THE CONCEPT OF MENS REA IN INTENATIONAL CRIMIMAL LAWPDF电子书下载

1. Introduction 1

Ⅰ The Mens Rea Enigma 1

Ⅱ General Principles of Law 4

A The Determination of General Principles of Law 6

B The Process of Establishing a General Principle 8

C Abstracting a Legal Principle from National Laws 8

D Verifying whether the Principle is 'Generally Recognised' 9

E Adapting the General Principle to the International Sphere 10

F The Role of General Principles 11

Ⅲ The Study 12

2. From Vengeance to Mens Rea to Mentes Reae 13

Ⅰ The Mental Requisites for Criminality in the Early Law 13

Ⅱ The Babylonians - The Code of Hammurabi 15

Ⅲ Ancient Hebrew Law 15

Ⅳ The Athenians - The Epic Period 16

Ⅴ Plato and Aristotle 16

Ⅵ Roman Law - 'The Twelve Tables': Cicero 17

Ⅶ The Irish - St Patrick's Time: Brehon Law 19

Ⅷ Islamic Legal Tradition 22

Ⅸ Early Medieval Period 22

Ⅹ Old Dutch Statutes 23

ⅩⅠ Leges Henrici Primi 23

ⅩⅡ Bracton 25

ⅩⅢ Dolus and Culpa 26

ⅩⅣ Early Critiques of Mens Rea in the Criminal Law of England 27

ⅩⅤ General Remarks 29

3. Mens Rea in the Common Law of England and Wales, Australia and Canada 31

Ⅰ Introduction 31

A The Sources of Criminal Law: Common Law versus Statute 32

Ⅱ Mens Rea Standards in Common Law Systems 33

Ⅲ Intention 33

A Smith - The 'Objective' Test 35

B Hyam -The 'Probability Test 36

C Moloney -The 'Natural Consequence' Test 37

D Hancock and Shankland - The 'High Probability' Test 39

E Nedrick - The 'Virtual Certainty' Test 40

F Woollin - Adhering to the 'Virtual Certainty' Test 41

G The Meaning of Intention in the Criminal Law of Ireland 43

H The Meaning of Intention in the Criminal Law of Australia 45

I The Meaning of Intention in the Criminal Law of Canada 46

J A Schematic Review of the Meaning of Intention in Common Law Jurisdictions 49

Ⅳ Recklessness 50

A Cunningham - Subjective Recklessness 52

B Caldwell/Lawrence - Objective Recklessness 54

C R v G and Another -The Fall of Objective Recklessness 56

D A Schematic Review of the Meaning of Recklessness in Common Law Jurisdictions 58

