Search

The present paper investigates the process of codifying crimes against humanity, with a specific focus on the difficulties encountered in achieving regulatory consistency and precision within international legal traditions. Notwithstanding the implementation of the Rome Statute and the endeavors of the International Law Commission (ILC), there are still deficiencies in the codification, namely in the areas of preventing and punishing these offenses. By employing the Neutrosophic Analytic Hierarchy Process (NAHP), Delphi method, and Neutrosophic Cognitive Maps (NCM), this study reveals key elements that impact the codification process. These elements include the necessity for a distinct convention and the sufficiency of current legal norms. Neutrosophic Cognitive Maps provide the visualization of the connections and interdependencies among important elements, therefore providing a deeper comprehension of their influence. An expert consensus highlighted the need for precise definitions, regulatory consistency, and a strong theoretical and legal basis. To enhance accountability and avoid future crimes against humanity, the report asserts that stronger international collaboration and a systematic approach to integrating these elements are essential. Subsequent investigations should prioritize the pragmatic application of suggested standards, comparative examination with other global legal systems, and ongoing expert verification through neutrosophic techniques. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is indicated that russia's aggression against Ukraine, which began in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea by the russian federation, has since intensified significantly, especially after the large-scale invasion of russia in February 2022. This armed aggression of the russian federation against Ukraine led to a serious humanitarian crisis, serious violations of international humanitarian law (IHL), international criminal law (ICC) and international human rights law (IHRC). The article explores the international legal responses to russia's ongoing aggression against Ukraine, beginning with the annexation of Crimea in 2014 and intensifying with the full-scale invasion in February 2022. This war has led to severe humanitarian crises and widespread violations of international humanitarian law, international criminal law, and international human rights law. The paper focuses on war crimes, including targeting civilians, the use of prohibited weapons, and the unlawful deportation of children to russia. This article addresses the scientific literature on the war crimes committed by russia against Ukraine and IHL implementation, noting the lack of research on forensic methodologies for war crime investigations in Ukraine. While Ukrainian scholars emphasize integrating international law into national legislation, foreign experts provide more detailed forensic approaches. The study evaluates the actions of international bodies like the International Criminal Court (ICC) and the United Nations, alongside efforts by the European Union and others, to ensure accountability and reparations, with particular focus on the various mechanisms established to address war crimes, human rights abuses, and the path toward reparations and justice for Ukraine. Special attention is given to international initiatives, such as the Atrocity Crime Advisor Group (ACA) and the International Centre for the Prosecution of the Crime of Aggression (ICPA), which are crucial in enhancing Ukraine's ability to prosecute atrocity crimes. The article underscores the need for coordinated international legal and financial support to achieve justice for the victims and rebuild Ukraine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Across the world, non-state actors are documenting international crimes and creating archives for accountability purposes. In this article, we consider how archives and their records are 'pressed into' legal service. At a time of wider archive creations, we suggest the archives pertaining to the Khmer Rouge regime (1975-1979) provide insights as a compelling 'post-accountability' case of the continuum of archival processes. By examining four Khmer Rouge archives, we demonstrate how records are activated in legal processes across different spacetimes, and how the records themselves '(im)press upon' on the legal process. In these processes, different actors seek to control the narrative of the past through archival holdings. We find that entrepreneurial justice, especially in the crucible of a legal process, can create fierce competition between actors over the economic and social capital inherent in record-keeping that is ultimately detrimental to understanding and pluralising the past. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The outbreak of the Russian–Ukrainian war fundamentally shook the international legal order. Consequently, possibilities of holding the aggressor state and potential perpetrators of international crimes accountable became a central topic. Options for establishing state responsibility for violating international law are limited. Possible individual criminal prosecution mechanisms are available at both national and international levels. At the national level, several jurisdictional bases can be found for prosecuting the most serious international crimes. In addition to the procedures at the national level, the International Criminal Court has jurisdiction at the international level in terms of holding persons accountable; however, this also faces challenges. In connection with the current conflict, the International Criminal Court cannot conduct proceedings in relation to all categories of crimes, so the international community seeks to rely on alternative mechanisms that support prosecution efforts. Furthermore, there is an increasing political demand for the creation of new mechanisms which, however, for the time being, are based on shaky international legal grounds. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The definition of the concept of war crimes is studied in a transdisciplinary course in the close connection of criminal and international law. The author's position regarding the legal definition of the terms «war», «military conflict», «armed «conflict», «laws and customs of war», «aggression» and their combination is formulated and substantiated. It has been confirmed that the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court provides for the definition of war crimes, taking into account Art. 6 of the Statute of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, and recognizes war crimes as gross, serious violations of the laws and customs of war with a significantly expanded list of such violations. And this, taking into account the national interests of Ukraine, is enshrined in Art. 