Abstract The home carries complexities of meaning and memory in the lives of those it shelters. It holds distinctive emotional, psychological and material value in the wellbeing of a community. The widespread attacks on homes in ongoing armed conflicts across the world have brought the term ‘domicide’ to the fore. Domicide refers to the deliberate destruction of a home and constitutes a physical and psychological attack on the displaced dwellers. In its extreme form, it has been used as a strategy to uproot and destroy entire societies. This essay aims to test the capability of existing international law to respond to the destruction of the home. The first part of this work introduces the argument, weaving it with the experiences of domicide survivors and their desire for substantive justice. The second part begins by providing a normative framework to define the act of domicide and identify the distinct injuries it inflicts upon the victims. Subsequently, the third part of the essay interrogates the efficiency of international humanitarian and criminal law in protecting the specific civilian object of a home. While certain categories of international crime recognize the need to outlaw the wanton destruction of property, there is no specific mention of the widespread attacks on homes. The fourth section engages in a theoretical exercise of defining a possible crime of domicide and situating it within the category of crimes against humanity. The essay concludes with a reminder of the relevance of international criminal law in achieving transitional justice. It argues that this corpus of law must be enriched by conversing with the victims of domicide, past and present, in communities across the world.
Nupur Paliwal (Mon,) studied this question.