Complicity in International Criminal Law and Law of State Responsibility: A Comparative Analysis

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joachim C. Savelsberg

With the expansion of international criminal law, the causation and exercise of mass violence is increasingly criminalized. However, the fields of humanitarian aid and diplomacy generate representations completely different from what criminal law suggests. A comparative analysis of eight countries reveals variable susceptibilities for these competing narratives. The empirical evidence is based on a content analysis of more than 3,000 newspaper articles on violence in Darfur and on interviews with African correspondents and specialists in non-governmental organizations and foreign ministries of the eight countries. The analysis suggests differentiations in argumentation concerning field theory as well as theories of globalization.


2020 ◽  
Vol 53 (04) ◽  
pp. 48-52
Author(s):  
Erkin Humbat Musayev Humbat Musayev ◽  

Key words: international law, international criminal law, genocide, war crimes, transnational crime


2020 ◽  
pp. 175-186
Author(s):  
Sean Fleming

This concluding chapter summarizes the implications of the Hobbesian theory of state responsibility and then looks to the future. There are three ongoing trends that are likely to alter both the nature and the scope of state responsibility: the development of international criminal law, the proliferation of treaties, and the replacement of human representatives with machines and algorithms. Although the practice of holding individuals responsible for acts of state might seem to render state responsibility redundant, the rise of international criminal law will not lead to the decline of state responsibility. The two forms of international responsibility are complementary rather than competitive. If anything, the domain of state responsibility will continue to expand in the coming decades because of the proliferation of treaties. New technologies pose the greatest challenge to current understandings of state responsibility. Thomas Hobbes' theory of the state, which is mechanistic to begin with, is well suited to the emerging world of mechanized states.


2007 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 841-849 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANTONIO CASSESE

The essay argues that the absence of an international treaty definition of aggression in international law should not preclude the prosecution of its perpetrators. Two legal regimes of responsibility, namely the prohibition against aggression as an international wrongful act and the crime of aggression have been entangled. Once one separates the criminal liability of individuals from state responsibility, a definition of the crime of aggression can be seen. According to the author, the contours of such a new definition contain the requisite degree of certainty for judicial approaches instead of merely political approaches. Consideration is also given as to whether conspiracy to wage a war of aggression may also be regarded as a separate crime within international criminal law.


Author(s):  
Raghavi VISWANATH

Abstract Codified in Articles 27 and 15(1)(a) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [ICCPR] and International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights [ICESCR], respectively, cultural rights are still read as distinct from linguistic and religious freedoms. The ICCPR vests cultural rights only in “persons belonging to minorities”, instead of groups. This paper attempts to analyze the reasons for the deficiencies in the ICCPR/ICESCR cultural rights regimes. In so doing, it unpacks the implications of these deficiencies for three current conflicts in Asia—the alleged persecution of Rohingyas in Myanmar, Uighurs in China, and Kashmiri Muslims in India—which are replete with cultural rights violations. It then tests whether the richer culture-based jurisprudence in international criminal law can offer lessons for the recalibration of cultural rights under the ICCPR/ICESCR. In particular, whether such cross-fertilization can trigger the jurisdiction of alternative forums to enforce state responsibility for these violations.


2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 65
Author(s):  
Hilda Rezaee ◽  
Sadegh Salimi

<p>This study examines the overlap ofinternational responsibility of individual and state for genocide. To describe this overlap, the material and psychological elements of genocide are discussed. International criminal law with the distinction between "ordinary state responsibility" and "aggravated state responsibility " drawing the latter offences beyond the State's international responsibility that is mainly focused on the principle of compensation and in which punitive sanctions are not relevant. The result of this change is the establishment of individual criminal responsibility, and aggravated state responsibility.</p>The goal ofthe research is to Explain The Overlap of international responsibility of individual and state for genocide to argue that the two items are not two separate categories and rather, they complete each other. so that responsibility of individual and state for the same action following primarily, individual criminal responsibility and exclusively, Bring theaggravated state responsibility.


Author(s):  
Yulia O. Goncharova

The article analyses the technique of regulating war crimes in the Criminal Code of the RSFSR of 1960. The author notes the need for a retrospective analysis of the legislative technique of war crimes in order to consider this type of crime most holistically. Despite the existence of discussions in the theory of criminal law about the concept of legislative technique and the elements included in it, the author interprets legislative technique as a set of means and techniques used to give the content of legislative norms an appropriate form. This article also notes the need to distinguish the category of «war crimes» in the criminal legislation of the Russian Federation, as this term is widespread in international criminal law. The author attributes the following provisions of the Criminal Code to war crimes: Article 356 («Application of prohibited means and methods of warfare»), Article 357 («Genocide») and Article 359 («Menary»). The author conducts a comparative analysis of the legislative technique of the norms on criminal liability for war crimes of the current criminal legislation and criminal legislation of the Soviet period. From the analysis, some features of the technique of regulating war crimes of the Soviet period are revealed, namely: a) most of the elements of war crimes were designed using the casual reception of legislative equipment; b) the Soviet legislator used a direct way of presenting the norms without applying references; c) the note was used to build some formulations of war crimes, but did not This paper also examines a number of imperfections in the technique of regulating war crimes in the 1960 Criminal Code.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-92
Author(s):  
Fadil Muhammad ◽  
Luh Putu Sudini ◽  
I Nyoman Sujana

War is a condition in which one party subdues its opponent to fulfill his will, a physical or non-physical act between two or more human groups to dominate. The formulation of the problem of this research is how the role of International Criminal Law on law enforcement in war crimes against humanity and how the state responsibility in war crimes against humanity in International Criminal Law. This research method uses the type of normative legal research by doing the assessment based on legal materials of the literature and is a process to find the rule of law, legal principles, and legal doctrines to answer the legal issues faced. War crimes and crimes against humanity are two types of international crimes that exist in twenty international criminal types designed by ILC (International Law Commission) to design the establishment of an international criminal tribunal. The conclusion of this study is  the role of International Criminal Law in  war crimes against humanity can be concluded that is contained in conventions contained in International Humanitarian Law contains only command or prohibition only but international criminal law have role in giving criminal sanction against violation of command or prohibition that and the state's responsibility in international criminal law can be an obligation to prosecute international criminal offenders encountered in various instruments of International Law. The form of state responsibility under the Rome Statute is  that States Parties shall have two main obligations:  States  Parties  shall  bring  each  perpetrator  of  genocide,  crimes  against humanity, criminal acts of war and criminal acts of aggression before the courts and the participating States in imposing their jurisdiction in enforcement of International Criminal Law must cooperate fully in the enforcement of International Criminal Law.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document