THE CRISIS OF DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY IN THE CONTEXT OF EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT ELECTIONS: HAS THE INCREASE IN VOTER TURNOUT CLOSED THE DEMOCRATIC DEFICIT?

The crime of genocide is generally committed systematically within the framework of a state policy. The Rwandan Genocide, during which an estimated one million people lost their lives within three months, is an issue that should be examined from the perspective of international law to prevent similar humanitarian tragedies in the future. In 2001, the International Law Commission's decision to remove Article 19 from the Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts effectively closed the door to the possibility of criminal prosecution of states. The responsibility of state officials who commit acts constituting crimes, however, remains in force. While there exist academic studies examining individual criminal responsibility within the context of the "Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide," a noticeable gap has been identified in the Turkish literature concerning the analysis of state responsibility under the framework of the Convention. Following this objective, the central aim of this study is to discuss state responsibility within the scope of the Convention, with a particular emphasis on the Rwandan Genocide. In this study, the legal criteria determining state responsibility in genocide have been evaluated in light of the jurisprudence of the ICJ.Additionally, the standards of Effective Control and Overall Control, as applied by the ICJ and the ICTY, have been comparatively analyzed. The issue of attributing criminal responsibility to states in cases such as "Failure to Fulfill the Obligation to Prevent and Punish Genocide," "Conspiracy, Direct and Public Incitement and Attempt in Genocide," and "Complicity in Genocide," which are additional obligations imposed on states by the Genocide Convention, has been examined in light of judicial precedents. The study also includes the Nicaragua v. Germany case adjudicated by the ICJ, aiming to clarify the scope of the Obligation to Prevent and Punish Genocide, as well as the types of state actions that may be considered violations of the Genocide Convention. The current study has focused primarily on Belgium and France, former colonial powers of Rwanda, due to their considerable influence on Rwanda's political history. The key argument of the thesis is that the issue of "State Responsibility within the Context of the Genocide Convention" can be addressed by examining the case of Rwanda from the perspective of international law. The subject will be reviewed within the scope of international legal sources. Research indicates that France did not fulfill its obligation to prevent and punish genocide in the context of the Rwandan Genocide. This failure can be attributed to several actions, including "maintaining secret relations and cooperation with the Hutu regime," "aiding and abetting of genocide suspects," and "providing arms supply and military training." The UN is often criticized for its lack of efficiency in humanitarian crises. Its performance during the Rwandan Genocide has also been criticized.