scholarly journals The Doctrine of “Joint Criminal Enterprise”: Criminal Liability of the Military-Political Leadership of the Armed Conflict Opposing Party for Committing War Crimes

wisdom ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-146
Author(s):  
Hayk GRIGORYAN
Keyword(s):  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Political Leadership ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Enterprise ◽  
Joint Criminal Enterprise ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Opposing Party ◽  
The Military

The article analyzes the mechanisms of bringing the military and political leadership of the opposing party of the armed conflict to criminal liability through the doctrine of "joint criminal enterprise", which is used in International criminal law, considering that the acts committed by this category of individuals, as a rule, are subject to investigation by international criminal tribunals on the basis of definitions developed by international practice. The analysis carried out by the Author also  enables to propose scientifically substantiated recommendations on the qualification of the acts conducted by the military and political leadership of the opposing party, which form  corpus delicti of various military and international crimes according to the rules of complicity provided for by the national legislation of the Republic of Armenia.

The First Trial of Former Members of the Kosovo Liberation Army: Prosecutor v. Fatmir Limaj, Haradin Bala, and Isak Musliu

2006 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 459-476
Author(s):  
PASCALE CHIFFLET
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
Eyewitness Identification ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Trial Chamber ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Enterprise ◽  
Civilian Population ◽  
Joint Criminal Enterprise

In its Judgement issued on 30 November 2005 in Prosecutor v. Limaj et al., Trial Chamber II of the ICTY found that an armed conflict existed in Kosovo between the Kosovo Liberation Army and the Serbian forces as of the end of May 1998. It held, however, that the evidence did not establish that there was a widespread or systematic attack by the KLA directed against a civilian population at the relevant time. The first trial of former members of the Kosovo Liberation Army also gave rise to a number of significant developments in the ICTY's jurisprudence relating to issues of international criminal law and procedure, such as the treatment of hostile witnesses and of eyewitness identification evidence, as well as the proof of the existence of a joint criminal enterprise.

Imputed Criminal Liability and the Goals of International Justice

2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 377-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
SHANE DARCY
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Historical Record ◽  
International Justice ◽  
Criminal Enterprise ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Joint Criminal Enterprise ◽  
International Criminal Tribunals ◽  
Superior Responsibility ◽  
Broad Form

This article considers the suitability of employing particular modes of imputed criminal liability in trials before international criminal tribunals. It focuses specifically on the doctrines of joint criminal enterprise and superior responsibility, two forms of liability which are central to many contemporary international criminal proceedings. Both doctrines can involve a broad form of criminal liability which may not be entirely appropriate when one considers the context in which such trials take place and the significance which often attaches to them. Proponents of international justice have contended that the contribution of these trials goes beyond basic accountability and providing justice for victims, extending also to peacemaking, reconciliation, deterrence, and the creation of a historical record. This article queries whether aspects of joint criminal enterprise liability and superior responsibility are appropriate when international justice is viewed in this light.

scholarly journals Complicity and the Doctrine of “Command Liability” for Committing War Crimes

wisdom ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 170-182
Author(s):  
Hayk GRIGORYAN
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Enterprise ◽  
International Crimes ◽  
Opposing Party

The article analyzes the mechanisms of bringing the servicemen of the opposing party of the armed conflict to criminal responsibility through the doctrines of “joint criminal enterprise” and “command responsibility”, which are dealt with International criminal law considering that the acts committed by this category of persons are usually subject to investigation by international bodies of criminal justice on the basis of definitions developed by international practice. The analysis carried out by the author enables to propose scientifically substantiated recommendations on the qualifications of acts committed by servicemen of the opposing party of the armed conflict that constitutes corpus delicti of various war and international crimes.

The “Kouwenhoven” Case

2019 ◽  
Vol 181 ◽  
pp. 568-704
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
Armed Conflict ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Activity ◽  
War Crimes ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Post Conflict ◽  
Arms Embargo ◽  
Witness Statements

Economics, trade and finance — Economic sanctions — Liberia — UN Security Council Resolutions 1343 (2001) and 1408 (2002) — Implementation of arms embargo under Dutch law — Whether sanctions regime violatedInternational criminal law — Difference between perpetrator and accomplice liability — Complicity in war crimes — Requirement that defendant promoted or facilitated the commission of war crimes — Conditional intent — Whether defendant consciously accepted the probability that war crimes would be committed in connection with his material support — Risk of doing business with a government engaged in international criminal activityInternational criminal law — Evidence — Admissibility and weight of witness statements — Factors relevant to assessing witness statements obtained in post-conflict environment — Coercion of witnesses — Whether inconsistencies in witness statements requiring acquittalInternational criminal law — Circumstances excusing unlawful conduct — National emergency — Whether violations of arms embargo and laws and customs of war justified by right to self-defence under international lawJurisdiction — Universal jurisdiction — War crimes — Prosecution of a Dutch national for offences committed abroad — Whether conduct of investigation by Dutch authorities making prosecution inadmissible — Whether amnesty scheme in Liberia barrier to prosecution — No violation of fair trial rightsWar and armed conflict — Existence of armed conflict — Whether armed conflict international or internal — Limited gap between norms applicable to international versus non-international armed conflict — Whether violations of laws and customs of war giving rise to individual criminal liability under Dutch law — The law of the Netherlands

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.

Joint Criminal Enterprise on the Decline: A Step Further in the ‘Self-Becoming’ of International Criminal Law?

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-233
Author(s):  
Pedro Caeiro ◽  
Joana Costa
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Focal Point ◽  
The Self ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Enterprise ◽  
Joint Criminal Enterprise

This article uses the legal construct ‘joint criminal enterprise’ (jce) as a focal point of the tensions between international criminal law (icl) and common criminal law. Drawing on the assumption that an over-arching concept of the criminal law in genere is plausible, and that icl is a special branch stemming therefrom, the authors start by characterising jce and by assessing the possible incompatibility of some of its forms with the principles of legality, voluntary act and guilt. The authors then question whether jce could be validated under a different understanding of icl (as an autonomous legal branch, or, at least, as a special branch within criminal law abiding by different principles). Finally, it is argued that the apparent decline of jce might be another instance where icl becomes itself ‘more wholly’.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document