Seeking Justice for the Holocaust: Herbert C. Pell Versus the US State Department

Herbert C. Pell served his nation as an Ambassador and member of the US House of Representatives, as well as US Representative on the United Nations War Crimes Commission (UNWCC). This article presents his struggle with the US State department and the bureaucratic and legalistic dispute that developed over the UNWCC particularly with respect to policy considerations surrounding whether or not to prosecute crimes against humanity committed by the Nazis in Germany and satellite territories. The article traces Pell’s initial difficulty engaging with the work of the UNWCC due to the State Department’s delaying techniques and the absence of clear instructions from either the State Department or the President. Moreover, it is shown how Pell struggled to convince the State Department and his fellow UNWCC members to include the above-mentioned crimes. This debate and Pell’s role has remained largely unknown to a public that considers the post-war Nuremberg war crimes trials an achievement in the advancement of international law and justice. To whatever extent those trials were such, particularly in advancing international human rights law by adjudicating Axis war criminals for crimes against humanity, it is singularly noteworthy that Axis war criminals might not have been prosecuted at all for these crimes were it not for the efforts of Herbert Pell.     

A Criticism of the International Harm Principle

According to the received view crimes like torture, rape, enslavement or enforced prostitution are domestic crimes if they are committed as isolated or sporadic events, but become crimes against humanity when they are committed as part of a ‘widespread or systematic attack’ against a civilian population. Only in the latter case can these crimes be prosecuted by the international community. One of the most influential accounts of this idea is Larry May’s International Harm Principle, which states that crimes against humanity are those that somehow ‘harm humanity.’ I argue that this principle is unable to provide an adequate account of crimes against humanity. Moreover, I argue that the principle fails to account for the idea that crimes against humanity are necessarily group based. I conclude by suggesting that the problem with May’s account is that it relies on a harm-based conception of crime which is very popular, but ultimately mistaken. I submit that in order to develop an adequate theory of crimes against humanity we need to abandon the harm-based model and replace it with an alternative conception of crime and criminal law, one based on the notion of accountability.     

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.     

How Can it Happen that Horrendous State Crimes are Perpetrated?: An Overview of Criminological Theories

This article offers a criminological explanation of crimes perpetratedby state officials or those involving states, more specificallysuch crimes as genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity.After exploring the criminological implications of the Milgramexperiments on obedience towards authority, the author presentsthe theory of ‘neutralization techniques’ and appliesit at the state level. Finally, by way of illustration, thenotorious speech made in 1943 by Himmler on the exterminationof Jews is analysed.     

Judging from a Guilty Conscience: The Chilean Judiciary's Human Rights Turn

Since the detention of General Pinochet in London in 1998 on charges of crimes against humanity, Chile's judges have sentenced more former officials of the military regime for human rights violations than judges of any other country in Latin America. This article argues that the prosecutorial turn reflects the judiciary's attempt to atone for its complicity with the dictatorship. The London arrest created pressure for prosecution of Pinochet-era human rights violations; but it is the contest over the judiciary's legacy, as an important piece of postauthoritarian memory struggles, that explains why Chile's notoriously illiberal judiciary ceded to that pressure. By reconceptualizing judicial culture as contested, heterogeneous, and dynamic, this article opens the door to richer understandings of judicial politics, transitional justice, and the reception of international human rights.     

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.     

Iraq and the case for Australian war crimes trials

This article presents the case for Australian war crimes trials, following Australian participation in the invasion of Iraq and the subsequent deaths of as many as a million Iraqi civilians. It focuses on jus in bello (war crimes) rather than jus ad bellum (just war). The article sets out the argument and rationale that Australian war crimes trials are needed. Having established the necessity, the article identifies two of the principal alleged atrocities for which Australian officials should be held criminally accountable. It details Australian military support for the use of cluster bombs against civilians during the 2003 invasion, and senior Australian military commanders’ responsibility for planning and carrying out multiple purported war crimes during the attack on Fallujah in late 2004. The article recognises that, in order for Australian officials to be prosecuted under the International Criminal Court (ICC), all domestic remedies must be first exhausted. It therefore specifically addresses which Australian laws can be used, with particular emphasis on anti-terrorist legislation passed in 2002 under the Howard Government and the introduction into Australia’s domestic federal criminal legislation offences equivalent to the ICC Statute offences of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. These provide the most applicable legal tools for prosecuting senior Australian officials for war crimes in Iraq.     

