Superior orders: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
(New article generated using Special:MetadataForm)
 
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
No edit summary
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{subpages}}
As a legal defense against [[war crime]] charges, the doctrine of '''superior orders''' holds that an individual cannot be held responsible for actions that were ordered by a superior officer. The doctrine was generally rejected by the [[Nuremberg Trials]], but has been challenged since.
Article 8 of the Nuremberg Charter states " "The fact that the defendant acted pursuant to an order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation of punishment, if the Tribunal determines that justice so requires."<ref>{{citation
| title = Charter of the International Military Tribunal
| url = http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/imtconst.asp#art8
}}</ref>
In the statute authorizing the [[International Criminal Court]], Article 33 reads :
*1 The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless :
**(a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question ;
**(b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful ; and
**(c) The order was not manifestly unlawful.
*2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.”<ref>{{citation
| title = Superior orders and the International Criminal Court: Justice delivered or justice denied
| date = 31 December 1999
| journal = International Review of the Red Cross | author = Charles Garraway
| url = http://www.icrc.org/eng/resources/documents/misc/57jq7h.htm
}}</ref>
==References==
{{reflist}}

Revision as of 17:30, 10 December 2010

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.

As a legal defense against war crime charges, the doctrine of superior orders holds that an individual cannot be held responsible for actions that were ordered by a superior officer. The doctrine was generally rejected by the Nuremberg Trials, but has been challenged since.

Article 8 of the Nuremberg Charter states " "The fact that the defendant acted pursuant to an order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation of punishment, if the Tribunal determines that justice so requires."[1]

In the statute authorizing the International Criminal Court, Article 33 reads :

  • 1 The fact that a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court has been committed by a person pursuant to an order of a Government or of a superior, whether military or civilian, shall not relieve that person of criminal responsibility unless :
    • (a) The person was under a legal obligation to obey orders of the Government or the superior in question ;
    • (b) The person did not know that the order was unlawful ; and
    • (c) The order was not manifestly unlawful.
  • 2. For the purposes of this article, orders to commit genocide or crimes against humanity are manifestly unlawful.”[2]

References