Introduction 介绍
依法追究刑事责任是指在一种权利意义上的自由，财产或生命等特定负担的权利，违反刑法义务，在刑法侵权行为规范实施后，违法者应当承担法律制裁。国际刑事责任是指依照国际刑法和有关国家的国内刑法对非法国际主体的刑事责任。换句话说，行为者执行国际刑事诉讼，应受到国际刑法的负面评价和相应的法律后果。
Criminal responsibility according to the law is the law in the sense of a kind of rights such as freedom, property or life by the particular burden, which violates criminal law obligation, implemented after the infringement behavior norms of criminal law, the offender shall bear by the legal sanctions. International criminal responsibility refers to the criminal liability of illegal international subjects according to the international criminal law and the domestic criminal law of relevant countries. In other words, the actor carries out international criminal ACTS and should be subject to the negative evaluation of international criminal law and the corresponding legal consequences.
“战争是一种迫使敌人服从我们意志的暴力行为。” “战争是一种政治行为。” “战争只不过是通过另一种手段延续政治。”这是着名的军事理论家克劳塞维茨对战争的经典定义。该定义表明，战争是一种暴力行为。战争的最初动机是政治，追求国家利益;直接目标是相互摧毁，使敌人无力抗拒。 “国际法战争主要是指武装冲突以及由于两个或更多国家使用武力而产生的法律地位。”在国际法中，战争是武装冲突和法治国家的事实。战争的主题是国家，其目的是用武力执行国家政策。除了各国内部的决策机制之外，人类的战争还逐渐了解了这一过程和限制。国际社会也在防范暴力和战争限制机制，例如在全球政治，外交协调，多边国际会议，国防集团形成集体安全体系等方面;在法律层面，国际法是规范战争的有意义的方式。反对战争的国际法准则经历了限制基本否认的过程。第一部国际法具有规范冲突的具体规则，主要涉及战争和战争实践。在中世纪晚期，欧洲封建国家逐渐获得独立并行使主权，国际法开始萌芽，出现了一批国际法学者，他们提出了有关战争的国际法学说。西班牙学者维多利亚继承了阿奎那的观念，并提出了“正义战争”的原则。
"War is a violent act that forces the enemy to obey our will." "war is a political act." "war is nothing but the continuation of politics by another means." It is the classic definition of war by the famous military theorist Clausewitz. The definition indicates that war is an act of violence. The initial motive for the war was political, in the pursuit of national interest; the direct aim is to destroy each other and make the enemy powerless to resist. "War in international law mainly refers to the armed conflict and the resulting legal status resulting from the use of force by two or more countries." In international law, war is a fact of armed conflict and a state of law. The subject of war is the state, whose purpose is to carry out national policies using force. Humans' war there was a gradual understanding of the process and restrictions, in addition to the decision-making mechanism within countries. The international community is also guarded against violence and war restriction mechanism, for example, in the global political, diplomatic coordination, multilateral international conference, defense group form a collective security system, etc.; At the legal level, international law is a meaningful way to regulate war. The norms of international law against the war have gone through the process of limiting to fundamental denial. The first international law had specific rules for regulating conflict, mainly about war and the practice of war. In the late middle ages, the feudal states of Europe gradually gained their independence and exercised their sovereignty, and international law began to sprout, and a group of scholars of international law emerged, and they put forward the doctrine of international law concerning the war. The Spanish scholar Victoria inherited the idea of Aquinas and put forward the principle of "just war."
The background of the international criminal law国际刑法的背景
In modern international law, the recognition of sovereignty also recognizes that national states have the right to wage war according to their national interests, which is to acknowledge that the state has the right to battle. But after the ravages of war, the international community recognized that the war should be limited to international law. The war is still the focus of the scholars of modern international law. They inherit and carry forward the theory of just war and argue that war should be justified. The Dutch scholar Gerhold, who laid the foundation of modern international law with the law of war and peace, is known as the "father of international law." He inherited and played the theory of just war, arguing that the key to the separation of the battle of justice and the unjust war was to conform to natural law and other laws. In August 1864, the 12 countries held an international conference in Geneva to sign the convention on the betterment of the army (Geneva convention) . Since then, the international community has organized numerous international conferences and signed international agreements on the prevention of war and the reduction of war damage . More important were the two Hague peace conferences. For easing international tensions, peaceful settlement of international disputes is to reduce the rules of war damage. From may to July 1899, 26 countries held in the Hague peace conference, discuss the peaceful settlement of international disputes, arms limitation and the problem of martial law, the meeting finally passed the principles of the Geneva convention applicable adaptation to the conference. The agreement on Marine laws and regulations and protocols, the convention on the peaceful settlement of international disputes and three weapons and fighting method declaration. From June to October 1907, 44 countries held in the Hague peace conference for the second time, the meeting adopted the convention on the peaceful settlement of international disputes; the debt limit the use of force for contract convention, and the agreement on about the war began, 13 of the assembly. Over both the peaceful settlement of international disputes convention, states parties should try to use peaceful means to resolve international disputes, in case of severe discussion, before the use of force, should be asked one or more friendly countries to mediate or the mediation. The two conventions, though a provision of the peaceful settlement of international disputes is a mandatory obligation of the parties, more not ban war, but the conference advocates the peaceful settlement of international disputes. Provisions for the use of force should be first to use peaceful solution, is to the right to resort to war a significant limitation.