Prosecuting Violence, Performing Sovereignty: The Trial of Dusko Tadic

This article is a critical reading of the contemporary international legal regulation of warfare and an analysis of war crimes trials as ``sovereignty-producing practices'. Whereas proponents of international law optimistically presume that the advent of war crimes tribunals signifies a humanitarian-inspired erosion of sovereignty in the international system, this article shows that legislating violence in war exemplifies an international commitment to structures which normalize war and violence while individualizing, dehistoricizing and depoliticizing criminal acts. This analysis focuses on the first trial of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia which convicted Dusko Tadic of war crimes and crimes against humanity.     

反贪工作与贯彻宽严相济刑事政策

作为一种基本的刑事法律指导方针,宽严相济刑事政策在我国的刑事立法、司法实践活动中早有体现;但是,在司法实务过程中,以数额为主导确定定罪量刑幅度法定刑的规定,存在诸多法律或技术上的障碍和困惑,以及对贪污贿赂犯罪处理上宽严失衡客观情况的存在,都给全面贯彻宽严相济刑事政策造成了困惑和尴尬,因此,完善关于贪污贿赂犯罪的刑罚规范,并修改程序法以提高侦查机关依法打击贪污贿赂犯罪能力,将反腐败斗争纳入法治化轨道,同时完善反贪工作中运用宽严相济刑事政策的相关工作机制,成为贯彻宽严相济刑事政策的主要途径。     

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.     

The Feasibility of Cost of Crime Estimations in Eastern Europe – The Case of Poland

Estimates of cost of crime have gradually been introduced into the public debate on crime policy. Estimates differ in their scope and methodologies and this impedes international comparisons. This article follows the model of estimating costs of crime developed under the 6th Framework Programme and provides the comparable results of costs of crime in Poland. The total costs of crime have been estimated at 5.1% of GDP. In particular, the victimisation costs of violent crimes have been estimated at 1.94% of GDP and the costs of property crimes against individuals at 0.5% of GDP. The results are in line with estimates for other countries and provide the relevant measure for any cost-benefit analysis of a crime policy.     

The Subject-Matter Jurisdiction of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) represents a sui generisinternational tribunal on various levels. It is the first timea treaty-based Tribunal has been established through a resolutionof the Security Council adopted under Chapter VII. A furtherunique feature is its sole dependence on domestic substantivecrimes. The attempt to include crimes against humanity in theStatute did not succeed, despite the fact that the elementsof a crime against humanity seem to be discernable in the conductthat falls within the jurisdiction of the STL. References tointernational and regional terrorism instruments, such as theArab Convention for the Suppression of Terrorism, were alsoabandoned. The Tribunal will rely on Lebanese criminal provisionsregarding terrorism, illicit associations, crimes and offencesagainst life and personal integrity. Lebanese law provides anold but concrete definition of terrorism. This raises the questionof whether the Lebanese definition, with its strengths and weaknesses,could assist in the evolution of a well-structured definitionof international terrorism. The possibility of ‘internationalizing’the Lebanese definition will depend on two factors: the judges’approach in adopting the Tribunal's rules of evidence and procedure,and then more importantly their creativity in developing thejurisprudence of the Tribunal.     

The Shifting Sands of Punishment in China in the Era of “Harmonious Society”

This article about the politics of punishment in China today follows some of the political machinations involved in the development of a new policy called “Balancing Leniency and Severity.” It treats this new policy as an exemplar of how politics works in the Hu Jintao era to change the way crimes are addressed in judicial decision making. This paper underscores the important ways in which political ideology informs criminal justice policy and practice in China. It examines a number of stages of development within the last decade during which Balancing Leniency and Severity has emerged as a foundational criminal justice policy.     

The Crime of Genocide in the ICTR Jurisprudence

The jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal forRwanda (ICTR) has properly focused on the special intent (dolusspecialis) to destroy a group as the distinguishing characteristicof genocide and differentiated it from result-oriented crimes.Although the ICTR has crowned genocide as ‘the crime ofcrimes’, it has simultaneously dethroned it by holdingthat it attracts the same sentence as other humanitarian lawviolations. Nonetheless, ICTR jurisprudence attaches considerableimportance to characterizing the destruction of the Tutsi asgenocide as distinct from crimes against humanity. Because theTutsi cannot be readily distinguished as one of the protectedgroups under the Genocide Convention, Trial Chambers have goneto great lengths to characterize them as an ‘ethnic’group in order to justify the label of genocide.     

