Two Kinds of Wrong: On the Context Element of Crimes against Humanity

2009 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 525-541 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEFAN KIRSCH
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
Foreign Country ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Civilian Population ◽  
International Jurisdiction ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Context Element

AbstractIt can be shown that – as with the tie between crimes against humanity and the perpetration of other international crimes in the Charter of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg – the context element of the crimes against humanity as set out in the Rome Statute is based on the international law principle of non-interference in the affairs of a foreign country, and only serves to justify ‘international’ jurisdiction in respect of crimes which are typically already punishable pursuant to the lex loci commissii. As a consequence, the feature of a ‘widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population’ is not an aggravating circumstance in respect of the material facts of the case that define the wrong of the act (Unrecht) or the offender's blameworthiness (Schuld), but a jurisdictional element which is a mere precondition for prosecution only.

New histories and new laws: Crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 801-818
Author(s):  
Amanda Alexander
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Humanitarian Law ◽  
Humanitarian Law ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
History Of

AbstractThis article looks at the development of the concept of crimes against humanity at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). It contends that the ICTR’s interpretation of crimes against humanity is generally seen by international lawyers as a commendable, but unsurprising, step in the historical development of this category. In much the same way, the ICTR’s historical account is considered to be a standard attempt by a war crimes court to relate a liberal history of crimes against humanity in a way that upholds civilized values. Yet, although the historical and legal work of the ICTR appear unexceptional, this article will argue that they do demonstrate a particular conceptual approach towards warfare, history, humanity, and the nature of international law. Moreover, this is a conceptual approach that is quite different to that taken by the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. The article suggests that these differences, and the invisibility of the change, are due to the ICTR’s reliance on familiar narrative tropes. These narratives were established through poststructuralist theory but could be expressed in a variety of more or (often) less theoretical forms. By exploring the influence of these narratives on the Tribunal, it is possible to examine some of the ways in which conceptual change is facilitated and knowledge is created in international law. In particular, it shows how theories that are often considered marginal to international law have had a significant impact on some of the central provisions of international humanitarian law.

scholarly journals The Crisis of International Criminal Law in Africa: A Regional Regime in Response?

2019 ◽  
Vol 66 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-311
Author(s):  
Eki Yemisi Omorogbe
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Armed Conflicts ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Crimes

Abstract This article considers the African Union’s (AU) proposal for a regional court for international crimes under the Malabo Protocol 2014 (Protocol). It places that within the AU’s rejection of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) arrest warrants for African Heads of States that are not party to the Rome Statute and a more general protection of incumbents. It argues that the enthusiasm for establishing a regional criminal court, which lacks jurisdiction to prosecute incumbents, has not been sustained and African states remain committed to the ICC. It shows that nevertheless the Protocol’s provisions on genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, although imperfect, better address the specific character of armed conflicts in Africa than current international law, including the Rome Statute of the ICC. It concludes that the regional court for international crimes is unlikely to be established unless the ICC takes further action against incumbent leaders but that the Protocol’s provisions could be used in the development of a more Africa-centric international law.

scholarly journals TERMINOLOGI KEJAHATAN DALAM HUKUM PIDANA INTERNASIONAL

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Dewi Bunga ◽  
Dewi Bunga
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Peace ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The People ◽  
International Conventions

The globalization of crime incised a social reality where crimes can be committed across national borders and have an impact not only on the people of a country, but on the international community. Theoretically, there are several terms that are known to describe acts which are called crimes under international law, namely international crimes, transnational crimes, and national crimes with international dimensions. International crimes are crimes that threaten both directly and indirectly to international peace and security, affect many countries and have universal jurisdiction. The qualification of international crimes refers to crimes regulated in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute circulated as document A / CONF.183 / 9 of 17 July 1998), namely crimes of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and crime of aggression. Transnational crimes are transnational crimes regulated in international conventions.

