Public International Law - Criminal Responsibility.

o Geneva Convention and the lack of criminal responsibility o War Crimes Grave breaches Regime (most serious violations of international law); Article 8 (INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL) of the ICC [covered in the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol I) Common Article II o War Crimes, Genoicde and Crimes against Humanity Distinct Genocide destruction based on discrimination (conflict or peacetime) Crimes against Humantiy substantive (conflict or peacetime) o Repression of War Crimes No Clear mechanism for repression or speicifc penalities laid out States must either prosecute themselves or handle trial to another state Principle of Universal Jurisdiction States should assist each other in connection with criminal proceedings relating to grave breaches o Individual Criminal Responsibiltiy for War Crimes The norms of Common Article 3 have acquired the status of customary law in that most states by their domestic penal codes, have criminalized acts which if committed during internal armed conflict, would constitute Violations of Article 3 Corpus of general principles and norms on intneral armed comflict embracing Common Article 3 but having a much greater scope Article 4 of APII also form part of Customary Law o Class of Perpetrator for War Crimes the category of persons to be held accountable in this respect then, would in most cases be limited to commanders, combatants, and other members of the armed forces individuals who do not belong to the armed forces bear criminal responsibility only when there is al ink between them and in armed forces o Nexus Requirement Rutaganda Appeals Judgment: The armed conflict need not have been causal to the commission of the crime The existence of an armed conlfct must have played a susbtatnial part in the perpetrators ability to commit it,

his decision to commit it, the manner in which hit was commited or the purpose for which it was committed The perpetrator acted in furthermnce of or under theguise of the armed conflict. Under the guise of the armed conflict does not mean simply at the same time as an armed conflict and or in any conlficts created in part by the armed conlfit The determination of a close relationship between aprticular offencese and an armed conflict will usually require consideration of several factors not just one. Particular care is needwed when the accused is a noncombatant. o Commander Responsibility Agency Law Respondeat Superior Artile 68 Addditional Protocol I The fact that a breach was committed by a subordinate does nto absolve his superiros from penal or disciplinary responsibility If they knewm or had information that should have enable d them to onclude in the circumstnaces at the time that he was committing or was going to commit sucha breach and if they did not take all feasible measures within their power to prevent or regress thebreach ICT and SCSL o Any crime was committed by a subordinate does not relieve his or her superior of criminal responsibility if he or she knew or had reason to know that the supbrodinate was about to cmmit such acts or had domes so and the superior failed to take the necessary and reasonable measures to prevent such acts or to punish the perpetrators thereof (ICTR cases, Musema, Baglishema, Bagosora) 2009 Millitary Commissions Act law to deal with individuals in Guantanamo; war crimes committed o laws of war/terrorism alien unprivileged enemy beliigerent (replacing unlawful enemy combatant) aliens nonUS citizens no age distinction made,juveniles and adults

Geneva Convention and Possible Revisions, Reforms, or Maintenance? [scrutinty and criticism in the past couple of years] - Geneva Conventions: Issues with Contemporary Armed Conflict o Clarrification and Enforcement

Largely and most widely ratified treaties Practically and universally recognized almost 196 nations signed in 1949 168 States to the First Protocol Part of customary Law and agreed upon Symettrical and Versatile o Geneva Convention needs to be analyzed in a totality of circumstnaces perspective NOT in isolation. Covers a wide variety of war cirmes. Main focus is HUMAN DIGNITY and peoples fundamental rights The original Geneva Conventions were focused on international armed conflict and conflict between two states. Btu since then, almost all armed conflicts are intenral about 90% are inside a coutnrys broders. o Totality of the Conventions Speciifcly protpect peoples who are not engaged in hostilities. o Geneva Convention needs to be clarified, INTERPRETED, and enforced. o Dealing with new things that werent taken into account during the original signing transcontinental corporations; privatization of military; changing environments in warfare i.e., increased engaging by civilians. Problems with the Current Geneva Conventions o Ignored by states. o Written when war was between states and regular armedforces o Rise of non-state actors Situations the Geneva Conventions dont cover Iraq and Afhganistan detainee terrorists are not a part of States,a dn therefore it is not clear what nad hwo to deal with them Somalian pirates failed states ; (no longer required to adhere to the Conventions) Blackwater Security private security Al-Queda o Detainees - All suspected combatants should be granted status detemrinations so that individuals may be prosecuted for just reason and not without cause POW? Providing due process as defined by the Convention as it stands now. o Treat them as part of quasi-state? Gratned due process and fundamental rights How to effectively punish if there is an inability to classify and distinguish detainees?

o Reforms? Broaden aht the Geneva Conventions cover To cover uses of force, what military targets are,e tc. Specify to give states clear guidelines o If Geneva Conventions broadedned to include what to do with capture no-state actors there neds to be a definition for them that is specific enough by states to apply. Rule of Law would be clearly and universally established