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.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Melbourne, Dept. of Criminology, 2005. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 321-365).

Originally presented as the author's thesis (PhD)--Wilhelms-Universität Münster, 2008. / Includes bibliographical references and index.

Zugl.: Berlin, Humboldt-Univ., Diss., 2008/2009 / Includes bibliographical references (p. 365-394) and index.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--York University, 2005. Graduate Programme in Political Science. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 260-268). Also available on the Internet. MODE OF ACCESS via web browser by entering the following URL: http://wwwlib.umi.com/cr/yorku/fullcit?pNR11565

Thesis (doctoral)--Universität, Münster (Westf.), 2008. / Includes English summary. Includes bibliographical references and index.

To prosecute perpetrators of war crimes the International Criminal Court (ICC) must connect the physical actions of the offence and ‘most responsible’ offenders charged with planning, instigating and intent on carrying out crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of aggression. To date there has been no empirical study of the types of physical actions that make up this offence. There is no baseline knowledge to contextualize the offence and enable the ICC to make links between the actions on the ground and a perpetrator’s culpability. The purpose of this study was to produce the first multivariate model of war crime ground action using cases of war crime offences in Cambodia and Rwanda. The aim was to first identify a representative range offence behaviours, and secondly determine if ground actions could be differentiated into distinct forms of offending that indicate culpability, that is, knowledge and intent in carrying out the crime. Lastly, offence behaviours assessed to determine if external factors could account for variances in offender behaviour, and help the ICC account for variances in behaviour when making inferences from the models. This was achieved through content analysis, cluster analysis, smallest space analysis and multivariate analysis of variance. It was found that as many as 44 different killing and disposal methods are used over the course of war crimes in Cambodia and Rwanda and that these offence actions can be classified into four distinct themes of behaviour. The indentified conservative, expressive, integrative and adaptive theme demonstrates that offenders were committing war crime offences in different ways. Using the underlying theories attached to each mode the ICC can infer the culpability of an offender based on which theme their actions fall into. In this case offenders subscribing to the conservative theme are likely to reflect the planning and instigation components of a war crime and offenders whose actions fall within the expressive theme are likely to be using war crimes as a cover for personal gratification and gain. Finally it was found that variances of behaviour can be attributed to the geographical location and timing of the event, and helps the ICC target their investigations to locations and periods linked to conservative behaviour, the offender who performs it and thus their culpability. This study shows that multivariate analysis can contextualize ground actions in manner that allows the ICC to make informed decisions of perpetrator culpability during war crimes.

L’objectif majeur de ce travail est de dresser un bilan de l’ensemble des litiges soumis et susceptibles d’être soumis aux juges relevant du droit international pénal ayant eu lieu dans les pays inter lacustres d’Afrique. Il articule autour des quatre axes principaux. Le premier axe consiste à placer le droit international pénal dans l’ensemble du droit international moderne. Le deuxième axe consiste à situer la criminalité de masse de la sous-région des pays inter lacustres d’Afrique dans le temps et dans l’espace tout en s’attardant sur le contexte politique et social dans lequel elle a eu lieu, son ampleur et son inhumanité. Le troisième axe quant à lui, s’attarde à la démonstration de quelles formes (chapeaux des crimes, et crimes sous-jacents) les crimes contre la paix et la sécurité de l’humanité se sont manifestés dans la sous-région des pays inter lacustres d’Afrique. Le quatrième et le dernier axe étudie les modes de participation aux crimes. Autrement, Il s’agit de passer en revue de la jurisprudence pour voir sous quels types de responsabilité les criminels des pays inter lacustres d’Afrique répondaient à leurs actes. Le présent travail permet d’étudier de long en large le génocide des Tutsis au Rwanda et s’attarde sur les éléments constitutifs des massacres perpétrés contre les communautés des hutus au Burundi, au Rwanda et au Congo dont l’hypothèse du génocide est fort avancée par le monde académique et diplomatique. Cela terminé, cette recherche analyse la jurisprudence des cours et tribunaux internationaux pour étudier les éléments contextuels et les crimes sous-jacents aux crimes de guerre et des crimes contre l’humanité. Il permet de comprendre d’une manière typique et circonstanciée les groupes protégés par les conventions internationales de droit humanitaires et les scénarios dans lesquels ce droit a été violé. En dernière analyse, ce travail étudie les modes de participation aux crimes contre la paix et la sécurité de l’humanité qui ont enclenché les responsabilités des criminels des pays inter lacustres d’Afriques. Les modes collectifs tels que les entreprises criminelles communes et la responsabilité du chef hiérarchiques sont succinctement étudiés en prenant pour cas d’études les massacres ayant eu lieu dans la région susmentionnée. / This thesis aims at making an update compilation of the all crimes perpetrated in Democratic Republic of Congo, in Burundi in Uganda and in Rwanda. The above said crimes are those related to the international law judged and those to be judged by international criminal courts and tribunals. Our thesis articulates around four main sub topics. The first consist of studying the high moments of international criminal law and the place of this branch of law in international law arena. The second studies the high moments of mass killings in the inter-lacustrine region of Africa while the third identifies the crimes against the peace and security of humanity perpetrated in the above-mentioned region. These crimes include genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. The fourth and final area of focus demonstrates the forms of international criminal responsibility developed by Law case in International Criminal tribunal for Rwanda and in International criminal court as well. The present research explores broadly the genocide perpetrated against Tutsi in Rwanda and focuses on the elements of the massacres perpetrated against the hutu communities in Burundi, Rwanda and Democratic Republic of Congo on which genocide hypothesis is highly advanced by international community and some scholars. Moreover, this research has analyzed the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals to study contextual elements and additional infractions to war crimes, and crimes against humanity. It provides a typical and comprehensive understanding of the groups protected by the international humanitarian law conventions and the scenarios in which this right has been violated. At the end, this work examines the liability in the crimes against the peace and security of humanity that have triggered the responsibility of criminals. The collective types of participation including joint criminal enterprises and command responsibility by taking the cases of study the massacres perpetrated in the above-mentioned region.

