Suchergebnisse

Lithuania is a party to major international treaties regulating war crimes, including Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and its Two Additional Protocols of 1977 as well as Rome Statute of International Criminal Court. Chapter XV of Lithuanian Criminal Code (LCC) lists twelve definitions of war crimes, including those that correspond to the grave breaches of Geneva Conventions as well as other customary law offences. However, there are certain problems regarding the definitions of crimes in LCC and its conformity with international law and especially Rome Statute. First of all, LCC does not include any war crime committed during non-international armed conflict. It is a major gap in Lithuanian criminal law system because of three reasons: first, the article 8 of the Rome Statute clearly points out for certain crimes committed during non-international armed conflict; second, a number of Lithuanian military personnel is serving in international missions where the situation sometimes might be very close to an armed conflicts of non-international character; third, it might pose problems regarding principle nullum crimen sine lege in the case of cooperation with International Criminal Court. This gap shall be removed as soon as possible. Secondly, LCC lacks the implementation of the command responsibility doctrine. It is unclear whether the military officer or commander could be held criminally responsible for the crimes defined in LCC according to command responsibility doctrine. Only in some articles of LCC an order to commit a crime as a form of actus reus is established and there are not enough arguments whether it is possible to treat such an order as a form of complicity in the definitions where the order as a form of actus reus is missing. Omission in prevention or repression of war crimes is missed as well.

Lithuania is a party to major international treaties regulating war crimes, including Four Geneva Conventions of 1949 and its Two Additional Protocols of 1977 as well as Rome Statute of International Criminal Court. Chapter XV of Lithuanian Criminal Code (LCC) lists twelve definitions of war crimes, including those that correspond to the grave breaches of Geneva Conventions as well as other customary law offences. However, there are certain problems regarding the definitions of crimes in LCC and its conformity with international law and especially Rome Statute. First of all, LCC does not include any war crime committed during non-international armed conflict. It is a major gap in Lithuanian criminal law system because of three reasons: first, the article 8 of the Rome Statute clearly points out for certain crimes committed during non-international armed conflict; second, a number of Lithuanian military personnel is serving in international missions where the situation sometimes might be very close to an armed conflicts of non-international character; third, it might pose problems regarding principle nullum crimen sine lege in the case of cooperation with International Criminal Court. This gap shall be removed as soon as possible. Secondly, LCC lacks the implementation of the command responsibility doctrine. It is unclear whether the military officer or commander could be held criminally responsible for the crimes defined in LCC according to command responsibility doctrine. Only in some articles of LCC an order to commit a crime as a form of actus reus is established and there are not enough arguments whether it is possible to treat such an order as a form of complicity in the definitions where the order as a form of actus reus is missing. Omission in prevention or repression of war crimes is missed as well.

Crimes against Humanity is one of the most dynamic categories in the International Criminal Law since it first appearance in the Charter of Nuremberg Military Tribunal in 1945 as an outgrowth of the war crimes. The concept of crimes against humanity in the Charter of Nuremberg Military Tribunal may be characterised by the following elements: crimes shall be carried out towards any civilian population, crimes can be carried out by the civil or military officers or actual agents of the state (policy element), crimes may be committed during the war or in peace time however such crimes requires conjunction with war crimes or crimes against peace. The concept of the crimes against humanity in later sources has developed steadily towards overall protection of fundamental human rights of civil population. First way of development concerns the elements and qualification criteria. First of all the conjunction between crimes against humanity and war crimes has been eliminated. It made crimes against humanity as an independent criminal category. Said development has been affirmed by the Rome Statute of International Criminal Court and were reflected in the Statute of International Criminal Tribunal for the Rwanda (ICTR) and UN Draft Code of Offences Against Peace and Security of Mankind. The jurisprudence of International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) has significantly amended the element of policy. It was established that crimes against humanity may be carried out by the organisation or political group which controls territory and performs civil, military, politic administration de facto as well. The United Nations Draft Code of the Offences Against Peace and Security of Mankind in 1991 has introduced two alternative qualification criteria: requirement of large scale or systematic actions. Large scale (or widespread) criteria has been introduced in order to eliminate an isolated inhumane act committed by a perpetrator acting on his own initiative and directed against a single or couple of victims. According to the said criteria crimes against humanity may be committed only as an massive, frequent, large scale action carried out collectively with considerable seriousness directed against multiplicity of victims. Systematic criteria means that crimes against humanity shall be result of systematic actions as a thoroughly organised and following a regular pattern on the basis of a common policy involving substantial public or private resources. ; Nusikaltimai žmoniškumui yra viena iš dinamiškiausių tarptautinės baudžiamosios teisės kategorijų. Ši sąvoka pirmą kartą buvo pavartota 1945 m. Niurnbergo karo tribunolo įstatuose išplėstiniam karo nusikaltimui įvardyti, tačiau ilgainiui buvo papildoma ir tapo savarankiškesnė. Niurnbergo tribunolo įstatuose pateiktą sąvoką galima apibūdinti šiais požymiais: nusikaltimai žmoniškumui gali būti įvykdyti prieš bet kokius civilius gyventojus tiek taikos, tiek karo metu, juos įvykdyti gali civilinės arba karinės valdžios pareigūnai, arba faktiniai agentai (politikos elementas), jų kvalifikacijai būtina sąsaja su karo nusikaltimais arba nusikaltimais taikai. Nusikaltimų žmoniškumui sąvoka plėtojosi dviem kryptimis. Pirmoji plėtros kryptis apėmė nusikaltimų žmoniškumui požymių ir kvalifikavimo kriterijų pokyčius. Pirmiausia buvo atsisakyta reikalavimo, kad nusikaltimų žmoniškumui kvalifikavimas turi būti siejamas su karo nusikaltimais arba nusikaltimais taikai. Šis pokytis lėmė nusikaltimų žmoniškumui kaip savarankiško nusikaltimo atsiradimą. Šią traktuotę patvirtino ir vėliausias tarptautinės baudžiamosios teisės šaltinis – Tarptautinio baudžiamojo teismo Romos statutas, ji taip pat atsispindėjo Jungtinių tautų nusikaltimų taikai ir žmonijos saugumui kodekso projekte, Tarptautinio tribunolo asmenims, atsakingiems už genocidą ir kitus sunkius tarptautinės humanitarinės teisės pažeidimus Ruandos teritorijoje teisti (Ruandos tribunolo) statute.

The present article analyses the phenomenon of targeted killing. This controversial practice is widespread and has most notoriously been applied by Israel, the USA and Russia. However, the limited scope allows only to focus on the problems of targeted killing under international humanitarian law (law of armed conflict) even though targeted killing can be analysed under various legal regimes, including international human rights law, the right of self- defence under Article 51 of the UN Charter. For the purpose of the article, targeted killing is defined as 'the premeditated killing of a specific target (person(s)) suspected of terrorism, with explicit or implicit governmental approval.' The advantage of using the term 'targeted killing'is that it is free from preconceived issues of legality, in contrast to such notions as 'extrajudieial execution' or 'assassination'. The starting point is that when committed in the course of an armed conflict a legal analysis of targeted killing shall be based on all applicable rules of international humanitarian law. In that respect the principle of distinction between civilians and combatants remains of the utmost importance, in particular the notion of a civilian taking direct part in hostilities. Furthermore there is no necessity to introduce or to elaborate any new specific rules regarding targeted killing. On the one hand, targeted killing during armed conflict is covered by already existing rules of international humanitarian law. On the other hand, easing down the regime by inventing new rules for targeted killing might not serve the role of law. This would merely exacerbate the discussion on what targeted killing is and what it is not. [.] ; Tikslinį nužudymą kaip nevienareikšmiai vertintiną kovos su terorizmu metodą naudoja beveik visos valstybės, aktyvios vadinamojo "karo su terorizmu1 dalyvės. Ypač plačiai jį taiko Izraelis, Jungtinės Amerikos Valstijos, Rusija. Šis metodas naudojamas ir ginkluoto konflikto, ir taikos metu, pasitelkiant ginkluotąsias pajėgas, specialiosios paskirties pajėgas, specialiąsias priemones (pvz., nepilotuojamus orlaivius) Svarbu pabrėžti, kad tiksliniai nužudymai valstybių naudojami kaip specialus politinis - karinis įrankis, kuomet prievarta tikslingai nukreipiama prieš konkretų asmenį (-is), įtariamą terorizmu. Straipsnio autoriai pateikia šią tikslinio nužudymo sąvoką: "tai iš anksto apgalvotas konkretaus asmens (taikinio), įtariamo terorizmu, nužudymas esant tiesioginiam ar netiesioginiam valstybės valdžios pritarimui.' Si sąvoka svarbi tuo, jog ji neapima išankstinio tikslinio nužudymo vertinimo teisėtumo (kaip nutinka tuos pačius veiksmus apibūdinant kitokiomis sąvokomis, pvz., "neteisminė egzekucija'), bet nurodo elementus, būtinus reiškinio teisinei analizei.[.].

