...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of International Criminal Justice >Terrorism According to the STL's Interlocutory Decision on the Applicable Law
【24h】

Terrorism According to the STL's Interlocutory Decision on the Applicable Law

机译:根据STL关于适用法律的中间裁决做出的恐怖主义行为

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

On 16 February 2011, the Appeals Chamber of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) handed down its unanimous Interlocutory Decision on the Applicable Law in response to a number of questions put to them by the Pre-Trial Judge. The decision touched on multiple legal issues arising from the court's unique jurisdictional attributes, including its jurisdiction ratione materiae over the crime of terrorism. This paper provides a commentary on two specific terrorism-related aspects of the decision: (i) the court's finding that terrorism has crystallized to form a distinct international crime under customary international law and (ii) its (re)interpretation of terrorism under Lebanese law (Article 314 of the Lebanese Criminal Code). In so doing, it draws attention to the Appeals Chamber's unique approach to customary international law formation in light of prima facie differences in state practice and the implications of a fully fledged international crime of terrorism that includes a ‘transnational’ element. In addition, it highlights the Appeals Chamber's internationalist interpretative approach to domestic law but also questions whether the STL should be deferential to the decisions and interpretations of Lebanese courts given its unique characteristics which do not exist in any other international court. Due to its far-reaching implications, the decision merits the attention of scholars and practitioners alike as it has the potential to affect both domestic and international approaches to, and prosecution of, terrorism for many years to come.
机译:2011年2月16日,黎巴嫩特别法庭上诉分庭针对预审法官向他们提出的一些问题作出了关于适用法律的一致中间裁决。该决定涉及了法院独特的司法管辖权属性所引起的多个法律问题,包括其对恐怖主义犯罪的属事管辖权。本文对裁决中与恐怖主义有关的两个特定方面进行了评论:(i)法院的调查结果表明,恐怖主义已根据习惯国际法明确形成一种独特的国际罪行,并且(ii)根据黎巴嫩法对恐怖主义进行(重新)解释(《黎巴嫩刑法》第314条)。通过这样做,它引起人们对上诉分庭针对习惯国际法形成的独特方式的关注,因为这种做法在国家实践中存在表面上的初步差异,而且还包括一种包括“跨国”成分在内的成熟的国际恐怖主义罪行的含义。此外,它着重强调了上诉分庭对国内法的国际主义解释方法,同时也质疑STL是否应尊重黎巴嫩法院的判决和解释,因为它具有其他国际法院所没有的独特特征。由于其影响深远,该决定值得学者和从业者的关注,因为该决定有可能在今后许多年影响国内和国际对恐怖主义的处理和起诉。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号