THE PRINCIPLES OF THE TRANSNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW IN THE COURSE OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Professional Status ◽

Transnational Organized Crime ◽

Procedural Law ◽

Penal Law

The article highlights systematic aspects of the major principles of transnational criminal law within the framework of international law transformation. The article is dedicated to the examination of the fundamental principles of international law and international criminal law, in particular, which are viewed systematically and in complex and tight connection with the principles of domestic criminal and criminal procedural law. The necessity of legal enshrinement of its principles is noted. The content of the fundamental principles of criminal law is overviewed, in particular, nullum crimen sine lege (No crime without a previous penal law), principle of individual criminal responsibility, principle of non-reference to the official or professional status of a person, prohibition of repetition of punishment for the same crime under international criminal law, execution of judicial power only by courts, equality of persons before the law and the court, local and temporal principles of criminal law (non-application of terms of limitation, territorial principle of criminal law etc.) Special attention is paid to the content of the universal criminal jurisdiction principle concerning transnational crimes, enshrined in the 2000 UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. The author comes to the conclusion that the principles of transnational criminal law are coordinated as between themselves and determine the main characteristics of transnational criminal law and directions of criminal policy.

Part 3 General Principles of Criminal Law: Principes Généraux Du Droit Pénal, Art.27 Irrelevance of official capacity/Défaut de pertinence de la qualité officielle

10.1093/law/9780198739777.003.0032 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Schabas William A

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Customary International Law ◽

Head Of State

This chapter comments on Article 27 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Article 27 consists two paragraphs that are often confounded but fulfil different functions. Paragraph 1 denies a defence of official capacity, i.e. official capacity as a Head of State or Government, a member of a Government or parliament, an elected representative or a government official shall not exempt a person from criminal responsibility under the Statute. Paragraph 2 amounts to a renunciation, by States Parties to the Rome Statute, of the immunity of their own Head of State to which they are entitled by virtue of customary international law. In contrast with paragraph 1, it is without precedent in international criminal law instruments.

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

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/157181208x308817 ◽

2008 ◽

Vol 8 (3) ◽

pp. 509-532 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Caroline Fournet

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Judicial System ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

Public International Law ◽

International Crimes ◽

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.

International criminal law: Between law and politics

Medjunarodni problemi ◽

10.2298/medjp1301042j ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 65 (1) ◽

pp. 42-67

Author(s):

Dragan Jovasevic

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Ad Hoc ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Armed Conflicts ◽

Humanitarian Law ◽

Criminal Courts ◽

Law And Politics

Crimes against international law are committed by violating the rules of international humanitarian law during wars or armed conflicts. The perpetrators of these crimes are under the jurisdiction of international criminal courts (military or civil, permanent or ad hoc). The process of the commission of crimes against international law may comprise several different phases or stadiums. Moreover, such criminal offences rarely appear as the results of only one person?s activities. On the contrary, in numerous cases of these criminal offences, accomplice appears as a form of collective participation of several persons in the commission of one or more crimes against international law. All these facts represent grounds for the specific type of criminal responsibility of the perpetrators of crimes against international law. It is a object of regulation international criminal law about whose characteristics converse this article.

An overview on Individual Criminal Liability for Crime of Aggression

Liberal Arts and Social Sciences International Journal (LASSIJ) ◽

10.47264/idea.lassij/5.1.28 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 433-444

Author(s):

Asif Khan ◽

Shaukat Hussain Bhatti ◽

Abid Shah

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Historical Background ◽

Proper Definition ◽

Definition Of ◽

Over the last few years, international criminal law has included an internationally recognized definition of the crime of aggression. One may sight the respective portion from part two (Jurisdiction, Admissibility and Applicable Laws) Article 8 of the respective document. The purpose of this research represents the historical background of individual criminal responsibility under international law and the concept of individual criminal accountability for the crimes falling under the ambit of international criminal law committed by persons. Whereas the idea of how an individual could be brought to justice, for one of the core crimes of ICC's statutes, i.e., crime of aggression, was recently adopted and envisaged into Rome statutes, after the Kampala conference 2010. The concept of individual criminal responsibility for the crime of aggression faced many difficulties in at-least adopting its proper definition, which was leftover for future when Rome statue was formulated. To keep pace, this concept needs further evolution. Such an evolution demands such a condition wherein while granting the characteristics of adaptability with the contextual conditions and principles of criminal law. This article explores the anatomy of the crime of aggression and highlights issues that remain to be resolved

Ch.Two General Principles

Principles of International Criminal Law ◽

10.1093/law/9780198826859.003.0002 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Werle Gerhard ◽

Jeßberger Florian

Keyword(s):

General Theory ◽

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Superior Responsibility ◽

This chapter focuses on the general principles of international criminal law. It first develops a general theory of crimes under international law by considering the concept of crimes under international law as well as the context of organised violence. The structure of crimes under international law is also explored. Next, the chapter studies the material and mental elements of crimes under international law. Individual criminal responsibility and superior responsibility are also discussed, as are the grounds for excluding criminal responsibility. Next, the chapter covers inchoate crimes, omissions within the context of the ICC Statute, immunity, the multiplicity of offences, and finally, the requirements for prosecution.

