Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2011
  • Online publication date: June 2011

10 - Modes of Participation

Summary

INTRODUCTION

Violations of international humanitarian law entail what Röling called “system criminality.” Indeed, international crimes such as crimes against humanity often occur on a mass scale or in the context of systemic violence. System criminality generally concerns a plurality of offenders, particularly in carrying out the crimes. It further presupposes an auctor intellectualis, or an “intellectual perpetrator,” pulling the strings. This can be one person, but also a group of people gathered together in a political or military structure. Any international prosecutor will acknowledge that linking those two levels – the intellectual perpetrator at leadership level and the plurality of offenders at execution level – is a difficult task. This chapter will discuss both traditional forms of liability (commission, instigation, and aiding and abetting/complicity) and crime-specific modes of liability. The latter have been conceptualized to punish “intellectual perpetrators” by way of inchoate modes of liability (conspiracy, incitement) or by linking the intellectual and execution levels (indirect perpetration, participation in a criminal enterprise, and superior responsibility).

The problem of linking crimes of foot soldiers to the masterminds is not new. In setting up the International Military Tribunal (IMT) at Nuremberg, U.S. Army Colonel Bernays devised a liability theory based on the concepts of conspiracy and membership in a criminal organization that would enable the conviction of not only the perpetrators of crimes but also their superiors and the thousands of lower-ranking Nazi culprits who had been passive observers. The theory was never fully implemented in practice.

Recommend this book

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this book to your organisation's collection.

Forging a Convention for Crimes against Humanity
  • Online ISBN: 9780511921124
  • Book DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511921124
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to *
×
Röling, Bernard Victor Aloysius, Aspects of the Criminal Responsibility for Violations of the Laws of War, inThe New Humanitarian Law of Armed Conflict 203 (Antonio Cassese ed., 1979)
Wilt, Harmen, Equal Standards? On the Dialectics between National Jurisdictions and the International Criminal Court, 8 Int'l Crim. L. Rev. 229 (2008)
Sliedregt, Elies, Complicity to Commit Genocide, inThe UN Genocide Convention: A Commentary (Paola Gaeta ed., 2009)
Wilt, Harmen, Genocide v. War Crimes in the Van Anraat Appeal, 6 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 557 (2008)
Robinson, Darryl, The Identity Crisis of International Criminal Law, 21 Leiden J. Int'l L. 925 (2008)
Ambos, Kai, Superior Responsibility, inThe Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary 850 (Antonio Cassese et al. eds., 2002)
Sliedregt, Elies, Joint Criminal Enterprise as a Pathway to Convicting Individuals for Genocide, 5 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 184, § 3B (2007)
Smith, K.J.M., A Modern Treatise on the Law of Criminal Complicity 69 (1991)
Kadish, Sanford H., Complicity, Cause and Blame: A Study in the Interpretation of Doctrine, 73 Cal. L. Rev. 323 (1985)
Ambos, Kai, inCommentary on the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court 748, margin nos. 8–9 (O. Triffterer ed., 2d ed. 2008)
Ambos, Kai, Amicus Curiae Brief in the Matter of Co-Prosecutor's Appeal of the Closing Order Against Kaing Guek Eav “Duch” Dated 8 August 2008, 20 Crim. L.F. 353, 353–54 (2009) [hereinafter Ambos Amicus Brief]
Weigend, Thomas, Intent, Mistake of Law, and Co-perpetration in the Lubanga Decision on Conformation of Charges, 6 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 471 (2008)
Rotsch, Thomas, Neues zur Organisationsherrschaft, 25 Neues Zeitschrift für Strafrecht 13 (2005)
Werle, Gerhard, Individual Criminal Responsibility in Article 25 ICC Statute, 5 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 953 (2007)
Sliedregt, Elies, Joint Criminal Enterprise as a Pathway to Convicting Individuals for Genocide, 5 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 184 (2007)
Sassòli, Marco & Olson, Laura M., The Judgment of the ICTY Appeals Chamber on the Merits in the Tadić Case: New Horizons for International Humanitarian and Criminal Law?, 82 Int'l Rev. Red Cross 733, 751–52 (2000)
Danner, Allison Marston & Martinez, Jenny S., Guilty Associations: Joint Criminal Enterprise, Command Responsibility, and the Development of International Criminal Law, 93 Cal. L. Rev. 75, 102–20 (2005)
Gustafson, Katrina, The Requirement of an “Express Agreement” for Joint Criminal Enterprise Liability: A Critique of Brdˉanin, 5 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 134 (2007)
Haan, Verena, The Development of the Concept of Joint Criminal Enterprise at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia, 5 Int'l Crim. L. Rev. 167, 194–95 (2005)
Fletcher, George P. & Ohlin, Jens David, Reclaiming Fundamental Principles of Criminal Law in the Darfur Case, 3 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 539, 548 (2005)
Powles, Steven, Joint Criminal Enterprise: Criminal Liability by Prosecutorial Ingenuity and Judicial Creativity?, 2 J. Int'l Crim. Just. 606, 613 (2004)
Osiel, Mark, The Banality of Good: Aligning Incentives Against Mass Atrocities, 105 Colum. L. Rev. 1751, 1785 (2005)
Parks, William H., Command Responsibility for War Crimes, 62 Mil. L. Rev. 1, 1–20 (1973)
Green, L.C., Command Responsibility in International Humanitarian Law, 5 Transnat'l L. & Contemp. Probs. 319, 320–27 (1995)
Bantekas, Ilias, The Contemporary Law of Superior Responsibility, 93 Am. J. Int'l L. 573 (1999)
Lippman, Matthew, The Evolution and Scope of Command Responsibility, 13 Leiden J. Int'l L. 139 (2000)
Damaška, Mirjan, The Shadow Side of Command Responsibility, 49 Am. J. Int'l L. 455 (2001)