Foreword

IF 1.5 3区社会学 Q1 LAW

Journal of International Criminal Justice Pub Date : 2022-08-24 DOI:10.1093/jicj/mqac033

Elies van Sliedregt, B. Weisser

{"title":"Foreword","authors":"Elies van Sliedregt, B. Weisser","doi":"10.1093/jicj/mqac033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Followers of the International Criminal Court (ICC) interested in theories of liability were looking forward to the Appeals Chamber judgment in the Ntaganda case, in which Bosco Ntaganda was convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The conviction was based on the theory of indirect co-perpetration through an Organized Structure of Power (OSP). This theory resulted from a specific interpretation of the ICC Statute, based on German legal scholarship. The theory has been criticized for its breadth and lack of legal basis. It has also been embraced as the theory of liability that best captures the liability of those who mastermind crimes. When the judgment was delivered on 30 March 2021, the appellate bench was divided, which arguably leaves the theory still contested. This symposium discusses indirect co-perpetration from perspectives hitherto not discussed. Two articles look at how the German theory of Tatherschaft that lies at the basis of indirect co-perpetration, has been absorbed in some domestic legal systems (Japan and Columbia). One article discusses the multi-layered concept of control that is at the heart of the theory. In another piece, adopting a law and sociology approach, authors explore the creative processes that produced indirect co-perpetration. Lastly, one author discusses the viability of an alternative to indirect co-perpetration: instigation.","PeriodicalId":46732,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Criminal Justice","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Criminal Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqac033","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Followers of the International Criminal Court (ICC) interested in theories of liability were looking forward to the Appeals Chamber judgment in the Ntaganda case, in which Bosco Ntaganda was convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). The conviction was based on the theory of indirect co-perpetration through an Organized Structure of Power (OSP). This theory resulted from a specific interpretation of the ICC Statute, based on German legal scholarship. The theory has been criticized for its breadth and lack of legal basis. It has also been embraced as the theory of liability that best captures the liability of those who mastermind crimes. When the judgment was delivered on 30 March 2021, the appellate bench was divided, which arguably leaves the theory still contested. This symposium discusses indirect co-perpetration from perspectives hitherto not discussed. Two articles look at how the German theory of Tatherschaft that lies at the basis of indirect co-perpetration, has been absorbed in some domestic legal systems (Japan and Columbia). One article discusses the multi-layered concept of control that is at the heart of the theory. In another piece, adopting a law and sociology approach, authors explore the creative processes that produced indirect co-perpetration. Lastly, one author discusses the viability of an alternative to indirect co-perpetration: instigation.

查看原文本刊更多论文

前言

国际刑事法院（国际刑院）对责任理论感兴趣的追随者期待着上诉分庭对恩塔甘达案的判决，在该案中，Bosco Ntaganda在刚果民主共和国被判犯有战争罪和危害人类罪。定罪依据的是通过有组织的权力结构（OSP）进行间接共犯的理论。这一理论源于基于德国法律学术对《国际刑事法院规约》的具体解释。该理论因其广度和缺乏法律依据而受到批评。它也被认为是最能反映犯罪主谋责任的责任理论。2021年3月30日判决时，上诉庭出现分歧，这可以说使该理论仍有争议。本次专题讨论会从迄今尚未讨论的角度讨论了间接共犯问题。有两篇文章探讨了以间接共同犯罪为基础的德国Tatherschaft理论是如何被一些国内法律体系吸收的（日本和哥伦比亚）。一篇文章讨论了控制的多层概念，这是理论的核心。在另一篇文章中，作者采用法律和社会学的方法，探讨了产生间接共同犯罪的创造性过程。最后，一位作者讨论了间接共同犯罪的替代方案的可行性：教唆。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of International Criminal Justice LAW-

CiteScore

1.30

自引率

22.20%

发文量

期刊介绍： The Journal of International Criminal Justice aims to promote a profound collective reflection on the new problems facing international law. Established by a group of distinguished criminal lawyers and international lawyers, the Journal addresses the major problems of justice from the angle of law, jurisprudence, criminology, penal philosophy, and the history of international judicial institutions. It is intended for graduate and post-graduate students, practitioners, academics, government officials, as well as the hundreds of people working for international criminal courts.