Ⅴ Knowledge or Awareness as to Circumstances 59

A Does 'Knowledge' have a Precise Definition in the Criminal Law of England? 60

B The Doctrine of 'Wilful Blindness' in England and Canada 61

C A Schematic Review of the Meaning of Knowledge in Common Law Jurisdictions 63

Ⅵ Further Principles of Mens Rea 64

A Specific Intent versus Ulterior Intent 64

Ⅶ Negligence 66

A Are there Degrees of Negligence? 68

Ⅷ Accessorial Liability 68

A Parties to the Commission of Crimes - Principal and Accessory 68

B Secondary Participation - Aiding, Abetting, Counselling or Procuring 70

C Joint Enterprise 79

Ⅸ Mistake as Denial of Mens Rea 91

Ⅹ Conclusion 94

4. Mens Rea in the American Law Institute's Model Penal Code 98

Ⅰ Introduction 98

Ⅱ Background of the Code 99

Ⅲ The Culpability Provisions of the Model Penal Code: In General 100

Ⅳ Degrees of Culpability under the Model Penal Code 102

A 'Purposely' 104

B 'Knowingly' 107

C 'Recklessly' 112

D Negligence 116

Ⅴ The Model Penal Code Element Analysis 119

Ⅵ Mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law 120

A Ignorance or Mistake vis-a-vis Culpability Requirement 121

B Belief that One is Committing a Different Crime 122

C Belief in Legality of Conduct 123

Ⅶ Mens Rea of Accomplice Liability 124

A The Full Mens Rea Approach 125

B Liability for Crimes of Recklessness and Negligence 126

C Liability of the Accomplice vis-à-vis the Principal Perpetrator 127

Ⅷ Conclusion and General Remarks 127

5. Mens Rea in German and French Criminal Law 130

Ⅰ Introduction 130

Ⅱ The German Three-stage Structure of Criminal Offences 131

A Straftatbestand - The Legal Elements of the Offence 131

B Rechtswidrigkeit - Unlawfulness, Wrongfulness or Illegality 131

C Schuld- Culpability/Guilt 132

Ⅲ Vorsatz or Dolus in German Criminal Law 135

A Absicht or Dolus Directus of the First Degree 136

B Dolus Directus of the Second Degree or Dolus Indirectus 138

C Bedingter Vorsatz or Dolus Eventualis 139

Ⅳ Fahrlassigkeit or Negligence 145

Ⅴ Grounds of Excluding Vorsatz or Schuld 146

A The Basic Distinction between Mistake of Fact and Mistake of Law 147

B Tatbestandsirrtum or Mistake of Fact 148

C Mistake of Law 151

Ⅵ Taterschaft und Teilnahme (Perpetration and Participation) 154

A Taterschaft (Perpetration) 154

B Teilnahme (Secondary Participation) 157

Ⅶ Mens Rea in French Criminal Law and other Romano Legal Systems 160

A Intention (le dol) 161

Ⅷ Negligence (la faute pénale) 166

Ⅸ Complicity 167

A The Requirement of a Principle Offence 167

B The Act of Complicity (l'element matériel) 168

C Mens Rea of Complicity (l'element moral) 168

Ⅹ Conclusion and General Observations 169

6. Mens Rea in Chinese and Russian Criminal Law 172

Ⅰ Introduction 172

Ⅱ Sources of Chinese Criminal Law 172

Ⅲ Crimes and Criminal Responsibility in Chinese Criminal Law 176

A Categories of Crimes in Chinese Criminal Law 177

B Criminal Responsibility 177

Ⅳ Negligence 186

A Negligence by being Over Confident 186

B Careless and Inadvertent Negligence 187

Ⅴ Cognition Error 188

A Mistake of Law 188

B Mistake of Fact 190

C Responsibility for a Crime Committed with Two Forms of Guilt in Russian Law 192

Ⅵ Mens Rea of Joint Crimes under Chinese Criminal Law 193

A The Intention of Enforcement 194

B The Intention of Organisation 194

C The Intention of Instigation 194

D The Intention of Aiding a Crime 195

Ⅶ Conclusion 196

7. Mens Rea in Islamic Criminal Law 198

Ⅰ Introduction to Islamic Law (Shari'a) 198

Ⅱ The Application of Islamic Law in Muslim States Today 199

Ⅲ Sources of Islamic Law - Shari'a and Fiqh 200

A Quran 201

B Sunnah 202

C Consensus by Collective Reasoning (Ijma) 203

D Analogical Deduction by Individual Reasoning (Qiyas) 203

Ⅳ Categories of Crimes in Islamic Criminal Law 204

Ⅴ The Leading Schools of Law (Madhahib) 206

Ⅵ Criminal Responsibility under Islamic Law 208

A The Material Element 209

B Motive 210

C Intent 210

D Different Degrees of Homicide and their Definition 211

E Standards used for Determining Intention 215

F Summary of Jurists' Opinions 216

Ⅶ Mistake 220

A Mistake of Fact 220

B Mistake of Law 221

C Cases Similar to Mistake 222

D Negligence as an Element of Mistake 222

Ⅷ Participation in Crime 223

A Direct Complicity 225

B Complicity in Indirect Homicide 228

C Causal Complicity 228

D Ordering 229

Ⅸ Conclusion 230

8. Mens Rea in post-World War Ⅱ Trials, the Travaux Préparatoire of the Genocide Convention and the Work of the International Law Commission 231

Ⅰ Introduction 231

Ⅱ Mens Rea - Guilty Knowledge 234

A Evidence - Facts from which Tribunals Infer Knowledge 240

Ⅲ Common Plan or Conspiracy 241

Ⅳ Membership of Criminal Organisations - Presumed Knowledge 246

Ⅴ Persons Concerned in the Killing 247

Ⅵ Complicity 248

Ⅶ Responsibility of Commanders 252

Ⅷ Mistake of Law and Mistake of Fact 255

Ⅸ The Mens Rea of Genocide in the Drafting History of the 1948 Genocide Convention 258

