the broad concept of common criminal activities in the international criminal law
Clicks: 220
ID: 146942
2014
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
30.0
/100
220 views
54 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #2 of 2 articles by views in argumentum: journal of the seminar of discursive logic, argumentation theory and rhetoric
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Abstract The doctrine of common criminal activities is considered as an example of criminal liability in international criminal law. This concept was discussed explicitly for the first time by the international appeal court of Yugoslavia (Tadic) in 1999. However, it had been emphasized for several times by international jurisprudence. It was then utilized as one of the most important and effective methods of suing by the mentioned court and other
special courts. According to this concept, members who form a common plan are not only recognized responsible for the planed crime but also liable for all the crimes which are the normal and predictable consequences of that agreement. Common activities and specially the third category of these category which is called under the title of “broad common criminal activities” and leads to the responsibility for the normal and predictable consequences has been brought up as one of the controversial issues in international criminal law. This essay is going to examine and analyze the common criminal activities, triple classification of this concept, actus reus and mens rea of each category along with the emphasis on the third category of these activities and its criticism.
| Reference Key |
janipour2014falnmah-ithe
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | ;Mojtaba Janipour;Masume Ladamekhi |
| Journal | argumentum: journal of the seminar of discursive logic, argumentation theory and rhetoric |
| Year | 2014 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.