Problems of bringing judges to administrative and criminal responsibility in connection with the existing legal advantages: the history of the issue and modern practice

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.G. Repev
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
History Of

Part IV The ICC and its Applicable Law, 20 Perpetration and Participation in Article 25(3)

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
van Sliedregt Elies
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Case Law ◽  
Second World War ◽  
World War ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
History Of ◽  
Second World

This chapter provides an overview of the theorization of modes of liability in the context of contemporary ICC jurisprudence and scholarship. It examines the structure of Article 25, its doctrinal specificities, and its possible interpretation in light of ICC jurisprudence from the Lubanga, Katanga, and Bemba cases. It places particular emphasis on the relevance of the distinction between principal and accessorial liability and the question of whether the differentiated approach reflected in Article 25 encompasses a hierarchization of modes of liability. To give Article 25 more context and to place it in a history of liability theories attuned to system criminality, the chapter takes into account post-Second World War case-law and Tribunal law on criminal responsibility.

scholarly journals Criminal Liability for Knowingly Unlawful Sentence, Decision or Other Judicial Act

2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 93-102
Author(s):  
Pavel Metelsky ◽  
Nadezhda Verchenko
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Considerable Complexity

Introduction. The publication is devoted to the corpus delicti, provided for by Art. 305 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which, being, in fact, a special type of official abuse, stands out as the direct object of a criminal assault and a special subject, since it can be committed exclusively by professional judges. The main features of the objective and subjective parties, qualifying signs of the offense are revealed, some problems that arise when applying this criminal law are outlined. Purpose. The goal is to analyze the design features of the crime and issues that arise when applying this rule. Methodology. The method of a formal legal analysis of the norms of the criminal law and theoretical provisions on problems directly related to the application of this rule was used. Results. The public danger of a criminal act that undermines the very foundations of justice is obvious, in connection with which it stands out as an independent crime by all the Russian Criminal Codes, starting in 1922, the history of criminal responsibility for its commission can be traced in our country in general since the 16th century. The current criminal law prohibition is characterized by considerable complexity, due to both the blanket nature of the disposition of the norm itself and the presence of discrepancies in the understanding of the signs embodied in it. Conclusion. The implementation of criminal liability for this crime involves the establishment of not only circumstances directly related to the corpus delicti that lie in the criminal law field. The subject of an infringement, a judicial act, must be subjected to procedural review without fail, after which, subject to the consent of the Higher Qualification Collegium of Judges of the Russian Federation, in fact, and the mechanism of criminal prosecution is “launched”. That is, a truly “multi-way” combination of actions is necessary, carried out in several stages, and the problem itself to some extent becomes interdisciplinary, going beyond only criminal law.

scholarly journals Specific Direction: An Unspecific Threshold

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 320
Author(s):  
Dhruv Sharma
Keyword(s):  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
International Criminal Tribunal ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
Customary Law ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
Specific Direction ◽  
History Of

Aiding and abetting has been recognised as a form of individual criminal responsibility since the 1940’s when the first international tribunals were created. The form of responsibility had a relatively simplistic history of application until it faced an unprecedented upheaval through the introduction of the threshold of specific direction in the Perišić appeals judgment. The judgment has since been rejected by the Special Court of Sierra Leone (SCSL) in the Charles Taylor judgment and by the International Criminal Tribunal for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) in Sainović, Popović and Stanišić and Simatović judgment. The present paper focuses on the relevance of the standard of specific direction before the International Criminal Court (ICC). It argues that the standard is unjustifiable under international criminal law as, firstly, no convictions or acquittals have been affected on the standard and, secondly and more importantly, the text of the Rome Statute has rejected the standard. The standard of specific direction has not legal pedigree under customary law, is contrary to the text of the Rome Statute and counter-intuitive to the objectives of the ICC as it unreasonably increases evidentiary requirements at the Court and consequently makes the fight against impunity, an already challenging task, even more difficult.

Wondrous Depths: Judging the Mind in Nineteenth-Century America

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (03) ◽  
pp. 828-849
Author(s):  
Catherine L. Evans
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
The Self ◽  
Psychological Consequences ◽  
American Democracy ◽  
Nineteenth Century America ◽  
Modern Mind ◽  
The Everyday ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Mind

Susanna L. Blumenthal’sLaw and the Modern Mind: Consciousness and Responsibility in American Legal Culture(2016) is a history of the self in nineteenth-century America. When judges considered a person’s criminal responsibility or civil capacity in court, they created a body of legal and political thought about the self, society, the economy, and American democracy. This essay uses Blumenthal’s book to explore recent work on law and the mind in Britain and North America, and argues that abstract questions about free will, the self, and the mind were part of the everyday jurisprudence of the nineteenth century. Debates about responsibility were also debates about the psychological consequences of capitalism and the borders of personhood and citizenship at a time of rapid economic, political, and social change.

Mental disorder, criminal responsibility and the social history of theories of volition

1979 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Smith
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Social History ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of

SYNOPSISNineteenth-century theories of human volition are discussed in relation to ideas on insanity and responsibility. Attention is drawn to the importance of accounts of volition for medical psychologists and to the implications of these accounts for medical and lay discussion of criminal responsibility.

