Bøger i International Criminal Justice Series serien

This book concentrates on the crisis perpetrated by the Boko Haram group in Nigeria, which since 2009 has made a definitive impact on both the domestic and international criminal landscape. The volume centres on three core issues: first, an assessment of the criminal legal responses at the domestic level, where the legal characterization of the conducts in question, including an evaluation of the state of specific domestic prosecutions, are assessed. Secondly, the book gauges the potential for international criminal justice while evaluating the Boko Haram situation at the International Criminal Court. This includes an assessment of the jurisdictional aspects, the admissibility, and the interests of justice requirements in addition to the appraisal of conducts amounting to war crimes and crimes against humanity perpetrated.Finally, the book explores possible non-prosecutorial responses in the form of classic and non-classic transitional justice mechanisms that maybe utilized as a response to the crisis in Nigeria. Furthermore, it draws instructive lessons from Nigeriäs past misadventure with specific transitional justice mechanisms while exploring the realities of utilizing the restorative justice mechanisms available in Nigeria. The volume concludes by calling for a victim-centred approach in the discourse around the Boko Haram crisis.This book presents a definitive study of the history of the development of Boko Haram and the related domestic and international criminal legal issues. Researchers and anyone seeking to understand the Boko Haram crisis in relation to international criminal law, including those looking for a clear overview of the criminal conduct perpetrated by Boko Haram in Nigeria and a view of Nigeriäs domestic legal regime, will benefit from the information on offer.Victoria Ojo-Adewuyi is a lawyer, called to the Nigeria Bar in 2012. She obtained a Bachelor of Laws degree (LL.B)in 2011 from the Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife (Nigeria), obtained a Master of Laws Degree (LL.M) from the University of the Western Cape, Cape Town (South Africa) and Humboldt Universität zu Berlin under the South African-German Centre for Transnational Criminal Justice in 2016, and completed her doctorate in International Criminal Law at the Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (Germany) in 2022.

This book explores the issue of leadership criminality from a new angle by comparing two highly relevant modes of responsibility. By contrasting individual criminal responsibility for ordering international crimes with indirect perpetration through an organisation, it shows the doctrinal weaknesses of the latter and outlines the much-overlooked advantages of the former. The volume analyses the development of both forms of responsibility, looking at their origins, and their reception in academia and practical use in jurisprudence.The history of indirect perpetration through an organisation (Organisationsherrschaft) is portrayed from its German academic origin, through German jurisprudence to the reception of the doctrine at the International Criminal Court. By comparing the doctrine¿s stages of evolution, the book sheds light on the different aspects of the various models of indirect perpetration through an organisation and carves out general and fundamental criticismof it. The characteristics of ordering liability are explored in depth through an analysis of jurisprudence of the Nuremberg subsequent trials, the ad hoc tribunals and the International Criminal Court. This historic and doctrinal comparison reveals a well-defined and to-date much neglected mode of responsibility with enormous potential for the adjudication of leadership figures in the ambit of international criminal law and only one conclusion can follow from this analysis: it calls for practitioners and academics to leave the well-trodden paths of national criminal law doctrine and embrace truly international modes of liability such as the ordering of a crime.This volume in the ICJ series provides practitioners, researchers and students with a detailed account of forms of leadership liability and an innovative approach to the topic¿s most discussed issue.Dr. Johannes Block is a criminal lawyer specializing in international criminal law, responsibility of leadership figures, questions of perpetration and participation in crime as well as the national-socialists¿ crimes. He studied in Münster, Germany and Bogotá, Colombia and obtained his Dr. iur. from the University of Cologne, where he also worked and taught as a research assistant for several years. His legal clerkship led him to organized crime investigations, criminal defence, the European Commission and the German Federal Ministry of Justice.

This timely book comprehensively examines whether the worst human rights violations directed specifically at sexual and gender minorities are punishable under international criminal law, as codified in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.Drawing on general rules of interpretation, the development of human rights for sexual and gender minorities, and the social construction of gender, this monograph reveals that the worst crimes committed against persons because of their sexual orientation or gender identity can amount to crimes against humanity, particularly the crime of persecution under Article 7(1)(h). It also shows how legislators can be held individually criminally responsible for passing laws that criminalize consensual same-sex sexuality.The book not only makes a significant and original contribution to the literature but is also highly relevant for international criminal law practitioners, since, so far, no cases regarding this topic exist.Dr. Valerie V. Suhr is currently a trainee lawyer in the district of the Koblenz Court of Appeal in Germany

