Case of kononov V. Latvia 9 страница

[32] See, in particular, the title of the Hague Convention 1907; Article 6(b) of the Charter of the IMT Nuremberg; Article 5(b) of the Charter of the IMT Tokyo and the judgments of those IMTs. See also Oppenheim & Lauterpacht (1944), at p. 451; and Lachs (1945), War Crimes – An Attempt to Define the Issues, Stevens & Sons London, p. 100 et seq.

[33] Notably in Articles 47, 59 and 71.

[34] Lauterpacht (1944), “ The Law of Nations and the Punishment of War Crimes ”, 21 BYIL, pp. 58-95 at p. 65 et seq. and Kelsen (1945), “ The rule against Ex Post Facto Laws and the Prosecution of the Axis War Criminals”, 2 The Judge Advocate Journal, pp. 8-12, at p. 10.

[35] See also Article 2(b) of the Allied Control Council Law No. 10, and the Hostages Case, cited at paragraphs 125-128 above.

[36] See, for example, Article 3 of the Hague Convention 1907.

[37] The Treaty of Versailles (Article 229); the Moscow Declaration 1943 and the Kharkov trials; the London Agreement 1945 (Article 6); and the Nuremberg Principles (No. II). The US courts-martial in the Philippines, notably Trial of Lieutenant Brown; Llandovery Castle case and Trial of Karl Hans Herman Klinge, all cited at paragraphs 97-100, 102 and 129 above; Lauterpacht (1944), p. 65; Kelsen (1945) p. 10-11; Lachs (1945) p. 8, p. 22, p. 60 et seq.; and G. Manner, The Legal Nature and Punishment of Criminal Acts of Violence contrary to the Laws of War, AJIL, vol. 37, no. 3 (Jul., 1943), pp. 407-435.

[38] Meron, T. (2006), Reflections on the Prosecution of War Crimes by International Tribunals, AJIL, vol.100, p. 558.

[39] G. Mettraux, US Courts-Martial and the Armed Conflict in the Philippines (1899-1902): Their Contribution to the National Case Law on War Crimes, Journal of International Criminal Justice (2003), 1, pp. 135-150.

[40] St James Declaration 1942 (notably, Article 3); the Diplomatic Notes of the USSR 1941-1942 and the USSR Decree of 2 November 1942; the Moscow Declaration, 1943; and the Potsdam Agreement.

[41] UNWCC established in 1943; the London Agreement 1945 (Article 6), the judgment of the IMT Nuremberg; and the Nuremberg Principles (Principle II).

[42] Paragraphs 106-110 above (“Prosecution of war crimes by the USSR” including the Krasnodar and Kharkov trials) and paragraph 114 above (ex parte Quirin).

[43] Paragraph 123-129 above.

[44] Lachs (1945), p. 100 et seq.; the Hostages case, cited at paragraphs 125-128 above.

[45] Re Yamashita and Trial of Takashi Sakai, cited at paragraph 129 above.

[46] German War Trials: Judgment in the Case of Emil Müller, AJIL, vol. 16(1922) No. 4, pp. 684-696.

[47] The St James Declaration 1942 (Article 3); the Moscow Declaration 1943; the Potsdam Agreement; the London Agreement 1945 (preamble); the Charter of the IMT Nuremberg (Article 6); and the Charter of the IMT Tokyo (Article 5(c)).

[48] Trial of Takashi Sakai case, cited at paragraph 129 above; Allied Control Council Law No. 10 (Article 2(2)) applied in the Hostages case; and Re Yamashita, cited above.

[49] Prosecutor v. Delalic et al, IT-96-21-A, judgment of 20 February 2001, § 195, Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (“ICTY”); D. Sarooshi (2001), Command Responsibility and the Blaskic Case, International and Comparative Law Quarterly vol. 50, No. 2 p. 460; Prosecutor v. Blaskic, IT-95-14-T, judgment of 3 March 2000, § 290, Trial Chamber of the ICTY

[50] Article 7(3) of the Statute of the ICTY; Article 6 of the Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda; Article 25 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court; and Article 6 of the Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone

[51] The Lieber Code (Article 47); the Oxford Manual 1880 (Article 84); Lauterpacht (1944), p. 62; and Lachs (1945), p. 63 et seq.

[52] “ Corfu Channel case ”, Judgment of 9 April 1949 I.C.J. Reports 1949, p. 4, at p. 22. See also the US Field Manual (description of the “Basic principles”).

[53] Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, cited above, §§ 74-87.

[54] Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, cited above, §§ 74-87. More specifically see the Lieber Code 1863 (Articles 15 and 16); the St Petersburg Declaration 1868 (Preamble); the Oxford Manual 1880 (Preface and Article 4); the Hague Convention 1907 (Preamble).

[55] Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons, at § 87; Prosecutor v. Kupreskic and Others, IT-95-16-T, judgment of 14 January 2000, §§ 521-536, Trial Chamber of the ICTY; and Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, Advisory Opinion, 7 July 2004, ICJ Reports 2004, at § 157.

[56] See inter alia the Lieber Code 1863 (Article 71); the St. Petersburg Declaration 1868; the Draft Brussels Declaration (Articles 13(c) and 23); the Oxford Manual 1880 (Article 9(b)); the Hague Regulations 1907 (Article 23(c)). See also Trial of Major Waller, cited at paragraph 98 above, and Article 41 of the Protocol Additional 1977.

[57] See, in particular, Article 3 of the Geneva Convention of 1929.

[58] The Lieber Code 1863 (Articles 15, 16 and 38); the Draft Brussels Declaration 1874 (Article 13(g)); the Oxford Code 1880 (Article 32(b)); the Hague Regulations 1907 (Article 23(g)); the International Commission Report 1919; Article 6(b) of the Charter of the IMT Nuremberg; and Control Council law No. 10 (Article 2). See also Trial of Hans Szabados, cited above; Oppenheim & Lauterpacht (1944) atp. 321.

[59] The Oxford Code 1880 (Article 84); the Draft Tokyo Convention 1934 (Articles 9 and 10); the US Field Manual: Rules of Land Warfare 1940; The Hostages case and the Trial of Eikichi Kato, cited at paragraphs 125-129 above, as well as ICTY, Kupreškić and Others, cited above. See also Oppenheim & Lauterpacht (1944), pp. 446-450.

[60] The USSR Fundamental Principles of Criminal Law and Procedure, 1924; and Ancel M., «Les Codes pénaux européens», Tome IV, Paris, CFDC, 1971

[61] Including the St. James’ Declaration 1942; the Moscow Declaration of 1943; and the Charters of the IMTs Nuremberg and Tokyo.

[62] Preamble to the 1968 Convention

[63] U.N. Commission on Human Rights (1966) Question of the non-applicability of Statutory Limitation to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity: Study submitted by the Secretary General UN Doc. E/CN.4/906, at p. 104; the 1968 Convention; Robert H. Miller “ The Convention on the Non-Applicability of Statutory Limitations to War Crimes and Crimes Against Humanity ”, AJIL, vol. 65, No. 3 (Jul., 1971), pp. 476-501, and further references therein; the 1974 Convention; the Statute of the International Criminal Court; and Kok R. (2001) “ Statutory Limitations in International Criminal Law ”, TMC Asser Press The Hague, pp. 346-382

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16