17,269 research outputs found
Dolus eventualis and the Rome statute without it?
No full textCopyright @ 2009 University of California PressArticle 30 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court provides a general definition for the mental element required to trigger the criminal responsibility of individuals for serious violations of international humanitarian law. At first sight, it appears that the explicit words of Article 30 are sufficient to put an end to a long-lasting debate regarding the mens rea enigma that has confronted the jurisprudence of the two ad hoc Tribunals for the last decade, but this is not true. Recent decisions rendered by the International Criminal Court evidence the discrepancy among the ICC Pre-Trial Chambers in interpreting the exact meaning of Article 30 of the ICC Statute. The paper challenges that dolus eventualis is one of the genuine and independent pillars of criminal responsibility that forms, on its own, the basis of intentional crimes, and suggests its inclusion in the legal standard of Article 30 of the ICC Statute
Current developments at the international criminal tribunals
No full textThe year 2006 evidenced several important judgments and decisions on substantive
and procedure aspects handed down by the Trial Chambers and the Appeals
Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
(ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and the
International Criminal Court (ICC). This article is not meant to be a comprehensive
overview or exhaustive compilation of all judgments and decisions issued
by international criminal courts in the last few months. Instead, it spotlights and
briefly comments on some recent developments at the international criminal
tribunals with regard to substantive and procedural law.
The present article digests the most significant developments at the International Criminal
Tribunals from 30 June through 12 December 2006
From the Nuremberg charter to the Rome statute: Defining the elements of crimes against humanity
No full textThe absence of a specialized convention for "crimes against humanity," and its consideration as a category of international crimes whose specific contents consist of a number of crimes contained in the laws of most national legal systems, required an exhaustive study to distinguish such a category of crimes from "ordinary" municipal crimes (i.e., murder, assault, torture, etc.).
The purpose of this study is to examine the past and present contours of the prohibition of "crimes against humanity", analyzing and scrutinizing the essential elements of this crime, with a view to obtaining and drawing together basic criteria that could eventually guide the adjudication of this offence. Furthermore, this clarification of "crimes against humanity" is particularly timely with respect to the soon functioning International Criminal Court (ICC)
The Story of "Me" Contemporary American Autofiction
No full textCover -- Title Page -- Copyright Page -- Contents -- Acknowledgments -- Introduction -- 1. Masculinity, Whiteness, and Postmodern Self-Consciousness -- 2. Rage against the Dying of the Author -- 3. The New Journalism as the New Fiction -- 4. Trauma Autofiction, Dissociation, and the Authenticity of "Real" Experience -- 5. Memoir vs. Autofiction as the Story of Me vs. the Story of "Me" -- Coda -- Appendix -- Notes -- References -- IndexDescription based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
Remember Me A Novella about Finding Our Way to the Cross
No full textShades of Light.Cover -- Title Page -- Copyright -- Dedication Page -- Contents -- 1 The Word Became Flesh -- 2 The Gift of Myrrh -- 3 Taking the Cup -- 4 With a Kiss -- 5 Awakened -- 6 Accused -- 7 Bearing the Cross -- 8 Lament -- 9 Stripped -- 10 Pierced -- 11 It Is Finished -- 12 Into Your Hands -- 13 Buried -- 14 Risen -- Epilogue -- Journey to the Cross -- Acknowledgments -- Also Available -- Praise for Remember Me -- About the Author -- More Titles from InterVarsity PressShades of Light.Description based on publisher supplied metadata and other sources.Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, YYYY. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries
"Test me and treat me" - attitudes to vitamin D deficiency and supplementation: a qualitative study
No full text© 2015 BMJ Open, "Test me and treat me"-attitudes to vitamin D deficiency and supplementation: a qualitative study. This manuscript version is made available under the Creative Commons Attribution Licens
The mental element in the Rome statute of the international criminal court: A commentary from a comparative criminal law perspective
No full textThis is the post-print version of the Article - Copyright @ 2008 Springer VerlagThis article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund
'Just convict everyone!' Joint perpetration: From tadic to stakic and back again
No full textOn 22 March 2006, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) rendered its Judgment in the Stakić case. One of the issues which the Appeals Chamber addressed propio motu was the mode of liability attributed to the Appellant by the Trial Chamber. In examining the criminal responsibility of Dr. Milomir Stakić for the crimes alleged, the Trial Chamber applied a mode of liability which it termed ‘co-perpetratorship’ (committing ‘jointly with another person’), in lieu of ‘joint criminal enterprise’ (JCE). In so doing, the Stakić Trial Chamber avoided “the misleading impression that a new crime [membership in a criminal organization] not foreseen in the Statute of this Tribunal has been introduced through the backdoor.” However, “[t]he introduction of new modes of liability [co-perpetratorship] into the jurisprudence of the Tribunal”, the Appeals Chamber stressed, “may generate uncertainty, if not confusion, in the determination of the law by parties to cases before the Tribunal as well as in the application of the law by Trial Chambers.”
Most notably, some ICTY judges have welcomed and fully approved the JCE doctrine “as an effective tool for overcoming the problems of ascribing individual criminal responsibility for international crimes.” Others hold the opinion that the concept of ‘joint criminal enterprise’, since its foundation and integration into the jurisprudence of the ICTY by the Tadić Appeals Chamber, “has caused confusion and a waste of time” and has been considered as a doctrine “of no benefit to the work of the Tribunal or the development of international criminal law.” This note will examine, therefore, both modes of liability (‘joint criminal enterprise’ and ‘co-perpetratorship’) in light of the Stakić Appeals and Trial Judgments
Some reflections on article 30 of the Rome Statute in Light of the Lubanga & Katanga decisions on the confirmation of charges
No full textReproduced with the permission of Kluwer Law International from Triffterer, O; Vogel, C; Burchard, C (Ed(s)), The Review Conference and the Future of the International Criminal Court: 109 - 130, 2010. The official published version can be accessed from www.kluwerlaw.co
Drawing the boundaries of mens rea in the jurisprudence of the international criminal tribunal for the former Yugoslavia
No full textEven though more than a decade has passed since the creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, the law of the most fundamental concept in international criminal law – mens rea - remains unsettled. Through its jurisprudence, the Yugoslavia Tribunal has made enormous efforts to assign different degrees of mens rea for different categories of crimes under its Statute. The present study is an attempt to clarify several issues with regard to the law of mens rea as developed in the case law of the Yugoslavia Tribunal. Among these issues are the following: what precisely is to be understood by the terms “specific intent”, “special intent”, “dolus specialis”, or “surplus intent”? Similarly, what are the precise meanings of the terms “deliberately”, “intention”, “intent”, “intentionally”, “wilful or wilfully”, “knowledge”, and “wanton” as provided for in the ICTY Statute or as employed by the Chambers within its judgments
- …