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. It is proven that wars and armed conflicts: 1) are not identical concepts and it is incorrect to combine them in terms of content, apparently partially; 2) war is a type of military conflict, which is characterized by bilateral use of military force and 3) war can be a military conflict of a non-international character only in the case of civil war, which in the civilized world should be cut off forever through diplomatic efforts and peaceful resolution of conflict problems with respect for rights people and nations. Focused attention on the need for further terminological improvement of the edition of a number of international documents and Art. 438 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine from the point of view of the further implementation of the principle of the rule of law and its key element - the legal certainty of the norms that determine criminal responsibility for the committed act. The author considers it expedient and offers a way to solve the problem of the correctness of the use of the legal construct «laws and customs of war» in the specified article and in international norms (primarily the so-called «Hague laws» and «Geneva laws»). Opinions are expressed regarding the adoption of a decision at the international level to ban wars as military conflicts of an international nature and any armed conflicts as phenomena unacceptable for humanity, and to criminalize violations of the ban on wars at the national level. The term «aggression» is presented as having a defining psychological component, which calls into question the validity of its use to characterize military conflicts as a type of war. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is noted that the concept of the presumption of innocence is a fundamental element of the modern legal system and a key principle of criminal law. According to this principle, every individual is considered innocent of committing an offense until their guilt is established in accordance with the law and confirmed by a court verdict. This principle serves a dual function: on the one hand, it ensures the protection of the rights of the accused, and on the other hand, it serves as a mechanism to deter potential abuses by state authorities. Thus, the presumption of innocence contributes to ensuring the fairness of the judicial process and strengthens public confidence in the le gal system as a whole. The article is devoted to the study of specific issues of the principle of presumption of innocence in the context of international criminal law. The author examines its enshrinement in international legal documents and application in the practice of international judi cial institutions. The paper analyzes certain aspects of the presumption of innocence, including its interpretation by the European Court of Human Rights as a fundamental principle of justice and a specific right of the accused. Particular attention is paid to the consideration of the presumption of innocence as an objective legal provision, rather than a subjective opinion of the partic ipants in the process. The author explores the differences in the formulation of the principle of presumption of innocence in various international documents and their impact on the procedures for applying and refuting this principle. Key decisions of the European Court of Human Rights that interpret and apply the relevant provisions of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms are examined. The author emphasizes the importance of this principle as a guarantor of fairness and objectivity in international criminal justice. The work contains a review of scientific sources, demonstrating the complexity and multifaceted nature of the issue of presumption of innocence in international law. Based on the analysis conducted, there is a need for further research and adaptation of this principle to ensure its effectiveness in the context of the development of international criminal justice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article examines the environmental and legal aspects of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine. The problems of bringing the aggressor state to responsibility for ecocide are analyzed. Having found a legislative enshrinement in the national criminal law (Article 441 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine), ecocide has not been enshrined in international criminal law. It is not recognized as a crime either in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court or in any other international legal act. As of today, Russian crimes against the environment can be investigated by the International Criminal Court as war crimes. The author of the article supports the proposal regarding the need to include the crime of ecocide in the Rome Statute. The ecological and legal aspect of the formation of an international compensation mechanism is studied, the components of which are: 1) an international register of damages; 2) compensation commission (which will consider individual applications for compensation by the Russian Federation for losses from citizens, companies and the state); 3) compensation fund (which will accumulate funds to pay commission decisions, including at the expense of confiscated Russian assets). The mechanism of compensation for environmental damage caused as a result of the armed aggression of the Russian Federation against Ukraine is analyzed, and ways of its optimization are proposed. The future compensation mechanism should be based on the «ecosystem services approach», which will significantly increase the amount of environmental damage that the Russian Federation will pay to Ukraine. The international practice of compensation for environmental damage caused by the aggressor as a result of military actions and temporary occupation was studied and analyzed. The author emphasized the need to reform the state environmental monitoring system. Without reliable monitoring data, it is difficult to prove a causal relationship between the illegal actions of the aggressor state and the damage caused to the environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Protecting civilian populations affected by violent conflict and mass atrocities is a challenge in global politics, particularly in view of the persistence of contestation over the application of the Responsibility to Protect principle and geopolitical gridlock in the