Command Responsibility: Mode of Liability for the Crimes of Subordinates or Separate Offence of the Superior?

The nature of command responsibility is still open to debatein international criminal law: is a superior to be held criminallyresponsible for the crimes committed by his subordinates ‘asan accomplice’, for having participated in the commissionof the crime by omission, or as a perpetrator of a separateoffence of dereliction of duty? This article surveys the post-WW2case law and the first international instruments on this point,and then analyses the jurisprudence of the International CriminalTribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). The judges appearto have recently adopted a new approach to Article 7(3) ICTYSt.in that the superior is held responsible ‘for failureto prevent or punish with regard to the crimes of the subordinate’and no longer ‘for the crimes of his subordinates’.It is a responsibility ‘sui generis’ indeed, wherethe crime of the subordinate plays a central role in the attributionof responsibility to the superior. It is, therefore, necessaryto carefully consider the relationship between the superior'sfailure to act and the subordinate's crime, both with regardto objective and subjective elements. The same question finallyarises in relation to Article 28 of the Rome Statute, the literalinterpretation of which implies that a superior shall be punishedfor the same crime committed by his subordinates. In order toavoid the risk of holding a person guilty of an offence committedby others in violation of the principle of personal and culpablecriminal responsibility, it is crucial to consider separatelythe different cases of command responsibility, which are basedon distinct objective and subjective requirements.     

Any Other Contribution? Ascribing Liability for Cover-Ups of International Crimes

As the International Criminal Court (the Court or ICC) continues to develop the parameters of the various modes of liability set out in Article 25(3) of the Rome Statute, recent developments raise questions as to whether the Court can consider participation in cover-ups or concealment of crimes as giving rise to individual criminal responsibility. It is only recently that international tribunals, and notably the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), have turned to consider how international criminal law approaches responsibility for cover-ups or concealment of crimes. In reviewing how and why the ICTY has addressed individual criminal liability for engaging in cover-ups, and in light of the ICC’s Mbarushimana decision, the aim of this paper is to suggest how the ICC might consider such issues in future cases. Having demonstrated the necessity of international criminal law accounting for cover-ups, the paper will discuss how the jurisprudence, in toto, excludes the possibility of holding to account individuals who contribute to the cover up of international crimes, by whatever means, or however grave, unless they were acting on the premise of a prior agreement with the principals. By way of conclusion the paper will suggest that an expansive interpretation of Article 25(3)(d) of the Rome Statute may provide a means of addressing this gap.     

国际犯罪的类型研究:回顾、反思与探寻

在理论研究的层面,国际犯罪的范围包括战争罪、侵略罪、危害人类罪等31种犯罪。在对这些国际犯罪进行类分时,根本立足点是国际犯罪,即以国际犯罪的自身特性为视角。由于国际犯罪是一定的主体所实施的严重危害国际社会共同利益,依据国际刑法应当承担刑事责任的行为,因此,在划分国际犯罪的基本类型时,可以采取如下几项标准:一是国际刑法的"两重性";二是国际犯罪的主体;三是国际犯罪的行为特征;四是国际犯罪侵害的法益。     

The Offence of Giving False Testimony under Solemn Declaration in the Rome Statute

As a preliminary matter, the article considers different legal regimes pertaining to the power of the international criminal tribunals to punish conduct that tends to impede or frustrate the good administration of justice, from Nuremberg to the UN Mechanism for International Criminal Tribunals. It further examines the actus reus and mens rea of the offence of giving false testimony under solemn declaration, pursuant to article 70(1)(a) of the Rome Statute. It separately evaluates whether materiality of the false testimony is a requisite legal element of this offence. In conclusion, the article observes that few offences are carried out with greater impunity in the international criminal proceedings, and cautions against a risk of routinisation of false testimony due to a deliberate non-enforcement of its prohibition.     

Complicity in International Criminal Law and Canadian Refugee Law: A Comparison

International criminal law is normally seen as the purview ofcriminal prosecutions, either internationally or domestically.However, international criminal law is also increasingly beingapplied in refugee law. This is because the 1951 Refugee Conventioncontains an exclusion clause prohibiting asylum seekers fromobtaining refugee status if they have committed a crime againstpeace, a war crime or a crime against humanity. Thus, refugeelaw refers back to international criminal law; however, whileinternational criminal tribunals deal with persons who bearthe greatest responsibility, in actual practice persons whohave been excluded from refugee protection have been mostlyfrom the lower echelons of organizations involved in atrocities.This article, based on Canadian case law, examines the conceptsof complicity, aiding and abetting and joint criminal enterprisefrom both an international criminal law point of view and froma Canadian refugee law angle, in order to determine whetherthese notions have similar contents in the two jurisdictions.     

