Spelling suggestions: "subject:"bolus specialise"" "subject:"bolus specialised""
1 |
Genocide : The complexity of genocidal intent / Folkmord : Komplexiteten av folkmordsavsiktGhebrai, Ruth, Tesfaye, Biya January 2012 (has links)
Article II of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide stipulates the definition of the crime. A key element of genocide is the criterion of “intent”; this requisite must be met in order to determine criminal liability. Even though “intent” is a paramount element of the crime neither definition nor guidance regarding its interpretation is provided for under Article II, this void of interpretation is absolute throughout the Genocide Convention. Hence, the purpose of this thesis is to examine this void in the provision. In order to fulfill the purpose of this thesis the following research questions have been regarded: How is the requisite intent defined in relevant preparatory work of Genocide Convention? How is the requisite intent interpreted in relevant case law and judicial doctrines and are these interpretations in line with the preparatory work of the Genocide Convention? Is the definition and interpretation of the requisite intent in the abovementioned legal sources consistent with the object and purpose of the Genocide Convention? We found that in the preparatory work of the Genocide Convention, the requisite intent has not been labeled. However, the Drafters definition of intent is in accordance with international criminal law’s definition of specific intent. Also, the case law and judicial doctrines that we have examined all fall within either the purpose-based or the knowledge-based approach. Both approaches acknowledge that a perpetrator needs to possess an inner aim or desire to meet the level of intent required for the Crime. Notwithstanding, the knowledge-based approach holds that “policy or plan” is part of the Crime whereas the purpose-based approach rejects it and consequently the application of genocidal intent is distinctively different. With regard to preparatory work, the purpose-based approach is in line with the definition of the Drafters whereas the knowledge-based approach is not in its literal meaning. However, the Drafters did not explicitly reject the knowledge-based approach in the preparatory work of the Genocide Convention. We have concluded that the purpose-based approach is not consistent with the object and purpose of the Genocide Convention. We hold that the knowledge-based approach is in line with the object and purpose of the Genocide Convention, and hence this approach upholds the goal of preventing and punishing genocide. Moreover, the method for this thesis is in accordance with the method in international law for interpretations of international treaties; the Vienna Convention on the law of Treaties. Hence, the selection, systemization and interpretation of legal sources are in line with the Vienna Convention.
|
2 |
Les conditions de la responsabilité en droit privé : éléments pour une théorie générale de la responsabilité juridique / The conditions of responsibility in private law : elements for a general theory of legal responsibilityLagoutte, Julien 16 November 2012 (has links)
Alors que l’on enseigne classiquement la distinction radicale du droit pénal et de la responsabilité civile, une étude approfondie du droit positif révèle une tendance générale et profonde à la confusion des deux disciplines. Face à ce paradoxe, le juriste s’interroge : comment articuler le droit civil et le droit pénal de la responsabilité ? Pour y répondre, cette thèse suggère d’abandonner l’approche traditionnelle de la matière, consistant à la tenir pour une simple catégorie de classement des différentes branches, civile et pénale, du droit de la responsabilité. La responsabilité juridique est présentée comme une institution autonome et générale organisant la réaction du système à la perturbation anormale de l’équilibre social. Quant au droit de la responsabilité civile et au droit criminel, ils ne sont plus conçus que comme les applications techniques de cette institution en droit positif.Sur le fondement de cette approche renouvelée et par le prisme de l’étude des conditions de la responsabilité en droit privé, la thèse propose un ordonnancement technique et rationnel du droit pénal et de la responsabilité civile susceptible de fournir les principes directeurs d’une véritable théorie générale de la responsabilité juridique. En tant qu’institution générale, celle-ci engendre à la fois un concept de responsabilité, composé des exigences de dégradation d’un intérêt juridiquement protégé, d’anormalité et de causalité juridique et qui fonde la convergence du droit pénal et du droit civil, et un système de responsabilité, qui en commande les divergences et pousse le premier vers la protection de l’intérêt général et le second vers celle des victimes. / While the radical distinction between criminal law and civil liability is classically taught, a thorough survey of positive law reveals a general and profound trend towards a confusion of these two disciplines. Faced with this paradox, the jurist wonders : how to articulate the civil and criminal laws of responsibility ? To answer this question, the thesis suggests abandoning the traditional approach of the subject, which consists in treating it as a mere category of classification of the different branches, civil and criminal, of responsibility/liability. Legal responsibility is presented as an autonomous and general institution organizing the response from the system to abnormal disturbance of social equilibrium. Civil liability law and criminal law are, as far as they are concerned, henceforth conceived as the mere technical applications of this institution in positive law.On the basis of this new approach and through the prism of the study of liability conditions in private law, the thesis proposes a technical and rational organization of criminal law and civil liability that may provide the guiding principles of a real general theory of legal responsibility. As a general institution, it gives not only a concept of responsibility, requiring degradation of a legally protected interest, abnormality and legal causation, and establishing the convergence of criminal law and civil law, but also a system of responsibility, determining the divergences of them and steering the first towards the protection of general interest and the second towards the protection of victims.
|
Page generated in 0.0804 seconds