Magister Legum - LLM / This research paper will focus on these controversial issues and their significance for the International Criminal Court (ICC) in dealing with the situation in Darfur/Sudan. Furthermore, another related issue that was addressed by the Commission will be analysed, namely which exact degree of mens rea is required for the special intent to destroy one of the protected groups. / South Africa

Doctor Legum - LLD / The crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity are customary international law crimes. The African continent has experienced quite a number of cases involving these crimes, and the continent's ability and willingness to prosecute offenders’ remains in doubt. As a result, in the past decade or so, non-African states have sought to institute proceedings against African leaders accused of perpetrating international customary law crimes. These attempts have taken two distinct formats, the first being the use of Universal Jurisdiction {UJ), and the second being the attempts by the International Criminal Court {ICC) to indict and prosecute African leaders. The African Union {AU) has vehemently opposed both these attempts on the grounds that they are inspired by neo-colonial thinking that is aimed at stifling peace and reconciliation efforts on the continent.Proponents of UJ argue that this principle is fundamental to international justice and the global fight to end impunity for international crimes. UJ allows a state to exercise jurisdiction over crimes committed outside its territory and for which the normal jurisdictional links of nationality and passive personality do not exist. Although the concept of UJ has been part of international law for quite some time, its relevance today has been questioned by national courts and international judicial bodies. Its recent usage by both Belgian and French courts, as well as by international tribunals, such as the ICC, has attracted sharp criticism from many African states. Given that African states constitute the biggest block of signatory states to the Rome Statute, their voice cannot be ignored. Their principal concern is that the ICC is unfairly targeting African leaders for prosecution. The negative sentiment is also evidenced by some African leaders' deliberate refusal to comply with ICC requests or to cooperate in cases where warrants of arrest have been issued against African leaders, such as in the case of the Sudanese President, Omar Al Bashir, and the present prosecution of the Kenyan President, Uhuru Kenyatta and his deputy, William Ruto. Given the aversion shown by African states to ICC prosecution of state leaders, and attempts by some non-African states to resort to UJ in order to try African leaders, the question is whether African states themselves have a solution to the problem of impunity on the continent? The answer might lie, partly, in the age old concept of UJ, where individual African states might be able to exercise jurisdiction over the international crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. It might also lie in the ability and willingness of African states to strengthen the Continent’s own, regional institutions by setting up an African international criminal tribunal, or strengthening an existing one to deal with these issues. It therefore becomes important to assess what the African standpoint on UJ is, as against what the practical realities are. In other words, what continental or regional institutions exist to combat impunity for international crimes: what do states do in fact?