UN Security Council. Over the past decade, there has been a pronounced rise in international accountability mechanisms to fill protection gaps in the multilateral system. Increasingly, international accountability mechanisms have been activated in the early phases of conflict situations to counter atrocities, promoting protection in 'real time'. This article proposes that the deepening association between accountability and protection is best understood as an emergent human protection transnational legal order (HPTLO), a mode of decentralized governance that was driven by diverse agency across borders and aimed at solving problems of a global reach through legal ordering. The article provides an account of the formation and character of the HPTLO, demonstrates how it is operating in the context of the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, and identifies key risks and opportunities that these developments present to the global governance of human protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The crime of gender persecution holds great potential for the adequate prosecution of gender-based violence in international criminal law. Codified in Article 7(1)(h) of the Rome Statute as a crime against humanity, it provides an opportunity to condemn gender-specific violence beyond sexual acts. However, the icc has so far only made limited use of this possibility and has yet to convict a defendant under Article 7(1)(h) on the basis of gender. In contrast, the Düsseldorf Higher Regional Court recently became the first court or tribunal to explicitly convict a person for gender persecution. The Sarah O. case has the potential to set an important precedent for the prosecution of this crime. Importantly, it may help to highlight the challenges of prosecuting gender persecution and to address them at the national and international level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In light of the increasing role of corporations in facilitating gross human rights violations, this article seeks to evaluate the implementation of the Indonesian Criminal Law in addressing corporate criminal liability. Notably, the recently amended Indonesian Criminal Law recognizes corporations as subjects of criminal law, but Law No. 26 of 2000, which regulates gross human rights violations, does not. Consequently, this research specifically scrutinizes the Indonesian Criminal Code, Law No. 26 of 2000, and international legal standards to answer the issues: rules of aiding and abetting under international criminal law and the applicability of corporate culture theory, and the implementation of Indonesian Criminal Law in addressing corporate criminal liability for gross human rights violations. Examining these issues relies on three methodologies, namely the statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. The results of this article uncover that the recognition of corporations as subjects under the new Indonesian Criminal Code and rectification of the ratione materiae of Law No. 26 of 2000 open the avenue for corporations to be held criminally liable for gross human rights violations based on aiding and abetting. Furthermore, the theory of corporate culture envisaged in the new Indonesian Criminal Code renders the plausibility of holding corporations liable if they are deemed to cultivate a culture that pushes or encourages a gross human rights violation.

The International Criminal Law Review's latest volume covers a range of topics, including the Ongwen case at the International Criminal Court, torture as a crime against humanity, and the recognition of children born of war as victims. The journal also delves into issues of justice, nonviolent resistance in authoritarian regimes, and global atrocity justice constellations. With articles from various perspectives and regions, this volume provides a comprehensive overview of current debates and developments in international criminal law. [Extracted from the article]

The article explores the domestic implementation of international criminal law and complementarity, when operating alongside parallel transitional justice approaches. International criminal justice in Uganda is best understood as part of the broader lens of transitional justice, in response to a two-decade war in the Northern part of the country. Besides a doctrinal analysis of the relevant legal regime and cases, the article benefits from the author's personal insights working in Uganda and The Hague, the two sites of international justice that inform this article. Specifically, the International Crimes Division (ICD) which is the specialised court dealing with war crimes and crimes against humanity and the International Criminal Court (ICC). The article highlights critical paradoxes of the ICD and trial of former rebel Thomas Kwoyelo, putting this domesticated International Criminal Justice regime in a dilemma, also suggesting pathways for reforms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hungary has had an intense engagement with international criminal justice. During communism and democracy alike, the normative framework and language of international criminal law was used to delegitimise the political opponent. This article aims to describe the way international criminal law was repeatedly instrumentalized to not simply serve as a genuine tool for justice but also as a potent political pawn through presenting the use of international criminal law in four different time periods: (1) during the post-World War II war crimes trials at the People's Tribunals; (2) the adoption of universal jurisdiction during the communist era as a tool of Cold War status competition; (3) in the 1990s, as an instrument of transitional justice; and finally, (4) in the post-2010s, as a tool for memory politics and anti-migration propaganda. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides a summary and reflection on the results relating to the United States of America (United States or US) in the EU COST Action CA18228 (the Action) and the Scoping Survey on states' experiences with international criminal justice. It looks at how the United States has engaged or not engaged with international criminal justice in its law, policy, institutions, civil society, and culture. The data demonstrates that the United States' relationship with international criminal justice has been complex and, at times, controversial. More specifically, it shows the importance of framing international criminal justice as within the United States' national interest to ensure US support for the project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article offers an overview and analysis of the findings regarding the case of Colombia within the EU COST Action CA18228 (the Action) and the Scoping Survey examining states' encounters with international criminal justice. It explores Colombia's nuanced and multifaceted approach to international criminal justice frameworks, focusing on the intersection of transnational crimes and the intricate dynamics of internal armed conflicts. It presents Colombia's multi-scalar legal approach to attempting to establish a positive complementarity and multilevel rule-of-law system, acknowledging the challenges inherent in integrating international law with diverse levels of governance and local legislation. It highlights how the ongoing implementation of the peace process and transitional justice mechanisms have sparked debates about striking the delicate balance between peace and justice, conducting in some cases expressions of magical legalism. This article's significance rests in the idea that Colombia's experience serves as an illustrative case study of the complexities involved in applying a multi-scalar positive complementarity legal approach and multilevel legal framework in the pursuit of justice for both national and international crimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article will explain how Argentina developed a strong commitment to international criminal justice to address the crimes of the last dictatorship (1976–1983) that transcended the local dimension and shaped the field globally. In particular, the article will focus on three specific dimensions: the disputes surrounding the concept of 'dirty war' in relation to the crimes committed in the 1970s and how its legal conceptualisation has evolved over time; how domestic courts have applied international and domestic criminal law to judge these crimes and how this has changed over time; and, finally, what was the role of human rights organisations in fostering the accountability process. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The International Criminal Law Review's special issue presents 13 papers developed by scholars involved in an EU COST Action, focusing on atrocity justice beyond international criminal courts and tribunals. The papers explore domestic law, policy, and institutions related to atrocity justice in various countries, highlighting interactions between states and international criminal justice mechanisms. The diverse set of countries covered in the papers reflects unique national interests, drivers, and capacities rooted in domestic politics and resources, emphasizing the complex and dynamic landscape of atrocity justice on a global scale. [Extracted from the article]

Weapons of mass destruction are lethal instruments that involve nuclear explosions, radioactive, chemical, and biological materials, and any similar substances. This research addresses the extent and limits of the prohibition of possessing and using such weapons. It has been prepared according to the analytical and comparative methodologies, and its scientific material has been incorporated into an introductory chapter dedicated to definitions and two main chapters. The first chapter deals with the customary, jurisprudential, and judicial prohibition of the use of weapons of mass destruction, while the second chapter discusses the prohibition of the use of such weapons in conventions and treaties. The research has concluded, among other things, that: - The prohibition of possessing and using chemical and biological weapons is agreed upon, while there is disagreement regarding nuclear weapons, despite the fact that international law contains provisions in the convention prohibiting the use of weapons that cause unnecessary suffering. - Jurisprudence has differed on the legality of possessing biological warfare weapons within the scope of Article 2(4). - The prohibition should extend to the use of all weapons of mass destruction, regardless of their type. - A weapon prohibited under the law of armed conflict does not become lawful in light of the theory of legitimate defense. - The prohibition of such weapons is supported by many theories of international law. - These weapons cause great damage to the environment, and their use constitutes a crime of genocide and a crime against humanity. Although not explicitly included in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, the Statute has included in Article 8(2)(b) (17, 18) war crimes (the use of poison or poisoned weapons), as well as (the use of asphyxiating, poisonous or other gases, and all analogous liquids, substances or gases). The research recommends adopting dual international criminal responsibility, as international criminal law cannot ignore the responsibility that rests on specific natural persons in connection with criminal acts committed by the state. The exceptions contained in the Rome Statute relating to the absence of international criminal responsibility should not apply in the case of the use of weapons of mass destruction. It also recommends considering the possession and use of chemical and biological weapons and the like as an international crime, especially after the entry into force of the Biological and Chemical Weapons Conventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the legitimacy and rationale of the Joint Criminal Enterprise (JCE) principle in international criminal law, focusing on the implications of the UK Supreme Court's decision in R v Jogee, which fundamentally abolished JCE as a legal principle. JCE, characterized by its complexity and contentious nature, has been criticized for being driven more by policy considerations than legal precedents. The article first explicates the concept and evolution of JCE, including common purpose liability and parasitic accessorial liability, and highlights the irrationalities within these principles. Through an in-depth analysis of the R v Jogee decision, the author argues that the ruling successfully rectified residual errors in criminal law, deeming the abolition of JCE consistent with legal logic and tradition. The article concludes with recommendations for enhancing transparency and clarity in prosecution and sentencing processes to restore public confidence in the criminal justice system. It also underscores the disproportionate negative impact of JCE on minority groups and young offenders, advocating for reforms to mitigate these effects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a legal doctrinal inquiry into the claim that Israel's policies and practices in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT) constitute apartheid. Its purpose is to provide a more nuanced analysis