ABSTRACT
As discussed in the preceding chapter, the Genocide Convention’s text contains no language excluding cultural genocide. Lacking textual support, exclusionists commonly invoke its preparatory work, claiming these materials evidence the parties’ intent to exclude cultural genocide. However, this chapter argues that recourse to preparatory work and other supplementary means of interpretation in this instance raises significant legal and theoretical problems. First, because the language of the Genocide Convention is clear on the issue of cultural genocide, The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (VCLT), article 32, should bar recourse to these materials. However, it also acknowledges that, given current practice, interpretive use of preparatory work is probably inevitable. Therefore, it discusses certain theoretical and practical problems posed by the use of these materials. The major portion of this chapter addresses the Genocide Convention’s preparatory work through its three successive stages of drafting. Finally, it concludes by pointing out that not only does the Genocide Convention’s preparatory work fail to offer evidence of exclusionary intent, it actually indicates that culture played a significant role in the parties’ conception of genocide.
