Three conceptual problems with the doctrine of joint criminal enterprise

This article dissects the Tadi court's argument for finding the doctrine of joint criminal enterprise in the ICTY Statute. The key arguments are identified and each are found to be either problematic or insufficient to deduce the doctrine from the statute: the object and purpose of the statute...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Ohlin, Jens David (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: [S.l.] SSRN [2010]
In: Journal of international criminal justice
Year: 2007, Volume: 5, Issue: 1, Pages: 69-90
Online Access: Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1526133083
003 DE-627
005 20220604105507.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 160223s2007 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1526133083 
035 |a (DE-576)456133089 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ456133089 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Ohlin, Jens David  |d 1974-  |0 (DE-588)1031908609  |0 (DE-627)737528680  |0 (DE-576)252021983  |4 aut 
109 |a Ohlin, Jens David 1974-  |a Ohlin, Jens 1974- 
245 1 0 |a Three conceptual problems with the doctrine of joint criminal enterprise  |c Jens David Ohlin 
264 1 |a [S.l.]  |b SSRN  |c [2010] 
300 |a Online-Ressource 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a Computermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
520 |a This article dissects the Tadi court's argument for finding the doctrine of joint criminal enterprise in the ICTY Statute. The key arguments are identified and each are found to be either problematic or insufficient to deduce the doctrine from the statute: the object and purpose of the statute to punish major war criminals, the inherently collective nature of war crimes and genocide and the conviction of war criminals for joint enterprises in World War II cases. The author criticizes this over-reliance on international case law and the insufficient attention to the language of criminal statutes when interpreting conspiracy doctrines. The result of these mistakes is a doctrine of joint criminal enterprise that fails to offer a sufficiently nuanced treatment of intentionality, foreseeability and culpability. Specifically, the doctrine in its current form suffers from three conceptual deficiencies: (1) the mistaken attribution of criminal liability for contributors who do not intend to further the criminal purpose of the enterprise, (2) the imposition of criminal liability for the foreseeable acts of one's co-conspirators and (3) the mistaken claim that all members of a joint enterprise are equally culpable for the actions of its members. The author concludes by briefly suggesting amendments to the Rome Statute to rectify these deficiencies 
773 0 8 |i In  |t Journal of international criminal justice  |d Oxford : Oxford Univ. Press, 2003  |g 5(2007), 1, Seite 69-90  |h Online-Ressource  |w (DE-627)363757368  |w (DE-600)2106537-8  |w (DE-576)110736575  |x 1478-1395  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:5  |g year:2007  |g number:1  |g pages:69-90 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mql044  |x Resolving-System  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
936 u w |d 5  |j 2007  |e 1  |h 69-90 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 2899646486 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1526133083 
LOK |0 005 20160223101804 
LOK |0 008 160208||||||||||||||||ger||||||| 
LOK |0 040   |a DE-21-110  |c DE-627  |d DE-21-110 
LOK |0 092   |o n 
LOK |0 852   |a DE-21-110 
LOK |0 852 1  |9 00 
LOK |0 935   |a k110 
ORI |a SA-MARC-krimdoka001.raw