which more clearly distinguishes between legal/doctrinal and political/policy arguments. While the popular, non-legal use of the apartheid claim regarding the OPT (and beyond) has dramatically increased in the last years, the legal doctrinal side of the issue, especially regarding the elements of the apartheid crime, remains underexplored. This inquiry intends to close this gap. The importance of such an objective legal analysis has even become more obvious with the Hamas' attack on Israel on October 7, 2023 and the ensuing armed conflict in Gaza. Yet, this inquiry is limited in that it only refers to the situation in the OPT and focuses on apartheid as an international crime and the ensuing individual criminal responsibility. After some preliminary and principled considerations on the status of apartheid under international (criminal) law, its substantive and geographical scope, its specific wrong, and the relationship between the relevant treaty instruments (infra section I), the second and main part of the paper will offer a detailed analysis of the elements of the crime (infra section II). Taking Article 7(2)(h) of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC Statute, ICCS) as the applicable crime definition, the following three elements will be examined: (i) "inhumane acts;" (ii) "institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups;" and (iii) the specific "intention of maintaining" the said regime. Applying these elements to the situation in the OPT, it will be shown that, while the first element is quite straightforward, the second element raises some tricky interpretative problems (especially the "racial group" part), and the third element is arguably the most difficult to demonstrate. Ultimately, criminal responsibility for apartheid cannot be established in the abstract but depends on the concrete circumstances of the individual case and the available evidence, with the specific apartheid intent to be inferred from context and conduct as the only reasonable inference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik (JIHHP) is the property of Dinasti Publisher and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article is devoted to an attempt to generalise and systematise the preliminary considerations regarding the outline of the initial contours of the socalled "interdependence" of the internal content and specific formulations and expressions which are currently commonly used to refer to the concept of "punishment in international criminal law". An assumption is suggested concerning the evolving nature of the definition of the notion of punishment in international criminal law, given the wide terminological variety of concepts and constructs present in scientific usage, which are as a rule either "located alongside" or "used instead". At least eighteen, to a certain extent, unique and original phrases designed to describe phenomena similar to "punishment in international criminal law" are identified, among which a special emphasis is traditionally assigned to such specific syntactic units as "international punishment" and "international criminal punishment", the use of which is quite typical and fairly evident in the modern scientific and information discourse. An assertion is made about the potential existence of a fundamental difference in the definition of the concept of punishment in international criminal law depending on the approaches to its perception, in view of the underlying method depicted in specific terms and categories: 1) through the prism of the imposition of punishment on specific individuals ("punishment of international criminals"); 2) by understanding punishment through the category of "incredible atrocities" ("punishment for international crimes"); 3) by "reading" its content from the perspective of international and national criminal justice bodies ("punishment in the law and practice of international criminal tribunals and courts, national and local institutions"); 4) comprehending its essence by inserting it into a certain setting ("punishment in international, transitional and transitional contexts"); 5) either from the standpoint and perspectives of legal norms ("punishment and international law, punishment and international criminal law") or their violation ("punishment for violations of international criminal and international humanitarian law"). It is emphasized that further scientific investigations aimed at establishing the essence of each of the currently existing terms with a view to clarifying their content in order to develop a unified definition of the concept of punishment in international criminal law are expedient. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If a biological or harmful toxin agent is used as weapon in armed conflict or terrorist acts, that agent is classified as a biological weapon. Biological weapons, which have a long history of being used in military conflicts, have received special attention from developed states. Due to their unique characteristics, these weapons are considered a serious threat to human health and the peace and security of the international community. The danger of such weapons is greater than nuclear and chemical weapons because they can destroy tens of millions of people in a short term, and the effects can be transferred to future generations. The results of this paper, which uses a descriptive-analytical method, show that under international law, the use of biological weapons in terrorist acts and armed conflicts violates legal rules and disrupts public order. Therefore, the use of such weapons can be criminalized both as a crime against humanity and as a war crime. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista de Direito Internacional is the property of Revista de Direito Internacional and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Direito Internacional is the property of Revista de Direito Internacional and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Direito Internacional is the property of Revista de Direito Internacional and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