This book argues for a more moderate approach to history-writing in international criminal adjudication by articulating the elements of a "e;responsible history"e; normative framework. The question of whether international criminal courts and tribunals (ICTs) ought to write historical narratives has gained renewed relevance in the context of the recent turn to history in international criminal law, the growing attention to the historical legacies of the ad hoc Tribunals and the minimal attention paid to historical context in the first judgment of the International Criminal Court.The starting point for this discussion is that, in cases of mass atrocities, prosecutors and judges are inevitably understood to be engaged in writing history and influencing collective memory, whether or not they so intend. Therefore, while writing history is an inescapable feature of ICTs, there is still today a significant lack of consensus over the proper place of this function. Since Hannah Arendt articulated her doctrine of strict legality, in response to the prosecutor's expansive didactic approach in Eichmann, the legal debate on the subject has been largely polarised between restrictive and expansive approaches to history-writing in mass atrocity trials. What has been noticeably missing from this debate is the middle ground. The contribution this book seeks to make is precisely to articulate a framework that occupies that ground. The book asks: what are the lenses through which judges of ICTs interpret historical events, what kind of histories do ICTs write? and what kinds of histories should ICTs produce? Its arguments for a more moderate approach to history-writing are based on three distinct, but interrelated grounds: (1) Truth and Justice; (2) Right to Truth; and (3) Legal Epistemology.Different target audiences may benefit from this book. Court officials and legal practitioners may find the normative framework developed herein useful in addressing the tensions between the competing objectives of ICTs and, in particular, in assessing the value of the history-writing function. Lawyers, historians and other academics may also find the analysis of the strengths, constraints and blind spots of the historical narratives written by ICTs interesting. This issue is particularly timely in view of current debates on the legacies of ICTs.Aldo Zammit Borda is Director of the Centre for Access to Justice and Inclusion at Anglia Ruskin University, Cambridge, UK.

The doctrine of universal jurisdiction has evolved throughout modern times in the context of global criminal justice as a paramount agent of combating impunity emanating from international criminality. Sierra Leone, as a member of the international community and the United Nations, has, in recent times, been a pioneer in the progressive application and development of international criminal law in the African region. Despite this role, the country's profile, both in terms of the incorporation and application of the doctrine of universal jurisdiction, is deficient in several major respects falling far short of its dual international obligation not to provide safe havens from justice for perpetrators of international crimes and to combat impunity from such criminogenic acts. Hence, a compelling reason for the author to write this book was to provide a seminal scholarly work on the subject articulating the existing state of the law in Sierra Leone and highlighting the deficiencies in the law and factors inhibiting the exercise of universal jurisdiction in this UN member state. It was also to propose necessary substantive and procedural law reforms in the state's jurisprudence on the subject.The book is recommended reading for practitioners and scholars in international criminal law and related disciplines. Its accessibility is highly enhanced by relevant tables and summaries of each chapter. Justice Rosolu J.B. Thompson is Professor Emeritus of Criminal Justice Studies, Eastern Kentucky University, USA. He was a member of and Presiding Judge in Trial Chamber I of the Special Court for Sierra Leone.

This book addresses the issue of corruption as a socio-economic rights concern at a national level.

In modern societies, full criminal trials are avoided on many occasions. This book is concerned with mechanisms that either divert from or speed up the proceedings.Koen Vriend argues that the fair trial rights as established by the European Court of Human Rights under Article 6 ECHR provide a normative framework that does not only apply in a full criminal trial, but that it can also be used for diverted and shortened proceedings. He shows that the concept of fairness-as derived from ECtHR case law-is a fundamental principle that underlies all criminal law enforcement. It provides for the appropriate framework to assess whether diverted or shortened proceedings are fair and legitimate.The book is intended for criminal law scholars and practitioners and human rights scholars.Dr. Koen Vriend is a Lecturer of Criminal Law and Criminal Procedural Law at the University of Amsterdam.

Tackling one of the most confusing and controversial issues in the field of international criminal law - i.e., the genocidal intent element, this monograph seeks to develop an account of genocidal intent from a collectivist perspective. Drawing upon the two-layered structure of the crime of genocide composed of the 'conduct level' and 'context level', it detects the genocidal intent element at the 'context level'. The genocidal intent found in this manner belongs to a collective, which significantly departs from the prior individualistic understandings of the notion of genocidal intent. The author argues that the crime of genocide is not a 'crime of mens rea'. Collective genocidal intent at the 'context level' operates in a way that renders the crime of genocide itself a criminal enterprise. The idea of genocide as a criminal enterprise also suggests that genocide is a leadership crime in respect of which only the high-level actors can be labeled as principals (as opposed to accessories). The book criticizes the dominant individualistic approaches to genocidal intent (in particular: the knowledge-based approach) which have thus far governed the relevant jurisprudential and academic analysis. It further demonstrates that the hidden notion of 'collective genocide' silently governs the relevant international jurisprudence. Practitioners and academics in the field of international criminal law and related disciplines will find in this book a new approach to the crime of genocide. The text is the first-ever book-length exposition of a collective account of genocidal intent. Its accessibility is highly enhanced by relevant footnotes.Sangkul Kim is Lecturer at Korea University in Seoul and Research Fellow with the Centre for International Law Research and Policy (CILRAP).He served as Associate Legal Adviser at the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (2004-2008). He earned law degrees from Korea University and Georgetown University Law Center.

