Fertile or Futile Grounds for Excluding Criminal Responsibility? A Critical Analysis of the Ongwen Judgment in Relation to the Claim of Coercive Environment

IF 0.8 Q2 LAW
W. Nortje, N. Quenivet
{"title":"Fertile or Futile Grounds for Excluding Criminal Responsibility? A Critical Analysis of the Ongwen Judgment in Relation to the Claim of Coercive Environment","authors":"W. Nortje, N. Quenivet","doi":"10.1163/15718123-bja10158","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nDominic Ongwen was convicted and sentenced for numerous atrocities by the International Criminal Court (icc) in 2021. The Defence focused on the coercive environment that Ongwen was subjected to from his abduction as a boy until his surrender as an adult. The icc rejected the claim of duress as a ground for excluding criminal responsibility in the context of a past and present coercive environment. This article examines how the icc interpreted and applied duress in the Ongwen case and evaluates whether a coercive environment can be categorised as a unique defence in the icc Statute. This is done by scrutinising whether a coercive environment has been raised as a defence in domestic jurisdictions. This paper shows that national courts have not recognised a defence specific to crimes committed in a coercive environment and thus concludes that no such defence can be used by defendants before the icc.","PeriodicalId":55966,"journal":{"name":"International Criminal Law Review","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Criminal Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15718123-bja10158","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dominic Ongwen was convicted and sentenced for numerous atrocities by the International Criminal Court (icc) in 2021. The Defence focused on the coercive environment that Ongwen was subjected to from his abduction as a boy until his surrender as an adult. The icc rejected the claim of duress as a ground for excluding criminal responsibility in the context of a past and present coercive environment. This article examines how the icc interpreted and applied duress in the Ongwen case and evaluates whether a coercive environment can be categorised as a unique defence in the icc Statute. This is done by scrutinising whether a coercive environment has been raised as a defence in domestic jurisdictions. This paper shows that national courts have not recognised a defence specific to crimes committed in a coercive environment and thus concludes that no such defence can be used by defendants before the icc.
排除刑事责任的理由是有利的还是无效的?论“强制环境”诉讼中的“翁文判决”
多米尼克·翁格文于2021年被国际刑事法院定罪并判处多项暴行。辩方的重点是Ongwen从童年被绑架到成年投降期间所遭受的胁迫环境。国际刑事法院驳回了在过去和现在的胁迫环境中作为排除刑事责任的理由的胁迫主张。本文考察了国际刑事法院在翁文案中如何解释和适用胁迫,并评估了胁迫环境是否可以归类为国际刑事法院规约中的独特抗辩。这是通过审查是否在国内司法管辖区提出了强制性环境作为辩护来完成的。本文表明,国家法院没有承认针对在胁迫环境中犯下的罪行的特定辩护,因此得出结论,被告不能在国际刑事法院使用这种辩护。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Thus there is also a need for criminological, sociological and historical research on the issues of ICL. The Review publishes in-depth analytical research that deals with these issues. The analysis may cover: • the substantive and procedural law on the international level; • important cases from national jurisdictions which have a bearing on general issues; • criminological and sociological; and, • historical research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信