The state is not the subject of international criminal responsibility
The inpidual is the subject of international criminal responsibility
The inpidual bears the practical basis of international criminal responsibility
Case study 案例分析
Application 应用
Conclusion 结论
In summary, the trial practice and international legislation of contemporary international law reaffirmed the principle of international law of global criminal responsibility. The problem of the former Yugoslavia international court statute and section 7 (1) the Rwanda is the foreign criminal court statute are stated explicitly. 6 (1) of all plans, instigated, command, guilty of or to assist in law or incite others to plan, prepare, or crime involved. Inpiduals should take personal responsibility for their crimes.
References 英文参考文献
1. FRASER, D. (2017). (De)Constructing the Nazi State: Criminal Organizations and the Constitutional Theory of the International Military Tribunal. Loyola Of Los Angeles International & Comparative Law Review, 39(1), 117-186.
2. Sedgwick, J. B. (2011). A People's Court: Emotion, Participant Experiences, and the Shaping of Postwar Justice at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, 1946-1948. Diplomacy & Statecraft, 22(3), 480-499.doi:10.1080/09592296.2011.599651
3. Reynolds, K. (2013). Banking against Humanity: The Holocaust, the Reichsbank Loot Film and the American Prosecution at the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal. History, 98(332), 511-529.
4. Bloxham, D. (2013). From the International Military Tribunal to the Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings: The American Confrontation with Nazi Criminality Revisited. History, 98(332), 567-591.
5. Kaufman, Z. D. (2013). Transitional Justice For Tōjō's Japan: The United States Role In The Establishment Of The International Military Tribunal For The Far East And Other Transitional Justice Mechanisms For Japan After World War Ii. Emory International Law Review, 27(2), 755-798.
6. Feltman, B. K. (2004). Legitimizing Justice: The American Press and the International Military Tribunal, 1945–1946. Historian, 66(2), 300-319.
7. SEDGWICK, J. B. (2009). Memory on Trial: Constructing and Contesting the 'Rape of Nanking' at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, 1946-1948. Modern Asian Studies, 43(5), 1229-1254.
8. Shahabuddeen, M. (2012). The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia: The Third Wang Tieya Lecture *. Chinese Journal Of International Law, 11(1), 13-44.
9. Mckeown, T. (2014). The Nuremberg Trial: Procedural Due Process At The International Military Tribunal. Victoria University Of Wellington Law Review, 45(1), 109-132.
10. Kalmbach, P. L. (2017). The German Courts-martial and their Cooperation with the Police Organizations during the World War II. Journal On European History Of Law, 8(1), 2-5.
11. Blandford, A. C. (2017). The History of Fair and Equitable Treatment before the Second World War. ICSID Review: Foreign Investment Law Journal, 32(2), 287-303. doi:10.1093/icsidreview/six002
12. Moffett, L. (2012). The Role of Victims in the International Criminal Tribunals of the Second World War. International Criminal Law Review, 12(2), 245-270.doi:10.1163/157181212X634153
13. HALEY, J. O. (2009). The Tokyo International Military Tribunal: A Reappraisal/The Tokyo War Crimes Trial: The Pursuit of Justice in the Wake of World War II. Journal Of Japanese Studies, 35(2), 445-451.
14. Riedel, D. ". (2006). The U.S. War Crimes Tribunals at the Former Dachau Concentration Camp: Lessons for Today?. Berkeley Journal Of International Law, 24(2), 554-609.
15. vonLingen, K. (2009). War Crimes Tribunals and Transitional Justice: The Tokyo Trial and the Nuremburg Legacy./The Tokyo War Crimes Trial: The Pursuit of Justice in the Wake of World War II. H-Net Reviews In The Humanities & Social Sciences, 1-3.
16. Plesch, D., & Sattler, S. (2014). Changing the Paradigm of International Criminal Law: Considering the Work of the United Nations War Crimes Commission of 1943-1948. International Community Law Review, 15(2), 203-223.doi:10.1163/18719732-12341252
17. International Criminal Law — Rome Statute — International Criminal Court Imposes First Sentence For War Crime Of Attacking Cultural Heritage.(2017). Harvard Law Review, 130(7), 1978-1985.
18. Davidson, C. (2017). How To Read International Criminal Law: Strict Construction And The Rome Statute Of The International Criminal Court. St. John's Law Review, 9137-103.
19. Dutton, Y. M., &Alleblas, T. (2017). Unpacking The Deterrent Effect Of The International Criminal Court: Lessons From Kenya. St. John's Law Review, 91105-175.
20. Nicholson, J. (2017). Strengthening the Effectiveness of International Criminal Law through the Principle of Legality. International Criminal Law Review, 17(4), 656-681.doi:10.1163/15718123-01701008
21. Abashidze, A., &Shatalova, S. (2017). International Crimes Exception to the Immunity of State Officials from Foreign Criminal Jurisdiction: The Russian Perspective on the Work of the International Law Commission. Netherlands International Law Review (Springer Science & Business Media B.V.), 64(2), 213-236.doi:10.1007/s40802-017-0090-5
22. Jain, N. (2016). Judicial Lawmaking and General Principles of Law in International Criminal Law. Harvard International Law Journal, 57(1), 111-150.
23. Chesterman, S. (2014). INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL LAW WITH ASIAN CHARACTERISTICS?. Columbia Journal Of Asian Law, 27(2), 129-164.