Abstract

This study addresses a novel doctrinal and legislative dilemma, namely "algorithmic incitement" to genocide, examining the widening gap between the rigidity of traditional international criminal law and the dynamism of contemporary digital media. The primary objective of the study is to pierce the corporate veil of transnational technology corporations to reach the liable "natural person", whether they are among "digital system creators and developers" or "platform executives and controllers. The approach relies on a foundational and analytical analysis of international criminal law provisions, specifically Articles 25 and 28 of the Rome Statute, and applies them to the technical structure of machine learning systems. The study yields several significant findings; most notably the inadequacy of the literal traditional interpretation of incitement criteria (direct and public) to encompass digital opacity. Concurrently, it demonstrates the adequacy of contemporary modes of liability – such as indirect co-perpetration, accessorial liability, and civilian superior responsibility for omission – in holding tech perpetrators accountable, once their actual knowledge and tacit acceptance of field atrocities are proven. The study concludes with forward-looking recommendations, chief among which are adopting an interpretative note for Article 25 that addresses the digital sphere and establishing a specialized "Algorithmic Forensics Unit" within the Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court.

Keywords

Algorithmic Incitement; Genocide; Rome Statute; Individual Criminal Responsibility; Amplification Algorithms; Civilian Superior Responsibility; Tech Corporations.