109 VI. THE THIRD GROUND OF CROSS-APPEAL BY THE PROSECUTION: THE TRIAL CHAMBER’S FINDING THAT CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY CANNOT BE COMMITTED FOR PURELY PERSONAL MOTIVES 238. In the Judgement, the Trial Chamber identified, from among the elements which had to be satisfied before a conviction for crimes against humanity could be recorded, the need to prove the existence of an armed conflict and a nexus between the acts in question and the armed conflict. 239. As to the nature of the nexus required, the Trial Chamber found that, subject to two caveats, it is sufficient for the purposes of crimes against humanity that the act occurred “in the course or duration of an armed conflict”. 297 The first caveat was “that the act be linked geographically as well as temporally with the armed conflict”. 298 The second caveat was that the act and the conflict must be related or, at least, that the act must “not be unrelated to the armed conflict”. 299 The Trial Chamber further held that the requirement that the act must “not be unrelated” to the armed conflict involved two aspects. First, the perpetrator must know of the broader context in which the act occurs. 300 Secondly, the act must not have been carried out for the purely personal motives of the perpetrator. 301 A. Submissions of the Parties 1. The Prosecution Case 240. The Prosecution submits that there is nothing in Article 5 of the Statute which suggests that it contains a requirement that crimes against humanity cannot be committed for purely personal motives. In the submission of the Prosecution, no such requirement can be inferred from the requirement that the crime must have a nexus to the armed conflict. In 297 Judgement, para. 633. Ibid. 299 Ibid., para. 634. 300 Ibid., paras. 656-657. 298 Case No.: -94-1-A 15 July 1999