scholarly journals Nuremberg modification of international crime and criminal responsibility of individuals

2020 ◽  
pp. 414-422
Author(s):  
Vadym Popko
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Nuremberg Trials

The article analyses the formation of the Nuremberg model of international crime, its origins and preconditions, the role of theVersailles Peace Treaty of 1919 and other factors. The author states that the inability to ignore the expansion of international crimemakes criminal responsibility unavoidable, and thus the experience of the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals bear the fundamental meaning.Examined are the legal bases of the Nuremberg trial, the main problematic issues of discussion, in particular, the recognition ofcertain acts as criminal, procedural security of the accused, harmonisation of procedural rules of different legal systems (continental,Anglo-American, Soviet legal system), immunity of officials and especially the importance of the Nuremberg Trials for the furtherdevelopment of international criminal law. The author argues that individual international criminal responsibility, which should be consideredthe first most important feature of international criminal law, was formed during the Nuremberg Trials on the basis of customarylaw, general principles of law and normative sources: the London Agreement of 1945 “On Prosecution and Punishment of the majorwar criminals of the European Axis countries” and the Statute of the International Military Tribunal. The Nuremberg Trials of1945–1946 and the Tokyo Trials of 1946–1948 were the first effective international criminal tribunals in which individuals with fullprocedural rights and acting on their own behalf were indicted. The precedents of these tribunals have proven the ability to criminalisecrimes under international law that are not crimes under national law and serve as a basis for developing a concept of international crimein a new sense that is closely linked to international justice.The author also concludes by drawing the attention to the fact that due to internationalisation of crime, two different characte -ristics and dimensions have formed: criminal responsibility stricto sensu, and criminal responsibility within the frames of a newlyformed autonomous subbranch of international criminal law – transnational criminal law.

scholarly journals Defining Hate Speech

2020 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 31-57
Author(s):  
Audrey Fino
Keyword(s):  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Causal Connection ◽  
International Human Rights Law ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Violent Acts

Abstract This article looks at the international criminal law on hate speech that falls short of direct and public incitement to commit genocide. Using the most egregious form of hate speech that has been prosecuted as an international crime — that of direct and public incitement to genocide — as a baseline, the author analyses the legal parameters of hate speech as persecution (a crime against humanity) and hate speech as instigation (a mode of liability). In so doing, the author critically reviews the International Residual Mechanism for the International Criminal Tribunals’ (IRMCT) appeal judgment in the Šešelj case (Šešelj Appeal Judgment) in the light of prior case law of the International Military Tribunal of Nuremberg (IMT) and the International Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia (ICTR and ICTY respectively). The author submits that a plain reading of the Šešelj Appeal Judgment supports the view that it is only the more extreme form of incitement to violence, incitement to commit crimes, followed by actual violent acts, that may constitute hate speech amounting to the crime of persecution: incitement to discrimination or incitement to hatred as such do not qualify. Whether ‘incitement to violence’ absent the commission of crimes could qualify as persecution (a crime against humanity) remains an unsettled point. With regard to hate speech as instigation, the Šešelj Appeal Judgment’s restatement and application of the law causes less controversy: the substantial causal connection required for instigation was found to be direct in the circumstances of that case — even though directness is not a legal requirement for instigation. The author concludes that both these interpretations of hate speech are consistent with the earlier ad hoc tribunals’ jurisprudence and, more generally, with international human rights law which, with some controversial exceptions, allows criminalization only of the most extreme forms of incitement to violence.

Part II Substantive Aspects, Ch.5 International Criminal Law and the Protection of Cultural Heritage

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frulli Micaela
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Cultural Property ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Strong Impact ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Protection Of Cultural Heritage

This chapter looks at how international criminal law has become a crucial tool to foster the protection of cultural heritage. On the normative level, the main developments consisted in the introduction of rules criminalizing acts against cultural property in binding treaties dealing with the protection of cultural property in times of armed conflict. Then, international criminal tribunals (ICTs) paved the way for implementing individual criminal responsibility. Three different and partially divergent approaches have characterized the criminalization of acts against cultural property. The first two—civilian use and cultural value—emerged in different moments and had a strong impact on the drafting of rules criminalizing acts against cultural property in times of armed conflict. The third one, the human dimension approach, developed from the jurisprudence of ICTs and characterizes both the qualification of acts against cultural property as crimes against humanity and their role in proving the mental element of genocide.

Treatise on International Criminal Law

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ambos Kai
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
General Structure ◽  
Case Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Previous Edition

This second edition of Volume I of the three-volume Treatise on International Criminal Law addresses the foundations of international criminal law and the emerging general principles. It examines the history of the discipline and the concepts behind it. Starting with the development of international criminal justice, the book proceeds as follows: it attends to the sources of international criminal law, then moves to investigate the general structure of crime in international criminal law, and addresses in detail the concept and forms of individual criminal responsibility; it then turns to the subjective requirements of criminal responsibility, and defences that exclude such responsibility. International criminal justice is a flourishing field, with the birth of new international criminal tribunals and both accountability and investigative mechanisms. Case law increases rapidly, so does the ensuing substantive scholarship. This is also true for international criminal law’s foundations and general principles, treated in this volume. Thus, the previous edition has been completely revised, updated, and rewritten in some parts. The author strived to include both relevant case law and scholarly work up to March 2021.

scholarly journals Is There any Blood on my Hands? Deportation as a Crime of International Law

2016 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 917-943
Author(s):  
VINCENT CHETAIL
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
World War ◽  
Nuremberg Trials ◽  
Second World

