Mojtaba Janipour; Masume Ladamekhi
Volume 2, Issue 6 , April 2014, , Pages 137-164
Abstract
AbstractThe doctrine of common criminal activities is considered as an exampleof criminal liability in international criminal law. This concept wasdiscussed explicitly for the first time by the international appeal court ofYugoslavia (Tadic) in 1999. However, it had been emphasized for severaltimes by ...
Read More
AbstractThe doctrine of common criminal activities is considered as an exampleof criminal liability in international criminal law. This concept wasdiscussed explicitly for the first time by the international appeal court ofYugoslavia (Tadic) in 1999. However, it had been emphasized for severaltimes by international jurisprudence. It was then utilized as one of the mostimportant and effective methods of suing by the mentioned court and otherspecial courts. According to this concept, members who form a common planare not only recognized responsible for the planed crime but also liable forall the crimes which are the normal and predictable consequences of thatagreement. Common activities and specially the third category of thesecategory which is called under the title of “broad common criminalactivities” and leads to the responsibility for the normal and predictableconsequences has been brought up as one of the controversial issues ininternational criminal law. This essay is going to examine and analyze thecommon criminal activities, triple classification of this concept, actus reusand mens rea of each category along with the emphasis on the third categoryof these activities and its criticism.
