The Accountability for International Crimes Perpetrated by Children

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 698-723
Author(s):  
Ugo Cedrangolo
Keyword(s):  
Final Section ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
National Level ◽  
Child Soldiers ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Legal Concept ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Minimum Age

The issue of accountability for international crimes committed by children is one of the most complex legal and moral conundrums in international criminal justice. While children are excluded from the jurisdiction of international criminal courts, they can be sometimes the authors of heinous crimes, including international crimes. In the first section, the author examines whether prosecution at national level may be a solution in these cases. He then discusses if a minimum age of criminal responsibility should be agreed at international level and, if so, what this age should be. The issue of whether child soldiers possess the necessary mens rea for the commission of international crimes is also discussed. In the final section, the author suggests that more emphasis should be put on the accountability of those who use children to commit these crimes, notably through the legal concept of indirect participation, included in the icc Statute.

When the Child Surpasses the Father – Admissible Defences in International Criminal Law

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 509-532 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caroline Fournet
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Judicial System ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Public International Law ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

AbstractDue to the heinous nature of international crimes, admissible defences in the context of international criminal justice understandably constitute an issue surrounded with controversy. Yet, while International Criminal Law precludes the use of a series of defences, it also admits that certain grounds may exclude individual criminal responsibility or mitigate punishment even in the case of the most serious international crimes. The present study thus proposes to analyse the permissibility of these defences and the availability of such grounds for excluding responsibility by drawing a comparison between Public International Law and International Criminal Law and by highlighting the differences and discrepancies between the two systems. Ultimately, this analysis aims at demonstrating that International Criminal Law, one of Public International Law's children, has now surpassed its parent to become a more sophisticated and a fairer legal and judicial system, for both the defendants and the victims.

scholarly journals Trials as Messages of Justice: What Should Be Expected of International Criminal Courts?

2016 ◽  
Vol 30 (4) ◽  
pp. 429-447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim Meijers ◽  
Marlies Glasius
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Final Section ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Legal Theory ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Judicial Process ◽  
Limited Success ◽  
Contemporary Practice

This article addresses the question what—if anything—we can and should expect from the practice of international criminal justice. It argues that neither retributive nor purely consequentialist, deterrence-based justifications give sufficient guidance as to what international criminal courts should aim to achieve. Instead, the legal theory of expressivism provides a more viable (but not unproblematic) guide. Contrary to other expressivist views, this article argues for the importance of the trial, not just the punishment, as a form of expressivist messaging. Specifically, we emphasize the communicative aspect of the judicial process. The final section, acknowledging the limited success of international criminal justice so far in terms of fulfilling its expressivist potential, diagnoses the main obstacles to, and opportunities for, expressivist messaging in the contemporary practice of international criminal justice.

Monetary Compensation as a Remedy for Fair Trial Violations under International Criminal Law

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yahli Shereshevsky
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Monetary Compensation ◽  
Effective Remedy ◽  
The Right

When international criminal courts face violations of the right to a fair trial, they encounter a dilemma: if they provide a significant remedy, such as a stay of proceedings, the remedy inevitably undermines the ability to punish the perpetrators of international crimes; on the other hand, if they grant a minimal remedy or no remedy at all, the right to a fair trial is undermined. This dilemma has led to the adoption of an interest-balancing approach to remedies. Under this approach, sentence reduction plays a prominent role in remedying fair trial violations that do not undermine the court’s ability to accurately determine the accused’s guilt. This Article argues that sentence reduction is an inadequate remedy, since it inevitably either harms the goals of international criminal sentencing or does not provide an effective remedy for violations of the right to a fair trial. Instead, monetary compensation should be the remedy for such violations. By granting monetary compensation, the court creates a separation between the punishment and the remedy and thus can usually provide an effective remedy for the accused without harming the main goals of international criminal justice.

Scope and Limits of Psychiatric Evidence in International Criminal Law

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 1013-1035
Author(s):  
Dragana Radosavljevic
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Health Sector ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Hearsay Evidence ◽  
Individual Criminal Responsibility

This article examines the role of the mental health sector evidence in international crimes prosecutions. Specifically, recent trials are examined with a view to assess the scope and limits of psychiatric evidence in relation to war crimes defences. Scrutinizing fully the origins and triggers of individual criminal responsibility, serves the interests of justice and enhances trial rights. This study also tries to illustrate the undesirable but extensive use of hearsay evidence in international criminal courts and the ways in which psychiatric evidence is used frequently to validate inconsistent testimonies and hearsay accounts of presumed victims and witnesses but not to enable defendants to form defences. The article concludes that defence trial rights would be better protected if relevant legal lacunae and ambiguities regarding the admissibility of psychiatric evidence are clarified and if the amount of such evidence required to satisfy certain defences, such as duress, is quantified with greater specificity.

Is the Opposition Between Civil Law and Common Law Criminal Procedure the Lock or Key to International(ized) Tribunals’ Success?