国际刑事法院《罗马规约》犯罪构成要件刍议——以危害人类罪作为样本

尽管世界各国对于犯罪的规定各不相同,但其犯罪规定中所涵盖的成立犯罪的要件(犯罪要素)却大体相当.这种认识对象与内容的相通,正是国际犯罪概念和国际刑事司法审判活动及其机构产生的基础.国际刑事法院管辖的是整个国际社会关注的最严重犯罪,具体包括四类:灭绝种族罪、危害人类罪、战争罪和侵略罪.《罗马规约》对于犯罪构成要件的规定采用规约规定与《犯罪要件》细释相结合的方式,为在国际刑法领域实现法治化作出了有益的创新,开辟了国际刑事司法的新纪元.     

Reductio Ad Absurdum: The Kapo Trial Judgements’ Contribution To International Criminal Law Jurisprudence And Customary International Law

Several Jewish persons designated as concentration camp guards (Kapos) during the Holocaust were subsequently tried in Israel in the 1950s and 1960s for allegedly committing grave crimes. This article examines these trial judgements and considers their significance to international criminal law jurisprudence and customary international law. First, this article will delineate the trial judgements’ purpose, relevance and previous contribution to customary international law. Secondly, a comparative narrative of the judgements with recent case law from the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia and the International Criminal Court will illuminate their potential contribution, specifically to the principles of modes of liability, criminal intent, and the defence of duress. The Kapo trial judgements may therefore continue to offer an extreme case example and a worthy source of common law for international criminal law jurisprudence and customary international law.     

论域观下的无被害人犯罪概念

不同的论域下有不同的犯罪概念。目前给无被害人犯罪所下的定义存在着论域不清的问题。无被害人犯罪的概念应区分刑法还是犯罪学论域。关于无被害人的含义是界定概念的关键。刑法中,无被害人犯罪的内涵要素是违背伦理道德并法益侵害不明显。犯罪学中,内涵要素是违背伦理但社会危害性小。外延上要与隐形犯罪、没有在意的犯罪相区别。     

Sexual Slavery: Do We Need This Crime in Addition to Enslavement?

The article focusses on the crime of sexual slavery in the ICC Statute. It examines the legal definition of enslavement in Article 7 (2) (c) ICC Statute and the Elements of Crimes (EOC) of enslavement and sexual slavery as well as the jurisprudence of the SCSL which was the first to deal with the application of the EOC of sexual slavery to a concrete situation (so-called ‘forced marriage’ phenomenon). The author questions whether there is a necessity to have two crimes against humanity of enslavement and sexual slavery but on the other hand, no war crime of enslavement. Further, she rejects the interpretation that human trafficking has become part of the definition of slavery/enslavement as the footnote in the EOC seems to suggest. The author argues vigorously that the phenomenon of ‘forced marriage’ should be prosecuted as sexual slavery and not under the residual offence of inhumane acts as a ‘new’ international crime.     

A Critical Assessment of Using Children to Participate Actively in Hostilities in Lubanga Child Soldiers and Direct Participation

The first judgment of the International Criminal Court, delivered on 9 March 2012, raises a pivotal and equally controversial issue of what constitutes ‘active participation in hostilities’ for the purpose of the child solider offences under the Rome Statute in the case against Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. The Majority (Judge Fulford and Judge Blattmann) adopted a broad definition of the notion of ‘active’ participation and the Minority (Judge Benito) an even more ample one. This was achieved by distinguishing between ‘active participation in hostilities’ and ‘direct participation in hostilities’ and by recourse to the travaux préparatoires of the Rome Statute and to human rights norms. The purpose of this contribution is to demonstrate that the meaning of ‘active participation in hostilities’ under Articles 8(2)(b)(xxvi) and 8(2)(e)(vii) of the Rome Statute is not ambiguous or obscure, but is the same as that of ‘direct participation in hostilities’ under international humanitarian law. Recourse to supplementary means of interpretation by the Trial Chamber, be it to the travaux préparatoires, or to human rights norms, was unnecessary and misguided. The contribution will also draw some conclusions on how criminal liability before the ICC may be excluded for Articles 8(2)(b)(xxvi) or 8(2)(e)(vii) of the Rome Statute on the basis of the broad definition adopted by the Trial Chamber of the notion of ‘active participation in hostilities’ and will discuss other consequences arising from the judgement at hand.     

