To be characterized as a crime against humanity under Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), the acts listed must have been committed as part of a systematic or widespread attack in furtherance of a State or organizational policy. Both variants of the attack, that is to say its “systematic” or “generalized” nature are alternative requirements. However, some of the legal literature since the preparatory work to draft the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court in 1998 considers that the requirement of a policy makes both variants cumulative, hence creating a conflict between Article 7(1) and Article 7(2) of the Rome Statute. The controversy over the content and the legal scope of the concept of policy is worsened by the absence of definitions of the notions of policy and systematic attack in the core legal texts of the ICC. What definition have Chambers of the ICC given to the notion of policy? What sources have Chambers relied on? Does ICC case law provide tools to avoid possible conflict between Article 7(1) and Article 7(2) of the Rome Statute? These are the issues this study attempts to examine.