The importance of gene duplication in developmental body plan evolution is wellestablished, but for many megadiverse clades such as true flies (Diptera), a comprehensive understanding is still just emerging through comparative genomics. In a survey of 377 developmental gene families, we found that in addition to the pea aphid, which has been previously shown to be genome-wide enriched with gene duplicates and was included as positive control, more than twice as many expanded developmental gene families were observed in Drosophila (49) compared to mosquito (21), flour beetle (20), and honeybee (14). Synonymous sequence divergence estimates and ortholog conservation analyses in additional dipteran genomes revealed that most Drosophila gene duplicates are ancient and accumulated during a time window that reaches back to the origin of brachyceran flies, ∼180 million years ago. Further, available genetic data suggest that more than half of the Drosophila developmental gene duplicates remained partially or even fully redundant despite their ancient separation. We therefore speculate that the exceptional accumulation of developmental gene duplicates in Drosophila and the higher Diptera was proximally driven by the evolution of fast development, benefiting from increased genetic robustness. At the same time, the concomitant increase of opportunities for gene duplicate diversification appears to have been a source for developmental and phenotypic innovation during the unparalleled diversification of brachyceran Diptera.

يتعلق البحث بتحليل عدد من مواد قانون العقوبات العراقي رقم 111 لسنة 1969 لبيان القصور التشريعي في صياغة أحكام الركن المعنوي للجريمة، وذلك لغرض تطويرها ، من خلال توضيح أوجه القصور التشريعي فيها وتقديم التوصيات المناسبة لمعالجتها. ويتوزع البحث على مقدمة ومبحثين وخاتمة. يوضح المبحث الأول القصور التشريعي في صياغة الركن المعنوي للجريمة في الإطار المفاهيمي، ويبيّن المبحث الثاني القصور التشريعي في صياغة الركن المعنوي للجريمة في نطاق تحميل المسؤولية الجزائية. وأدرجت في الخاتمة أهم الاستنتاجات والتوصيات المتوصل إليها في مساره.

Article 3, paragraph (C) of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948 provides, along with the punishment in paragraph (E) of it for participation in the commission of the crime of genocide, punishment for direct and public incitement to commit it. Article (25) paragraph (d) of the statute of the International Criminal Court also punishes any contribution to international crimes that fall within its jurisdiction, including the crime of genocide. Paragraph (e) of it specifically punishes direct and public incitement to commit the crime of genocide, which raises two questions: how different it is from one of the forms of participation in it, which is incitement to commit its, as a form of participation in the crime of genocide and what are its distinguishing features? On this basis, this research is devoted to studying the concept of direct and public incitement to commit the crime of genocide, by analyzing the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948, the Statuses of international criminal courts, their practices, and comparative criminal legislation.

The crime of genocide within the scope of international crimes is characterized by its extreme gravity. Its severity increases if it is committed in light of its contribution, given the multiplicity of perpetrators and the possibility of causing great harm to the targeted human groups. Accordingly, the International Criminal Court statute specialized in contributing to international crimes, including the crime of genocide, with some of the provisions regulating them, based on which criminal accountability is held for those who contributed to its commission (Article 25). And because the statute of the court provides that the court, in exercising its jurisdiction, applies its statute, corpus delicti, procedural rules and rules of proof for the court, relevant international treaties and principles and norms of international law, as well as the general principles of law that it arises from the national legal systems of the countries of the world (article 21), which raises questions about the legal system adopted by the court in criminal liability for the contribution to the crime of genocide, given the different national legal systems in regulating participation in the crime, especially about the types of accomplices in the crime, and their criminal responsibility. In light of this, the study shows the forms of complicity in crime in various legal systems and studies the Institute of complicity in the crime of genocide in the statute of the International Criminal Court and its judicial decisions, as well as judicial decisions of the Provisional International Criminal Courts in this regard.