Recent Legal Developments: The Judgement of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Mladen Naletilić and Vinko Martinović

2003 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-539 ◽  
Author(s):  
PASCALE CHIFFLET
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Legal Definition ◽  
The Third ◽  
Definition Of

This article focuses on three specific legal developments arising from the Martinović and Naletilić Judgement of the ICTY. The first issue is the possibility of prisoners of war consenting to perform otherwise prohibited labour under Geneva Convention III. The second relates to the legal definition of occupation within the meaning of Geneva Convention IV. The third issue concerns the trial chamber's analysis of the discriminatory requirement as an element of the offence of persecution.

Case Analysis: Torture and Related Crimes – A Discussion of the Crimes Before the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia

1998 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jasper M. Wauters
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Analysis ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Bodily Harm ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
Legal Definition ◽  
Definition Of

The Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia lists certain offences that might constitute a war crime or a crime against humanity. It does not, however, define any of these offences, among which are torture, inhuman treatment and wilfully causing great suffering or serious bodily harm. Although their meaning is clear in plain language, their legal definition is not. This article attempts to find the customary international law definition of these crimes.

The Judgment of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia in Prosecutor v. Pavle Strugar

2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 477-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
SILVA HINEK
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Mental States ◽  
Case Note ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Definition Of

This case note focuses on two aspects of the January 2005 Strugar Judgment of the ICTY. The first is the trial chamber's finding that the accused was not aiding and abetting his subordinates in the commission of the crimes charged through his failure to discharge his duty to prevent the crimes and/or punish the perpetrators. The second is the trial chamber's definition of one of the alternative mental states a superior must possess before a conviction can be entered against him on the basis of Article 7(3).

Keeping POWs Safe

2021 ◽  
pp. 164-172
Author(s):  
Theodor Meron
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Geneva Convention ◽  
Prisoners Of War ◽  
The Third ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Yugoslav Wars

This chapter addresses the protection of prisoners of war (POWs). Few groups of individuals are more vulnerable and more in need of protection than POWs who have been captured by their enemy or by other hostile actors. All too often, they are mistreated, tortured or even killed by those who have taken them captive or to whom they have surrendered. The Geneva Conventions and especially Common Article 3 have been cited and applied in a multitude of cases by international criminal tribunals. The chapter focuses on the case of the largest murder of POWs in the Yugoslav wars—the Ovčara massacre—a case where the Third Geneva Convention formed the gravamen of the Judgement.

Individual Criminal Responsibility before the International Criminal Court

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara Goy
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

For more than 15 years the two ad hoc Tribunals, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), have interpreted the requirements of different forms of individual criminal responsibility. It is thus helpful to look at whether and to what extent the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR may provide guidance to the International Criminal Court (ICC). To this end, this article compares the requirements of individual criminal responsibility at the ICTY/ICTR and the ICC. The article concludes that, applied with caution, the jurisprudence of the ICTY/ICTR – as an expression of international law – can assist in interpreting the modes of liability under the ICC Statute. ICTY/ICTR case law seems to be most helpful with regard to accessorial forms of liability, in particular their objective elements. Moreover, it may assist in interpreting the subjective requirements set out in Article 30 ICC Statute.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document