Chicago Journal of International Law pages on Facebook and then flooded them with incendiary comments and posts timed for peak viewership.”195 Tatmadaw officials repeatedly reinforced and legitimized dehumanizing themes and narratives with more opaque posts from their official accounts.196 Ultimately, the campaign culminated in the mass killings of the Rohingya.197 The foregoing reports, to the extent that they are accurate, suggest that by launching Internet.org and extending Facebook’s services to Myanmar, Zuckerberg provided the Tatmadaw with a massive platform to systematically promote dehumanizing narratives about the Rohingya. Like the CEO’s contribution in The Zyklon B Case, Zuckerberg extended a commercial service that proved indispensable to the commission of an international crime (assuming the Tatmadaw’s campaign amounted to incitement).198 Accordingly, it is at least plausible that Zuckerberg satisfied the actus reus for complicity. The next pertinent inquiry is whether the CEO made the contribution knowingly. The CEO is only complicit if he or she knew the inciters were using the platform to commit direct and public incitement to genocide.199 Reflective of this challenge, much of the litigation in The Zyklon B Case centered around the issue of mens rea.200 The prosecution succeeded by pointing to multiple reports by individual employees, as well as the fact that the company’s gas shipments increased so significantly that Tesch must have known the end to which they would be used.201 But the size of social media companies alone would make it difficult for the CEO to know the particulars of any given business dealing.202 Presumably, there are everyday business operations of which the CEO has no knowledge. And flaws in the company’s compliance system, while arguably evidence of negligence or recklessness, could insulate the CEO from satisfying the higher mens rea of knowledge. On the other hand, even if a CEO’s subordinates do not report the incitement to genocide, the CEO could be alerted to the situation by external 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 Mozur, supra note 165. Detailed Report, supra note 11, at ¶ 1329 (“A systematic analysis of statements and communications from government and security sector officials and of those in official settings indicates that—while mostly using less inflammatory language—they mirror and promote the same narratives espoused by MaBaTha and others.”). Stecklow, supra note 10 (“Some 700,000 members of the Rohingya community had recently fled the country amid a military crackdown and ethnic violence. In March, a United Nations investigator said Facebook was used to incite violence and hatred against the Muslim minority group.”). See The Zyklon B Case, Case No. 9, 1 Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals 93, 101 (British Military Court, Hamburg, Germany Mar. 1–8 1946), http://perma.cc/GU9K-GLH6. Rome Statute, supra note 29, at art. 25(3)(d). See The Zyklon B Case, Case No. 9, 1 Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals at 97. Id. See Mike Isaac, Dissent Erupts at Facebook Over Hands-Off Stance on Political Ads, N.Y. TIMES (Oct. 28, 2019), http://perma.cc/UY5R-BZL5 (noting that Facebook has more than 35,000 employees). 112 Vol. 21 No. 1