282. The Appeals Chamber considers that the fact that Ntabakuze was acquitted of all charges against him pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Statute and was solely convicted pursuant to Article 6(3) of the Statute is not subject to consideration as a mitigating factor. The form of liability is not an individual circumstance of the accused but the objective definition of his participation in the criminal conduct. Further, failure to prevent or punish subordinates’ crimes constitutes the culpable conduct under Article 6(3) of the Statute and the absence of conviction under Article 6(1) of the Statute does not reduce that culpability.[1] The Appeals Chamber finds that the Trial Chamber was therefore correct in not considering in mitigation the fact that Ntabakuze was not convicted pursuant to Article 6(1) of the Statute and, accordingly, rejects Ntabakuze’s argument in this respect.