-
1
-
-
35248883457
-
-
Judgment, Tadić (IT-94-1-A), Appeals Chamber, 15 July 1999, § 191 (hereinafter: 'Tadić' Appeals Judgment').
-
Judgment, Tadić (IT-94-1-A), Appeals Chamber, 15 July 1999, § 191 (hereinafter: 'Tadić' Appeals Judgment').
-
-
-
-
3
-
-
4344658597
-
-
Oxford: Oxford University Press, at
-
A. Cassese, International Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003), at 180
-
(2003)
International Criminal Law
, pp. 180
-
-
Cassese, A.1
-
4
-
-
35248856450
-
-
A. Eser, 'Individual Criminal Responsibility', in A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J.R.W.D. Jones (eds), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary 1 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) 767-822, at 784 et seq.
-
A. Eser, 'Individual Criminal Responsibility', in A. Cassese, P. Gaeta and J.R.W.D. Jones (eds), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary Vol. 1 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002) 767-822, at 784 et seq.
-
-
-
-
5
-
-
35248893371
-
6(a) Nuremberg Charter; see also Art
-
Charter
-
Art. 6(a) Nuremberg Charter; see also Art. 5(a) Tokyo Charter.
-
5(a) Tokyo
-
-
Art1
-
6
-
-
35248892009
-
Judgment of 1 October 1946
-
See, London: HMSO, at
-
See Nuremberg Tribunal, Judgment of 1 October 1946, in The Trial of German Major War Criminals. Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal Sitting at Nuremberg, Germany (London: HMSO, 1950), Part 22, at 449.
-
(1950)
The Trial of German Major War Criminals. Proceedings of the International Military Tribunal Sitting at Nuremberg, Germany
, Issue.PART 22
, pp. 449
-
-
Tribunal, N.1
-
7
-
-
35248814830
-
-
Nuremberg Principle VII
-
Nuremberg Principle VII.
-
-
-
-
9
-
-
35248837418
-
-
G. Werle, Principles of International Criminal Law (The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2005), marginal nos 339 et seq.
-
G. Werle, Principles of International Criminal Law (The Hague: TMC Asser Press, 2005), marginal nos 339 et seq.
-
-
-
-
11
-
-
35248881552
-
-
For an in-depth discussion, see
-
For an in-depth discussion, see ibid., §§ 185 et seq.
-
sect;§ 185 et seq
-
-
Tadić1
-
12
-
-
35248876196
-
-
Judgment, Vasiljević (IT-98-32-A), Appeals Chamber, 25 February 2004, §182 (hereinafter: 'Vasiljević Appeals Judgment');
-
Judgment, Vasiljević (IT-98-32-A), Appeals Chamber, 25 February 2004, §182 (hereinafter: 'Vasiljević Appeals Judgment');
-
-
-
-
13
-
-
35248815559
-
-
Judgment, Krstić (IT-98-33-A), Appeals Chamber, 19 April 2004, §268 (hereinafter: 'Krstić Appeals Judgment').
-
Judgment, Krstić (IT-98-33-A), Appeals Chamber, 19 April 2004, §268 (hereinafter: 'Krstić Appeals Judgment').
-
-
-
-
14
-
-
35248864396
-
-
Judgment, Semanza (ICTR-97-20-A), Appeals Chamber, 20 May 2005, §§ 355 et seq., 364 (hereinafter: 'Semanza Appeals Judgement').
-
Judgment, Semanza (ICTR-97-20-A), Appeals Chamber, 20 May 2005, §§ 355 et seq., 364 (hereinafter: 'Semanza Appeals Judgement').
-
-
-
-
16
-
-
35248830742
-
-
See Eser, supra note 2, at 789
-
See Eser, supra note 2, at 789.
-
-
-
-
17
-
-
35248885208
-
-
See also Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, §188
-
See also Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, §188
-
-
-
-
18
-
-
35248871587
-
-
Judgment, Kvočka et al. (IT-98-30/1-T), Trial Chamber, 2 November 2001, §243 (hereinafter 'Kvočka Trial Judgment').
-
Judgment, Kvočka et al. (IT-98-30/1-T), Trial Chamber, 2 November 2001, §243 (hereinafter 'Kvočka Trial Judgment').
-
-
-
-
20
-
-
35248865311
-
-
See also Judgment, Vasiljević (IT-98-32-T), Trial Chamber, 29 November 2002, §§63 et seq. (hereinafter: 'Vasiljević Trial Judgment');
-
See also Judgment, Vasiljević (IT-98-32-T), Trial Chamber, 29 November 2002, §§63 et seq. (hereinafter: 'Vasiljević Trial Judgment');
-
-
-
-
21
-
-
35248887565
-
-
Kvočka Trial Judgment, supra note 11, §§265 et seq., 312.
-
Kvočka Trial Judgment, supra note 11, §§265 et seq., 312.
-
-
-
-
22
-
-
35248837417
-
-
See e.g. Judgment, Simba (ICTR-01-76-T), Trial Chamber, 13 December 2005, §§ 385 et seq.
-
See e.g. Judgment, Simba (ICTR-01-76-T), Trial Chamber, 13 December 2005, §§ 385 et seq.
