Abstract
Bailey deconstructs the United Nations' definition of "genocide" to reveal its flaws, specifically in the case of defining Darfur as genocide, rather than its current status as a "humanitarian crisis." This paper outlines the current definition’s flaws as lacking judgment capacity, neglecting groups of people and its inflexibility to allow for different levels of genocide. The author looks at other model definitions of genocide made by scholars in the field, but is not satisfied with the results. In the end, the author proposes a new definition of genocide that removes the widely debatable term "genocide" and replaces it with his term, The Code of Greater Crimes Against Humanity. [Abstract by editor]