Just as we never get a second chance to make a good first impression, we may equally be deprived of a unique chance to act both as witnesses and evaluators of the centennial after regaining the independence of the Republic of Lithuania if we fail to review and assess this period. Therefore, we have to seize the opportunity and reflect upon the twisting path of our history since regaining the independence of the state until the current situation. The centennial development of law cannot be disembodied from the story of state's development. One can treat law both as a pathfinder and as a legal guide of the state; however it can likewise be applied as an instrument to solely ensure proper functioning of the state. Creating an effective system of law is not a one-day project; it is the process requiring deliberation, constant effort and deep awareness, otherwise the system will be doomed to failure or malfunctioning. Every state or nation is believed to deserve such a legal system as the efforts that the state puts to ascertain and develop it. The centennial period since the restoration of the independence of the Republic of Lithuania can unmistakably be described as a unique one: on the one hand the state was faced with the challenges of restoration and creation in various areas of the state and the society; it later experienced the loss of independence and survived 50 years of occupation; it eventually restored an independent state and was repeatedly faced with fresh challenges of re-establishing a historically-literate, well-structured and well-functioning state-governance system in both national and international levels. On the other hand, the technological and communications progress intensified the recent hundred years to such an extent that it clearly outdistances any previous centennials. Advancement of information technologies intensifies our time, our law, while huge amounts of information and its immense spread accelerate the pace of our life and our history. New forms of social relations and new branches of law emerge all in need of proper legal regulation. The study "The Development of the Lithuanian Law within the Period of 1918-2018: the Centennial Experience and Prospects" is a result of joint research efforts of more than 50 outstanding lawyers representing different areas of law from Mykolas Romeris University, Vytautas Magnus University, and Vilnius University. The study, dedicated to the Centennial of Lithuanian statehood due in 2018, presents the results of scientific research on legal science and major branches of law, covering the period of 1918-beginning of 2018 (information presented in the study covers a period until end-2017); it reflects upon the centennial development of Lithuanian law, discusses its major characteristics, tendencies and preconditions of their formation; it examines its influence on the state and state authorities and envisages possible impact on the development of law in the future. The Lithuanian law of 1918-2018 is analysed from the perspective of three statehood periods. 1918-1940 is the period when the independence of the Republic of Lithuania was declared, the groundwork for the statehood was laid and an independent legal system was being established. 1940- 1990 denotes the period of occupation, when the authentic legal system of Lithuania was destroyed and the Soviet legal system was forcibly entrenched. The latter was based on socialist ideology and the superiority of governmental authority over the civil society. It is not easy to evaluate the span of 1990- 2018 as the impartial assessment of it is seriously hindered by the authors' partial attitude towards the existing surrounding phenomena. [.]

Just as we never get a second chance to make a good first impression, we may equally be deprived of a unique chance to act both as witnesses and evaluators of the centennial after regaining the independence of the Republic of Lithuania if we fail to review and assess this period. Therefore, we have to seize the opportunity and reflect upon the twisting path of our history since regaining the independence of the state until the current situation. The centennial development of law cannot be disembodied from the story of state's development. One can treat law both as a pathfinder and as a legal guide of the state; however it can likewise be applied as an instrument to solely ensure proper functioning of the state. Creating an effective system of law is not a one-day project; it is the process requiring deliberation, constant effort and deep awareness, otherwise the system will be doomed to failure or malfunctioning. Every state or nation is believed to deserve such a legal system as the efforts that the state puts to ascertain and develop it. The centennial period since the restoration of the independence of the Republic of Lithuania can unmistakably be described as a unique one: on the one hand the state was faced with the challenges of restoration and creation in various areas of the state and the society; it later experienced the loss of independence and survived 50 years of occupation; it eventually restored an independent state and was repeatedly faced with fresh challenges of re-establishing a historically-literate, well-structured and well-functioning state-governance system in both national and international levels. On the other hand, the technological and communications progress intensified the recent hundred years to such an extent that it clearly outdistances any previous centennials. Advancement of information technologies intensifies our time, our law, while huge amounts of information and its immense spread accelerate the pace of our life and our history. New forms of social relations and new branches of law emerge all in need of proper legal regulation. The study "The Development of the Lithuanian Law within the Period of 1918-2018: the Centennial Experience and Prospects" is a result of joint research efforts of more than 50 outstanding lawyers representing different areas of law from Mykolas Romeris University, Vytautas Magnus University, and Vilnius University. The study, dedicated to the Centennial of Lithuanian statehood due in 2018, presents the results of scientific research on legal science and major branches of law, covering the period of 1918-beginning of 2018 (information presented in the study covers a period until end-2017); it reflects upon the centennial development of Lithuanian law, discusses its major characteristics, tendencies and preconditions of their formation; it examines its influence on the state and state authorities and envisages possible impact on the development of law in the future. The Lithuanian law of 1918-2018 is analysed from the perspective of three statehood periods. 1918-1940 is the period when the independence of the Republic of Lithuania was declared, the groundwork for the statehood was laid and an independent legal system was being established. 1940- 1990 denotes the period of occupation, when the authentic legal system of Lithuania was destroyed and the Soviet legal system was forcibly entrenched. The latter was based on socialist ideology and the superiority of governmental authority over the civil society. It is not easy to evaluate the span of 1990- 2018 as the impartial assessment of it is seriously hindered by the authors' partial attitude towards the existing surrounding phenomena. [.]