-
-
-
-
23
-
-
35248862994
-
-
The doctrine of the joint criminal enterprise can be traced to the ICTY Appeals Chamber judgment of the defendant Tadić, see Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, §§188 et seq.
-
The doctrine of the joint criminal enterprise can be traced to the ICTY Appeals Chamber judgment of the defendant Tadić, see Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, §§188 et seq.
-
-
-
-
24
-
-
35248841985
-
-
See ibid., §227
-
See ibid., §227
-
-
-
-
25
-
-
35248841522
-
-
Judgment, Krnojelac (IT-97-25-A), Appeals Chamber, 17 September 2003, §31 (hereinafter: 'Krnojelac Appeals Judgment');
-
Judgment, Krnojelac (IT-97-25-A), Appeals Chamber, 17 September 2003, §31 (hereinafter: 'Krnojelac Appeals Judgment');
-
-
-
-
26
-
-
35248863457
-
-
Vasiljević Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, 1§00
-
Vasiljević Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, 1§00
-
-
-
-
27
-
-
35248833066
-
-
Judgment, Kvočka et al. (IT-98-30/1-A), Appeals Chamber, 28 February 2005, 8§1 (hereinafter: 'Kvočka Appeals Judgment').
-
Judgment, Kvočka et al. (IT-98-30/1-A), Appeals Chamber, 28 February 2005, 8§1 (hereinafter: 'Kvočka Appeals Judgment').
-
-
-
-
28
-
-
35248884400
-
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, §227.
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, §227.
-
-
-
-
29
-
-
35248860216
-
-
See Vasiljević Trial Judgment, supra note 12, 6§7
-
See Vasiljević Trial Judgment, supra note 12, 6§7.
-
-
-
-
30
-
-
35248828596
-
-
As recently expressly stated in Kvočka Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, §§97, 104, 187.
-
As recently expressly stated in Kvočka Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, §§97, 104, 187.
-
-
-
-
31
-
-
35248832155
-
-
Tadič Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 1§95.
-
Tadič Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 1§95.
-
-
-
-
32
-
-
35248854371
-
-
Ibid., 2§27
-
Ibid., 2§27
-
-
-
-
33
-
-
35248885673
-
-
Krnojelac Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, 3§1.
-
Krnojelac Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, 3§1.
-
-
-
-
34
-
-
35248878078
-
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 1§95.
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 1§95.
-
-
-
-
35
-
-
35248860738
-
-
Ibid., §§ 202, 220. For details on the second category (concentration camp cases'), see also Kvočka Trial Judgment, supra note 11, §§268 et seq.
-
Ibid., §§ 202, 220. For details on the second category (concentration camp cases'), see also Kvočka Trial Judgment, supra note 11, §§268 et seq.
-
-
-
-
36
-
-
35248851526
-
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 2§04
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 2§04
-
-
-
-
37
-
-
35248828118
-
-
VasiljevićAppeals Judgment, supra note 9, 9§9.
-
VasiljevićAppeals Judgment, supra note 9, 9§9.
-
-
-
-
38
-
-
35248886157
-
-
On the terminology used by the ICTR ('basic', 'systemic' and 'extended' form of joint criminal enterprise), see ibid., at §§ 97 et seq.
-
On the terminology used by the ICTR ('basic', 'systemic' and 'extended' form of joint criminal enterprise), see ibid., at §§ 97 et seq.
-
-
-
-
39
-
-
35248837906
-
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 2§28
-
Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 2§28
-
-
-
-
40
-
-
35248855970
-
-
Krnojelac Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, 3§2
-
Krnojelac Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, 3§2
-
-
-
-
41
-
-
35248838333
-
-
Vasiljević Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, 1§01
-
Vasiljević Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, 1§01
-
-
-
-
42
-
-
35248826471
-
-
Kvoćka Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, 8§3
-
Kvoćka Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, 8§3
-
-
-
-
43
-
-
35248821784
-
-
Judgment, E. and G. Ntakirutimana (ICTR-96-10-A/ICTR-96-17-A), Appeals Chamber, 13 December 2004, 4§67.
-
Judgment, E. and G. Ntakirutimana (ICTR-96-10-A/ICTR-96-17-A), Appeals Chamber, 13 December 2004, 4§67.
-
-
-
-
44
-
-
35248830741
-
-
Decision, Brdanin (IT-99-36-A), Appeals Chamber, 19 March 2004, §§ 5 et seq.;
-
Decision, Brdanin (IT-99-36-A), Appeals Chamber, 19 March 2004, §§ 5 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
45
-
-
35248826963
-
-
Decision, Rwamakuba (ICTR-98-44-AR72.4), Appeals Chamber, 22 October 2004, 6§.
-
Decision, Rwamakuba (ICTR-98-44-AR72.4), Appeals Chamber, 22 October 2004, 6§.
-
-
-
-
46
-
-
35248813387
-
-
See Judgment, Stakić (IT-97-24-A), Appeals Chamber, 22 March 2006, §§ 58 et seq. This judgment rejects opinions expressed in other decisions that criticized the concept of joint criminal enterprise as applied by the Tribunal.
-
See Judgment, Stakić (IT-97-24-A), Appeals Chamber, 22 March 2006, §§ 58 et seq. This judgment rejects opinions expressed in other decisions that criticized the concept of joint criminal enterprise as applied by the Tribunal.
