International Criminal Responsibility Research Articles

Peculiarities of international criminal liability: legal realities and past experience

The relevance of the topic of international criminal responsibility in the modern context is emphasized not only by the need to improve the mechanisms of legal response to violations of the international legal order but also by the need to develop and apply effective strategies to combat the most important crimes. Crimes against humanity, war crimes, and genocide are catastrophic manifestations of violations of the basic principles of humanity and international law, which require immediate and decisive measures to ensure the accountability of those responsible for such acts.
 In the conditions of a constantly changing world order and new challenges facing the international community, the proper study and analysis of legal realities and experience in the field of international criminal justice acquires importance.
 In the context of the evolution of international criminal law and the deepening of international cooperation in the field of justice, this study sets itself the task of identifying and analyzing the trends in the development of international criminal responsibility, focusing on the need to improve existing tools and define new strategies for ensuring the effectiveness of justice in the context of changing challenges in the modern world.
 This research, aimed at promoting understanding and solving modern challenges in the field of international criminal responsibility, is of great practical importance for the development of effective measures to counter international crimes and to hold accountable those who commit such violations.
 The main importance of this study lies in the fact that it contributes not only to the scientific understanding of the theoretical aspects of international criminal responsibility but also to the formulation of practical recommendations for improving the existing mechanisms of countermeasures and bringing guilty persons to justice. The scientific contribution to this topic will allow us to develop and implement new strategies for ensuring justice, as well as to determine the ways of further development of this complex and important field of international law.

The Implications of Cultural Property Destruction in Armed Conflict: A Critical Analysis of International Criminal Responsibility

The Implications of Cultural Property Destruction in Armed Conflict: A Critical Analysis of International Criminal Responsibility

Justice for war crimes in Ukraine: In search of an optimal model

The article is devoted to the investigation of the problems of finding and applying the optimal mechanism for bringing to international criminal responsibility persons guilty of committing war crimes on the territory of Ukraine. During the research a set of methods of scientific knowledge was used. Among them: dialectical and formal logic, analysis, abstraction, historical, comparative, system-structural and modeling methods. The investigated problem is considered through Ukraine's obligation to ensure compliance with the right to a fair trial for persons accused of committing war crimes. The paper provides current statistics on the number of war crimes committed on the territory of Ukraine in 2022 and, furthermore, provides their classification in accordance with the provisions of the Statute of the International Criminal Court. The known historical models of international criminal justice are highlighted, their general features and differences are given. The shortcomings of the model of judicial procedure for war crimes chosen by the Government of Ukraine are highlighted. As a result, the author's model of international criminal justice is proposed in accordance with the specifics of the situation in Ukraine.

Criminal responsibility for war crimes in the context of armed aggression against Ukraine

Introduction. Armed conflicts are one of the important problems of our time. They lead to social tension because the rights of not only military personnel, but also the civilian population are violated. At the international level, more and more attention is paid to such issues as war crimes during armed aggression. For Ukraine, the issue of criminal responsibility at the state and international level is relevant. The purpose of the paper is to analyze issues related to criminal responsibility for committing crimes during armed aggression in Ukraine. Results. War crimes during the armed aggression of Russia against Ukraine have been ongoing since 2014. However, with the beginning of a full-scale invasion, they acquired a systematic character. In international humanitarian law, a gross intentional violation of the laws and customs of war is considered a war crime. War crimes are one of the main crimes of international law. The four Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949 and Additional Protocol I to them of June 8, 1977 oblige states to criminalize serious violations of international humanitarian law in their national legislation. Ukraine fulfills this requirement primarily by adding Article 438 "Violation of laws and customs of war" to the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The definition of criminal responsibility for committing war crimes is also contained in such an international act as the Rome Statute. The widest list of war crimes is enshrined in the Statute of the International Criminal Court, the so-called Rome Statute. The more discovered facts of war crimes in Ukraine appear in the public space, the more the term "genocide" sounds from various international bodies and public figures. The Verkhovna Rada also demanded that war crimes of the Russian Federation should be recognized as genocide against the Ukrainian people. Conclusions. For Ukraine, the problem of criminal responsibility for war crimes is and will be relevant. In the conditions of martial law, it is important that each such crime is discovered and investigated separately. After all, those who commit crimes against humanity should know that they cannot escape criminal responsibility. The specified features of war crimes will allow to distinguish them from other crimes in the future, and will allow to better specify and implement international criminal responsibility for their commission.

