No description available.

The prosecutorial standard for incitement is subject to different approaches in the common law and civil law traditions respectively. The most crucial difference lies in the role attributed to the result as a definitional element of the offence. While the civil law generally characterizes proof of results as a prerequisite to liability, the common law views it as significant but not determinative of guilt. This divergence is expounded at the international level, which condones both approaches with respect to different crimes, employing the common law approach only to genocide and relegating all other crimes to the purview of the civil law approach. The practical effect is a focus on the gravity of the substantive crime to which incitement attaches, rather than on the crucial role of incitement itself. This thesis will seek to elucidate the parameters of this debate with the aim of deconstructing and redrawing preconceived barriers in international criminal law.

Univ., Diss.--Köln, 2001. / Literaturverz. S. [199] - 208.