5 Chapeau or Contextual Elements

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mettraux Guénaël
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Civilian Population ◽  
Customary International Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Core ◽  
Contextual Element ◽  
Contextual Elements ◽  
Between The Acts ◽  
Formed Part

This chapter addresses the chapeau or contextual elements of crimes against humanity. To constitute a crime against humanity, a crime must be committed in the context of and as part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population. This contextual element is the core distinguishing feature of crimes against humanity. It highlights their collective character and excludes isolated or random criminal acts. It also distinguishes crimes against humanity from ordinary crimes and other categories of international crimes. As a matter of customary international law, the chapeau element of crimes against humanity may be divided into five sub-elements: (i) there must be an ‘attack’; (ii) the attack must be ‘directed against any civilian population’; (iii) the attack must be ‘widespread or systematic’; (iv) there must be a sufficient link or ‘nexus’ between the acts of the accused and the attack; and (v) the accused must have known that there was a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population, and he must have known that his acts formed part of that attack.

scholarly journals REGULASI PENDAFTARAN MEREK INTERNASIONAL DALAM UNDANG-UNDANG REPUBLIK INDONESIA NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2016 TENTANG MEREK DAN INDIKASI GEOGRAFIS

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 68-77
Author(s):  
Cokorda Istri Dian Laksmi Dewi
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Peace ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The People ◽  
International Conventions

The globalization of crime incised a social reality where crimes can be committed across national borders and have an impact not only on the people of a country, but on the international community. Theoretically, there are several terms that are known to describe acts which are called crimes under international law, namely international crimes, transnational crimes, and national crimes with international dimensions. International crimes are crimes that threaten both directly and indirectly to international peace and security, affect many countries and have universal jurisdiction. The qualification of international crimes refers to crimes regulated in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome Statute circulated as document A / CONF.183 / 9 of 17 July 1998), namely crimes of genocide; crimes against humanity; war crimes; and crime of aggression. Transnational crimes are transnational crimes regulated in international conventions.  

7 Crimes Against Humanity and Other International Crimes

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mettraux Guénaël
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Civilian Population ◽  
Community Or ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Form Part ◽  
Core Features

This concluding chapter provides an overview of crimes against humanity. Crimes against humanity are characterized by several core features. First, they are crimes of scale insofar as they must involve and form part of a widespread or systematic attack against a civilian population. Second, similar to genocide but unlike war crimes, crimes against humanity may be committed in times of peace or in times of war. Third, the possibility of being a victim to a crime against humanity does not depend on the victim's nationality or on the victim's membership in any particular community or faction in an armed conflict. Fourth, crimes against humanity are intrinsically serious criminal offences and reflect some of the most important human interests protected by international law. Lastly, crimes against humanity are not subject to any statutory limitations as a matter of international law. The chapter then looks at the differences between crimes against humanity and other international crimes. These include war crimes, genocide, aggression, and terrorism.

scholarly journals Non-retroactivity in Prosecuting Crimes against Humanity and International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 180
Author(s):  
Maruf Billah
Keyword(s):  
International Crime ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
The Public ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Internal Mechanism ◽  
International Laws ◽  
Set Up

The International Crimes Tribunal Bangladesh (ICTB) was set up by Bangladesh through the adaptation of the International Crimes Tribunal Act 1973, as an internal mechanism trying to prosecute and punish Bangladeshi perpetrators who committed international crimes in Bangladesh liberation war in 1971. After a long disappearance from the public eye, the Tribunal was reemerged in 2010. The recent cases decided by the Tribunal have revealed that the international crimes; namely, crimes against humanity, were allegedly committed in 1971, while the relevant Statute was enacted in 1973, and was implemented in 2010. Recently, the ICTB is prosecuting crimes against humanity retroactively, which might have violated the prohibition of penalizing certain conducts committed by the perpetrators before the enforcement of such conduct as a law banning such demeanor as an offense. Therefore, this study firstly analyzes the rule against retroactivity in international criminal law. Secondly, it investigates the justification of the retroactive criminalization of crimes against humanity at the first International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, and its crystallization into the regional and international legal instruments. Thirdly, the study examines the characteristics of crimes against humanity as an international crime, to scrutinize whether the ICTB needs to fulfill such requirements either in 1971 or 2010. Then, it illustrates various judgments of the ICTB, demonstrating that it does not comply with the rule prescribed by international laws either in 1971 or 2010, in prosecuting crimes against humanity retroactively. Lastly, the study concludes by forwarding ways necessary to the ICTB in retroactive prosecution of international offenses.