Charismatic leadership accountability under international criminal law

Existing modes of liability in international law have been derived from the experiences of the Holocaust and the Nuremberg Trials. Since then, international criminal responsibility has developed in how it addresses and responds to international crimes, albeit primarily in the context of warfare characterised by well-organised hierarchical structures where leaders possess a defined scope of influence and ‘effective control’ over their subordinates. Charismatic leadership breaks down this strict understanding of organisations and ‘effective control’ and demonstrates the need for a broader understanding of international criminal liability. It introduces scenarios where despite the absence of a formal, hierarchical organisation or superior–subordinate relationship, the leader plays a determining role in crime commission and directly and effectively shapes their subordinates’ behaviours. This article examines whether such situations are captured by the existing framework for leaders’ liability under international criminal law, using Colombian ex-president Álvaro Uribe Vélez and the crimes committed during and after his presidency as a case study. In doing so, the article underlines the tensions and shortcomings of the current modes of liability when seeking accountability of charismatic leaders while stressing the need to reconceptualise and revisit classic modes of liability to answer to less formalised leadership styles.

CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR DISINFORMATION ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW

Media disinformation is an international crime that carries with it international criminal culpability for its perpetrators. All elements of international crime from the legal, material, moral, and international pillars are present in media disinformation. The legal pillar consists of the international texts found in international conventions, declarations, covenants, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their additional protocols, and others, which all stipulate combating media disinformation, whether in times of peace or armed conflict. The material pillar is only represented by behavior; therefore, it is an offense of behavior and not of results. For the establishment of international criminal responsibility, the law does not require the occurrence of the result, but only the commission of criminal acts. As for the moral element, it necessitates the presence of criminal intent, represented by knowledge and will, both of which are present in the media misinformation crime. We have noted the presence of an international element in the crime of disinformation, which necessitates a culpability criterion. We discussed the topic of international criminal responsibility, where it was discovered that jurists attributed the subject of responsibility to three orientations to explain international responsibility. The first trend is to restrict accountability to the state alone. The second trend is the consolidation of state and individual responsibility. The third tendency, which is the predominant trend in international justice, is to position it in the hands of individuals.

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY OF COMMANDERS FOR WAR CRIMES DURING CONFLICTS ARMED FORCES OF A NON-INTERNATIONAL NATURE

International criminal responsibility is one of the important topics on which International Criminal Law is based, as it holds a person accountable for his criminal act by subjecting him to the punishment prescribed by law, war crimes are one of the oldest international crimes that the international community tried to identify early, and limit their results to warring armies only, and violations between belligerents accompanied by behaviors tinged with brutality and extreme cruelty to achieve victory due to the lack of organizational rules in the fighting, since the decision of war and the method of its implementation are ordered by commanders on the battlefield or outside, Which results in the commission of serious crimes that are a violation of international humanitarian law, whose humanitarian rules came to alleviate the scourge of wars and minimize their losses, many international crimes that are a violation of the international legal order, Article "VIII" of the statute of the International Criminal Court enumerated war crimes based on The Hague Convention of 1907, and the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, in practical and legal, Thus, criminal intent plays a fundamental role in assigning international criminal responsibility, whether under domestic or international law, by bearing the responsibility for the crime and being subject to the punishment prescribed by law, as international jurisprudence is divided into three doctrines :- The first: he denied that responsibility for the individual and made the state responsible for international crime, while he took the second doctrine: the principle of dual responsibility and the third doctrine: he embraced the principle of individual responsibility in international law through the Nuremberg, Tokyo, Yugoslavia and Rwanda trials, so the study tagged with the international criminal responsibility of leaders for war crimes during armed conflicts of a non-international nature aims to clarify the provisions of the international criminal responsibility of leaders in accordance with the provisions of International Criminal Law and the rules of international humanitarian law for grave violations committed during armed conflicts that war crimes within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Courts, The problem of the study lies in the issues raised by the international responsibility of leaders and the practical problems it raises, so the question centered on the person who Bears International Criminal Responsibility in International Criminal Law was answered, is it the sovereign state Or an individual who works in her name and for her benefit On the one hand, and on the other hand, I was exposed to the standard adopted by the International Criminal judiciary to hold the International Criminal accountable based on the Rome Statute and the development that took place in this regard, and I also followed a research methodology based on a descriptive analytical study through which the research was divided into three balanced investigations, the first, The second topic dealt with war crimes during non-international armed conflicts and the third topic dealt with the contraindications of International Criminal Responsibility, and ended with a conclusion to the research and recommendations. Keywords: International Criminal Responsibility, War Crimes