More than 50 years have passed since the first proposal of a crime of ecocide under international criminal law. What seemed to be slow progress at first reached a peak of proliferation in public-legal discussion over the recent years. This paper is an effort to recapitulate the development of ecocide as a crime, analysing the different proposals from a critical point of view that will attempt to crystallise the challenges that they present. This analysis will be based on four main criteria: (a) the punishable conduct described, which will necessarily raise the discussion of the anthropocentric vis-à-vis an ecocentric vision; (b) the subjective element proposed and its compatibility with the Rome Statute; (c) the possible perpetrator; and (d) the legal instrument through which it is sought to be enshrined. Finally, we present certain guidelines regarding an International Criminal Court for the Environment and its compatibility with the International Criminal Court. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the multiple ways that international criminal law (ICL)--the body of international law that seeks to impose criminal responsibility on individuals for international crimes--has impacted the conflict in Ukraine. Most violations remain unpunished, and ICL's legal accountability mechanisms continue to face significant obstacles. But even absent prosecutions and trials, which remain contingent on an array of shifting factors, ICL has affected the Ukraine conflict in multiple ways. The article focuses on how ICL has helped shape narratives about the war in Ukraine. In doing so, the article cautions against a strict law/politics dichotomy and instead focuses on the more dynamic and multi-faceted interaction between international law, policy, and politics. It offers some broader conclusions about the opportunities as well as the challenges that a reliance on narrative presents for ICL's overarching aim of holding individuals accountable for mass atrocities through prosecutions. As the article explains, narrative can advance ICL's goals, but harnessing narrative's full potential requires a more consistent commitment to ICL's norms and principles, especially from the most powerful states. Further, an overreliance on narrative, without judicial enforcement, carries significant risks, particularly in today's digital world, where facts can be distorted, stories manipulated, and disinformation widely and rapidly disseminated. Extensive reliance on narrative, moreover, can dilute the norms on which ICL is based, weakening its status as law and breeding cynicism. Thus, the more disputes about atrocity crimes are resolved through competing narratives rather than by courts, the more blurred the distinction may become between ICL's regime of individual responsibility and the world of international power politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review essay discusses two books: Fairness and Rights in International Criminal Procedure by Sophie Rigney and Punishing Atrocities through a Fair Trial by Jonathan Hafetz. It discusses the methods used in each book, their conceptions of fairness, and what they see as the future of fairness in international criminal law. The review argues that when the two books are read together they show how far fairness has come, where it is now, and where fairness is headed in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The focal point of transitional justice efforts in Cambodia have been recently-completed criminal prosecutions at the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia ("ECCC"). Like other international criminal justice institutions, the ECCC has been framed as not only a criminal court, but also as an institution capable of helping achieve various transitional justice goals such as improving the rule of law and respect for human rights domestically in Cambodia. This Article identifies troubling connections between the ECCC experience and the Cambodian government's increasing use of rule by law tactics in recent years. The Article identifies two related ways in which the ECCC experience may have further damaged, rather than helped mend, the rule of law in Cambodia. First, by providing training to Cambodian legal actors beholden to the autocratic government, the ECCC has engaged in a form of "negative capacity-building" by enhancing the abilities of such actors to weaponize Cambodia's legal system against perceived threats to the dominant Cambodia People's Party ("CPP"). Second, by playing into the dominant social perception in Cambodia that powerful CPP-aligned actors remain the ultimate arbiters of contentious legal cases, even when producing inconsistent, incompatible outcomes, the Court's social messaging has lent some legitimacy to rule by law tactics in Cambodia. These negative rule of law outcomes are especially troubling given the authoritarian backsliding Cambodia has recently experienced. Moreover, the potential negative rule of law legacy of the ECCC should serve as a cautionary tale against the notion that international criminal law prosecutions solely produce positive rule of law effects in post-atrocity States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article concludes the Special Issue by exploring the role that international criminal law (ICL) could play in the protection of the environment in light of the three core issues covered in the Special Issue: the right to a healthy environment, climate change litigation and Indigenous peoples' Earth-Centric vision. First, the paper argues that fora applying ICL, including the International Criminal Court, could offer legal avenues to prosecute serious violations of the right to a healthy environment. Second, it alleges that whilst cases involving conducts leading to environmental degradation and destruction could be brought under ICL, ICL could not address the broader impact of such conducts, including on climate change. Third, it discusses the extent to which ICL could incorporate Indigenous peoples' Earth-centric approach to enhance the protection of the environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon ('STL') Trial Judgment in the Ayyash case contained some important comments that emphasised a decoupling of two sets of objectives in international criminal justice: individual criminal accountability and collective truth-telling. This article applauds these important comments as a welcome development in international criminal law. This article seeks to contextualise these important comments in the STL Trial Judgment within decades of international criminal jurisprudence regarding the place of historical truth-telling as a function of international criminal proceedings. This article will examine how international criminal justice evolved to promote the idea that truthtelling is one of the main objectives of international criminal trials. The article will then examine international criminal jurisprudence regarding balancing the objectives of truth-telling and individualised criminal accountability in international criminal proceedings and how these objectives have evolved over time. The article will also critically evaluate the normative claim regarding