This book addresses the interpretation and application of human rights norms by International Criminal Tribunals (ICTs). Such Tribunals are widely heralded as human rights defenders. At the same time, however, they employ activities that necessary entail the risk of human rights violations: they conduct criminal investigations, arrest and detain individuals, and put them on trial. This book investigates this flip-side of the ICTs' relationship with international human rights law, and focuses on the ICTs' own interpretation and application of human rights norms.First, the book addresses whether and how ICTs are bound by human rights law, since unlike states, they do not sign or ratify human rights conventions. Second, the book provides an in-depth analysis of the way in which ICTs interpret and apply human rights norms, compared to the way in which these norms are interpreted in a traditional state-context. Relying on the unique circumstances in which they operate, ICTs have often deviated from generally accepted interpretations of human rights. The author critically examines this so-called contextual approach and seeks to recommend ways in which ICTs can improve their interpretative practice by giving due regard to the context in which they operate, while still providing adequate human rights protection. Addressing the ICTs' possible leeway in terms of contextualization, this book contributes to the broader debates about adherence to human rights norms in international law.Krit Zeegers is an Associate at Allen & Overy LLP, Amsterdam, and previously worked as a researcher / junior lecturer at the University of Amsterdam.

This work deals with the exclusion of illicitly obtained evidence at the International Criminal Court. At the level of domestic law, the so-called exclusionary rule has always been a very prominent topic. The reason for this is that the way a court of law deals with tainted evidence pertains to a key aspect of procedural fairness. It concerns the balancing of the right to a fair trial with the interest of society in effective law enforcement. At the international level, however, the subject has not yet been discussed in detail. The present research intends to fill this gap. It provides an overview of the approaches of a number of domestic legal systems as well as of the approaches of the UN ad hoc tribunals and the European Court of Human Rights and uses the different perspectives to develop a version of the exclusionary rule which fits the International Criminal Court. The book is highly recommended for practitioners and researchers in the field of international criminal law and especially the law of international criminal evidence. Petra Viebig is a Public Prosecutor at the Staatsanwaltschaft Hamburg, Germany.

Since the historic Nuremberg Trial of 1945 an international customary law principle has developed that commission of a core crime under international law - war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and aggression - should not go unpunished. History shows, that when in Africa such violations occurred, especially as a result of election disputes, national and regional actors, including the African Union, resorted to political rather than legal responses. However, when crimes against humanity were alleged to have been committed in Kenya during the 2007-2008 post-election violence, a promising road map for criminal accountability was agreed upon alongside a political solution.In the spirit of this road map, the author analyzes the post-election violence in Kenya from a legal point of view. He extensively examines legal options for domestic criminal accountability and discusses both retributive (prosecutions) and restorative justice (mainly truth commission) mechanisms, being the main legal responses to the gross violations of human rights. Furthermore, he thoroughly investigates the Kenya situation before the ICC and the legal-cum-political responses to the ICC intervention in Kenya.Practitioners and academics in the field of international criminal law and related disciplines, as well as political sciences and (legal) history will find in this book highly relevant information about alternative legal approaches of the fight against and punishment of crimes against humanity, as defined under the ICC Statute.

The chapters in this book are reworkings of presentations given during a conference held in 2018 at the German Embassy to the Netherlands in The Hague on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the adoption of the Rome Statute. They provide an in-depth analysis of major points of contention the International Criminal Court (ICC) is currently facing, such as, inter alia, head of state immunities, withdrawal from the Rome Statute, the exercise of jurisdiction vis-à-vis third-party nationals, the activation of the Court's jurisdiction regarding the crime of aggression, as well as the relationship of the Court with both the Security Council and the African Union, all of which are issues that have a continued relevance and carry a particular controversy.The collection provides insights from both practitioners, including judges of the ICC, and diplomats who participated in the negotiations leading to the adoption of the Rome Statute, as well as well-known academics from various parts of the world working in the field of international criminal law.The aim of the book is not only to inform and stimulate academic debate on the topic, but also to serve as an instrument for lawyers involved in the practice of international criminal law.Gerhard Werle is Professor at the Faculty of Law of the Humboldt-University in Berlin, Germany and Andreas Zimmermann is Professor at the Faculty of Law of the University of Potsdam in Germany. Jürgen Bering, who worked on this book as assistant editor, is an Associate at Dentons, Berlin and a PhD candidate at the Martin Luther University, Halle-Wittenberg, Germany.