Justifying a Dichotomy in Defences. The Added Value of a Distinction between Justifications and Excuses in International Criminal Law

in International Criminal Law Review
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.

Help

 

Have Institutional Access?

Login with your institution. Any other coaching guidance?

Connect

The distinction between justifications and excuses is a much-debated topic in legal doctrine. Justifications are said to negate the wrongfulness of the act; excuses negate the blameworthiness of the actor. This article discusses the (moral and legal) significance of distinguishing between justifications and excuses and explores the value this dichotomy has for international criminal law.

Sections
References
  • 8

    Fletcher 1998supra note 5 p. 85.

  • 12

    Cassese and Gaetasupra note 9 p. 209; K. Greenawalt ‘Distinguishing justifications from excuses’ 49(3) Law and Contemporary Problems (1986) 100.

  • 20

    Krebssupra note 17 p. 384.

  • 22

    Cassese and Gaetasupra note 9 p. 210; F. de Jong Daad-Schuld (bju The Hague 2009) pp. 392–393.

  • 23

    Greenawaltsupra note 12 p. 91.

  • 25

    Greenawaltsupra note 12 p. 90: criminal law ‘reflects and reinforces moral judgements’.

  • 26

    Cassese and Gaetasupra note 9 p. 210.

  • 27

    Greenawaltsupra note 12 p. 89 (‘our moral evaluation of a justified actor is different from our moral evaluation of an excused actor’).

  • 28

    Krebssupra note 17 p. 385.

  • 31

    Cassese and Gaetasupra note 9 p. 210; Cassese supra note 19 p. 952.

  • 33

    Krebssupra note 17 p. 385.

  • 44

    Cassesesupra note 19 p. 955.

Index Card
Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 76 71 3
Full Text Views 216 215 2
PDF Downloads 24 22 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0