246 / 268
244
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.