The ICC as a "Tool" of the United Nations Security Council and the "Absurdity" of Head of State Immunity with Regard to International Crimes

In Jordan Referral re Al-Bashir, the appeals chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) had to decide (1) whether Jordan had an obligation to arrest and surrender the sitting head of state of Sudan to the ICC for crimes against his own people and (2) whether to refer the matter of Jordan’s alleged noncompliance to the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). The appeals chamber tackled both questions inappropriately. On the one hand, in view of the lack of guidance from the UNSC and the whole mess created during the “AlBashir saga,” the chamber should have found that Jordan justifiably failed to comply with the arrest warrant issued by the ICC. On the other hand, the ICC should have referred the whole matter to the UNSC. This Article addresses these issues while surveying the centuries’ long evolution of the law on the international criminal responsibility of heads of state. While relying on prevalentaccounts on International Criminal Law (ICL), the appeals chamber narrates a story according to which, for a long time, heads of state enjoyed absolute immunity—even with regard to international criminal conduct. However, at present, such immunity does not operate before international courts. The whole story does not correspond to the most compelling account of the evolution of thelaw on international crimes.

المسؤولية الجنائية الدولية والوطنية لموظفي الشركات العسكرية والأمنية الخاصة

The world is witnessing many armed conflicts, which played a prominent role in tearing the countries that were exposed to those conflicts, and therefore these conflicts prompted governments that are experiencing internal or external conflicts and turmoil to seek the assistance of private military and security companies in order to maintain their rule, and the services provided by these companies are Several, including training, providing advice and intelligence information, as well as securing convoys and transporting supplies, but their progress increased to the point of participating with the security forces in the fighting. This research is of great importance in the international and national criminal responsibility of employees of private military and security companies, to clarify individual criminal responsibility in the light of the provisions of international humanitarian law and international criminal law. Since private security companies are so far governed by clear and binding international rules, it is necessary to make possible efforts to prevent serious violations of the rules of international humanitarian law and human rights rules by employees of those companies at the internal and international levels.

Внесок Нюрнберзького трибуналу у формування норм міжнародного права щодо злочинних організацій

The article examines the contribution of the Nuremberg tribunal in the formation of modern international law on criminal organizations. The methodological basis of the study is a systematic analysis of international law on liability for international crimes, the use of comparative law, formal law and other methods, historical analysis of the origin and development of liability for international crimes, generalization of a wide range of normative and practical materials. The evolution of the responsibility of non-governmental organizations that committed international crimes in the period after the Nuremberg Trials is analyzed, in particular the trends and factors that influenced the development of the concept of international criminal responsibility. In characterizing evolution in international law, it is advisable to consider not all changes in international law, but only those that indicate qualitative improvement. The evolution of international law, like all development, is always objective. The enshrinement of the principle of international criminal responsibility in the Statute of the Nuremberg Tribunal constitutes a protective function, which is expressed in the direct application of the norms of international criminal law and international humanitarian law. The development of international law governing the jurisdiction of criminal organizations does not stop. It is noted that with the development of legal certainty of the status of non-governmental organizations, the principles set out in the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal on the responsibility of individuals and legal entities under public law for crimes against humanity are developing. The main trends in the development of international criminal law, including the liability of non-state legal entities under public and private law. It is determined that in the period after the Nuremberg Trials, the main direction in the legal definition of liability for war crimes was the development of norms and mechanisms of criminal liability. Criticism of Russian researchers’ views on the responsibility for international crimes of non-governmental organizations committed in other countries, who believe that non-governmental organizations in this case can not be recognized as criminal organizations. It is stated that international law does not contain a clear line between formally defined organizations - legal entities recognized as subjects of national law, and criminal groups, whose legal status can be recognized from the standpoint of the decisions of the Nuremberg tribunal. International legal norms on this issue should be devoted to identifying the criminal nature of the group and the establishment of criminal consequences for members of the criminal group. Dissemination of international legal responsibility for war crimes, crimes against humanity committed during armed conflicts of international and non-international nature, the modern concept of international humanitarian law.

