Modes of Liability for International Crimes

Started in January 2015

The most senior political and military figures in any given context are almost invariably not the people ‘pulling the trigger’. Indeed, today, many of the greatest debates and controversies in international criminal law (ICL) concern forms of responsibility for international crimes other than direct commission.

An Inconsistent Jurisprudence

Jurisprudence in the various ICL tribunals and national courts is inconsistent, both internally and across different tribunals, as illustrated by recent debates surrounding the complex notions of joint criminal enterprise – involving the participation of several individuals in a common criminal plan – or of command responsibility – when a superior is held responsible for international crimes committed by his subordinates and for failing to prevent or punish them. This has left the state of the law unclear, to the detriment of accountability and the ongoing struggle against impunity.

Clarifying the Conditions of Accountability for International Crimes

This project therefore intends to clarify the conditions of accountability for international crimes by providing a detailed assessment of the customary international law status of, in particular, the actus reus and mens rea elements of modes of liability: planning, instigating, conspiracy, direct and indirect perpetration, co-perpetration, the three forms of joint criminal enterprise, the doctrine of common purpose under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), command responsibility and aiding and abetting.

Having started in 2015, the project will be completed at the end of 2016 and its findings published in a book. This will constitute an essential reference for national courts and international tribunals, as well as ministries of justice and foreign affairs, international organizations, fact-finding missions and commissions of inquiry, United Nations human rights treaty bodies and special procedures, judges and academics.

The research is directed by Professor Robert Roth and coordinated by Jérôme de Hemptinne and involves the active participation of several leading experts in the field of ICL as well as young scholars from universities, the ICC and other international tribunals who have acquired extensive experience in this area.

RESEARCHERS

Picture of Jérôme de Hemptinne

Jérôme de Hemptinne

Lecturer at the Universities of Louvain, Strasbourg and Lille

Jérôme de Hemptinne's research focuses on modes of liability for international crimes, the qualification of armed conflicts and institutional aspects of international criminal courts and tribunals.

MORE ON THIS THEMATIC AREA

 Nelson Mandela, Deputy President of the African National Congress of South Africa, raises his fist in the air while addressing the Special Committee Against Apartheid in the General Assembly Hall. 22 June 1990 Event

Nelson Mandela Human Rights Lecture

July 2019, 18:00-19:30

Michelle Bachelet, UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and Albie Sachs, Former Judge of the South African Constitutional Court, will reflect on the current human rights challenges and how to move the human rights agenda forward.

Read more

U.S. Ambassador Keith Harper, after the presentation of the report to the Human Rights Council September 27 by independent experts: Mr. Pablo de Greiff, Mr. Christof Heyns, Ms. Maya Sahli-Fadel. Project

Support to the UN Special Rapporteur on the Promotion of Truth, Justice, Reparation and Guarantees of Non-Recurrence

Completed in January 2012

From 2012 to 2015 the Geneva Academy hosted the Adviser to the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion of truth, justice, reparation and guarantees of non-recurrence Pablo de Greiff.

Read more

Screenshot of the RULAC webpage Project

Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts (RULAC)

Started in May 2007

The Rule of Law in Armed Conflicts project (RULAC) is a unique online portal that identifies and classifies all situations of armed violence that amount to an armed conflict under international humanitarian law (IHL). It is primarily a legal reference source for a broad audience, including non-specialists, interested in issues surrounding the classification of armed conflicts under IHL.

Read more