2020 ◽  
pp. 282-294
Author(s):  
Leïla Bourguiba
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Paris Declaration ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

This chapter offers a comparative consideration of the efficacy of civil versus common law in adjudicating atrocity crimes, using the example of the French war crimes unit prosecution practice. On 16 October 2017, representatives of international criminal courts and tribunals met in France at the French National School for the Judiciary. Their meeting resulted in the signing of a Declaration on the effectiveness of international criminal justice (Paris Declaration). In gathering professionals from international courts and tribunals where the need to comply with founding texts and specific procedures can challenge those who, by habit, comfort, or conviction, draw on their national practise to interpret and apply the rules of procedure, the question of common versus civil law practice was the implicit focus. The Paris Declaration was adopted at a time when disappointment towards the ‘efficiency’ of international(ized) tribunals and courts is high. They are considered too slow and too costly. In this context, it is not unusual to hear that international trials would be better managed and more efficient if they borrowed more elements of ‘civil law’ on their ‘common law’ foundation. The chapter then describes the main characteristics of each procedural system to help identify which procedural model has been favoured before international(ized) tribunals. It also asks whether national investigation and prosecution of core international crimes are more efficient.

Prosecutor v. Taylor: The Status of the Special Court for Sierra Leone and Its Implications for Immunity

2005 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 299-322 ◽  
Author(s):  
ZSUZSANNA DEEN-RACSMÁNY
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Sierra Leone ◽  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Institutions ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Status

On 31 May 2004, the Appeals Chamber of the Special Court for Sierra Leone ruled in a sweeping but brief decision that the Court had jurisdiction over Charles Ghankay Taylor, President of Liberia at the time of his indictment. The judges reached this conclusion finding that the accused could not invoke immunities ratione personae before this institution, an international criminal court. As this article demonstrates, the Chamber's argumentation lacks specificity and displays confusion over certain issues related to UN law, the law of international institutions and international immunities. The factual outcome is a welcome one, facilitating the prosecution of international crimes. Yet, the Appeals Chamber's approach is regrettable, especially if one considers that the same result could have been reached through less controversial avenues, without endangering the credibility of the Court and thereby the idea of international criminal justice through internationalized criminal courts.

From The Hague to the Balkans: A Victim-oriented Reparations Approach to Improved International Criminal Justice

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-41 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stathis N. Palassis
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Former Yugoslavia ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
The Hague ◽  
Yugoslav Wars

The international crimes committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia during the 1990s have been the subject of both State responsibility claims and prosecutions establishing individual criminal responsibility. On 26 February 2007 the International Court of Justice handed down its judgment in the Genocide case while it is expected that in 2014 the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia will conclude all appeals from prosecutions. While these initiatives contribute to the acknowledgement of the commission of international crimes they have not provided the victims with any financial reparations. Instead victims have had to make compensation claims under domestic law. The article examines how, in addition to the international initiatives at The Hague, a regionally focused victim oriented reparations approach can assist in attaining improved international criminal justice for international crimes committed during the Yugoslav wars. A victim oriented reparations approach would enhance victims’ rights through the provision of financial reparations, reflect improved international criminal justice and assist in the attainment long-term stability in the war-torn States of the former Yugoslavia.

Coherence in International Criminal Justice: A Victimological Perspective

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Pemberton ◽  
R.M. Letschert ◽  
A.-M. de Brouwer ◽  
R.H. Haveman
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Government Agencies ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Large Numbers

This article develops a victimological perspective on international criminal justice, based on a review of the main victimological characteristics of international crimes: the complicity of government agencies, the large numbers of victims involved and the peculiar position of victims of international crimes, who at the time of the commission of the crimes are viewed as perpetrators and/or beyond the moral sphere, rather than as victims. Key elements of the framework concern the external coherence of the criminal justice reaction – the interlinking of criminal justice with other reparative efforts – as well as its internal coherence – the extent to which the procedures of international criminal justice are aligned with what it realistically can and should achieve. This latter aspect of coherence is used in an examination of victims’ rights in international criminal justice procedures.

‘Cosmopolitan Citizenship’, Territorial Borders, and Bringing Denationalized Terrorists to Justice

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Seet
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal Justice ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Territorial State ◽  
International Obligations ◽  
Cosmopolitan Citizenship ◽  
Globalized World

Abstract This article challenges scholarly claims that a post-national ‘cosmopolitan citizenship’ — an expanded and less territorially bounded belonging of ‘humanity’ — has been emerging in the international criminal justice context. In examining the contemporary denationalization of terrorists from the under-explored angle of criminal justice, this article argues that states’ territorial borders prevent denationalized terrorists — deemed enemies of ‘humanity’ — from being brought to justice. Some states strip citizenship from terrorists without holding them accountable for terrorist offences and international crimes, subsequently deporting them to — or leaving them stranded in — states which are, according to international criminal law, ‘unable’ or ‘unwilling’ to prosecute. As such, states’ territorial borders serve as a ‘shield’ which not only enable denationalized terrorists to avoid accountability for their terrorist offences and international crimes, but which also enable states to avoid their international obligations to bring terrorists to justice. This case study of denationalized terrorists not only demonstrates the enduring relevance of territoriality to international criminal justice but also broadly demonstrates how post-national ‘citizenship’ remains tied to the territorial state in a globalized world.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document