International Criminal Responsibility Concerning ‘Control over an Organization’ and Command Responsibility Lato Sensu

International Criminal Law Review ◽

10.1163/157181212x634162 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 12 (2) ◽

pp. 293-300 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Hiromi Satō

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

Rome Statute ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Customary International Law

The International Criminal Court recently presented its arguments concerning criminal responsibility arising pursuant to the theory of ‘control over an organization’. This theory is based on the notion of ‘perpetrator-by-means’ found in the Rome Statute, Article 25(3)a. The court appears to have utilized this theory to establish principal responsibility for ordering in contrast to accessorial responsibility prescribed in Article 25(3)b of the said Statute. However, it should be noted that customary international law has long established the notion of command responsibility lato sensu, recognizing the serious and primary nature of superiors’ responsibility for ordering. This article argues that there should be some conscious sequence between the discussions of ‘control over an organization’ and command responsibility lato sensu for the sake of the integrity of the discourse in international criminal law.

International Criminal Law and International Criminal Justice

Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice ◽

10.1093/acrefore/9780190264079.013.412 ◽

2018 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Kai Ambos ◽

Alexander Heinze

Keyword(s):

Criminal Justice ◽

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

Justice System ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

International Criminal Justice ◽

Public International Law ◽

International Criminal Justice is a controversial concept, and there is a burgeoning body of literature on its exact contours. Understood broadly, the term “international criminal justice” covers a broad category, integrating international criminal law (ICL) within an overarching interdisciplinary enterprise also “incorporating philosophical, historical, political and international relations, sociological, anthropological and criminological perspectives” (Roberts, 2007). International criminal law consists, at its core, of a combination of criminal law and public international law principles. The idea of individual criminal responsibility and the concept of prosecuting an individual for a specific (macrocriminal) act are derived from criminal law, while the classical (Nuremberg) offenses form part of (public) international law and thus the respective conduct is directly punishable under ICL (principle of direct individual criminal responsibility in public international law). The dualistic base of international criminal law is also reflected in the reading of the mandates of the international criminal tribunals; one can either take a “security, peace, and human rights”–oriented approach or a “criminal justice”–oriented approach, either of which may entail a paradoxical goal or purpose ambiguity of international criminal law. In any case, the strong grounding in criminal law, together with the actual enforcement of international criminal law by way of international criminal proceedings and trials, converts international criminal law into criminal law on a supranational level and thus entails the full application of the well-known principles of liberal, post-enlightenment criminal law, in particular the principles of legality, culpability, and fairness. These principles constitute the minimum standard of any criminal justice system based on the rule of law and thus must also apply in an international criminal justice system. The adoption of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in 1998 and the effective establishment of the Court in 2002 have led to an institutionalization of international criminal law, turning the page on ad hoc imposition in favor of a treaty-based universal system. In addition, the Rome Statute provides for the first codification of international criminal law, with a potentially universal reach. Therewith, international criminal law was not only united into a single penal system of the international community, but it was also extended beyond its fundamental core areas of substantive and procedural law into other branches of criminal law (law of sanctions, enforcement of sentences, and judicial assistance).

Philosophy of Globalization of Criminal Law

Russian Journal of Legal Studies ◽

10.17816/rjls18486 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (2) ◽

pp. 73-81

Author(s):

Vadim Vladimirovich Khilyuta

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Policy ◽

International Standards ◽

Global Level ◽

Economic Parameters ◽

Global Initiatives ◽

External Intervention

In article the questions of globalization of criminal law and the pursued criminal policy are raised. At the doctrinal level trends of implementation of norms of the international criminal law and a problem of general unification of norms of criminal law are analyzed. The author comes to a conclusion about discrepancy of the mechanism of a global instrumentalization of criminal law and artificial imposing of the international standards to the national states. In article global initiatives of general and unconditional implementation of rules of international law and other legal institutes are in detail described. It is specified that these trends cannot be born in itself, without external intervention. It is proved that the drawn line of artificial unification of criminal tools at the global level leads to institutional crisis since basic borders of criminal law cannot identically be considered in relation to each single country (a national criminal system) in view of various social and economic parameters of functioning of the states and means of their realization.

13. International criminal law

10.1093/he/9780192895684.003.0013 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 178-190

Author(s):

Ilias Bantekas ◽

Efthymios Papastavridis

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Court ◽

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).

17. International criminal law

International Law ◽

10.1093/he/9780198748830.003.0017 ◽

2019 ◽

pp. 439-467

Author(s):

Gleider Hernández

Keyword(s):

International Law ◽

Criminal Law ◽

International Criminal Court ◽

International Criminal ◽

Criminal Responsibility ◽

Criminal Court ◽

Crimes Against Humanity ◽

Customary International Law ◽

Fundamental Shift

This chapter describes international criminal law. International criminal law represented a fundamental shift for international law. Historically, international law regarded accountability and responsibility almost purely through the lens of the State and contained neither substantive rules nor the requisite institutions to prosecute an individual. Today, there exist several institutions, most prominently the International Criminal Court (ICC), which have given shape both to the substance of the crimes themselves and to the method for their effective prosecution. Through international criminal law, the criminal responsibility and liability of individuals, even if acting in groups, are now addressed internationally. There is a category of indisputable ‘core crimes’ under customary international law: genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and aggression. These are helpfully defined in an ICC document called the ‘Elements of Crimes’, which is intended to guide the Court in the interpretation and application of these crimes.