the lofty promises of truth-telling as an important tool for the realisation of peace and reconciliation in the context of international criminal proceedings. Against this background, the article will examine the noteworthy comments of the STL that decisively decouple the objectives of truth-telling from individualised criminal accountability in international criminal law. This article argues that while international criminal courts can certainly contribute to a range of transitional justice processes, international criminal justice alone cannot be regarded as the panacea, and the primary focus of an international court or tribunal must be the administration of individual criminal accountability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Araucaria is the property of Araucaria-Revista Iberoamericana de Filosofia, Politica y Humanidades and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article examines complex legal challenges in prosecuting war crimes and crimes against humanity (CAH) through a comparative analysis of Islamic law and international law. This article argues for the necessity of a multidimensional approach that considers both Islamic and modern international law rule to effectively prosecute war crimes and CAH, advocating for the integration of diverse legal traditions to strengthen global justice mechanisms. It explores these complexities by delving into the foundational legal frameworks of Islamic jurisprudence and international conventions. The article analyses the comprehensive framework for justice and punishment based on principles from the Qur'an, Hadith, Ijma (consensus), and Qiyas (analogical reasoning), which extends beyond individual conduct to encompass governance and state affairs, emphasising social justice, ethical behaviour, and the protection of individual rights. The article further analyses the methods of evidence collection, preservation, protection of the accused's rights, and principles guiding sentencing and punitive measures. By comparing Islamic legal principles with international law, this article identifies similarities, differences, and potential avenues for harmonisation between Islamic and modern international law. This comprehensive analysis contributes to understanding how best to address severe human rights violations and uphold international law, promoting accountability and justice on a global scale. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Lebanese Special Court is a special tribunal established after 2005 assassination of Lebanese politician Rafik Hariri by Security Council with the aim of investigating the assassination and related assassinations and punishing their perpetrators. In this regard, although the statute of the court and its judicial procedure, have made great efforts to a kind of reconciliation between international criminal law and Lebanese domestic criminal law in the field of Criminal responsibility of Individuals. The present study is an attempt to evaluate the procedure of the mentioned court in a descriptiveanalytical manner from the perspective of pursuing the criminal responsibility of individuals as well as the fight against the phenomenon of terrorism. The review of the court's practice in the process leading up to the August 18, 2020 verdict indicates that some major shortcomings remain in the institution's achievement of its goals. Recognizing the possibility of a trial in absentia and relying of The Lebanese Special Court on such trials is not only a threat to the human rights of these individuals, but also it seems that the court has not been very successful in providing a comprehensive definition of terrorism as well as in combating the phenomenon of impunity for terrorist acts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Article dedicated to investigating the object of the composition of a criminal offense of violation of the laws and customs of war. The relevance of the topic is determined by the increase in violations of international humanitarian law in contemporary armed conflicts, including in the context of Russian aggression against Ukraine. The author analyses various approaches to defining the concept of "object of criminal offense," critically assessing the traditional Soviet notion of the object as social relations. The need to move away from this concept in favour of a broader understanding of the object as a complex of socially significant values, interests, and goods protected by criminal law is substantiated. The article discusses the specificity of the object of violations of the laws and customs of war, as defined by international acts regulating the conduct of war. The author emphasizes that this object includes the international legal order in the sphere of armed conflicts, the principles of international humanitarian law, rules of conduct of hostilities, and the protection of war victims. An additional optional object of violation of the laws and customs of war analysed is the life and health of the person. It is emphasized that a mandatory feature of the object for this criminal offense is its subject matter, which constitutes objects of civilian purpose, including national property, which serves as a material carrier of cultural values. Special attention is paid to the analysis of the structure of criminal offenses against peace, security of humanity, and international order, which differs from the traditional structure of a criminal offense and includes material, mental, and contextual elements. The author also examines the concept of command responsibility, which is an important component of criminal responsibility for violations of the laws and customs of war. The conclusions assert that a clear understanding of the object of violations of the laws and customs of war is crucial for the correct qualification of actions and ensuring the inevitability of punishment for criminal offenses against peace, security of humanity, and international order. The author emphasizes the need for further improvement of approaches to defining the object of this criminal offense considering the development of international criminal law and the practice of international judicial institutions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This scientific article carefully examines the differences in the penal systems of the criminal law of Ukraine and the United States. The content of the article is focused on the comparison of different approaches to criminal liability, various types of punishments, their application in practice and general consequences for the criminal himself and society as a whole. The main goal of the study is to identify features