Duress in Votes of the International Criminal courts 

Abstract

p>Duress provided as one of the most important and controversial issues of criminal liability barriers in domestic and international law. But what is the difference in the civil law and common law systems of the duress of the crimes leading to the death of innocent people. The civil law system in compliance with the strict requirements duress accepted and considered it as prevents criminal liability. But the common law system is not accepted in these crimes but only can be Mitigating factor of punishment .the Base of accepting duress in the civil law as an obstacle to the establishment of criminal responsibility is reasonable choose and understandable in a society. In other words culprit action against an intolerable threat to the community does have a reasonable and understandable and understood. Statute of the International Criminal Court for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and … is silent in the duress of the crimes leading to the death. According to the judges of the courts of common law systems function (duress as a barrier offense) or the civil law (duress to simply commute the sentences), opinions differ on acceptance and rejection duress issued. To the Statute of the International Criminal Court was adopted in 1998 and the controversy ended. Component d of paragraph 1 of Article 31 of duress and necessity to comply with the strict requirements of all crimes, even leading up to the murder of innocent people as barriers to the responsibility of the Criminal is known. By examining the sources of international law in Article 38 of the International Court of Justice is listed as follows:1: international agreements2: international standard3: General principles of law recognized by civilized nations is determined andCRevue de Recherche Juridique, No. 69. 20154: What Lawyers authentic It can be concluded that the duress is acceptability as criminal liability barriers for all crimes, even crimes leading to the death of innocent people with the strict conditions.Keywords:duress, necessity, criminal liability barriers, Statute of the International Criminal Court.

References

.138
و محمد
4. Chie
Law
5. EUG
GEN
6. Jerm
7. Dres
8. Kadi
9. Larry
and p
10. wes
Buff
11. ROB
12. Wer
Asse
13. Yeo, S
14.R. v.
15. R v.
16.16 -U
war
راه در نظریات حقوقی
ری بین المللی
اپ اول، بهار 83
هنام یوسفیان
esa,Luis E,
School, Http
GENIO RA
NERAL (Edi
my Horder. A
ssler, Joshua,
ish, sanford H
y, Alexande
public Affair
tern peter an
falo Criminal
BINSON, PA
rle ,Gerhard
erpres, 2005.
Stanley, Compu
. Home and O
. Dudley and
United Natio
Criminals. V
اکر
امه دادگاه کیف
نشر دادگستر، چا
ری، ترجمه به
Duress Dem
p: II Digital
AúL ZAFF
ar, 2nd ed., 2
Automy provo
, Exegesis of
,Excusing
er, self – De
rs, Vol.22.
nd James Ma
l Law Review
AUL H, II CR
, Principle O
ulsion And N
Others, l All
d stephens. 18
ons War Cri
Vol, (London
54
طرار در اساسنا
ری بین المللی، نش
ق بین المللی کیف
. پ اول 1383
manding Her
Commons :
FARONI, D
2002)
ocation and D
f the law Dur
crime, Calif
efense, Justif
angiafico,Th
w.2003
RIMINAL L
Of Internatio
Necessity In A
ER (1987).
884, 14 QBD
imes Comm
n: H.M. Statio
69
سین؛ اکراه و اضط
. ش
46 ، بهار 83
سین؛ دادگاه کیفر
کریانگ حقوق
سمت، تهران، چاپ
roism And
Pace. Edu/ L
DERECHO
Duress, 1992
ress. Cal.L.R
fornia law Re
fication and
he Criminal D
LAW DEFEN
onal Crimina
African Crim
D 273 DC.
ission, Law
onary Office
قیقات حقوقی شماره
منابع
سی
مد صادقی، حس
دادگستری، مد صادقی، حسی
شیایزری، ساک،
لی، انتشارات سم
Proportional
Law Facalty
PENAL
2 Crim. L.Re
Rev.1988-89.
eview,pp.265
Excuse, ph
Defence Of
NSES (West
al Law , A. T
ت
minal Law , p.
ها
Reports of
e. 1949).
فصلنامه تحق
فهرست
الف) فارس
1. میرمحم
حقوقی
2. میرمحم
3. کیتی ش
اسماعیل
ب) لاتین
lity,Pace
,2007.-
PARTE
ev.
.
5-273.
ilosophy
Duress ,
, 1948)
T. M. C.
1. مقالات
.97.
2. پرونده
Trial of
ی بین المللی
17. Bern
July
18. Srá,
1947
19. s &k
21, 1
20. Http
Octo
21. http
2013
22. Http
Octo
راه در نظریات حقوقی
nardi and R
14, 1947;
, et al, Deci
7;
k, Decision
1948.
p://Sim.Law.
ober 2013.
p://www. Un
3.
p://www.Jusc
ober 2013.
اکر
Randazzo, De
ision of the
of the Landg
.Uu.Nl/Sim/C
.org/ icty/ ca
comp.org/Gl
55
ecision of th
Italian Cou
gericht of Ra
CaseLaw/Tri
asese/ indexla/
Statutes/St
69
he Italian Co
urt ofCassati
avensburg of
سانی
ibunaler.Nsf.
-e.htm. last v
tgb.Htm. l
قیقات حقوقی شماره
ات
ourt of Cass
ion of Nove
f Ravenburg
های اطلاع رس
f. last visita
visitation, 9
last visitat
فصلنامه تحق
3. تصمیما
sation of
ember 6,
g of May
ج) پایگاه ه
ation, 9
October
tion, 9

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics