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