and propose potential improvements to the Ukrainian penal system based on the experience of other countries, namely the US penal system. In general, the Ukrainian penal system focuses on three main aspects: compensation for harm caused by criminal offences, correction of the offender's deviant behaviour, and prevention of recidivism through rehabilitation measures. Moreover, the criteria for classifying such measures of state coercion and the characteristic features of each group are highlighted. The US system, especially at the federal level, is characterised by a complex and diverse range of punishments. This structure is a result of long historical development and the accumulation of practical experience over centuries. In the context of our research, it was revealed that the US places greater emphasis on maintaining public order, preventing crime, and rehabilitating offenders. Despite this, some US states retain the practice of capital punishment for particularly serious crimes. However, this type of punishment is used extremely rarely and only in exceptional circumstances, confirming its exceptional nature. The comparative legal analysis allows us to identify advantages and disadvantages in both systems, as well as to establish effective methods of punishment, which can contribute to the further improvement of the system of punishment for criminal offences in both legal systems. The significance of this article lies in its analytical and comparative approach, which facilitates the identification of effective ways to improve Ukraine's national legislation, taking into account best international practices and generally recognized standards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In light of the increasing role of corporations in facilitating gross human rights violations, this article seeks to evaluate the implementation of the Indonesian Criminal Law in addressing corporate criminal liability. Notably, the recently amended Indonesian Criminal Law recognizes corporations as subjects of criminal law, but Law No. 26 of 2000, which regulates gross human rights violations, does not. Consequently, this research specifically scrutinizes the Indonesian Criminal Code, Law No. 26 of 2000, and international legal standards to answer the issues: rules of aiding and abetting under international criminal law and the applicability of corporate culture theory, and the implementation of Indonesian Criminal Law in addressing corporate criminal liability for gross human rights violations. Examining these issues relies on three methodologies, namely the statutory approach, conceptual approach, and case approach. The results of this article uncover that the recognition of corporations as subjects under the new Indonesian Criminal Code and rectification of the ratione materiae of Law No. 26 of 2000 open the avenue for corporations to be held criminally liable for gross human rights violations based on aiding and abetting. Furthermore, the theory of corporate culture envisaged in the new Indonesian Criminal Code renders the plausibility of holding corporations liable if they are deemed to cultivate a culture that pushes or encourages a gross human rights violation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The question of how international responsibility fares following the Russian aggression against Ukraine has become commonly discussed and explored. This article argues that the context is nevertheless more complicated as the global order is changing due to power shifts. International norms and institutions as Western states used to know them are no longer secure, but subject to great power contestation leaving it unclear if and how practices, pursuits and invocations of international responsibility change. By analysing, in turn, three institutional snapshots of responsibility from the UN General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, and the International Criminal Court respectively, the article identifies three themes prevalent in current responsibility practices: lawfare, short-term goals like prevention, and accusations of double standards. These attributes reflect the tensions of the reordering of the global order and stands far apart from the story of progress that characterised international responsibility in the Halcyon Days of the 1990s. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The intersection of armed conflicts and environmental degradation has given rise to a critical and evolving field of study known as eco-crimes. This paper delves into the multifaceted dimensions of eco-crimes during armed conflicts, examining the challenges in defining and prosecuting these offenses under international criminal law. It underscores the deficiencies in existing international legal frameworks and the necessity for specialized attention. Through a scrutiny of case studies, the paper analyzes instances of environmental violations during armed conflicts, including deliberate ecosystem destruction, use of hazardous substances, and natural resource exploitation. The paper further proposes enhanced mechanisms for information-sharing, capacity-building, and joint responses to prevent, prosecute, and remediate eco-crimes. The study concludes with comprehensive recommendations, urging a global commitment to address eco-crimes through legal reforms, international collaboration, and public awareness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study was aimed at identifying the most important methods that help in developing criminal investigation skills to confront cyber-crimes. The study was based on more than one approach. It was based on the inductive method, which is based on the deductive approach. The most important findings were: Electronic evidence has a specific scientific value in referring to the facts it contains, but it is indispensable that it be legitimate, both in terms of existence, to be among the legally accepted evidence as a means of proof. 1. The reasons for the difficulty of detecting cybercrime can be explained by the fact that this crime does not leave any visible external impact that the offender can commit this crime in other countries and continents because cybercrime is a transnational crime. 2. The lack of technical and technical expertise in the police, prosecutors, and the judiciary. This is a major obstacle to proving cybercrime. This type of crime requires training and qualification in information technology, evidence collection, research, and trial in the computer and Internet environment. 3. Cybercrime may be part of traditional crime, in the sense that there is a traditional crime involving an electronic aspect.