Book contents
- Modes of Liability in International Criminal Law
- Modes of Liability in International Criminal Law
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Biographies
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- 1 Cross-Cutting Issues
- Part I Individual Commission
- Part II Joint Commission
- Part III Participation
- Part IV Participating in Group Activities
- Part V Inchoate and Preparatory Acts
- Part VI Other Forms of Responsibility
- Part VII Concluding Observations
- Index
- References
Part III - Participation
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 July 2019
Book contents
- Modes of Liability in International Criminal Law
- Modes of Liability in International Criminal Law
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Biographies
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- 1 Cross-Cutting Issues
- Part I Individual Commission
- Part II Joint Commission
- Part III Participation
- Part IV Participating in Group Activities
- Part V Inchoate and Preparatory Acts
- Part VI Other Forms of Responsibility
- Part VII Concluding Observations
- Index
- References
Summary
Historically, aiding and abetting, as such, was not included in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal or the Charter of the Tokyo Tribunal. Rather, Control Council Law No. 10 first provided for the criminal prosecution of persons who were ‘accessor[ies] to the commission of any … crime or ordered or abetted the same’. Oddly, aiding and abetting was also not explicitly included in the 1950 Nuremberg Principles or the 1954 ILC Draft Code of Crimes – in both documents ‘complicity’ is employed – but it reappeared in Article 3(2) of the 1991 ILC Draft Code of Crimes and in Article 2(3)(d) of the 1996 ILC Draft Code of Crimes. Nonetheless, it is now consistently found in the Statutes of all modern international criminal tribunals.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Modes of Liability in International Criminal Law , pp. 171 - 306Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Select Bibliography
Ambos, K., Treatise on International Criminal Law – Volume 1: Foundations and General Part (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Ambos, K., ‘Article 25: Individual Criminal Responsibility’, in Triffterer, O. and Ambos, K. (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (3rd edn, Munich: C.H. Beck, 2016), 979.Google Scholar
Boas, G., Bischoff, J.L. and Reid, N.L., International Criminal Law Practitioner Library – Volume I: Forms of Responsibility in International Criminal Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).Google Scholar
Cryer, R., Friman, H., Robinson, D. and Wilmshurst, W., An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure (3rd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).Google Scholar
Finnin, S., Elements of Accessorial Modes of Liability: Article 25 (3)(b)and (c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2012).Google Scholar
Greenawalt, A., ‘Foreign Assistance Complicity’, 54(3) Columbia Journal of Transnational Law (2016), 531.Google Scholar
Ingle, J., ‘Aiding and Abetting by Omission before the International Criminal Tribunals’, 14 (4) Journal of International Criminal Justice (2016), 747.Google Scholar
Jackson, M., Complicity in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jouet, M., ‘Judging Leaders Who Facilitate Crimes by a Foreign Army: International Courts Differ on a Novel Legal Issue’, 47(4) Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law (2014), 1091.Google Scholar
Noto, F., Secondary Liability in International Criminal Law: A Study on Aiding and Abetting or Otherwise Assisting the Commission of International Crimes (Zurich: Dike Publishers, 2013).Google Scholar
Peterson, I., ‘Open Questions Regarding Aiding and Abetting Liability in International Criminal Law: A Case Study of ICTY and ICTR Jurisprudence’, 16(4) ICLR (2016), 565.Google Scholar
Schabas, W.A., ‘Article 25: Individual Criminal Responsibility/Responsabilité pénale individuelle’, in Schabas, W.A., The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute (2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 559.Google Scholar
van Sliedregt, E., Individual Criminal Responsibility in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Ventura, M., ‘Farewell “Specific Direction”: Aiding and Abetting War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity in Perišić, Taylor, Šainović et al. and US Alien Tort Statute Jurisprudence’, Casey-Maslen, in S. (ed.), The War Report: Armed Conflict in 2013 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014), 511.Google Scholar
