Nandor Knust joins JiC for this article, a part of JiC’s ongoing symposium on Alette Smeulers’ new book “Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities Terribly and Terrifyingly Normal?”. Nandor is an Associate Professor of Law at the Arctic University of Norway, in Tromsø. He has a rich history of practical experience during his time at international, regional, and non-governmental organisations within the field of human rights, atrocity crimes and transitional justice. All other contributions to the symposium can be found here.

This review examines the implications of Alette Smeulers’ comprehensive typology of perpetrators of mass atrocities, as presented in her impressive work, Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities: Terribly and Terrifyingly Normal? for possible future designs and applications of transitional justice (TJ). By analysing the fourteen distinct perpetrator categories identified by Smeulers, my following little ‘thought experiment’ tries to explore how her typology can inform and enhance transitional justice mechanisms, particularly in the realms of justice, truth-seeking, and reconciliation.
Smeulers’ work is rooted in the notion that mass atrocity crimes are inherently collective in nature, manifesting within organisational frameworks and frequently involving significant numbers of otherwise law-abiding citizens. The central question driving her theoretical framework is how so many ordinary people can come to commit or enable extraordinary evil. In answering this question, Smeulers adopts an interdisciplinary approach, drawing on criminology and social psychology to complement her legal analysis. She surveys classic explanations, including obedience to authority, conformity to peer pressure, ideological indoctrination, hatred and dehumanisation of victims, greed or opportunism, fear and duress, etc. It is evident that all these factors can play a role, albeit in different ways and to a different extent, depending on the perpetrator. To summarise, there is no single cause-and-effect relationship leading to atrocities. Rather, personal dispositions (individual traits, beliefs, pathologies) interact with situational forces (group dynamics, coercive environments, war conditions) to produce varying outcomes. This theoretical stance explicitly rejects a one-size-fits-all portrayal of the atrocity perpetrator, emphasising nuance and diversity.
The foundation of Smeulers’ framework is a typology of fourteen perpetrator types. She developed this by studying individuals involved in mass violence from World War II to contemporary conflicts. By examining biographies, diaries, interviews, trial records and prior scholarship, she groups perpetrators according to common motivators and roles.
Continue reading