A.N. Savenkov. Nuremberg: A Verdict for name of Peace

In the reviewed monograph A.N. Savenkov “Nuremberg: A Verdict for name of Peace” provides a detailed analysis of the preparation, conduct and Verdict of the Nuremberg Tribunal, which for the first time established the institution of international criminal responsibility of individuals and predetermined the development of entire branches of International Law. The author substantiates that the principles formulated by the International Military Tribunal became the basis of post-war international agreements on human rights and most national constitutions. The paper presents a fundamental understanding of the Nuremberg Tribunal from the point of view of a formal legal assessment of its nature, as well as the impact of its Verdict on the development of International Law and national law enforcement.

Autonomous weapons systems controlled by Artificial Intelligence: a conceptual roadmap for international criminal responsibility

Autonomous weapons systems controlled by Artificial Intelligence: a conceptual roadmap for international criminal responsibility

THE MAIN STAGES OF FORMATION AND DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

The main stages of the formation and development of the institution of criminal liability of the individual in international law are studied in the article, features and characteristic features of each of the studied stages are clarified, as well as various doctrinal approaches to the recognition or non-recognition of the individual, the subject of international law analyzed, and consequently, the subject of international crime within the framework of the International criminal law. It has been shown that the primary responsibility for persecuting individuals lies with the state. However, individuals are prosecuted in accordance with international criminal law. The expansion of this practice is a manifestation of the further formation and implementation of the principle of punishing individuals for committing international crimes recognized by the world community as international crimes. The institute of international criminal responsibility of individuals for committing international crimes is a significant deterrent to modern international law to prevent violations of its most important norms. The statutes of the tribunals oblige states to provide assistance, including search and identification, obtaining evidence and finding evidence, arresting and detaining, and transferring the accused to the tribunal. All this requires the introduction of appropriate provisions in the criminal and criminal procedural law of states. It is concluded that the formation and development of the institution of individual criminal responsibility in international law has come a long way from complete non-recognition and denial to the emergence of a permanent judicial institution to which international crimes fall and individuals are recognized as perpetrators. An individual becomes a subject of international law and will be held accountable if he or she commits international crimes. It is confirmed that the principle of inevitability of criminal punishment has the ability to be implemented in any case. which is a progressive phenomenon of modern reality.

Постнюрнберзький розвиток концепції міжнародного злочину

У статті аналізується еволюція концепції міжнародного злочину в постнюрнберзький період, зокрема тенденції та фактори, що вплинули на її розвиток. Показана трансформація поняття міжнародного злочину в його еволюції й названі його основні модифікації: «нюрнберзька», «постнюрнберзька», «гаазька» та «римська». Досліджені фактори, що вплинули на концепцію міжнародного злочину в постнюрнберзький період.
 Автор виявляє основні тенденції розвитку міжнародного кримінального права, що сформували концепцію міжнародного злочину у постнюрнберзький період, основним напрямом яких була розробка норм і механізму кримінальної відповідальності за воєнні злочини та злочини проти людяності в повоєнний період.

Sanctioning International Terrorist Organizations (ITOs): The Changing Paradigm of International Legal Personality?

Este trabajo aborda el problema de la así llamada “guerra contra el terrorismo”, las sanciones de la ONU y la posible responsabilidad penal internacional de las organizaciones terroristas internacionales (OTI), y la influencia de las mismas en el concepto contemporáneo de “personalidad jurídica internacional”. De este modo, las OTI, como destinatarios de las normas jurídicas internacionales que incriminan el terrorismo y las sanciones por ese delito, adquieren algún tipo de capacidad jurídica internacional que podría llevar a su personalidad jurídica internacional.

Autonomous Weapons Systems Controlled by Artificial Intelligence: A Conceptual Roadmap for International Criminal Responsibility

Autonomous Weapons Systems Controlled by Artificial Intelligence: A Conceptual Roadmap for International Criminal Responsibility

Nuremberg modification of international crime and criminal responsibility of individuals