-
-
-
-
47
-
-
35248899449
-
-
See e.g. Judgment, Stakić (IT-97-24-T), Trial Chamber, 31 July 2003, §§433 et seq.;
-
See e.g. Judgment, Stakić (IT-97-24-T), Trial Chamber, 31 July 2003, §§433 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
48
-
-
35248824618
-
-
Judgment, Gacumbitsi (ICTR-2001-64-A), Appeals Chamber, 7 July 2006, Separate Opinion of Judge Schomburg, §§14 et seq.
-
Judgment, Gacumbitsi (ICTR-2001-64-A), Appeals Chamber, 7 July 2006, Separate Opinion of Judge Schomburg, §§14 et seq.
-
-
-
-
49
-
-
79251517986
-
The Development of the Concept of Joint Criminal Enterprise at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia', 5
-
See also, at
-
See also VHaan,'The Development of the Concept of Joint Criminal Enterprise at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia', 5 International Criminal Law Review (2005) 167-201, at 176.
-
(2005)
International Criminal Law Review
, vol.167-201
, pp. 176
-
-
VHaan1
-
50
-
-
35248883456
-
-
See K. Ambos, Internationales Strafrecht (München: C.H. Beck, 2006), at 136 et seq.;
-
See K. Ambos, Internationales Strafrecht (München: C.H. Beck, 2006), at 136 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
51
-
-
68049086088
-
Individual Criminal Responsibility in the Execution of a Joint Criminal Enterprise
-
Jurisprudence of the Ad Hoc International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 63-120, at et seq
-
A. Bogdan, 'Individual Criminal Responsibility in the Execution of a "Joint Criminal Enterprise" in the Jurisprudence of the Ad Hoc International Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 6 International Criminal Law Review (2006) 63-120, at 109 et seq.;
-
(2006)
International Criminal Law Review
, vol.6
, pp. 109
-
-
Bogdan, A.1
-
52
-
-
35248816009
-
-
S. Powles, 'Joint Criminal Enterprise: Criminal Liability by Prosecutorial Ingenuity and Judicial Creativity?', 2 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2004) 606-619, at 615 et seq.
-
S. Powles, 'Joint Criminal Enterprise: Criminal Liability by Prosecutorial Ingenuity and Judicial Creativity?', 2 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2004) 606-619, at 615 et seq.
-
-
-
-
53
-
-
78650523302
-
-
M.E. Badar, 'Just Convict Everyone!. Joint Preparation: From Tadić to Stakić and Back Again', 6 International Criminal Law Review (2006) 293-302, at 301 et seq.;
-
M.E. Badar, '"Just Convict Everyone!". Joint Preparation: From Tadić to Stakić and Back Again', 6 International Criminal Law Review (2006) 293-302, at 301 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
55
-
-
84920450317
-
-
G. Mettraux, International Crimes and the ad hoc Tribunals (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 292 et seq.;
-
G. Mettraux, International Crimes and the ad hoc Tribunals (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 292 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
56
-
-
35248841520
-
-
Powles, supra note 27, at 611
-
Powles, supra note 27, at 611.
-
-
-
-
57
-
-
35248819697
-
-
That was also the position of the Prosecutor's Office in Lubanqa: '[L]'Accusation soutient qu'il importe de prendre en considération les différences fondamentales existant entre les tribunaux ad hoc et la Cour, cette dernière étant régie par un Statut qui non seulement expose très en détail les formes de résponsabilité pénale, mais s'écarte délibérément à cet égard des définitions plus générales figurant, par exemple, à l'article 7-1 du Statut du TPIY.', ICC, Decision, Lubanga (ICC-01/04-01/06), Pre-Trial Chamber, 29 January 2007, §323.
-
That was also the position of the Prosecutor's Office in Lubanqa: '[L]'Accusation soutient qu'il importe de prendre en considération les différences fondamentales existant entre les tribunaux ad hoc et la Cour, cette dernière étant régie par un Statut qui non seulement expose très en détail les formes de résponsabilité pénale, mais s'écarte délibérément à cet égard des définitions plus générales figurant, par exemple, à l'article 7-1 du Statut du TPIY.', ICC, Decision, Lubanga (ICC-01/04-01/06), Pre-Trial Chamber, 29 January 2007, §323.
-
-
-
-
58
-
-
35248843138
-
-
The Pre-Trial Chamber followed this approach, ibid., at §§ 326 et seq.
-
The Pre-Trial Chamber followed this approach, ibid., at §§ 326 et seq.
-
-
-
-
59
-
-
35248816458
-
-
Ibid., at §§ 330 et seq.
-
Ibid., at §§ 330 et seq.
-
-
-
-
61
-
-
27244443808
-
Unless Otherwise Provided. Article 30 of the ICC Statute and the Mental Element of Crimes under International Criminal Law, 3
-
G. Werle and F. Jessberger, '"Unless Otherwise Provided". Article 30 of the ICC Statute and the Mental Element of Crimes under International Criminal Law, 3 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2005) 35-55.
-
(2005)
Journal of International Criminal Justice
, pp. 35-55
-
-
Werle, G.1
Jessberger, F.2
-
62
-
-
35248878550
-
-
ICC, Decision, Lubanga, supra note 29
-
ICC, Decision, Lubanga, supra note 29.
