Nature of the legal duty

Notion(s) Filing Case
Appeal Judgement - 05.05.2009 MRKŠIĆ & ŠLJIVANČANIN

151. The Appeals Chamber recalls that it has previously recognised that the breach of a duty to act imposed by the laws and customs of war gives rise to individual criminal responsibility.[1] The Appeals Chamber further recalls that Šljivančanin’s duty to protect the prisoners of war was imposed by the laws and customs of war.[2] Thus, the Appeals Chamber considers that Šljivančanin’s breach of such duty gives rise to his individual criminal responsibility. Therefore, it is not necessary for the Appeals Chamber to further address whether the duty to act, which forms part of the basis of aiding and abetting by omission, must stem from a rule of criminal law.

[1] Blaškić Appeal Judgement, para. 663, fn. 1384.

[2] See supra Section III.(B)( 3).

Download full document