The requirement of an "express agreement" for joint criminal enterprise liability: a critique of Br─æanin

The mode of liability known as joint criminal enterprise (JCE) has emerged in the case law of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) as a means of assigning criminal liability to individuals for activities carried out by a collective. As a result, the doctrine must be c...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Gustafson, Katrina (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Published: [S.l.] SSRN [2010]
In: Journal of international criminal justice
Online Access: Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Check availability: HBZ Gateway

MARC

LEADER 00000caa a22000002 4500
001 1526134330
003 DE-627
005 20220604105515.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 160223s2007 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
035 |a (DE-627)1526134330 
035 |a (DE-576)456134336 
035 |a (DE-599)BSZ456134336 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Gustafson, Katrina  |4 aut 
245 1 4 |a The requirement of an "express agreement" for joint criminal enterprise liability  |b a critique of Br─æanin  |c Katrina Gustafson 
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 The mode of liability known as joint criminal enterprise (JCE) has emerged in the case law of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) as a means of assigning criminal liability to individuals for activities carried out by a collective. As a result, the doctrine must be carefully defined so as not to allow it to extend a defendant's liability beyond the appropriate limits of individual criminal responsibility. In this regard, a recent ICTY Trial Chamber decision in Br anin held that, where a defendant is not alleged to have participated in the physical perpetration of the crimes charged but to have contributed in some other way to the commission of the crimes by a group, the prosecution must demonstrate that the defendant entered into an express agreement with the physical perpetrators to commit the crimes charged. The author argues that this express agreement requirement is both conceptually unsound and practically unhelpful. Conceptually, it would be inconsistent with core principles of JCE liability to require an express agreement between a defendant and the physical perpetrators of crimes, at least in circumstances in which it is alleged that there existed a structure of two or more overlapping JCEs. Moreover, because this structure allows the accused and the physical perpetrators to be operating in two separate JCEs, they need not even share a common criminal purpose. On a practical level, arguably in a system-criminality context such as the one that developed in the former Yugoslavia during the time period in question, the organizers of criminal activity are unlikely to enter into express criminal agreements with those who physically carry out crimes, because existing organized hierarchies provide much more efficient mechanisms by which leaders are able to ensure the realization of their criminal plans 
773 0 8 |i In  |t Journal of international criminal justice  |d Oxford : Oxford Univ. Press, 2003  |g 5(2007), 1, Seite 134-158  |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:134-158 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mqi085  |x Resolving-System  |3 Volltext 
935 |a mkri 
936 u w |d 5  |j 2007  |e 1  |h 134-158 
951 |a AR 
ELC |a 1 
LOK |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 
LOK |0 001 2899647768 
LOK |0 003 DE-627 
LOK |0 004 1526134330 
LOK |0 005 20160223101813 
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