-
-
-
-
63
-
-
35248856958
-
-
This has now been affirmed by the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber, ibid, at §349
-
This has now been affirmed by the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber, ibid., at §349.
-
-
-
-
64
-
-
35248872513
-
-
Similarly Ambos, supra note 27, at 138
-
Similarly Ambos, supra note 27, at 138.
-
-
-
-
65
-
-
35248839557
-
-
See also Eser, supra note 2, at 793
-
See also Eser, supra note 2, at 793.
-
-
-
-
66
-
-
35248881083
-
-
For instance §2.06(2) Model Penal Code states: 'A person is legally accountable for the conduct of another person when: (a) [...] he causes an innocent or irresponsible person to engage in such conduct [...]'. For details, see Ambos, supra note 2, at 568 et seq.;
-
For instance §2.06(2) Model Penal Code states: 'A person is legally accountable for the conduct of another person when: (a) [...] he causes an innocent or irresponsible person to engage in such conduct [...]'. For details, see Ambos, supra note 2, at 568 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
67
-
-
0004273012
-
-
Oxford: Oxford University Press, at
-
G. Fletcher, Rethinking Criminal Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), at 639.
-
(2000)
Rethinking Criminal Law
, pp. 639
-
-
Fletcher, G.1
-
69
-
-
35248848321
-
Individuelle Verantwortlichkeit im Völkerstrafrecht', 114
-
at
-
J.Vogel, 'Individuelle Verantwortlichkeit im Völkerstrafrecht', 114 Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft (2002) 403-436, at 427.
-
(2002)
Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft
, vol.403-436
, pp. 427
-
-
Vogel, J.1
-
70
-
-
35248860214
-
-
Thus, the doctrine of the 'perpetrator behind the perpetrator' has been affirmed for international criminal law. It was originally developed by C. Roxin ('Straftaten im Rahmen organisatorischer Machtapparate', Goltdammer's Archiv für Strafrecht (1963), 193-207) in connection with the Eichmann trial - that is, in an international criminal law context - and has since considerably influenced German criminal jurisprudence.
-
Thus, the doctrine of the 'perpetrator behind the perpetrator' has been affirmed for international criminal law. It was originally developed by C. Roxin ('Straftaten im Rahmen organisatorischer Machtapparate', Goltdammer's Archiv für Strafrecht (1963), 193-207) in connection with the Eichmann trial - that is, in an international criminal law context - and has since considerably influenced German criminal jurisprudence.
-
-
-
-
71
-
-
35248883003
-
-
For a thorough discussion, see F.-C. Schroeder, Der Täter hinter dem Täter: Ein Beitrag zur Lehre von der mittelbaren Etersehaft (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1965), at 119 et seq.
-
For a thorough discussion, see F.-C. Schroeder, Der Täter hinter dem Täter: Ein Beitrag zur Lehre von der mittelbaren Etersehaft (Berlin: Duncker & Humblot, 1965), at 119 et seq.
-
-
-
-
72
-
-
35248864863
-
-
German Federal Supreme Court, Judgment of 26 July 1994, BGHSt 40, 218 et seq., at 236
-
German Federal Supreme Court, Judgment of 26 July 1994, BGHSt 40, 218 et seq., at 236
-
-
-
-
73
-
-
35248889474
-
-
German Federal Supreme Court, Judgment of 4 March 1996, BGHSt 42, 65 et seq., at 68
-
German Federal Supreme Court, Judgment of 4 March 1996, BGHSt 42, 65 et seq., at 68
-
-
-
-
74
-
-
35248837415
-
-
German Federal Supreme Court, Judgment of 8 November 1999, BGHSt 45, 270 et seq., at 296.
-
German Federal Supreme Court, Judgment of 8 November 1999, BGHSt 45, 270 et seq., at 296.
-
-
-
-
75
-
-
27244457618
-
International Criminal Law Principles
-
For a thorough discussion, see, R.S. Lee ed, The Hague: Kluwer Law International, at
-
For a thorough discussion, see P. Saland, 'International Criminal Law Principles', in R.S. Lee (ed), The International Criminal Court, The Making of the Rome Statute (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 1999) 189-216, at 212.
-
(1999)
The International Criminal Court, The Making of the Rome Statute
, vol.189-216
, pp. 212
-
-
Saland, P.1
-
76
-
-
27244458570
-
-
At the same time, however, it is also reported that the majority of the negotiating delegations apparently assumed that in certain cases, some already addressed in the text, omissions should be criminal. See R.S. Clark, The Mental Element in International Criminal Law: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Elements of Offences, 12 Criminal Law Forum (2001) 291-334, at 303
-
At the same time, however, it is also reported that the majority of the negotiating delegations apparently assumed that in certain cases - some already addressed in the text - omissions should be criminal. See R.S. Clark, 'The Mental Element in International Criminal Law: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Elements of Offences', 12 Criminal Law Forum (2001) 291-334, at 303.