2 Crimes Against Humanity Under General International Law

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mettraux Guénaël
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Core Values ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Human Beings ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Relationship

This chapter discusses crimes against humanity under international law. Crimes against humanity were first introduced at Nuremberg as a means of criminalizing three sorts of criminality that so far had evaded the sanction of international law: atrocities committed outside the context of an armed conflict or independent of it; crimes committed against fellow nationals or nationals of allied nations; and institutionalized discriminatory violence that resulted in individuals being targeted and mistreated by a state because of their identity. Crimes against humanity seek to protect core attributes of all human beings: their dignity; their humanity; and their fundamental human rights. The notion of crimes against humanity reflects the fact that the protection of those interests and the punishment of serious violations of these interests is a matter of universal concern. It also makes it clear that the protection arising from international law does not depend on the nationality of the victim or his membership in a group, nor on his or relationship to the perpetrator. Instead, it is the sheer humanity of the victim that warrants and justifies the criminalization of such acts. And whilst the notion of genocide and crimes against humanity overlap in part in their efforts to protect these core values, unlike genocide, crimes against humanity seek to protect individuals as such, rather than groups of individuals. The chapter then looks at the relationship between crimes against humanity and other international crimes as well as the process of defining crimes against humanity.

Betraying their Motherland: Soviet Military Tribunals of Izmenniki Rodiny in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, 1941–1953

2014 ◽  
Vol 41 (1) ◽  
pp. 57-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Claire P. Kaiser
Keyword(s):  
Soviet Union ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
Second World War ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
World War ◽  
International Military Tribunal ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Military Tribunal ◽  
Second World

The immediate aftermath of the Second World War saw a transnational effort to identify and prosecute those individuals who committed war crimes and crimes against humanity in such fora as the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. However, parallel national processes were carried out across Europe to punish those citizens who, by a range of definitions, allegedly collaborated with enemy occupiers and committed treason. In the Soviet Union, suspected collaborators were tried as counterrevolutionaries in both the areas where crimes were committed and also those distant from regions of German or Romanian occupation. By examining tribunals in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan in this article, I argue for the importance of identifying and prosecuting alleged collaborators to the Soviet postwar project – a project which was far from limited to areas in the western parts of the country and which remained intimately linked to prewar, Stalinist understandings of justice and revolution.

III. Case Concerning the Arrest Warrant of April 00 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium)

2001 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 670-675
Author(s):  
Malcolm D. Evans ◽  
Chanaka Wickremasinghe
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Democratic Republic ◽  
Democratic Republic Of Congo ◽  
Foreign Minister ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
National Courts ◽  
Geneva Conventions ◽  
Republic Of The Congo ◽  
Sensitive Issues

An initiating Application filed by the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) against Belgium on 17 October 20001 potentially raises similar issues to those raised by the Pinochet case,2 namely the scope of “universal” jurisdiction in relation to serious international crimes against individuals (in this case “grave breaches of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and the 1977 Protocols thereto and crimes against humanity”) and the question of immunity where State officials (in this case a Foreign Minister) are accused thereof. As such it may represent an opportunity for the Court to give an authoritative ruling on these highly controversial and sensitive issues of international law, which seem to be raised with increasingly regularity before national courts. However for now such a ruling is a matter for the future, as on 8 December 2000 the Court dismissed the DRC application for provisional measures, and thus made no comment on the substantive issues of the case. Instead it found that certain intervening factual developments had removed from the application for provisional measures the requisite elements of irreparable prejudice to the rights of the applicant and urgency, thus obviating any need for an Order to be made at this stage.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document