The article analyses the formation of the Nuremberg model of international crime, its origins and preconditions, the role of theVersailles Peace Treaty of 1919 and other factors. The author states that the inability to ignore the expansion of international crimemakes criminal responsibility unavoidable, and thus the experience of the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals bear the fundamental meaning.Examined are the legal bases of the Nuremberg trial, the main problematic issues of discussion, in particular, the recognition ofcertain acts as criminal, procedural security of the accused, harmonisation of procedural rules of different legal systems (continental,Anglo-American, Soviet legal system), immunity of officials and especially the importance of the Nuremberg Trials for the furtherdevelopment of international criminal law. The author argues that individual international criminal responsibility, which should be consideredthe first most important feature of international criminal law, was formed during the Nuremberg Trials on the basis of customarylaw, general principles of law and normative sources: the London Agreement of 1945 “On Prosecution and Punishment of the majorwar criminals of the European Axis countries” and the Statute of the International Military Tribunal. The Nuremberg Trials of1945–1946 and the Tokyo Trials of 1946–1948 were the first effective international criminal tribunals in which individuals with fullprocedural rights and acting on their own behalf were indicted. The precedents of these tribunals have proven the ability to criminalisecrimes under international law that are not crimes under national law and serve as a basis for developing a concept of international crimein a new sense that is closely linked to international justice.The author also concludes by drawing the attention to the fact that due to internationalisation of crime, two different characte -ristics and dimensions have formed: criminal responsibility stricto sensu, and criminal responsibility within the frames of a newlyformed autonomous subbranch of international criminal law – transnational criminal law.

Does Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Make Difference to Civilians?: An Analytical and Evaluation Study

In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State sovereignty (ICISS) proposed rethinking on sovereignty through the prism of a new concept: the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P). Several years after, its message has been achieved? This is answer to this question that, in the aftermath of the Arab spring, at the end of an intervention that is controversial in Libya and in the face of the Syrian drama, we decided to make an evaluation, by analyzing this doctrine. From details of methodological of the purpose of this article, the review of the legal framework of the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) in international law is based on pre-existing concepts and rules that are sometimes approached such as the international responsibility and criminal responsibility priori conceptualization of the “Responsibility to Protect”, will be the first axis of this study. In the second, axis the responsibility to protect the population rests primarily on the territorial State against war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes of genocide and ethnic cleansing. It must be stated that the obligation to protect the concerned State, was necessary before the States itself by establishing international legal standards. If the State is not willing to do or unable, the subsidiary protective role is the responsibility of other actors.The reality of major obstacles reduces the effective implementation on the ground of the “Responsibility to Protect”. These obstacles can be linked with the same design of it, just as they may result from external causes that could make inoperative the responsibility to protect in view of the situation, the international community application does not rely on the implementation of the responsibility to protect in some cases that meet, however, all the conditions to act within this framework. In the third axis of this study, it will be also a review of the operational legal framework.The United Nations has adopted several resolutions on the “Responsibility to Protect”, examining not only their support to the doctrine, but also their willingness to authorize the deployment of peacekeeping operations and to adopt resolutions in support of military intervention paragraph. But the Security Council of the United Nations has not always been unanimous about the situations to which the “responsibility to protect” applies. The case of Darfur and the crisis of the Syria, there was something else, they were exemplary cases of the application of the “Responsibility to Protect” inertia, and the different responses by the international community in the face of these crises, will allow us in the Fourth axis of interesting conclusions about the difficulties in the application thereof.

Could International Fact-Finding Missions Possibly Render a Case Inadmissible for the ICC? Remarks on the Ongoing Attempts to Include International Criminal Law in Fact-finding

Abstract Twenty years after the adoption of the Rome Statute questions concerning complementarity remain. There is no clear indication as to how international involvement would influence the admissibility of a case. One of the responses to human rights violations and possible international crimes that has risen to prominence in the past decades is fact-finding mandated by UN organs. At the same time these mechanisms have started to incorporate a focus on issues of international criminal law and individual criminal responsibility. As these mechanisms are starting to attempt to resemble a criminal investigation in some regards the question starts to rise as to what effect an international fact-finding mechanism can have on the admissibility of a case before the International Criminal Court. This article explains how these mechanisms need to be viewed in the context of the complementarity-regime of the Rome Statute.

INTRODUCTION TO INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW

In discourse of international criminal law, today, individual criminal responsibility is an important principle. This principle will be explained along with other aspects, such as "secondary rules'� "actus reus'� "mens rea" and c,lso some international crimes under international law, particularly genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. While, the international legal mechanisms, such as ICC and ICTY are also presented in this paper in connection with the implementation of international criminal responsibility. Key words: individual criminal responsibility, criminal conduct, international criminal law.