The doctrine of Joint Criminal Enterprise might find its application in international law, however its application in the Government One case particularly in its so called extended form otherwise called JCE 3, suffers serious challenges. In Government One trial, the Tribunal acknowledged the lack of legal provision providing for JCE as a mode of establishing criminal liability and relied on the authority of the ICTY in its decision in the Tadic case. This research has found that a thorough study of the Tadic judgement proves that it was decided on shaky grounds. In its reasoning, the ICTY relied on cases in which JCE was not successfully pleaded or in other instances, the tribunal relied on cases which were rather decided on different legal questions. Furthermore, a review of the jurisprudence of current international criminal courts including the International Criminal Court and the Extraordinary Chamber in the Court of Cambodia did not confirm the position held by the ad-hoc tribunals according to which there was a norm of customary law providing for the doctrine of Joint Criminal Enterprise particularly in its extended form.
Foreseeable Liability through Joint Criminal Enterprise in International Law: Special Focus on Government One Trial-PDF
Foreseeable Liability through Joint Criminal Enterprise in International Law: Special Focus on Government One Trial-PDF
Author | |
---|---|
ISBN | |
Publication Date | November 20, 2024 |
No. of Pages | 144 |
Size |
€46.99
Author | |
---|---|
ISBN | |
Publication Date | November 20, 2024 |
No. of Pages | 144 |
Size |
About the author
Prof. Dr. iur. Gracieux Mbuzukongira teaches International Criminal Law. Other than teaching activities, he has held various positions in the academia including in the Directorate for Postgraduate Studies and the office of Deputy Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs. Also he is a guest researcher at the Max Planck Institute for Comparative Public Law in Heidelberg.
Table of contents
TABLE OF CONTENT
Acknowledgment………………………………………I
Chapter 1: Introduction
1.1 The Indictment………………………………………1
1.2 Questions Pleaded in the Indictment………………………………………3
1.3 Individual Contribution of the Accused ………………………………………5
1.4 Commission Through JCE………………………………………8
Chapter 2: Review of the Jurisprudence of Early Tribunals
2.1 The Georg Otto Sandrock et al. Case………………………………………11
2.2 The Alfred Jepsen et al. Case………………………………………13
2.3 The Schonfeld et al., Case………………………………………17
2.4 The Einsatzgruppen Case………………………………………19
2.5 The Concentration Camp Cases………………………………………22
2.6 The Dachau Concentration Camp………………………………………22
2.6.1 Acts which are Illegal in Themselves ………………………………………24
2.6.2 Acts which are not Illegal in Themselves ………………………………………24
2.7 The Belsen Trial ………………………………………26
Chapter 3: International Customary Law
3.1 The ICC and the Common Purpose Concept………………………………………34
3.2 The Extraordinary Chamber in the Court of Cambodia ……………………………………36
3.3 Domestic Legislation ………………………………………38
Chapter 4: The Government One Case
4.1 The Structure of JCE ………………………………………41
4.1.1 Plurality of Persons ………………………………………42
4.1.2 The Agreement to Distribute Weapons in Kigali ………………………………………43
4.1.3 The Intent Behind the Distribution of Arms ………………………………………48
4.1.4 Reasoning by Inference ………………………………………50
4.2 Weapons Distribution on or about 12 April 1994 ………………………………………55
4.3 The Defence ………………………………………56
4.4 The Murambi Meeting of 18.04.1994 ………………………………………57
4.4.1 The Prosecution’s Witnesses ………………………………………58
4.4.2 Karemera Defence ………………………………………59
4.4.3 Ngirumpatse Defence ………………………………………61
4.5 Extended Liability ………………………………………62
Concluding Remarks ………………………………………70
Chapter 5: Violation of Common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II
5.1 Scope of Application ………………………………………71
5.2 Organized Armed Groups ………………………………………74
5.3 Intensity of Fights ………………………………………75
5.4 Prohibited Acts ………………………………………77
5.4.1 Violence to Life and Person ………………………………………77
5.4.2 Mutilation ………………………………………78
5.4.3 Cruel Treatment and Torture ………………………………………79
5.4.4 Taking of Hostages ………………………………………81
5.4.5 Outrages upon Personal Dignity ………………………………………83
5.4.6 Prohibition of Execution of extra-judicial Punishment ……………………………….84
Concluding Remarks ………………………………………87
Selected Bibliography ………………………………………89
Disclaimer ………………………………………91
Appendix ………………………………………93