Accounting for Actions: Techniques of Neutralization and the Maintenance of Identity Among Perpetrators of Genocide

• In Event: 423 - Section on Crime, Law and Deviance Paper Session. Classic and Emerging Perspectives

Abstract

The 1994 Rwandan genocide was one of the worst cases of mass atrocity during the 20th century. By analyzing the transcripts of defendants who testified on their own behalf at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), this research seeks to understand two phenomena. First, how do defendants discuss the grave crimes of which they are accused? Second, how do their explanatory styles allow them to rationalize their actions and preserve their identities? Analyses of 27 defendants' testimony indicate that defendants employ Sykes and Matza’s (1957) techniques of neutralization, which serve as a means of explanation, rationalization, and identity maintenance. The five techniques put forth by this well-established theory in criminology consist of denial of responsibility, denial of the victim, denial of injury, condemnation of the condemners, and appeals to higher loyalty. Based on the nature and frequency with which these techniques were employed, we illustrate their extensive, though varied use by defendants. While categorically and analytically useful, the five techniques do not capture all aspects of defendants’ accounts. We thus suggest additional techniques to achieve a comprehensive understanding of the means by which defendants rationalize their actions. By focusing on ICTR perpetrators, this project illuminates understandings of deviance, criminal behavior, and accounts of offending and provides a deeper analysis of established and emerging techniques of neutralization as a driving force of rationalization, identity maintenance, and genocide denial for perpetrators of genocide.

Authors

• Emily Philipp, Boston University

• Emily Schulz, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee

• Christopher Uggen, University of Minnesota