Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) >
University >
Publications >

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/6031

Title: Dolus eventualis and the Rome statute without it?
Authors: Badar, ME
Publication Date: 2009
Publisher: University of California Press
Citation: New Criminal Law Review, 12(3), 433 - 467, Summer 2009
Abstract: Article 30 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court provides a general definition for the mental element required to trigger the criminal responsibility of individuals for serious violations of international humanitarian law. At first sight, it appears that the explicit words of Article 30 are sufficient to put an end to a long-lasting debate regarding the mens rea enigma that has confronted the jurisprudence of the two ad hoc Tribunals for the last decade, but this is not true. Recent decisions rendered by the International Criminal Court evidence the discrepancy among the ICC Pre-Trial Chambers in interpreting the exact meaning of Article 30 of the ICC Statute. The paper challenges that dolus eventualis is one of the genuine and independent pillars of criminal responsibility that forms, on its own, the basis of intentional crimes, and suggests its inclusion in the legal standard of Article 30 of the ICC Statute.
Description: Copyright @ 2009 University of California Press
URI: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/6031
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/nclr.2009.12.3.433
ISSN: 1933-4192
Appears in Collections:Law
Publications
Dept of Politics, History and Law Research Papers

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
Fulltext.pdf168.5 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.