Hate Speech and International Criminal Law: The Mugesera Decision by the Supreme Court of Canada

On 28 June 2005, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered a decisionin Mugesera, bringing to an end the decade-long legal saga involvinga speech made by Leon Mugesera in November 1992 in Rwanda. Whilethe decision of the Supreme Court was handed down in the contextof an immigration case, its impact will be mostly felt in therealm of criminal law, as the court embraced international jurisprudencefor the international elements of crimes against humanity. Inaddition, the decision is important for three reasons: it (i)clarified the interrelationship between international and domesticcriminal law; (ii) examined the notion of hate crime; and (iii)analysed the concept of inchoate crimes.     

La evolución del crimen de lesa humanidad en el derecho penal internacional*

Due to its “ex novo” character and the lack of a definition provided by a treaty, crimes against humanity have been evolutionarily defined by different international norms and by the jurisdictional activity of the International criminal tribunals that have been established throughout recent history up until the creation of the International Criminal Court. Thus, both positive and customary International criminal law have represented a competent judicial cooperative way to face these acts, first and foremost, by developing its gradual conceptualization and final codification and, secondly, through enabling the prosecution and the punishment of those responsible for these crimes. Accordingly, the evolution of the crimes against humanity’s definition is an outstanding legal element, which has contributed to the further consolidation of international criminal law.     

论罪过形式的“知欲构造”——兼论酒后驾车连续撞人事件的罪过定性

＂知＂和＂欲＂可以被分别用来对应罪过理论中的＂认识因素＂和＂意志因素＂。＂知＂和＂欲＂结合在一起所形成的＂知欲构造＂可以用来对罪过形式重新进行分类,而疏忽大意的过失将不属于罪过形式的一种。用＂知欲构造＂对罪过形式所作出的重新分类将有助于在刑法立法上适度紧缩犯罪圈和刑法司法上实现刑法的基本价值。     

Violence and Massacres -- Towards a Criminal Law of Inhumanity?

The law's responses to massacres seem to vacillate between twomodels: (i) the model of the ‘criminal law of the enemy’inspired by the national criminal law and rendered topical againby the attacks of September 11; (ii) the model of the ‘criminallaw of inhumanity’ symbolized by the paradigm of crimesagainst humanity. The latter model is better suited to takeaccount of the qualitative dimension of massacres, i.e. thefact that they, besides being mass offences (quantitative criterion),also offend against humanity. To establish a ‘criminallaw of inhumanity’ as a model with a universal, or universalizable,dimension, three conditions are necessary, which concern (i)the definition of the crimes, (ii) the assignment of responsibilityand (iii) the nature of the punishment. As for the definitionof the crime, one could implicitly deduce from the list of actsconstituting crimes against humanity (Article 7 of the InternationalCriminal Court Statute) that humanity so protected has two inseparablecomponents: the individuality of each human being, not reducibleto membership in a group, and the equal membership of each inthe human community as a whole. With regard to the second condition,it is not sufficient to hold responsible the de jure or de factoleaders; intermediaries and perpetrators, at all levels of hierarchy,must also be held accountable. As for the third condition, itis not sufficient to content oneself with the watchword of thefight against impunity without bringing up the nature and functionsof the punishment; hence the necessity not only to rethink therole ‘criminal’ law can play in a policy of punishment,but also to focus on prevention, reparation and reconciliation.Finally, the author suggests that the proposed model of a ‘criminallaw of inhumanity’ must be built through the interplaybetween municipal law and international law. On the one hand,the wealth of national legal systems — also with regardto penalties and responsibility — should be better integratedinto international criminal justice; on the other, nationalcriminal systems should be better adapted to conditions of internationallaw, through the introduction into domestic law of the definitionsof the crimes and also the rules for assigning criminal responsibility.     

Stateless Crimes,Legitimacy, and International Criminal Law: The Case of Organ Trafficking

Organ trafficking and trafficking in persons for the purpose of organ transplantation are recognized as significant international problems. Yet these forms of trafficking are largely left out of international criminal law regimes and to some extent of domestic criminal law regimes as well. Trafficking of organs or persons for their organs does not come within the jurisdiction of the ICC, except in very special cases such as when conducted in a manner that conforms to the definitions of genocide or crimes against humanity. Although the United States Code characterizes trafficking as “a transnational crime with national implications,” (22 U.S.C. § 7101(b)(24) (2010)), trafficking is rarely prosecuted in domestic courts. It has thus functioned in practice largely as what might be judged a “stateless” offense, out of the purview of both international and national courts. Yet these forms of organ trafficking remain widespread—and devastating to those who are its victims. In this article, we begin by describing what is known about the extent of organ trafficking and trafficking in persons for the purpose of removal of organs. We then critically evaluate how and why such trafficking has remained largely unaddressed by both international and domestic criminal law regimes. This state of affairs, we argue, presents a missed chance for developing the legitimacy of international criminal law and an illustration of how far current international legal institutions remain from ideal justice.     