-
-
-
-
78
-
-
35248890416
-
-
See Judgment, Mucić et al. (IT-96-21-T), Trial Chamber, 16 November 1998, 4§24 (hereinafter: 'Musić Trial Judgment');
-
See Judgment, Mucić et al. (IT-96-21-T), Trial Chamber, 16 November 1998, 4§24 (hereinafter: 'Musić Trial Judgment');
-
-
-
-
79
-
-
35248865309
-
-
Judgment, Kordić and Čerkez (IT-95-14/2-T), Trial Chamber, 26 February 2001, 2§29.
-
Judgment, Kordić and Čerkez (IT-95-14/2-T), Trial Chamber, 26 February 2001, 2§29.
-
-
-
-
80
-
-
35248815556
-
-
Mucić Trial Judgment, supra note 41, 4§94.
-
Mucić Trial Judgment, supra note 41, 4§94.
-
-
-
-
81
-
-
35248882482
-
-
Ibid., at §511.
-
Ibid., at §511.
-
-
-
-
82
-
-
35248849332
-
-
See Judgment, Blaškić (IT-95-14-A), Appeals Chamber, 29 July 2004, 4§7 (on aiding and abeting) (hereinafter: 'Blaškić Appeals Judgment');
-
See Judgment, Blaškić (IT-95-14-A), Appeals Chamber, 29 July 2004, 4§7 (on aiding and abeting) (hereinafter: 'Blaškić Appeals Judgment');
-
-
-
-
83
-
-
35248856446
-
-
Judgment, Limaj et al. (IT-03-66-T), Trial Chamber, 30 November 2005, 5§14 (on instigation) (hereinafter: 'Limaj Trial Judgment').
-
Judgment, Limaj et al. (IT-03-66-T), Trial Chamber, 30 November 2005, 5§14 (on instigation) (hereinafter: 'Limaj Trial Judgment').
-
-
-
-
84
-
-
35248824617
-
-
For an even wider concept of omission, see Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 1§88
-
For an even wider concept of omission, see Tadić Appeals Judgment, supra note 1, 1§88.
-
-
-
-
85
-
-
35248838829
-
-
See e.g. US Military Tribunal Nuremberg, Judgment of 20 August 1947 ( Brandt et al., so-called Medical Trial), in Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, II (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Service, 1950), at 193 (concerning the supervisory duty of head doctors in regard to their assistants' acts);
-
See e.g. US Military Tribunal Nuremberg, Judgment of 20 August 1947 ( Brandt et al., so-called Medical Trial), in Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. II (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Service, 1950), at 193 (concerning the supervisory duty of head doctors in regard to their assistants' acts);
-
-
-
-
86
-
-
35248821344
-
-
US Military Tribunal Nuremberg, Judgment of 28 October 1948 (von Leeb et al., so-called High Command Case), in ibid., XI, 542 et seq.;
-
US Military Tribunal Nuremberg, Judgment of 28 October 1948 (von Leeb et al., so-called High Command Case), in ibid., Vol.XI, 542 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
87
-
-
35248858798
-
-
British Military Court Brunswick, Judgment of 3 April 1946 (Gerike et al., so-called Velpke Children's Home Trial), in UNWCC, Law Reports on Trials of War Criminals, VII (London: HM Stationary Office, 1947), at 76.
-
British Military Court Brunswick, Judgment of 3 April 1946 (Gerike et al., so-called Velpke Children's Home Trial), in UNWCC, Law Reports on Trials of War Criminals, Vol.VII (London: HM Stationary Office, 1947), at 76.
-
-
-
-
88
-
-
35248832154
-
Liability for Omission in International Criminal Law
-
See, 1-61, at et seq
-
See M. Duttwiler, 'Liability for Omission in International Criminal Law', 6 International Criminal Law Review (2006) 1-61, at 30 et seq.;
-
(2006)
International Criminal Law Review
, vol.6
, pp. 30
-
-
Duttwiler, M.1
-
89
-
-
35248820638
-
-
K.Weltz, Die Unterlassungshaftung im Völkerstrafrecht: Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung des französischen, US-amerikanischen und deutschen Rechts (Freiburg im Breisgau: Ed. iuscrim, 2004), 189 et seq.
-
K.Weltz, Die Unterlassungshaftung im Völkerstrafrecht: Eine rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung des französischen, US-amerikanischen und deutschen Rechts (Freiburg im Breisgau: Ed. iuscrim, 2004), 189 et seq.
-
-
-
-
90
-
-
35248888998
-
-
In Lubanga, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber, by generally referring to 'actions ou omissions, held obiter that liability for omission is included in the ICC Statute, see ICC, Decision, Lubanga, supra note 29, §§351 et seq.
-
In Lubanga, the ICC Pre-Trial Chamber, by generally referring to 'actions ou omissions, held obiter that liability for omission is included in the ICC Statute, see ICC, Decision, Lubanga, supra note 29, §§351 et seq.
-
-
-
-
93
-
-
35248823617
-
-
This concept also forms part of customary international law. See Judgment, Galić IT-98-29-T, Trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, 1§68
-
This concept also forms part of customary international law. See Judgment, Galić (IT-98-29-T), Trial Chamber, 5 December 2003, 1§68
-
-
-
-
94
-
-
35248881082
-
-
Judgment, Ndindabahizi (ICTR-2001-71-I), Trial Chamber, 15 July 2004, 4§55.
