This is not meant to be a question or a debate about international law…it’s something far worse…an English question. :eek:
That is, as the title says; If someone who commits War Crimes is a War Criminal, what do you call someone who commits Crimes Against Humanity, not necessarily in the course of a war?
Obviously, “Human Criminal” doesn’t work at all. Is there anything else?
Supervillain?
“Tyrant” seems to work.
I think it would be difficult to accuse someone of only committing crimes against humanity. Things like that seem to be part of a bigger picture. Yes, tyrant seems to work.
I’m not sure about “tyrant”…it seems to imply that the accused is the leader of a country, which isn’t necessarily the case. Like if it was an undersecretary or a cabinet minister or something who’s responsible for the crimes against humanity. If they’re working for a tyrant, they’re not technically a tyrant themselves.
I mean, I can imagine the New York Times saying “The trial for accused war criminal Joe Blowski begins tomorrow…”, but not “the trial for accused tyrant Joe Blowski…” It’s not precise enough.
Reality TV Producer?
I was never an English major, but it seems to me that if it’s precision you’re looking for, “crimes against humanity” is too vague.
Genocidist?
That term is perhaps too specific. For example, look at this:
Demostylus, in the example you give there, I would say that “a crime against humanity” is a description or qualifier rather than a specific crime. Same sort of usage as “a fedral crime” for example.
Yes, I agree. I meant that “genocidist” was too specific.
criminal against humanity.
[indent][indent][indent]DIRTY BASTARD 
[/indent][/indent][/indent]