Werle, G. and Jessberger, F., Principles of International Criminal Law (3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Agbor, A., ‘The Substantial Contribution Requirement: The Unfortunate Outcome of an Illogical Construction and Incorrect Understanding of Article 6(1) of the Statute of the ICTR’, 12 International Criminal Law Review (2012) 155.Google Scholar
Agbor, A., Instigation to Crimes against Humanity: The Flawed Jurisprudence of the Trial and Appeal Chambers of the International Tribunal for Rwanda (Leiden: Nijhoff, 2013).Google Scholar
Agbor, A., ‘The Problematic Jurisprudence on Instigation under the Statute of the ICTR: The Consistencies, Inconsistencies and Misgivings of the Trial and Appeal Chambers of the ICTR’, 13 International Criminal Law Review (2013) 429.Google Scholar
Ambos, K., ‘Article 25: Individual Criminal Responsibility’, in Triffterer, O. and Ambos, K. (eds.), Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (Munich: C.H.Beck, 2016) 979.Google Scholar
Badar, M., The Concept of Mens Rea in International Criminal Law: The Case for a Unified Approach (Oxford: Hart, 2013).Google Scholar
Cryer, R., ‘General Principles of Liability in International Criminal Law’, in McGoldrick, D., Rowe, P. and Donnelly, E. (eds.), The International Criminal Court: Legal and Policy Issues (Oxford: Hart, 2004) 233.Google Scholar
Cryer, R., ‘Imputation and Complicity in Common Law States: A (Partial) View from England and Wales’, 12 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2014) 267.Google Scholar
Eser, A., ‘Individual Criminal Responsibility’, in Cassese, A., Gaeta, P., and Jones, J.R.W.D. (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), Vol. I, 767.Google Scholar
Finnin, S., Elements of Accessorial Modes of Liability: Article 25 (3)(b) and (c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Leiden: Nijhoff, 2012).Google Scholar
Hamsdorf, K., ‘The Concept of a Joint Criminal Enterprise and Domestic Modes of Liability for Parties to a Crime: A Comparison of German and English Law’, 5 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2007) 208.Google Scholar
Jain, N., Perpetrators and Accessories in International Criminal Law: Individual Modes of Responsibility for Collective Crimes (Oxford: Hart, 2013).Google Scholar
Mettraux, G., ‘Instigation’ in Cassese, A. (ed.), The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009) 375.Google Scholar
van Sliedregt, E., The Criminal Responsibility of Individuals for Violations of International Humanitarian Law (The Hague: Asser Press, 2003).Google Scholar
Vest, H., ‘Problems of Participation: Unitarian, Differentiated Approach, or Something Else?’, 12 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2014) 295.Google Scholar
Weigend, T., ‘Problems of Attribution in International Criminal Law: A German Perspective’, 12 Journal of International Criminal Justice (2014) 253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Werle, G. and Jeßberger, F., Principles of International Criminal Law (3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).Google Scholar
Select Bibliography
Ambos, K., Treatise on International Criminal Law – Volume 1: Foundations and General Part (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013).Google Scholar
Ambos, K., ‘Article 25: Individual Criminal Responsibility’, in Triffterer, O. and Ambos, K. (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (3rd edn, Munich: C.H.Beck, 2016), 979.Google Scholar
Boas, G., Bischoff, J. L. and Reid, N. L., International Criminal Law Practitioner Library – Volume I: Forms of Responsibility in International Criminal Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007).Google Scholar
Cryer, R., Friman, H., Robinson, D. and Wilmshurst, W., An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure (3rd edn, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014).Google Scholar
Eser, A., ‘Individual Criminal Responsibility’, in Cassese, A., Gaeta, P. and Jones, J.R.W.D. (eds.), The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court: A Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), Vol. I, 767.Google Scholar
Finnin, S., Elements of Accessorial Modes of Liability: Article 25 (3)(b) and (c) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (Leiden: Nijhoff, 2012).Google Scholar
Schabas, W. A., ‘Article 25: Individual Criminal Responsibility / Responsabilité pénale individuelle’, in The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute (2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016), 559.Google Scholar
van Sliedregt, E., Individual Criminal Responsibility in International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012).Google Scholar
Werle, G. and Jessberger, F., Principles of International Criminal Law (3rd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014).Google Scholar