-
Judgment, Ndindabahizi (ICTR-2001-71-I), Trial Chamber, 15 July 2004, 4§55.
-
-
-
-
95
-
-
35248831672
-
-
See Judgment, Kordić and Čerkez (IT-95-14/2-A), Appeals Chamber, 17 December 2004, 2§7 (hereinafter: Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment').
-
See Judgment, Kordić and Čerkez (IT-95-14/2-A), Appeals Chamber, 17 December 2004, 2§7 (hereinafter: Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment').
-
-
-
-
96
-
-
35248874791
-
-
See Judgment, Blaškić (IT-95-14-T), Trial Chamber, 3 March 2000, §§280, 339 (hereinafter: Blaškić Trial Judgment');
-
See Judgment, Blaškić (IT-95-14-T), Trial Chamber, 3 March 2000, §§280, 339 (hereinafter: Blaškić Trial Judgment');
-
-
-
-
97
-
-
35248826002
-
-
Limaj Trial Judgment, supra note 44, 5§14.
-
Limaj Trial Judgment, supra note 44, 5§14.
-
-
-
-
98
-
-
35248851522
-
-
Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, 2§7.
-
Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, 2§7.
-
-
-
-
99
-
-
35248827659
-
-
See Blaškić Trial Judgment, supra note 51, 2§78
-
See Blaškić Trial Judgment, supra note 51, 2§78
-
-
-
-
100
-
-
35248895806
-
-
Judgment, Brdanin (IT-99-36-T), Trial Chamber, 1 September 2004, 2§69
-
Judgment, Brdanin (IT-99-36-T), Trial Chamber, 1 September 2004, 2§69
-
-
-
-
101
-
-
35248858356
-
-
Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, 3§2.
-
Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, 3§2.
-
-
-
-
102
-
-
35248867410
-
-
See Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, §28
-
See Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, §28
-
-
-
-
103
-
-
35248870651
-
-
Semanza Appeals Judgment, supra note 10, §361.
-
Semanza Appeals Judgment, supra note 10, §361.
-
-
-
-
104
-
-
35248848861
-
-
Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §42
-
Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §42
-
-
-
-
105
-
-
35248856957
-
-
Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, § 30.
-
Kordić and Čerkez Appeals Judgment, supra note 50, § 30.
-
-
-
-
106
-
-
35248847446
-
-
For a summary of the requirements, see Vasiljević Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, §102
-
For a summary of the requirements, see Vasiljević Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, §102
-
-
-
-
107
-
-
35248872046
-
-
Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §45
-
Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §45
-
-
-
-
108
-
-
35248871585
-
-
a thorough analysis of the state of customary law can be found in Judgment, Furundžija (IT-95-17/1-T), Trial Chamber, 10 December 1998, §§ 192 et seq. (hereinafter: 'Furundžija Trial Judgment').
-
a thorough analysis of the state of customary law can be found in Judgment, Furundžija (IT-95-17/1-T), Trial Chamber, 10 December 1998, §§ 192 et seq. (hereinafter: 'Furundžija Trial Judgment').
-
-
-
-
109
-
-
35248823147
-
-
Judgment, Aleksovski (IT-95-14/1-A), Appeals Chamber, 24 March 2000, §162 (hereinafter: 'Aleksovski Appeals Judgment');
-
Judgment, Aleksovski (IT-95-14/1-A), Appeals Chamber, 24 March 2000, §162 (hereinafter: 'Aleksovski Appeals Judgment');
-
-
-
-
110
-
-
35248843631
-
-
Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §45
-
Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §45
-
-
-
-
111
-
-
35248837414
-
-
Furundžija Trial Judgment, supra note 56, §§235, 249
-
Furundžija Trial Judgment, supra note 56, §§235, 249
-
-
-
-
112
-
-
35248828592
-
-
Judgment, Kamuhanda (ICTR-95-94A-T), Trial Chamber, 22 January 2004, §597.
-
Judgment, Kamuhanda (ICTR-95-94A-T), Trial Chamber, 22 January 2004, §597.
-
-
-
-
113
-
-
35248812525
-
-
See Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §48
-
See Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §48
-
-
-
-
114
-
-
35248821166
-
-
Furundžija Trial Judment, supra note 56, §§ 231 et seq.
-
Furundžija Trial Judment, supra note 56, §§ 231 et seq.
-
-
-
-
115
-
-
35248832594
-
-
See Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §48
-
See Blaškić Appeals Judgment, supra note 44, §48
-
-
-
-
116
-
-
35248824135
-
-
Judgment, Kamuhanda (ICTR-95-94A-T), Trial Chamber, 22 January 2004, §597.
-
Judgment, Kamuhanda (ICTR-95-94A-T), Trial Chamber, 22 January 2004, §597.
-
-
-
-
117
-
-
35248820181
-
-
However, for a more restrictive approach see Judgment, Blagojević and Jokić (IT-02-60-T), Trial Chamber, 17 January 2005, §731.
-
However, for a more restrictive approach see Judgment, Blagojević and Jokić (IT-02-60-T), Trial Chamber, 17 January 2005, §731.
