its non-repetition, despite their formal distinction, intersect significantly in practice, while simultaneously highlighting their differences and peculiarities.
This contribution has been published as an advanced article in the International Criminal Law Review and can be viewed here.