History of development of modern concepts of criminal responsibility of artificial intelligence in Spain

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 (03) ◽  
pp. 259-264
Author(s):  
Viktor Shestak
Keyword(s):  
Artificial Intelligence ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Cyber Security ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Criminal Prosecution ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
History Of Development ◽  
History Of ◽  
Legal Entities

This research proves the failure to address theoretically fundamental issues of robots' legal capacity and cyber security and as a result crudity of issues concerning criminal liability of robots for their actions. The proposals of a number of Spanish scientists on the possibility of non-proliferation of the sphere of criminal law on robots in connection with the existing possibility of criminal prosecution of legal entities in Spain have been worked out. In retrospect, the Spanish concepts of criminal responsibility of artificial intelligence were studied: their novels, shortcomings and problems of application in modern conditions were revealed.

scholarly journals The V. Schoeneman Case: Einsatzkommando 8, the Wehrmacht and the Holocaust

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 74 (10) ◽  
pp. 113-124
Author(s):  
A. P. Grakhotskiy
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Armed Forces ◽  
Guerrilla Warfare ◽  
Service Members ◽  
Professional Groups ◽  
German Armed Forces ◽  
The Holocaust ◽  
History Of ◽  
The 1960S

In 1964, the trial of Werner Schoenemann, the commander of one of the 6 punitive units of the Einsatzkommando 8, took place in Cologne. The criminal was charged with mass executions of Jews on the territory of Belarus in late June — September 1941. The paper shows how the former Nazi tried to avoid criminal responsibility and what legal assessment by the German justice his atrocities received. V. Schoeneman denied his guilt and sought to shift responsibility for what he had done to the Wehrmacht troops. The defendant argued that the actions of extermination of Jews were carried out on the initiative of the German armed forces and were in the nature of reprisals; they were designed to force the local population to abandon the conduct of guerrilla warfare. Based on the testimony of the accused, law enforcement officers detained three officers of the 354th Infantry Regiment involved in the liquidation of the Jewish community of the town of Krupki (September 18, 1941). During the investigation, it was established that the service members provided support to members of the Einsatzkommando 8 during the execution, but were not the initiators of this atrocity. For complicity in the grave murders of 2,170 Jews in the settlements of Slonim, Borisov, Smolevichi, Krupki and others, V. Schoeneman was sentenced to 6 years in prison. When assigning such a lenient punishment, representatives of the German Themis relied on the dominant approach to assessing the criminal activities of former Nazis in the 1960s. According to the jury, the defendant was only a submissive executor of orders, an impersonal, devoid of his own motives “cog” in the mechanism of the Nazi state. V. Schoeneman did not repent of what he had done. For the former punisher, Jewish victims were still just dry figures in the reports, thanks to which he sought to make a career. Schoeneman’s case proves that Wehrmacht service members took an active part in the Holocaust along with members of the Einsatzkommandos. The genocide, unprecedented in the history of humankind, became possible only because of the broad participation of German citizens representing various social strata and professional groups.

scholarly journals Russian Legislation of XI-XVIII Centuries on the Criminal Responsibility of Minors

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 231-244
Author(s):  
S.N. Shishkov ◽  
E.V. Makushkin ◽  
E.G. Dozortseva ◽  
V.D. Badmaeva ◽  
E.V. Nutskova
Keyword(s):  
Juvenile Offenders ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
18Th Century ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Roman Law ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
Initial Stage ◽  
Minimum Age ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject

The problem of juvenile criminal responsibility /liability, minimum age, and measures of influence for juvenile offenders is relevant and often becomes the subject of public discussion. However, very little is known about the history of criminal law attitudes towards minors in Russia. The purpose of the article is to analyze the development of this relationship from the beginning of Russian statehood to the 18th century. It is shown that at the initial stage in the practice of applying the criminal law to children and adolescents, the traditions of Roman law were traced, however, there was practically no legislative differentiation of adult and juvenile offenders. The turning point was the 18th century, at the beginning of which the need for such differentiation became apparent, and at the end it was implemented along with certain humanistic tendencies that reflected the ideas of the Enlightenment in Europe, including the creation of special courts to consider juvenile crimes.

The Prevention of Crime

2019 ◽  
pp. 209-234
Author(s):  
Brian H. Bornstein ◽  
Jeffrey S. Neuschatz
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Behavior ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Psychological Research ◽  
Related Question ◽  
Legal Standards ◽  
Nature Versus Nurture ◽  
History Of ◽  
Prevention Of Crime ◽  
Or History

In his final chapter, Münsterberg moves from the psychological questions of earlier chapters to the questions of how to prevent crime and whether criminals are “born” or “made.” The psychology of crime, with its implications for prevention, treatment, and punishment, is a large question that continues to be of interest to psychologists, sociologists, criminologists, and policymakers. This chapter focuses on the two main issues that Münsterberg raises: the “nature-versus-nurture” question regarding criminality and the related question of criminal responsibility. Research shows that criminal behavior, especially for crimes involving violence, has significant biological as well as environmental components. Both biological and environmental factors have implications for criminal responsibility—if one commits a crime because his brain or history of conditioning predisposed him to it, should he be held accountable for it? This chapter discusses questions related to criminal responsibility in the context of the relevant legal standards and psychological research.

Expertise, procedure and the possibility of a comparative history of forensic psychiatry in the nineteenth century

1989 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Smith
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Forensic Psychiatry ◽  
Criminal Responsibility ◽  
Medical Knowledge ◽  
Comparative History ◽  
Mentally Disordered ◽  
Administrative Procedure ◽  
The Past ◽  
Social Interests ◽  
History Of

SynopsisThe comparative history of forensic psychiatry may help unravel relations between legal and administrative procedure, medical knowledge and expertise, and social interests, as they determine judgements about the criminal responsibility of the mentally disordered. But little has been done to compare the past or the present under different jurisdictions. This paper, therefore, suggests some points which would encourage such comparisons, and particularly a comparison between France and England in the nineteenth century, for both of which countries there is now a valuable historical literature. It also illustrates the complex interaction of procedure and medical expertise by reference to the case of George Victor Townley (1863).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document