General Principles of Liability in International Criminal Law

The Permanent International Criminal Court: Legal and Policy Issues

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 233-262

  Cryer, Robert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85190040818     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (27)

1. I Bantekas, Principles of Direct and Superior Responsibility in International Humanitarian Law (Manchester University Press, Manchester, 2002) xi.
2. R Cryer, ‘Implementation of the International Criminal Court Statute in England and Wales’ (2002) 51 ICLQ 733
3. W Schabas, ‘Canadian Implementing Legislation for the Rome Statute’ (2000) 3 Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law 337.
4. RS Clark, ‘The Mental Element in International Criminal Law: The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court and the Elements of Offences’ (2002) 12 Criminal Law Forum 291, 293, n 6 for comment.
5. A Cassese, ‘The Statute of the International Criminal Court: Some Preliminary Reflections’ (1999) 10 EJIL 144 at 153.
6. J Horder, ‘Criminal Law and Legal Positivism’ (2002) 8 Legal Theory 221.
7. K Ambos, ‘Article 25’ in O Triffterer (ed), Commentary on the Rome Statute for The International Criminal Court (Baden-Baden, Nomos, 1999) 475 at 492.
8. WA Schabas, ‘General Principles of Criminal Law in the International Criminal Court Statute (Pt III)’ (1998) 6 European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice 400 at 412.
9. LN Sadat, The International Criminal Court and the Transformation of International Law (Transnational, New York, 2002) 193, but see also 194, 196-7.
10. AP Simester, ‘Why Omissions are Special’ (1995) 1 Legal Theory 311 at 320-27.
11. JC Smith, Smith and Hogan: Criminal Law (10th edn) (Butterworths, London, 2002) 60-68
12. GP Fletcher, Rethinking Criminal Law (Little, Brown & Co, Boston, 1978) 421-26, 585-634.
13. A Pellet, ‘Applicable Law’ in Cassese et al, above n 4 at 1051.
14. A von Hirsch, ‘Extending the Harm Principle: “Remote” Harms and Fair Imputation’ in A Simester and ATH Smith (eds), Harm and Culpability (OUP, Oxford, 1996) 259.
15. Y Dinstein, ‘Defences’ in GK McDonald and O Swaak-Goldman (eds), Substantive and Procedural Aspects of International Criminal Law (Kluwer, The Hague, 2000) 367 at 381-82.
16. K Ambos, ‘Individual Criminal Responsibility in International Criminal Law: A Jurisprudential Analysis, From Nuremberg to the Hague’ in McDonald and Swaak-Goldman (eds), above n 89, 1 at 8-9.
17. PH Robinson, Criminal Law (Aspen, New York, 1997) 327-29.
18. W Schabas, Genocide in International Law: The Crime of Crimes (CUP, Cambridge, 2000).
19. RS Lee (ed), The International Criminal Law: Elements of Crimes and Rules of Procedure (Transnational, New York, 2001) 19, 26-36
20. A Eser, ‘Mental Elements-Mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law’ in Cassese et al (eds), above n 4, 889.
21. K Dörmann, ‘War Crimes in the Elements of Crimes’ in H Fischer, C Kress and SR Lüder (eds), International and National Prosecution of Crimes Under International Law: Current Developments (Arno Spitz, Berlin, 2001) 95, at 98.
22. W Fenrick, ‘A First Attempt to Adjudicate Conduct of Hostilities Offences: Comments on Aspects of the ICTY Trial Decision in the Prosecutor v Tihomir Blaskic´’ (2000) 13 Leiden Journal of International Law 931 at 936-43.
23. M Damška, ‘The Shadow Side of Command Responsibility’ (2001) 49 American Journal of Comparative Law 455 at 462.
24. J Horder, ‘Gross Negligence and Criminal Culpability’ (1997) 47 University of Toronto Law Journal 495
25. AP Simester ‘Can Negligence be Culpable?’ in J Horder (ed), Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence (OUP, Oxford, 2000) 85
26. J Horder, ‘A Critique of the Correspondence Principle in Criminal Law’ [1995] Criminal Law Review 759
27. A Cassese, ‘International Criminal Justice: Is it Needed in the Present World Community?’ in G Kreijen et al (eds), State Sovereignty, and International Governance (OUP, Oxford, 2002) 239 at 258.