Shutting Down the United Nations War Crimes Commission

This article presents the struggle between factions in the executive branch of the US government over post-war relations with Eurasia in general and Germany in particular. It argues that the legal and moral divide between the groups concerned interpretation of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and the limits of national sovereignty. It discusses the discontent of members of the UNWCC over US and UK efforts to close the Commission and how the United Nations dealt with the remaining UNWCC cases and records.     

Protectors on trial? Prosecuting peacekeepers for war crimes and crimes against humanity in the International Criminal Court

Allegations of criminal conduct have been made against UN peacekeeping personnel. While only a small number commit criminal offences, these personnel must be held accountable for their actions. Ensuring accountability is difficult due to jurisdictional issues, including in which jurisdiction (host state, sending state, or third state) to prosecute offenders. However, the possibility of the International Criminal Court exercising jurisdiction over peacekeeping personnel (civilian or military) has not really been considered. This article will examine the potential applicability of the substantive law of war crimes and crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute to crimes committed by peacekeeping personnel.     

Crimes Against Humanity and the Limits of International Criminal Law

Crimes against humanity are supposed to have a collective dimension with respect both to their victims and their perpetrators. According to the orthodox view, these crimes can be committed by individuals against individuals, but only in the context of a widespread or systematic attack against the group to which the victims belong. In this paper I offer a new conception of crimes against humanity and a new justification for their international prosecution. This conception has important implications as to which crimes can be justifiably prosecuted and punished by the international community. I contend that the scope of the area of international criminal justice that deals with basic human rights violations should be wider than is currently acknowledged, in that it should include some individual violations of human rights, rather than only violations that have a collective dimension.     

Green crime and the role of environmental courts

Environmental issues continue to capture international headlines and remain the subject of intense intellectual, political and public debate. As a result, environmental law is widely recognised as the fastest growing area of international jurisprudence. This, combined with the rapid expansion of environmental agreements and policies, has created a burgeoning landscape of administrative, regulatory and judicial regimes. Emerging from these developments are increases in environmental offences, and more recently environmental crimes. The judicial processing of environmental or ‘green’ crimes is rapidly developing across many jurisdictions. Since 1979, Australia has played a lead role in criminal justice processing of environment offences through the New South Wales Land and Environment Court (NSW LEC). This article draws on case data, observations and interviews with court personnel, to examine the ways in which environmental justice is now administered through the existing court structures, and how it has changed since the Court’s inception.     

The Criminal Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in China: Recent Developments and Implications

This article systematically introduces and analyzes a number of aspects of the criminal enforcement of intellectual property rights (IPR) in China, focusing on recent trends and developments. China has been under tremendous pressure from the US to expand the criminalization of its IP infringement. The article first summarizes the substantive criminal law regarding IP offenses in China and describes the main enforcement agencies and judicial organs responsible for the investigation and processing of IP crimes. Analysis of the substantive criminal IP law and enforcement practices shows a steady pattern of rapid criminalization, not only on the books but also in action. Newly promulgated judicial interpretations and notices substantially expand criminalization of IP infringements. In addition, the enforcement rates of IP and related crimes have been rising consistently and rapidly. There have also been numerous joint meetings, information exchanges, issuance of provisions, collaborative “strike-hard” enforcement campaigns and other major efforts initiated by the police, the prosecutors, and administrative agencies to facilitate agency cooperation and strengthen the criminal enforcement of IPR. However, accompanying this rapid criminalization of IP infringement control are serious problems rooted in the Chinese criminal judicial system, including local protectionism, the lack of respect for procedural justice as well as the protection of defendants’ basic rights, and inadequate training, professional incompetence, misconduct, or corruption.     

Protecting the planet: a proposal for a law of ecocide

A wide range of actions imperil the planet and threaten the future of humanity and other species. This essay notes some examples of crimes and harms damaging to the environment and human and non-human species as well as various forms of response that have called for more effective and appropriate models of justice and law than currently prevail. This leads to a discussion of several suggestions regarding the development and expression of an earth jurisprudence and to the history of a proposal that “ecocide” be recognised internationally as a crime. Analysis of documentary sources traces this idea from debates about the concept of genocide to consideration by United Nations officials as to how crimes against the environment might be defined, and shows how near such a proposal has previously come to acceptance and enactment. The article concludes with an argument for supporting a law of ecocide as the 5th Crime against Peace.