Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-558cb97cc8-mjrxc Total loading time: 7.103 Render date: 2022-10-06T07:41:28.305Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "displayNetworkTab": true, "displayNetworkMapGraph": true, "useSa": true } hasContentIssue true

7 - Joint criminal enterprise and functional perpetration

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 October 2009

André Nollkaemper
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Harmen van der Wilt
Affiliation:
Universiteit van Amsterdam
Get access

Summary

Introduction

The joint criminal enterprise doctrine (hereafter JCE) has made quite an impressive appearance on the stage of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. Raised from the ashes of Nuremberg conspiracy law, the doctrine has been enthusiastically embraced by the Tribunal, which has polished the doctrine in order both to meet the principles of criminal law and to face the complexities of international crimes.

The gist of the doctrine is to nail persons who joined forces for a Common purpose to commit (international) crimes and contributed to this aim, although they did not physically perpetrate those crimes. The doctrine connotes group responsibility. However, mere membership does not suffice to incur criminal responsibility, as the ICTY has emphasized correctly.

In the Tadic case, the Appeals Chamber of the ICTY has tried to refine and diversify the doctrine, identifying no fewer than three versions. Whereas the requirements as to the actus reus are basically the same a plurality of persons, membership of this group and an unarticulated ‘contribution’ they differ in the mens rea. The first, relatively straightforward and unproblematic form (JCE (I)) implies that all group members share the common intent to commit certain crimes which actually materialize. The second form (JCE (II)), which has been called the ‘systemic variant’, covers participation in a repressive system in the context of which multiple crimes are committed on a structural basis and has been applied in the so-called ‘concentration camp’ cases.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)
3
Cited by

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×