Abstract
In the book Perpetrators and Accessories in International Criminal Law, Neha Jain develops a theory to distinguish between the perpetrators and accessories of international crime. She defines international crimes as collective in nature. The author identifies two competing doctrines in international law—Joint Criminal Enterprise (JCE) and Indirect Perpetration and Co-perpetration. Within the scope of these laws, Jain argues, there is no clear policy on how to identify and hold the principal perpetrator and co-perpetrators responsible. The author provides an overview of the existing international doctrines and then proposes how components of English and German criminal law might be used to clarify concepts in international law. She outlines in detail how domestic law deals with principalship and accessories. The author applies the concepts from domestic law to the existing standards of international law.
The strength of the book is that it provides a comprehensive overview of information—iterations of international law, how the interpretations of international law vary, dependent on specific cases, and how accountability has been assigned historically in collective crimes. The author provides a detailed overview of current international law, highlighting the problematic elements in assigning responsibility. The author establishes JCE as the most prominent doctrine in international law for several decades. She provides a historical foundation of JCE, highlighting cases that established the doctrine. Jain also provides a comprehensive overview of the three iterations of JCE, again providing numerous cases to support her points.
Jain outlines how JCE was challenged by the standards of the International Criminal Court (ICC). There were, however, problems with assigning responsibility in collective crimes even when using the ICC doctrines of co-perpetration and indirect perpetration. Throughout the discussion of JCE and ICC, the main point Jain continues to highlight is that there is no clear doctrine in international law on accountability for the person(s) responsible in collective crime. The person behind collective crimes often does not actively commit the crimes but oversees the crimes that are being committed. As a result, the person in authority can only be charged with aiding and abetting under the current international law.
The author continues her thorough overview of the law in her coverage of English and German criminal law. She outlines components of the domestic laws that resonate with assigning responsibility as noted at the international level. To complete her theoretical venture, the author explores how specific concepts from domestic laws might be restructured to help strengthen the concept of responsibility in the current international law. Jain’s argument is a well-organized, very thorough, and detailed presentation of laws and cases, highlighting the problem of holding people accountable in collective crimes.
Overall, the author assumes the reader has a general knowledge of international law and is familiar with the cases under review. For those readers who have this knowledge, the book will provide a host of useful information. Throughout the discussion of JCE and ICC, for example, the author uses terminology specific to law to explain concepts. She also presents a host of cases to demonstrate changes and standards in international law. This information helps provide the history and context of the doctrines, but the number of cases and standards presented as evidence is somewhat overwhelming. A reader who is hoping to gain a more general understanding of the problems of international law in assigning responsibility is likely to be hindered by the vast amount of information presented in discipline specific language.
For readers who do not have extensive information about international law but instead are grounded more generally in the field of criminology, the assumptions of knowledge of international law made by the author make the book a difficult read. The author presents ideas immediately in the introduction, expecting readers to have a background in international law. For example, the introduction incorporates a discussion of JCE, JCE II, and JCE III without providing context or a definition of these concepts. This can prove challenging to readers not grounded in a law or legal background. In addition, the number of acronyms used for laws, court cases, international incidents, groups, and various other distinctions and the frequency with which they are used is burdensome on the reader.