SLP 09 (2015)

Following on the first chapter, David Kohout analyses Grounds for the Punishment of the Nazi Criminals before National Courts for Crimes under the International Criminal Law. The text seeks to discuss the various forms of the reflection of the prosecution of Nazi criminals after the end of the World War II. Considering the far-reaching scale of the Nazi crimes, it is self-evident that only a small fraction of the major war criminals could be brought to justice before the international tribunal. The major part of these criminals was therefore tried before national courts. In certain cases these trials were conducted on the basis of the traditional criminal law, while in other cases they were based on the direct or indirect application of the rules of the ICL. On the examples of the German, Austrian and Israeli experience with such trials the chapter attempts to reflect the effectiveness of these various national approaches and via this historical excursion to identify certain key elements of the complementarity principle, which is essential for the jurisdiction of the contemporary International Criminal Court. Adopting a broader perspective, Milan Lipovský gives an overview of the Evolution of War Crimes Prosecution. He notes that the development of the prosecution of war crimes is a process that is undoubtedly marked not only by evolution of legal instruments but also by the historical context. The most dynamic evolution took place during the 20 th century because of new legal tools as well as due to armed conflicts of till then unknown scale. Although these conflicts obviously brought negative effects, it may be at least said that they lead to existence and strengthening of the principle of individual criminal responsibility of the perpetrator of crimes under international law. This chapter seeks to take note of some of the most important moments in the development of the prosecution of war crimes. Kristýna Urbanová pays attention to the institution of the Defence of Superior Order and Prosecution for War Crimes. The theory of superior order as a defence to an interna- tional crime has been a subject of wide academic debates which have often produced diametrically opposite conclusions. The chapter examines different approaches towards this controversial defence since the beginning of the 20 th century, and also takes into con- sideration difficult moral and legal questions arising in connection with the topic. The aim of the chapter is also a search for an answer to a question, whether there may be identified an international custom governing treatment of the plea of superior order. Finally, Helena Opatová discusses the Status of Victims of International Crimes before the Ad hoc Criminal Tribunals. Status of victims of international crimes has been under a rapid development in the last few years. The international military tri- bunals in Nuremberg and Tokyo admitted only a passive participation of victims as witnesses of the prosecution. Not even the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and for Rwanda granted the victims a significantly better position. However, current ad hoc criminal tribunals, particularly the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia and the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, grant the victims the right to actively participate in the proceedings. This trend is being carried on by the International Criminal Court in the Hague.

244