4. The severity of the humiliation, degradation or other violation was of such a degree as to be generally recognised as an outrage upon personal dignity. [Note: with respect to mental elements associated with elements involving value judgment, such as those using the terms "inhumane" or"severe", it is not necessary that the perpetrator personally completed a particular value judgment, unless otherwise indicated.]

4. The severity of the humiliation, degradation or other violation was of such a degree as to be generally recognised as an outrage upon personal dignity. [Note: with respect to mental elements associated with elements involving value judgment, such as those using the terms "inhumane" or"severe", it is not necessary that the perpetrator personally completed a particular value judgment, unless otherwise indicated.]

ICC

The Pre-Trial Chamber in Katanga and Chui provided a synopsis of the types of conduct considered severe enough to constitute outrages upon personal dignity:

"compelling victims to dance naked on a table, using detainees as human shields or trench diggers; forcing detainees to relieve bodily functions in their clothing; imposing conditions of constant fear of being subjected to physical, mental, or sexual violence on detainees; forced incest, burying corpses in latrine pits; and leaving infants without care after killing their guardians."[1]

Furthermore, the Pre-Trial Chamber in Katanga held that:

"[t]he types of actions or omissions which could constitute a crime under article 8(2)(b)(xxi) were left undefined. As a result, the core element of this war crime is the humiliation, degradation, or violation of the person's dignity. In addition, the acts of humiliation, degradation or violation to the person's dignity must be committed with objectively sufficient gravity so as to be 'generally recognized as an outrage upon personal dignity.' Nevertheless, the jurisprudence of the ICTY provides that 'so long as the serious humiliation or degradation is real and serious,' there is no requirement that such suffering be lasting, or that it is 'necessary for the act to directly harm the physical or mental well-being of the victim.'"[2]

SCSL

The Trial Chamber in Sesay et al. cited both the Appeals Chamber and Trial Chamber in Kunarac et al. in recognizing that:

"[t]he second element reflects that the determination of whether or not the act is severe enough to constitute an outrage upon personal dignity must be based on an objective assessment. It is not necessary that the act cause 'lasting suffering' to the victim."[3]

Additionally, the Trial Chamber in Taylor held that:

"sexual slavery, including the abduction of women and girls as "bush wives", a conjugal form of sexual slavery, is humiliating and degrading to its victims and constitutes a serious attack on human dignity, falling within the scope of outrages upon personal dignity."[4]