AbstractThe present article revisits international criminal law as a tool for sanctioning the most patent abuses against migrants. Although deportation is traditionally considered as an attribute of the state inherent to its territorial sovereignty, this prerogative may degenerate into an international crime. The prohibition of deportation has been a well-established feature of international criminal law since the Nuremberg trials following the Second World War. This prohibition has been further refined over the past 15 years by an extensive jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Criminal Court.Against such a background, this article demonstrates that, in some circumstances, deportation may amount to a war crime, a crime against humanity or even a crime of genocide, depending on the factual elements of the case and the specific requirements of the relevant crime. This article accordingly reviews the constitutive elements of each crime and transposes them into the context of migration control. It highlights in turn that, although its potential has been neglected by scholars and practitioners, international criminal law has an important role to play for domesticating the state's prerogative of deportation and infusing the rule of law into the field of migration. The article concludes that there are reasonable grounds for asserting that a crime against humanity would have been committed in the Dominican Republic and Australia with regard to their deportation policy.

13. International criminal law

2021 ◽  
pp. 178-190
Author(s):  
Ilias Bantekas ◽  
Efthymios Papastavridis
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals

This chapter examines the fundamental concepts and notions of international criminal law, which is linked to other key areas of international law, particularly human rights, international humanitarian law, immunities, and jurisdiction. In particular, there is a focus on the concept of individual criminal responsibility under international law. The four core crimes are considered; namely, genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions, and the crime of aggression. Moreover, attention is paid to two unique forms of participation in international crimes, namely, command responsibility and joint criminal enterprise. Finally, the chapter addresses enforcement of international criminal law, particularly through international criminal tribunals, with an emphasis on the International Criminal Court (ICC).

The Principle of Complementarity: A Reflection on Its Meaning, Origin and Types in International Criminal Law

2021 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-94
Author(s):  
Muyiwa Adigun
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
World War ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
The First World War ◽  
Domestic Courts ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
First World ◽  
Principle Of Complementarity

The principle of complementarity is one of the most important concepts in international criminal law as it defines the relationship between international criminal tribunals and domestic courts. Certain claims have been made in respect of this concept thus this study examines the correctness of the claims made. The study finds that the concept is claimed to have originated from the sciences and that its expression in international criminal law has taken a distinctive form different from that in the sciences, that it is traceable to the First World War and that there are at least about four categories of the concept. The study, however, argues that while the concept originated from the sciences, its expression in international criminal law is no different from that in the sciences, that it is traceable to the trial of Peter von Hagenbach in 1474 (the Breisach Trial) and that there are at least five categories of the concept. The study therefore concludes that the claims made are incorrect.

scholarly journals The Rise of Spanish and Latin American Criminal Theory

2008 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-383
Author(s):  
Luis E. Chiesa
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
General Structure ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Sanction ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Third ◽  
Anglo American ◽  
Vast Range

As the contributions to this two-part special issue demonstrate, Spanish and Latin American criminal theory has attained a remarkable degree of sophistication. Regrettably, Anglo-American scholars have had limited access to this rich body of literature. With this volume, the New Criminal Law Review has taken a very important first step toward rectifying this situation. Although the articles written for this special issue cover a vast range of subjects, they can be divided into four main categories: (1) the legitimacy of the criminal sanction, (2) the punishability of omissions, (3) the challenges that international criminal law and the fight against terrorism pose to criminal theory, and (4) the theory of justification and excuse. The articles pertaining to the first two categories will appear in the first half of this special issue (Volume 11, Number 3) and the pieces belonging to the third and fourth categories will be published in the upcoming second half (Volume 11, Number 4). In accordance with this general structure, in the pages that follow I will provide a brief summary and critique of the pieces contained in both parts.

scholarly journals Nazi Crimes in Poland. A Never-Ending Search for Justice

2019 ◽  
pp. 142-160
Author(s):  
Hanna Kuczyńska
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
World War ◽  
National Courts ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Efficient Machine

This article deals with the model for prosecuting Nazi crimes committed in Poland in the light of the model presently used in international criminal law. It tries to answer the question: should the investigation of crimes of international law be handed over to transnational tribunals? Should they be hybrid tribunals involving a national factor, or completely supra-national tribunals like the International Criminal Court? Is it legitimate to transfer jurisdiction over these matters to national courts? The case of unpunished Nazi crimes in Poland may give a partial answer to this question. Certainly, various attempts made after World War II, including procedures brought before Polish courts, have contributed to understanding the function of international criminal law, and finding the answer to the question of the best model for prosecuting crimes of international law. At present, we also have the experience of international criminal tribunals, in particular the ICC, which is an efficient machine for prosecuting crimes of international law. Interesting conclusions can be drawn from its functioning that could improve the work of Institute of National Remembrance (IPN) prosecutors, and shed new light on the considerations regarding the prosecution of Nazi crimes in Poland after World War II.

scholarly journals TINDAK PIDANA TERORISME DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM PIDANA INTERNASIONAL

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rahma Yanti
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Crime ◽  
Transnational Crime ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Positive Law ◽  
Sensitive Issue ◽  
International Conventions

Terrorism is one of transnational crime base on international conventions. One of national crime which consists of transnational aspects. Transnational crime convention only manage about how to run cooperation to eliminate national crime which across country borders. Terrorism hasn’t consider as International crime because there’s no unification about its definition. Terrorism still consider as a sensitive issue in each country related with rass, etnis, culture, religion, and geographical aspects. Terrorism law enforcement proses is each country positive law jurisdiction and not as International Criminal Court jurisdiction based on Rome Statuta.Keywords: Crime, Terrorism, International Criminal Law

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document