how do I explain that this paragraph is a limitation for Australia's dualism Genocide is mentioned under a treaty: the convention on the prevention and punishment of the Crime of Genocide, approved by the UN General Assembly in Paris on 9 December 1948 (the genocide convention) Australia ratified the Genocide Convention (The genocide act 1949) however, this does not give the convention the force of law in Australia. This case shows how Genocide is a part of customary international law, and that even without legislation criminalising genocide as customary international law did not form a part of Australian domestic law and therefore no Australian court has jurisdiction to try individuals for genocide therefore, Whitlam and Wilcox JJ ruled that customary international law did not form a part of Australian law and therefore genocide was not a crime under Australian law