Defenses in Contemporary International Criminal Law

Knoops, Geert-Jan Alexander

doi:10.1163/ej.9781571051585.i-334

Cited by 36 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…31 The aspects of retributive and restorative justice in the Nuremberg and Tokyo Military Tribunals, particularly to the references to them as 'victors' justice,' were mainly addressed by Alexander Boraine (2004). 32 Very importantly, Nanci Adler (2004), 33 Gideon Boas, James L. Bischoff and Natalie L. Reid (2007), 34 Ciara Damgaard (2008), 35 Geert-Jan Alexander Knoops (2008), 36 and Kai Ambos (2013) 37 traced, in a detailed and comprehensive manner, the evolutionary status of the recognition of individual criminal responsibility in International Criminal Law and the forms of criminal responsibility.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Mazzinghy

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This book investigates the legal nature and criminal responsibility of ISIL/DAESH’s crimes against civilians in Iraq, especially Christians. The author examines whether these crimes constitute genocide or persecution as crimes against humanity under the Rome Statute, based on the actus reus and mens rea of the perpetrators. The book draws on hundreds of cases from international criminal tribunals and offers a significant and original contribution to the study of genocide and crimes against humanity.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Mazzinghy

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Case law contents that in those situations the doctrine of prior fault should be applied. This doctrine is summarized by Ashworth and Horder as 'not allowing a person to take advantage of any defence or partial defence to criminal liability if the relevant conditions or circumstances were brought about by his or her own fault' (Knoops 2008;Duff, 2009;Ashworth & Horder, 2013;Bassiouni, 2013;Reed & Bohlander, 2016).…”

Section: Voluntariness and Criminal Liability: The Doctrine Of Prior ...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Child Soldiers Caught in a Cultural Kaleidoscope

Bondt¹

2022

Int. J. Child. Rights

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Child participation in armed conflicts continues to challenge societies. Many diverging opinions and (perceived) legislative inconsistencies can be brought back to cultural differences spread over three axes. First, the recognition of child competence and their right to decide to participate in an armed conflict, differs significantly across and even within cultures. Second, the notion of “child” in child soldiers is conceptualised differently. Third, questions concerning their criminal liability for acts committed whilst being a child soldier continue to be fiercely debated. The question arises whether it is possible to draft a solid legal framework, recognising the vast cultural diversities.

show abstract

“…(Westhusing 2003: 4) With respect to peacekeeping, Nasu (2009: 188) proposes that ROE represent a '[h]ybrid of military operability and legal regulation'. Going even further, Knoops (2008) describes ROE as 'semi-legislative', suggesting that ROE enacted by international organizations could be considered part of international customary law. Citing Greenwood, Knoops controversially puts forward the idea that 'a wide measure of agreement on military policy targets and proceedings was itself reflected (in the ROE) as the applicable law'.…”

Section: Regulating War In the Shadow Of Law 127mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…But if the order was not 'manifestly unlawful', one may, arguably, be exempted due to one's compliance with ROE,under Article 33.1(c). As more cases are brought before the ICC, the legal status of ROE in terms of potential defenses for peacekeepers under ICL will likely be considered in further detail (see generally Knoops 2008).…”

Section: Adjudicating Unlawful Roe and Illegal Roe Actsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Regulating War in the Shadow of Law: Toward a Re-Articulation of ROE

Sandvik

2014

Journal of Military Ethics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The experiences of multinational engagements in Kosovo in the late 1990s, and then more recently Afghanistan from 2001 and Iraq from 2003, have led to a political debate about the linkage between legality and legitimacy. At the heart of contemporary political and academic discourses about war are questions about the scope and content of the law of armed conflict. Considerably less attention has been given to another mode of regulating warfare, namely Rules of Engagement (ROE), despite their operational significance. This article seeks to begin to bridge this knowledge gap by examining ROE as a means to achieving greater legal accountability for the use of force against civilians. To that end, the article aims to do two things: first, to use examples from the US and the multinational context to develop a typology of the various issues that might affect ROE adversely in a legal accountability perspective, either as a background context or through the deployment and use of ROE itself; and second, to look at ways of rearticulating ROE, setting them on a path toward a more standardized and judicialized form of accountability.

show abstract

Defenses in Contemporary International Criminal Law

Cited by 36 publications

References 0 publications

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Beyond a Reasonable Doubt

Child Soldiers Caught in a Cultural Kaleidoscope

Regulating War in the Shadow of Law: Toward a Re-Articulation of ROE

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About