Responsibility for Offences against Internationally Protected Persons: Contemporary Legal Aspects
https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2023.4.26.745-787
Abstract
The article examines complex legal aspects of the problem of responsibility, when it comes to offences against internationally protected persons (OIPP). The article reveals that, depending on the international legal qualification of the offence, OIPP can be qualified as either an ordinary crime (the one prosecuted under domestic law following the participation of the State in the relevant international conventions the key of which is the 1973 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Internationally Protected Persons, Including Diplomatic Agents) or an international crime when it is a violent act against the protected person committed in the situation of an armed conflict. The authors argue that notwithstanding the fact that both cases entail individual criminal responsibility of the delinquent, individual criminal responsibility for OIPP as an ordinary crime occurs to the extent in which a State party to a relevant international convention has provided for punishment in its national legislation for the conduct criminalized thereby. At the same time, with regard to OIPP as a war crime, the article highlights that the commission of OIPP engenders the right to exercise universal jurisdiction under customary international law and the obligation to exercise quasiuniversal jurisdiction under the “Geneva law” for the purpose of bringing delinquents to justice. In the meantime, the most controversial issue is the question of international legal responsibility of a State in cases of OIPP. It is argued that such responsibility can arise, when OIPP is a war crime committed by a State agent or a non-State actor effectively controlled by the State, as well as when it fails to undertake necessary measures to ensure personal inviolability of protected persons in violation of diplomatic law, or in situations of the denial of justice.
About the Authors
A. N. Vylegzhanin
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Aleksander N. Vylegzhanin, Dr. Sci. (Law), Professor, Head of the Department of International Law
76 Prospekt Vernadskogo, Moscow 119454
R. A. Kantur
Ministry of Foreign Aɣ airs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ruslan A. Kantur, Legal Advisor, Department on the Issues of New
Challenges and Threats
32/34 Smolenskaya-Sennaya Square, Moscow 119200
References
1. Akinsanya, A.A., (1989). ReÀ ections on the Inviolability of Diplomatic Premises and Diplomatic Bags. Pakistan Horizon, 42 (3/4), pp. 98–120.
2. Alexander, J.F., (2009). The International Criminal Court and the Prevention of Atrocities: Predicting the Court’s Impact. Villanova Law Review, 54 (1), pp. 1–56.
3. Ambach, Ph., (2015). From State to Individual: Evolution and Future Challenges of the Transposition of International Humanitarian Law into International Criminal Trials Against Individuals. In: Historical Origins of International Criminal Law. Brussels: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher.
4. Ambos, K., (2013). Treatise on International Criminal Law. Vol. I: Foundations and General Part. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Ambos, K., (2014). Treatise on International Criminal Law. Vol. II: The Crimes and Sentencing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. Aust, A., (2010). Handbook of International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Bantekas, I. and Nash, S., (2003). International Criminal Law. London, Sydney, Portland, OR: Cavendish Publishing Limited.
8. Bonafè, B.I., (2009). The Relationship Between State and Individual Responsibility for International Crimes. Leiden, Boston: Martinus Nijhoɣ Publishers.
9. Boyle, A.E., (1990). State Responsibility and International Liability for Injurious Consequences of Acts not Prohibited by International Law: A Necessary Distinction? International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 39 (1), pp. 1–26, doi: 10.1093/iclqaj/39.1.1.
10. Cassese, A., (2003). Is the Bell Tolling for Universality? A Plea for a Sensible Notion of Universal Jurisdiction. Journal of International Criminal Justice, 1 (3), pp. 589–585, doi: 10.1093/jicj/1.3.589.
11. Crawford, J. and Ollson, S., (2006). The Nature and Forms of International Responsibility. In: Evans, W.D., editor, (2006). International Law. Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pp. 451–477.
12. Cryer, R., (2007). An Introduction to International Criminal Law and Procedure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Darcy, Sh., (2010). Prosecuting the War Crime of Collective Punishment: Is It Time to Amend the Rome Statute? Journal of International Criminal Justice, 8 (1), pp. 29–51, doi: 10.1093/jicj/mqp083.