-
-
-
-
118
-
-
35248871122
-
-
The ICC Statute does not expressly determine that abetting can lead to liability even after completion of the crime. A footnote to Art. 23 of the Draft ICC Statute (1998) states: 'This presumption [that successive assistance incur criminal liability] was questioned in the context of the ICC. If aiding, etc., ex post facto were deemed necessary to be criminalized, an explicit provision would be needed.' Eser, supra note 2, at 807 also supports the inclusion of 'successive assistance'.
-
The ICC Statute does not expressly determine that abetting can lead to liability even after completion of the crime. A footnote to Art. 23 of the Draft ICC Statute (1998) states: 'This presumption [that successive assistance incur criminal liability] was questioned in the context of the ICC. If aiding, etc., ex post facto were deemed necessary to be criminalized, an explicit provision would be needed.' Eser, supra note 2, at 807 also supports the inclusion of 'successive assistance'.
-
-
-
-
119
-
-
35248837905
-
-
See Blaškić Appeals judgment, supra note 44, §48
-
See Blaškić Appeals judgment, supra note 44, §48
-
-
-
-
121
-
-
35248874337
-
-
See also Eser, supra note 2, at 800
-
See also Eser, supra note 2, at 800.
-
-
-
-
122
-
-
35248835099
-
-
See Aleksovski Appeals judgment, supra note 57, §162
-
See Aleksovski Appeals judgment, supra note 57, §162
-
-
-
-
123
-
-
35248847431
-
-
Blaškić Appeals judgment, supra note 44, §§ 45, 49
-
Blaškić Appeals judgment, supra note 44, §§ 45, 49
-
-
-
-
124
-
-
35248873869
-
-
Judgment, Kayishema and Ruzindana (ICTR-95-1-A), Appeals Chamber, 1 June 2001, §186.
-
Judgment, Kayishema and Ruzindana (ICTR-95-1-A), Appeals Chamber, 1 June 2001, §186.
-
-
-
-
125
-
-
35248857889
-
-
This requirement is taken from §2.06 Model Penal Code
-
This requirement is taken from §2.06 Model Penal Code.
-
-
-
-
126
-
-
35248890415
-
-
See Trial Judgment, note 56, §§
-
See Furundžija Trial Judgment, supra note 56, §§ 236, 252, 257
-
supra
, vol.236
, Issue.252
, pp. 257
-
-
Furundžija1
-
127
-
-
35248829089
-
-
Krnojelac Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, §52
-
Krnojelac Appeals Judgment, supra note 15, §52
-
-
-
-
128
-
-
35248897625
-
-
Krstić Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, §140.
-
Krstić Appeals Judgment, supra note 9, §140.
-
-
-
-
129
-
-
35248892007
-
-
Mettraux, supra note 28, at 212 et seq., 286 et seq.;
-
Mettraux, supra note 28, at 212 et seq., 286 et seq.;
-
-
-
-
131
-
-
35248873408
-
-
See Art. 2(3)(c) of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings of 12 January 1998 (UN Doc. A/RES/52/164).
-
See Art. 2(3)(c) of the International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings of 12 January 1998 (UN Doc. A/RES/52/164).
-
-
-
-
132
-
-
35248871564
-
-
See Saland, supra note 39, at 199
-
See Saland, supra note 39, at 199
-
-
-
-
133
-
-
35248830736
-
-
Eser, supra note 2, at 802
-
Eser, supra note 2, at 802.
-
-
-
-
134
-
-
35248894369
-
-
See Eser, supra note 2, at 802
-
See Eser, supra note 2, at 802.
-
-
-
-
135
-
-
35248884773
-
-
See Vogel, supra note 37, at 421
-
See Vogel, supra note 37, at 421.
-
-
-
-
136
-
-
35248834605
-
-
This interpretation has now been upheld in ICC, Decision, Lubanga, supra note 29, §337
-
This interpretation has now been upheld in ICC, Decision, Lubanga, supra note 29, §337.
-
-
-
-
139
-
-
35248833684
-
-
Under Art. 23 (7)(e) of the Draft ICC Statute (1998), anyone who '[intentionally] [participates in planning] [plans] to commit such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted' is subject to criminal sanction.
-
Under Art. 23 (7)(e) of the Draft ICC Statute (1998), anyone who '[intentionally] [participates in planning] [plans] to commit such a crime which in fact occurs or is attempted' is subject to criminal sanction.
-
-
-
-
140
-
-
35248837413
-
-
See Genocide Convention, Art. III(c), Art. 4 (3)(c) ICTYSt., Art. 2(3)(c) ICTRSt. and Art. 25(3)(e) ICCst.
-
See Genocide Convention, Art. III(c), Art. 4 (3)(c) ICTYSt., Art. 2(3)(c) ICTRSt. and Art. 25(3)(e) ICCst.
-
-
-
-
141
-
-
35248887540
-
-
See Judgment, Akayesu (ICTR-96-4-T), Trial Chamber, 2 September 1998, §562 (hereinafter: Akayesu Trial judgment').
-
See Judgment, Akayesu (ICTR-96-4-T), Trial Chamber, 2 September 1998, §562 (hereinafter: Akayesu Trial judgment').
-
-
-
-
142
-
-
35248891523
-
-
See also Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1996, Commentary on Art. 2, §16.
-
See also Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1996, Commentary on Art. 2, §16.
