Skip to main content
    • Aa
    • Aa
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 5
  • Cited by
    This article has been cited by the following publications. This list is generated based on data provided by CrossRef.

    CUPIDO, MARJOLEIN 2016. Common Purpose Liability Versus Joint Perpetration: A Practical View on the ICC's Hierarchy of Liability Theories. Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 29, Issue. 03, p. 897.

    Ohlin, Jens David 2015. The One or the Many. Criminal Law and Philosophy, Vol. 9, Issue. 2, p. 285.

    SADAT, LEILA NADYA and JOLLY, JARROD M. 2014. Seven Canons of ICC Treaty Interpretation: Making Sense of Article 25's Rorschach Blot. Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 27, Issue. 03, p. 755.

    Jain, Neha 2013. Individual Responsibility for Mass Atrocity: In Search of a Concept of Perpetration. American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 61, Issue. 4, p. 831.

    ROBINSON, DARRYL 2013. A Cosmopolitan Liberal Account of International Criminal Law. Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 26, Issue. 01, p. 127.


The End of ‘Modes of Liability’ for International Crimes


Modes of liability, such as ordering, instigation, superior responsibility, and joint criminal liability, are arguably the most-discussed topics in modern international criminal justice. In recent years, a wide range of scholars have rebuked some of these modes of liability for compromising basic concepts in liberal notions of blame attribution, thereby reducing international defendants to mere instruments for the promotion of wider sociopolitical objectives. Critics attribute this willingness to depart from orthodox concepts of criminal responsibility to international forces, be they interpretative styles typical of human rights or aspirations associated with transitional justice. Strangely, however, complicity has avoided these criticisms entirely, even though it, too, fails the tests international criminal lawyers use as benchmarks in the deconstruction of other modes. Moreover, the source of complicity's departures from basic principles is not international as previously suggested – it stems from international criminal law's emulation of objectionable domestic criminal doctrine. If, instead of inheriting the dark sides of domestic criminal law, we apply international scholars’ criticisms across all modes of liability, complicity disintegrates (as do all other modes of liability) into a broader notion of perpetration. A unitary theory could also attach to all prosecutions for international crimes, both international and domestic, transcending the long-endured fixation on modes of liability within the discipline.

Linked references
Hide All

This list contains references from the content that can be linked to their source. For a full set of references and notes please see the PDF or HTML where available.

M. Damaška , ‘The Shadow Side of Command Responsibility’, (2001) 49 American Journal of Comparative Law 455, at 456

H. Olásolo , ‘Reflections on the International Criminal Court's Jurisdictional Reach’, (2005) 16 Criminal Law Forum 279

D. Robinson , ‘The Identity Crisis of International Criminal Law’, (2008) 21 LJIL 925

I. Tallgren , ‘The Sensibility and Sense of International Criminal Law’, (2002) 13 EJIL 561

M. S. Moore , ‘The Superfluity of Accomplice Liability’, in M. S. Moore (ed.), Causation and Responsibility: An Essay in Law, Morals, and Metaphysics (2009), 280

S. H. Kadish , ‘Reckless Complicity’, (1996) 87 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 369

J. Gardner , ‘Complicity and Causality’, (2007) 1 Criminal Law and Philosophy 127

V. Haan , ‘The Development of the Concept of Joint Criminal Enterprise at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia’, (2005) 5 International Criminal Law Review 167, at 177

P. H. Robinson , ‘Imputed Criminal Liability’, (1983) 93 Yale Law Journal 609

G. Williams , ‘Convictions and Fair Labelling’, (1983) 42 Cambridge Law Journal 85

J. Chalmers and F. Leverick , ‘Fair Labelling in Criminal Law’, (2008) 71 Modern Law Review 217

B. B. Jia , ‘The Doctrine of Command Responsibility Revisited’, (2004) 3 Chinese Journal of International Law 1

O. Triffterer , ‘Causality, a Separate Element of the Doctrine of Superior Responsibility as Expressed in Article 28 Rome Statute?’, (2002) 15 LJIL 203

S. H. Kadish , Complicity, Cause and Blame: A Study in the Interpretation of Doctrine, (1085) 73 CLR 323

R. Weisberg , ‘Reappraising Complicity’, (2000) 4 Buffalo Criminal Law Review 217

D. Yeager , ‘Helping, Doing, and the Grammar of Complicity’, (1996) 15 Criminal Justice Ethics 25

F. Bowes Sayre , ‘Criminal Responsibility for the Acts of Another’, (1929) 43 Harvard Law Review 689

L. Alexander , ‘Insufficient Concern: A Unified Conception of Criminal Culpability’, (2000) 88 CLR 931

R. A. Duff , ‘“Can I Help You?”: Accessorial Liability and the Intention to Assist’, (1990) 10 Legal Studies 165

T. Hörnle , ‘Commentary to “Complicity and Causality”’, (2006) 1 Criminal Law and Philosophy 143

Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Leiden Journal of International Law
  • ISSN: 0922-1565
  • EISSN: 1478-9698
  • URL: /core/journals/leiden-journal-of-international-law
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *