The Criminal Responsibility of Senior Political and Military Leaders as Principals to International PDF电子书下载

1 First Approach to the Criminal Liability of Political and Military Leaders for International Crimes 1

2 Perpetration of a Crime and Participation in a Crime Committed by a Third Person: Principal versus Accessorial Liability 13

Ⅰ Introduction 13

Ⅱ First Approach to the Problem: Principal versus Accessorial Liability in National Law 14

Ⅲ Principal versus Accessorial Liability in International Criminal Law 20

Ⅳ Differences between the ICC and the Ad hoc Tribunals with regard to the Notion of Accessorial Liability 27

Ⅴ Different Approaches to the Distinction between Principal and Accessorial Liability 30

Ⅵ First Approach to the Notion of Joint Criminal Enterprise as Elaborated by the Case Law of the Ad hoc Tribunals and to the Notion of Control of the Crime 33

Ⅶ Are the Notions of Joint Criminal Enterprise and Control of the Crime Part of Customary International Law? 38

3 Direct Perpetration and Indirect Perpetration 69

Ⅰ Direct Perpetration 69

Ⅱ Principal Liability of Senior Political and Military Leaders for Commission by Omission 82

Ⅲ Indirect Perpetration 109

4 Co-perpetration Based on Joint Criminal Enterprise 153

Ⅰ Joint Criminal Enterprise and Joint Control as Two Competing Definitional Criteria of the Concept of Co-perpetration 153

Ⅱ Three Forms of Co-perpetration Based on Joint Criminal Enterprise 155

Ⅲ Elements of Co-perpetration Based on Joint Criminal Enterprise 157

Ⅳ Traditional Notion of Joint Criminal Enterprise 182

Ⅴ The Notion of Joint Criminal Enterprise at the Leadership Level 202

Ⅵ Pleading Co-perpetration Based on Joint Criminal Enterprise 231

Ⅶ Distinguishing between the Notion of Co-perpetration Based on Joint Criminal Enterprise and Aiding and Abetting as a Form of Accessorial Liability 252

Ⅷ Final Remarks on the Relationship between the Notions of Co-Perpetration Based on Joint Criminal Enterprise, Aiding and Abetting and Superior Responsibility 261

5 Co-perpetration Based on Joint Control of the Crime 265

Ⅰ The Notion of Joint Control of the Crime 265

Ⅱ The Treatment of the Notions of Joint Control of the Crime and Joint Criminal Enterprise in the Rome Statute 267

Ⅲ Elements of the Notion of Joint Control of the Crime 273

Ⅳ Cases of Co-perpetration Based on Joint Control of the Crime versus Cases of Indirect Perpetration 285

Ⅴ Applications of the Notion of Co-perpetration Based on Joint Control 291

Ⅵ Joint Application of the Notions of OSP and Joint Control: Indirect Co-perpetration 302

Epilogue 331

Bibliography 337

Index 347