战争罪的国内立法研究

战争罪是在战争或者武装冲突中发生的违反战争法规、严重侵犯人权的罪行。战争罪主要是国际法上的罪行,但国内法院也承担着追究战争罪罪犯刑事责任的重要任务。将我国缔结的国际公约里规定的战争罪转化为国内刑法上的犯罪,是我国作为缔约国应当履行的条约义务。但我国《刑法》只有第446条和第448条规定的两个犯罪才基本符合国际法对于战争罪的定义。我国《刑法》应当专章设立“危害人类和平与安全罪”,使其包括战争罪等核心罪行,这样可以更好地维护我国的刑事管辖权,有效地避免我国公民受到国际刑事法庭的审判,以便享受《国际刑事法院规约》补充管辖原则提供的益处。     

Corruption as an International Crime and Crime against Humanity: An Outline of Supplementary Criminal Justice Policies

Transnational corruption has in recent years been elevated toan international offence but in practical terms it is not consideredserious enough in order for heads of state or cabinet membersto be prosecuted in foreign jurisdictions. There is evidenceto suggest that, in certain cases, corruption may take the formof a crime against humanity. This possibility extends significantlythe jurisdictional ambit of national courts and empowers theInternational Criminal Court to consider a case. Moreover, therestorative component of such criminal prosecutions should aimat restoring, through civil mechanisms, the funds illegallyappropriated to their rightful recipients, the defrauded localpopulations, under the principle of self-determination.     

Data Theft? Cybercrime and the Increasing Criminalization of Access to Data

The use of computers in the commission of crime, so-called ??cybercrime??, presents a considerable challenge to law enforcement. Central to the prosecution of cybercrime is the offence of unauthorised access to a computer, or ??hacking??. Originally conceived of as analogous to trespass, the trend in some jurisdictions has been toward punishing access to computer data per se. This issue also arises under the Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime which criminalizes ??offences against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems??. As the criminal law traditionally provides protection only to limited forms of information, the increasing use of the criminal law to protect computer data therefore confers on it a status not enjoyed by information stored in other forms. Drawing upon the laws of Australia, the United Kingdom and the United States, this article explores the increasing criminalization of access to computer data. It describes the evolution of cybercrime laws and considers ways in which problems of over breadth may be avoided. Questions will also be raised as to the appropriate role of the criminal law in protecting information.     

National Security vs Criminal law. Perspectives,Doubts and Concerns on the Criminalisation of Organised Crime in England and Wales

This paper will interpret and critically analyse the new offence for organised crime in England and Wales (Section 45 of the Serious Crime Act 2015) from a criminological perspective in light of evidence found in research in the country. It will argue that changes in the law relate to changes in political narratives rather than to variations in the criminal panorama of organised crime. It will discuss these changes within three perspectives, which address various levels of concern: a narrative perspective, which reflects on the overlapping of meanings in the use of the words ‘organised crime’; an evolution perspective, which reflects on the origins of the new participation offences with reference to both national and international pressures; a management perspective, which reflects on some of the immediate effects of the new offences of organised crime on the criminal justice system. This paper will conclude that political narratives have indeed influenced criminal policy, while there is no significant change in the phenomenon of organised crime to justify such narratives.     

危险驾驶罪罪过等问题之规范研究

危险驾驶罪是抽象危险犯,危险的实现并非其构成要件要素,危险的载体为追逐竞驶行为或醉酒驾驶行为自身。在具体危险犯中,危险的实现是构成要件要素,危险与行为分离,其载体为刑法保护的具体人或物。因罪过是对客观构成要件要素的认知与所持的态度,故在没有罪过阻却事由的情况下,行为人只要认识到自己是在道路上追逐竞驶或醉酒驾驶就意味着对与行为相伴随的抽象危险的希望或放任,动机可能是从抽象危险中寻求刺激或为了某一目的而放任抽象危险的发生等。在刑法没有明文规定过失可以构成本罪的情况下,本罪的罪过只能是故意。法定刑的高低并不必然决定罪过的性质,法定刑的轻重还与犯罪的客观方面相关。罪过也不能仅从社会意义与便于司法操作的角度认定。对危险驾驶罪的体系性考察,应结合社会现实从刑法规范动态不平衡、相互协调的角度才能得出合理的结论。