-
-
-
-
143
-
-
35248887562
-
-
For more information, see V. Morris and M.P. Scharf, The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, I (New York: Transnational Publishers, 1998), 183
-
For more information, see V. Morris and M.P. Scharf, The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Vol. I (New York: Transnational Publishers, 1998), 183
-
-
-
-
144
-
-
35248846517
-
-
D.D.N. Nsereko, 'Genocide: A Crime against Mankind', in G. Kirk McDonald and O. Swaak-Goldman (eds), Substantive and Procedural Aspects of International Criminal Law, 1 (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2000) 117-140, at 132 et seq.
-
D.D.N. Nsereko, 'Genocide: A Crime against Mankind', in G. Kirk McDonald and O. Swaak-Goldman (eds), Substantive and Procedural Aspects of International Criminal Law, Vol. 1 (The Hague: Kluwer Law International, 2000) 117-140, at 132 et seq.
-
-
-
-
146
-
-
35248816008
-
-
Judgment, Ruggiu (ICTR-97-32-I), Trial Chamber, 1 June 2000, 1§7
-
Judgment, Ruggiu (ICTR-97-32-I), Trial Chamber, 1 June 2000, 1§7
-
-
-
-
147
-
-
35248862090
-
-
Schabas, supra note 65, at 277
-
Schabas, supra note 65, at 277.
-
-
-
-
148
-
-
35248851521
-
-
See Judgment, Kambanda (ICTR-97-23-S), Trial Chamber, 4 September 1998, 3§9 (x).
-
See Judgment, Kambanda (ICTR-97-23-S), Trial Chamber, 4 September 1998, 3§9 (x).
-
-
-
-
149
-
-
35248879721
-
-
The Appeals Chamber affirmed the perpetrator's conviction, see Judgment, Kambanda (ICTR-97-23-A), Appeals Chamber, 19 October 2000.
-
The Appeals Chamber affirmed the perpetrator's conviction, see Judgment, Kambanda (ICTR-97-23-A), Appeals Chamber, 19 October 2000.
-
-
-
-
150
-
-
35248864383
-
-
To separate criminal attempt and mere non-criminal preparation, the provision connects two criteria that are usually applied in the alternative: 'commencement of execution, a criterion borrowed from French criminal law, and a 'substantial step' towards carrying out the crime, according to US law. See K. Ambos, Article 25', in O. Triffterer (ed), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1999), marginal no. 32.
-
To separate criminal attempt and mere non-criminal preparation, the provision connects two criteria that are usually applied in the alternative: 'commencement of execution, a criterion borrowed from French criminal law, and a 'substantial step' towards carrying out the crime, according to US law. See K. Ambos, Article 25', in O. Triffterer (ed), Commentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Baden-Baden: Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 1999), marginal no. 32.
-
-
-
-
151
-
-
35248861630
-
-
See also §5.01 Model Penal Code;
-
See also §5.01 Model Penal Code;
-
-
-
-
152
-
-
35248882981
-
-
T. Weigend, 'Article 3', in M.C. Bassiouni (ed), Commentaries on the International Law Commission's 1991 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (Toulouse: Érès 1993), 117.
-
T. Weigend, 'Article 3', in M.C. Bassiouni (ed), Commentaries on the International Law Commission's 1991 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind (Toulouse: Érès 1993), 117.
-
-
-
-
154
-
-
35248826449
-
-
For more, see Ambos, supra note 2, at 488
-
For more, see Ambos, supra note 2, at 488
-
-
-
-
155
-
-
35248898782
-
-
Eser, supra note 2, at 813
-
Eser, supra note 2, at 813.
-
-
-
-
157
-
-
35248853843
-
-
See also Eser, supra note 2, at 815
-
See also Eser, supra note 2, at 815.
-
-
-
-
158
-
-
35248894871
-
-
See Ambos, supra note 78, at marginal no. 34.
-
See Ambos, supra note 78, at marginal no. 34.
-
-
-
-
159
-
-
35248857464
-
-
See T. Hillenkamp, 'Versuch', in B. Jähnke et al. (eds), Strafgesetzbuch: Leipziger Kommentar, I (11th edn., Berlin: De Gruyter Becht, 2003), Vor §22, marginal nos 53 et seq.
-
See T. Hillenkamp, 'Versuch', in B. Jähnke et al. (eds), Strafgesetzbuch: Leipziger Kommentar, Vol. I (11th edn., Berlin: De Gruyter Becht, 2003), Vor §22, marginal nos 53 et seq.
-
-
-
-
160
-
-
35248885195
-
-
For a critical view of the inclusion of attempt in the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1996, see C.Tomuschat, 'Die Arbeit der ILC in Bereich des materiellen Völkerstrafrechts', in G. Hankel and G. Stuby (eds), Strafgerichte gegen Menschheitsverbrechen (Hamburg: Hamburger Edition, 1995) 270-294, at 288.
-
For a critical view of the inclusion of attempt in the Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1996, see C.Tomuschat, 'Die Arbeit der ILC in Bereich des materiellen Völkerstrafrechts', in G. Hankel and G. Stuby (eds), Strafgerichte gegen Menschheitsverbrechen (Hamburg: Hamburger Edition, 1995) 270-294, at 288.
-
-
-
|