English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In the last two decades, the principle of individual criminal responsibility has consolidated a regime of secondary norms that stands beside the older regime of State responsibility for internationally wrongful acts. The relationship between these two forms of responsibility has thus become a matter of concern for international law and international tribunals. This paper analyses the contact points between State and individual responsibility for international crimes, suggesting that recent practice indicates a very close relationship between the two regimes. It supports the theory proposed by Beatrice I. Bonafe according to which there is a unity at the level of primary norms that describe international crimes and a duality of secondary norms that establish the conditions for attribution of responsibility for international crimes. Finally, it criticizes the compartmentalized approach to individual and State responsibility that has been adopted by international tribunals. The struggle for the protection of human rights and against impunity must take into account that States and individuals commit international crimes and therefore both should be accordingly punished.

A relação entre a responsabilidade do Estado e do indivíduo por crimes internacionais