Class 4
Identify: what is the connection between the state and the crime?
- Who committed the crime?
- Where was the crime committed?
- Against whom was the crime committed?
- What kind of crime was committed?
1.
a) Universal jurisdiction Eichmann committed an international crime. He was part of
the genocide and it was a crime against humanity.
- Eichmann, German man
- In Germany
- Against the Jewish people
- Protective is also possible threat to the Jewish people, moeilijk in dit geval. He
was living in Argentina living his life, he wasn’t a direct threat anymore.
b) Passive personality jurisdiction in this case it was about the victim. One of the
passengers of the aircraft was an US citizen. On that ground the US could claim to
have jurisdiction.
- Committed in Jordan
- Committed by Yuni, Lebanese citizen.
- Against passengers, also from the US.
c) Territorial jurisdiction the US has jurisdiction and control due to the lease over GB.
So GB could be considered territory of the US.
d) Universal jurisdiction
- Committed in chili
- By Pinochet
- Against Chilean nationals.
- So under universal because he committed crimes against humanity.
2.
The court in the case of the knowledge clip said that the crimes were unlawful, but they
were done in a governmental capacity (jure imperii). In the Tokyo case it is the same. The
crimes of the Japanese were committed in a governmental capacity during the WW2. In the
Italy case the court said there was no exception of immunity. They said no customary rule
that allows for exception for immunity based on serious crimes.
Paragraph numbers!!
3.
The crimes were not committed in Australia, so no territorial jurisdiction. the victims are not
Australian so no personality jurisdiction and there was no threat for Australia so no
protective jurisdiction. Australia could prosecute Ms Suu Kyi through universal jurisdiction.
she is a high-ranking state official, so she has immunity, private and official. She is a minister
of foreign Affairs of Myanmar. There is no exception so Ms Suu Kyi could not be prosecuted.
Paragraph 51 ‘such as!!
Identify: what is the connection between the state and the crime?
- Who committed the crime?
- Where was the crime committed?
- Against whom was the crime committed?
- What kind of crime was committed?
1.
a) Universal jurisdiction Eichmann committed an international crime. He was part of
the genocide and it was a crime against humanity.
- Eichmann, German man
- In Germany
- Against the Jewish people
- Protective is also possible threat to the Jewish people, moeilijk in dit geval. He
was living in Argentina living his life, he wasn’t a direct threat anymore.
b) Passive personality jurisdiction in this case it was about the victim. One of the
passengers of the aircraft was an US citizen. On that ground the US could claim to
have jurisdiction.
- Committed in Jordan
- Committed by Yuni, Lebanese citizen.
- Against passengers, also from the US.
c) Territorial jurisdiction the US has jurisdiction and control due to the lease over GB.
So GB could be considered territory of the US.
d) Universal jurisdiction
- Committed in chili
- By Pinochet
- Against Chilean nationals.
- So under universal because he committed crimes against humanity.
2.
The court in the case of the knowledge clip said that the crimes were unlawful, but they
were done in a governmental capacity (jure imperii). In the Tokyo case it is the same. The
crimes of the Japanese were committed in a governmental capacity during the WW2. In the
Italy case the court said there was no exception of immunity. They said no customary rule
that allows for exception for immunity based on serious crimes.
Paragraph numbers!!
3.
The crimes were not committed in Australia, so no territorial jurisdiction. the victims are not
Australian so no personality jurisdiction and there was no threat for Australia so no
protective jurisdiction. Australia could prosecute Ms Suu Kyi through universal jurisdiction.
she is a high-ranking state official, so she has immunity, private and official. She is a minister
of foreign Affairs of Myanmar. There is no exception so Ms Suu Kyi could not be prosecuted.
Paragraph 51 ‘such as!!
