The Emerging Mental Incapacity Defense in International Criminal Law

Some Initial Questions of Implementation

Bibliographic Data

ID9553555
AuthorsPeter Krug (University of Oklahoma, corresponding author)
Year2000
Volume94
Issue2
Pages317-335
Publication date2000-04-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueAmerican Journal of International Law (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0002-9300 • E-ISSN: 2161-7953
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/2555295
OpenAlexW2057878988
LanguageEN
Citations received3

The norms and mechanisms for international prosecution of humanitarian law and mass human rights violations have been refined in the 1990s to include affirmation of the principle that separate (or “affirmative”) defenses to individual liability are admissible in international criminal law. Explicit recognition of the availability and nature of separate defenses is found in the statute of the international criminal court (ICC). Indirect application is found to a very limited extent in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), but not in the Statute of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). Moreover, although the Appeals Chamber of the ICTY has rejected the argument that duress is a complete defense under customary international law or general principles of law to a charge of crimes against humanity involving the taking of innocent lives, it has implicidy accepted that duress could be available in other circumstances

Argument (complex analysis · Crimes against humanity · Criminal law · Human rights · Humanity · International humanitarian law · International law · Political science · Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court · Statute · Statute of limitations · Tribunal · War crime · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law · Medicine · Torture, Ethics, and Law

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub