The subject of intention in the criminal law is currently causing many debates among criminal lawyers. This compelling and probing volume addresses two key questions: should the criminal law distinguish between direct intention and recklessness, and what should the law be concerning cases of oblique intention - i.e. cases in which the actor does not act in order to cause the proscribed result, but is nevertheless practically certain that his, or her, action will cause it? The discussion is divided into two parts with the first being devoted to the question of whether it is justified to grade offences based on the distinction between intention and recklessness. The second part deals with offences in which intention is required as a condition for the criminalisation of the conduct and in the context of which reckless actors are not exposed to criminal liability. The book explores the issue of intention from the viewpoint of degrees of moral culpability and it discusses, inter alia, the doctrine of double effect, the possibility that the law in cases of oblique intention should not be the same for all crimes of intention , and the possibility of using a moral formula in the definition of certain offences. The discussion also addresses many other criminal law issues, including the philosophy of punishment, the role of motives in determining degrees of blameworthiness, sentencing, stigma, and criminal attempts.

The subject of intention in the criminal law is currently causing many debates among criminal lawyers. This compelling and probing volume addresses two key questions: should the criminal law distinguish between direct intention and recklessness, and what should the law be concerning cases of oblique intention - i.e. cases in which the actor does not act in order to cause the proscribed result, but is nevertheless practically certain that his, or her, action will cause it? The discussion is divided into two parts with the first being devoted to the question of whether it is justified to grade offences based on the distinction between intention and recklessness. The second part deals with offences in which intention is required as a condition for the criminalisation of the conduct and in the context of which reckless actors are not exposed to criminal liability. The book explores the issue of intention from the viewpoint of degrees of moral culpability and it discusses, inter alia, the doctrine of double effect, the possibility that the law in cases of oblique intention should not be the same for all crimes of intention , and the possibility of using a moral formula in the definition of certain offences. The discussion also addresses many other criminal law issues, including the philosophy of punishment, the role of motives in determining degrees of blameworthiness, sentencing, stigma, and criminal attempts.

Anchored by the normative framework, this book aims to clarify the basis for individual criminal liability for persons who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes. The objective of this monograph is to clarify the rules to enable international courts and tribunals to identify the extent to which individual criminal liability attaches to the financing of core crimes, as well as the legal basis for such liability. By clarifying the criminal liability of individual who finance entities that perpetrate core crimes, this book also seeks to clarify the mental elements of the mode of liability of aiding and abetting. This is achieved through a thorough analysis of the applicable rules in the international arena, as well as through the comparative analysis.

Presently, many of the greatest debates and controversies in international criminal law concern modes of liability for international crimes. The state of the law is unclear, to the detriment of accountability for major crimes and of the uniformity of international criminal law. The present book aims at clarifying the state of the law and provides a thorough analysis of the jurisprudence of international courts and tribunals, as well as of the debates and the questions these debates have left open. Renowned international criminal law scholars analyze, in discrete chapters, the modes of liability one by one; for each mode they identify the main trends in the jurisprudence and the main points of controversy. An introduction addresses the cross-cutting issues, and a conclusion anticipates possible evolutions that we may see in the future. The research on which this book is based was undertaken with the Geneva Academy.

A comparative and collaborative study of the foundational principles and concepts that underpin different domestic systems of criminal law.

This book examines the rapid development of the fundamental concept of a crime in international criminal law from a comparative law perspective. In this context, particular thought has been given to the catalyzing impact of the criminal law theory that has developed in major world legal systems upon the crystallization of the substantive part of international criminal law. This study offers a critical overview of international and domestic jurisprudence with regard to the construal of the concept of a crime (actus reus, mens rea, defences, modes of liability) and exposes roots of confusion in international criminal law through a comprehensive comparative analysis of substantive criminal laws in selected legal jurisdictions.

This book is exceptional in the sense that it provides an introduction to law in general rather than the law of one specific jurisdiction, and it presents a unique way of looking at legal education. It is crucial for lawyers to be aware of the different ways in which societal problems can be solved and to be able to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of different legal solutions. In this respect, being a lawyer involves being able to reason like a lawyer, even more than having detailed knowledge of particular sets of rules. Introduction to Law reflects this view by focusing on the functions of rules and on ways of arguing the relative qualities of alternative legal solutions. Where ‘positive’ law is discussed, the emphasis is on the legal questions that must be addressed by a field of law and on the different solutions which have been adopted by, for instance, the common law and civil law tradition. The law of specific jurisdictions is discussed to illustrate possible answers to questions such as when the existence of a valid contract is assumed.

The criminal law on serious traffic offenses presents legislators with numerous controversial issues. One such issue is when severe consequences are matched with low moral culpability. How should the law deal with a driver who kills someone because she failed to see the person when looking? Another controversial issue concerns highly culpable behavior that remains without serious consequences. How should the law cope with a driver who nearly kills someone when overtaking recklessly? The traffic context generates many hard cases that call the outermost boundaries of general doctrinal concepts like intent, negligence, or causation into question. This book contains an international collection of essays on criminal liability for serious traffic offenses. With a focus on England/Wales, the Netherlands, France, Germany, and Spain, the book reveals that there are enormous differences in both drafting and interpretation of serious traffic offenses. Additionally, it elaborates on the role of culpability and harm in sentencing, traffic-psychological insights relevant to accident causation, and the concept of conditional intent in relation to extremely dangerous traffic behavior. (Series: Governance & Recht - Vol. 11) [Subject: Criminal Law, Traffic Law, Comparative Law]

The proper construction of co-perpetration responsibility in international criminal law has become one of the most enduring controversies in this field, with the UN Tribunals endorsing the theory of joint criminal enterprise, and the International Criminal Court adopting the alternative joint control over the crime theory to define this mode of liability. This book seeks to reconcile the ICTY/R’s and ICC’s jurisprudence by providing a definition of co-perpetration that could be uniformly applied in the two justice models that these institutions represent: the ad hoc- and the treaty-based model. An evaluation framework is adopted, pursuant to which the origins, merits and deficiencies of the said competing theories are critically assessed, and a refined legal framework of co-perpetration responsibility is proposed.