14. De Stefano, C., (2020). Attribution in International Law and Arbitration. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
15. Dinstein, Y., (2004). The Conduct of Hostilities under the Law of International Armed ConÀ ict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
16. Douglas, Z., (2014). International Responsibility for Domestic Adjudication: Denial of Justice Deconstructed. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 63 (4), pp. 867–900, doi: 0.1017/ S0020589314000402.
17. Eagletone, C., (1928). Denial of Justice in International Law. American Journal of International Law, 22 (3), pp. 538–559, doi: 10.2307/2188742.
18. Editorial (2008). Analysis of the Punishments Applicable to International Crimes (War Crimes, Crimes against Humanity and Genocide) in Domestic Law and Practice. International Review of the Red Cross, 90 (870), pp. 461–468.
19. Frankfurter, F., (1927). The Case of Sacco and Vanzetti: A Critical Analysis for Lawyers and Laymen. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
20. Gaeta, P., (1999). The Defence of Superior Orders: The Statute of the International Criminal Court versus Customary International Law. European Journal of International Law, 10 (1), 172–191, doi: 10.1093/ejil/10.1.172.
21. Gaeta, P., (2007). On What Conditions Can a State Be Held Responsible for Genocide? European Journal of International Law, 18 (4), pp. 631–648, doi: 10.1093/ejil/chm037.
22. Henckaerts, J-M. and Doswald-Beck, L., (2009). Customary International Humanitarian Law. Vol. I: Rules. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
23. Higgins, R., (1985). The Abuse of Diplomatic Privileges and Immunities: Recent United Kingdom Experience. American Journal of International Law, 79(3), pp. 641–651, doi: 10.2307/2201891.
24. Hillier, T., (1998). Sourcebook on Public International Law. London: Cavendish Publishing Limited.
25. Jenks, Ch., (2014). Moral Touchstone, Not General Deterrence: The Role of International Criminal Justice in Fostering Compliance with International Humanitarian Law. International Review of the Red Cross, 96, pp. 776–784, doi: 10.1017/S1816383115000363.
26. Jeßberger, F., (2018). Towards “Complementary Preparedness”: Trends and Best Practices in Universal Criminal Jurisdiction in Europe. Universal Jurisdiction and International Crimes: Constraints and Best Practices. Study. Brussels: European Union Policy Department for External Relations.
27. Jonas, L.A., (2022). Individual Criminal Responsibility for the Financing of Entities Involved in Core Crimes. Leiden: Brill.
28. Jordash, W. and Bracq, N., (2019). Modes of Liability and Individual Criminal Responsibility. In: Jalloh C., Clarke K., Nmehielle V. (eds). The African Court of Justice and Human and Peoples’ Rights in Context: Development and Challenges. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29. Joyner, Ch.C., (1996). Arresting Impunity: The Case for Universal Jurisdiction in Bringing War Criminals to Accountability. Law and Contemporary Problems, 59 (4), pp. 153–162, doi: 10.2307/1192196.
30. Kolosov, Y.M., (2014). Responsibility in International Law. Moscow: Statut Publ. (In Russ.).
31. Ku, J.G. and Nzelibe, J., (2006). Do International Criminal Tribunals Deter Or Exacerbate Humanitarian Atrocities? Washington University Law Review, 84 (4), pp. 777–833.
32. Lissitzyn, O.J., (1936). The Meaning of the Term Denial of Justice in International Law. American Journal of International Law, 30 (4), pp. 632–646, doi: 10.2307/2191125.
33. Melzer, N., (2009). Interpretative Guidance on the Notion of Direct Participation in Hostilities under International Humanitarian Law. Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.
34. Meron, T., (1995). International Criminalization of Internal Atrocities. American Journal of International Law, 89 (3), pp. 554– 577, doi: 10.2307/2204173.
35. Nagieva, A.A., (2022). Personal Inviolability of Members of the Diplomatic Mission: Current Issues of International Law. Moscow Journal of International Law, 1, pp. 65–77, doi: 10.24833/0869- 0049-2022-1-65-77. (In Russ.).
36. Nollkaemper, A., (2003). Concurrence between Individual Responsibility and State Responsibility in International Law. International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 53 (3), pp. 615–640.
37. Oppenheim, L., (1905). International Law: A Treatise. Vol. I. Peace. London: Longmans, Green and Co.
38. Paulsson, J., (2005). Denial of Justice in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
39. Pellet, A., (2010). The De¿ nition of Responsibility in International Law. In: Crawford, J., Pellet, A., Olleson, S. and Parlett, K. (eds). The Law of International Responsibility. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
40. Philippe, X., (2006). The Principles of Universal Jurisdiction and Complementarity: How Do the Two Principles Intermesh? International Review of the Red Cross, 88 (862), pp. 375–398.
41. Przetacznik, F., (1983). Protection of Oɤ cials of Foreign States According to International Law. The Hague, Boston, London: Martinus Nijhoɣ Publishers.
42. Rothe, D.L. and Mullins, Ch.W., (2010). Beyond the Juristic Orientation of International Criminal Justice: The Relevance of Criminological Insight to International Criminal Law and its Control: A Commentary. International Criminal Law Review, 10, pp. 97–110, doi: 10.1163/157181209X12584562670893.
43. Sander, B., (2019). Justifying an International Criminal Punishment: A Critical Perspective. In: Philosophical Foundations of International Criminal Law: Foundational Concepts. Brussels: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher.
44. Shaw, M.N., (2014). International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
45. Skuratova, A.Y., (2012). International Crimes: Moderm Problems of Quali¿ cation. Moscow: Norma, Infra-M Publ. (In Russ.).
46. Soler, Ch., (2019). The Global Prosecution of Core Crimes Under International Law. Berlin: Springer.
47. Spinedi, M., (2002). State Responsibility v. Individual Responsibility for International Crimes: Tertium Non Datur? European Journal of International Law, 13 (4), pp. 895–899, doi: 10.1093/ejil/13.4.895.
48. Stahn, C., (2019). A Critical Introduction to International Criminal Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
49. Strapatsas, N., (2001). Universal Jurisdiction and the International Criminal Court. Manitoba Law Journal, 29 (1), pp. 124–148.
50. Talmon, S., (2015). Determining Customary International Law: The ICJ’s Methodology between Induction, Deduction and Assertion. European Journal of International Law, 26 (2), pp. 417–443, doi: 10.1093/ejil/chv020.
51. Tarabrin, V.E. and Kantur, R.A., (2021). Oɣ ences against Internationally Protected Persons: Problems of International Legal Quali¿ cation. Moscow Journal of International Law, 1, pp. 61–77, doi: 10.24833/0869-0049-2021-2-61-77.
52. Vereina, L.V., (2021). Responsibility in International Law. In: Vylegzhanin, A.N. (ed.). International Law. Part 2. Moscow. Fourth Edition. Pp. 13–30.
53. Werle, G. and Jessberger, F., (2014). Principles of International Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
54. Williams, Sh.A., (2000). The Rome Statute on the International Criminal Court — Universal Jurisdiction or State Consent — To Make or Break the Package Deal. International Law Studies, 75, pp. 539–563.
55. Zgonec-Rožej, M. and Foakes J., (2013). International Criminals: Extradite or Prosecute? Chatham House Briefing Paper: International Law, pp. 1–7.
Review
For citations:
Vylegzhanin A.N., Kantur R.A. Responsibility for Offences against Internationally Protected Persons: Contemporary Legal Aspects. Kutafin Law Review. 2023;10(4):747-787. https://doi.org/10.17803/2713-0533.2023.4.26.745-787
Views:
508
Email this article 
