127 lacking a discriminatory intent. For example, a discriminatory intent requirement would prevent the penalization of random and indiscriminate violence intended to spread terror among a civilian population as a crime against humanity. A fortiori, the object and purpose of Article 5 would be thwarted were it to be suggested that the discriminatory grounds required are limited to the five grounds put forth by the Secretary-General in his Report and taken up (with the addition, in one case, of the further ground of gender) in the statements made in the Security Council by three of its members. 347 Such an interpretation of Article 5 would create significant lacunae by failing to protect victim groups not covered by the listed discriminatory grounds. The experience of Nazi Germany demonstrated that crimes against humanity may be committed on discriminatory grounds other than those enumerated in Article 5 (h), such as physical or mental disability, age or infirmity, or sexual preference. Similarly, the extermination of “class enemies” in the Soviet Union during the 1930s (admittedly, as in the case of Nazi conduct before the Second World War, an occurrence that took place in times of peace, not in times of armed conflict) and the deportation of the urban educated of Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge between 1975-1979, provide other instances which would not fall under the ambit of crimes against humanity based on the strict enumeration of discriminatory grounds suggested by the Secretary-General in his Report. 286. It would be pointless to object that in any case those instances would fall under the category of war crimes or serious “violations of the laws or customs of war” provided for in Article 3 of the Statute. This would fail to explain why the framers of the Statute provided not only for war crimes but also for crimes against humanity. Indeed, those who drafted the Statute deliberately included both classes of crimes, thereby illustrating their intention that those war crimes which, in addition to targeting civilians as victims, present special features such as the fact of being part of a widespread or systematic practice, must be classified as crimes against humanity and deserve to be punished accordingly. 346 347 ICJ Reports (1950), p. 8. See paragraphs 294-300 below. Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999