provide appropriate legal sources that support this argument: The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) plays a crucial role in addressing issues of genocide, as it is the only UN body where all member states have equal representation. However, its ability to take meaningful action to prevent or punish the crime of genocide is limited by several factors.

Firstly, the UNGA's resolutions are non-binding, meaning they do not have the force of law. While they can exert moral and political pressure on states, they cannot compel compliance. This is a significant limitation in cases of genocide, where the offending state is often unwilling to halt its actions voluntarily.

Secondly, the UNGA's role is primarily deliberative, not executive. It can discuss and make recommendations on any matter within the scope of the UN Charter, but it cannot take enforcement action. This role is reserved for the Security Council, which has the power to impose sanctions, authorize the use of force, and refer cases to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle, adopted by the UNGA in 2005, is an attempt to overcome these limitations. It asserts that states have a responsibility to protect their populations from mass atrocity crimes, and that the international community has a responsibility to intervene when states are unable or unwilling to fulfill this responsibility. However, the implementation of R2P is still subject to the approval of the Security Council, which can be blocked by the veto of any of its five permanent members.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the ICC also play important roles in preventing and punishing genocide. The ICJ settles legal disputes between states and gives advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized UN organs and specialized agencies. However, its judgments are binding only on the parties to the dispute, and it has no enforcement mechanism. The ICC, on the other hand, can prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, but it can only exercise its jurisdiction when national courts are unable or unwilling to do so, or when a situation is referred to it by the Security Council.

Australian domestic law also provides mechanisms for addressing genocide. The Genocide Convention Act 1949 (Cth) and the Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) incorporate the crime of genocide into Australian law, allowing for the prosecution of individuals responsible for genocide. However, the application of these laws is limited to acts committed within Australia or by Australian nationals abroad.