A The UN General Assembly and the ECOSOC Resolutions 258

B The UN Secretary-General's Draft 259

C The Ad Hoc Committee Draft 260

D The General Assembly Sixth Committee 263

E Analysis 267

Ⅹ The Developing Law of Mens Rea through the Work of the International Law Commission 268

A Codification of the Nuremberg Principles by the International Law Commission 268

B The 1954 Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind 269

C The 1991 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 270

D The 1996 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace andSecurity of Mankind 277

E Analysis 284

ⅩⅠ Conclusion and General Remarks 285

9. Mens Rea of Crimes in the Jurisprudence of the the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda 287

Ⅰ Introduction 287

Ⅱ Special Intent or Primary Purpose Crimes 289

A The Crime of Terror against the Civilian Population 289

B Torture 293

C Persecution as a Crime against Humanity 295

D Taking Civilians as Hostages 297

E Genocide 299

Ⅲ Direct Intent Crimes, Dolus Eventualis and Gross Negligence Crimes 302

A Rape - Direct Intent Crime (Intent and Knowledge) 302

B Outrages upon Personal Dignity - Direct Intent Crime 304

C Extermination - Direct Intent, Dolus Eventualis or Negligent Crime? 306

Ⅳ Wilful Crimes 311

A Wilful Killing 311

B Wilfully Causing Great Suffering or Serious Injury to Body or Health 316

C Destruction or Wilful Damage to Institutions Dedicated to Religion or Education 317

Ⅴ Wanton Crimes 319

A Unlawful and Wanton Extensive Destruction and Appropriation of Property 320

B Wanton Destruction of Cities, Towns or Villages, or Devastation not Justified by Military Necessity 321

Ⅵ Premeditated Crimes - Murder under Article 3(a) of the ICTR Statute 322

Ⅶ General Remarks and Conclusion 324

10. The Mens Rea of Perpetration and Participation in the Jurisprudence of the ICTY and ICTR 326

Ⅰ Introduction 326

Ⅱ Responsibility under Articles 7(1) and 6(1) of the ICTY and ICTR Statutes 328

A Planning 328

B Instigating 330

C Ordering 333

D Aiding and Abetting 336

E Committing 344

Ⅲ Responsibility under Articles 7(3) and 6(3) of the ICTY and ICTR Statutes 366

A General Requirements under Articles 7(3) and 6(3) of the ICTY and ICTR Statutes 366

Ⅳ General Remarks and Observations 379

11. Mens Rea in the Jurisprudence of the International Criminal Court 382

Ⅰ Introduction 382

Ⅱ Anatomy of Article 30 of the ICC Statute 384

A Elements Analysis - Mental Elements and their Objects 384

B Different Culpability Terms Defined in relation to each Objective Element 385

Ⅲ Different Degrees of Mental Elements under Article 30 387

A The Meaning of Intent 387

B Intent in relation to Conduct 388

C Intent in relation to Consequence - The First Alternative of Intent 390

D Intent in relation to Consequence - The Second Alternative of Intent 391

E The Meaning of Knowledge 398

Ⅳ The Relationship between Article 30 and other Provisions of the ICC Statute 401

A Article 30 vis-à-vis the Culpability Requirements stated in an Offence Definition 401

B Article 30 vis-à-vis the Elements of Crimes 403

C Article 30 vis-à-vis Individual Criminal Responsibility - Article 25 405

D Article 30 vis-à-vis Superior Responsibility - Article 28 412

E Article 30 vis-à-vis Mistake of Law and Mistake of Fact 414

Ⅴ Conclusion 416

12. General Conclusions and Recommendations 418

Ⅰ A subjective test should be followed in ascertaining the guilt of the accused 421

Ⅱ Culpability terms should be confined to three culpable mental states 423

Ⅲ 'Special intent', 'dolus specialis', 'ulterior intent' or 'primary purpose' crimes require proof of dolus direct us of the first degree on the part of the accused 426

Ⅳ Negligence or gross negligence does not satisfy the mens rea requirement for international crimes 427

Ⅴ Actual knowledge and wilful blindness are blameworthy - constructive knowledge has no place in criminal law and should be abandoned 427

Ⅵ Element analysis versus offence analysis 428

Ⅶ The mens rea of accomplice liability requires proof of cognitive and volitional components 429

Ⅷ The 'reasonably foreseeable' test of the extended form of joint criminal enterprise is fundamentally unjust 431

Epilogue&Roger Clark 433

Bibliography 436

Index 471