scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Patricia Viseur Sellers

Bio: Patricia Viseur Sellers is an academic researcher from University of Oxford. The author has contributed to research in topics: Sexual violence & Crimes against humanity. The author has an hindex of 3, co-authored 3 publications receiving 21 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: In 2018, a majority of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reversed the conviction of former military commander Jean-Pierre Bemba for the crimes against humanity of rape and murder and the war crimes of rape, murder, and pillaging committed by his troops in the Central African Republic (CAR) between October 2002, and March 2003 as discussed by the authors.
Abstract: On June 8, 2018, a majority of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reversed the conviction of former military commander Jean-Pierre Bemba for the crimes against humanity of rape and murder and the war crimes of rape, murder, and pillaging committed by his troops in the Central African Republic (CAR) between October 2002, and March 2003. The decision was clearly a disappointment for the victims of the crimes committed by Bemba’s troops, who have been waiting for more than fifteen years for a measure of justice. Significantly, the acquittal also means that sixteen years after the Rome Statute came into force, and despite increasing recognition of the prevalence of sexual violence in the situations under the jurisdiction of the court, the ICC has yet to issue a single, final conviction for the crime of sexual violence. A number of commentators have critiqued various aspects of the judgment, including the standard of review used by the Appeals Chamber. However, with few exceptions, little of this commentary has focused on the impact of the Appeals Chamber’s analysis of command responsibility under Article 28 of the Rome Statute on sexual and gender-based crimes. We argue that the majority’s decision — in particular, its analysis of the necessary and reasonable measures that a commander is required to take to avoid liability under Article 28 — lacks the kind of insight that a critical gender analysis would have offered. We conclude that absent reconsideration, the Court’s jurisprudence on modes of liability will remain a major obstacle to the successful prosecution of cases of sexual and gender-based crimes at the ICC, especially for high-ranking accused who either did not clearly order the crimes or were not physically present during the commission of those crimes.

10 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the International Criminal Court has developed a number of legal theories designed to hold individuals responsible for their role in collective criminal conduct, known as modes of liability, which are the subject of significant scholarly commentary.
Abstract: International criminal tribunals have developed a number of legal theories designed to hold individuals responsible for their role in collective criminal conduct. These doctrines of criminal participation, known as modes of liability, are the subject of significant scholarly commentary. Yet missing from much of this debate, particularly as regards the International Criminal Court, has been an analysis of how current doctrine on modes of liability responds to the need to hold collective perpetrators criminally responsible for crimes of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). Indeed, many writings in this area of the law address perceived shortcomings in the theoretical underpinnings of modes of liability doctrine in the abstract but ignore the application of this doctrine in concreto. As a result, facially neutral writings on modes of liability may in fact be gendered in application, either because they fail to account for the specific characteristics of sexual and gender-based violence or because they are applied in a manner that requires higher thresholds for finding culpability for the commission of SGBV crimes. This article fills the gap between theory and practice, examining past and present doctrine, and suggesting ways in which the treatment of modes of liability by international criminal courts and tribunals can both properly respond to the need for personal culpability and the dangers of collective criminal activity, particularly as regards SGBV crimes.

9 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In 2018, a majority of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reversed the conviction of former military commander Jean-Pierre Bemba for the crimes against humanity of rape and murder and the war crimes of rape, murder, and pillaging committed by his troops in the Central African Republic (CAR) between October 2002, and March 2003.
Abstract: On June 8, 2018, a majority of the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) reversed the conviction of former military commander Jean-Pierre Bemba for the crimes against humanity of rape and murder and the war crimes of rape, murder, and pillaging committed by his troops in the Central African Republic (CAR) between October 2002, and March 2003. The decision was clearly a disappointment for the victims of the crimes committed by Bemba’s troops, who have been waiting for more than fifteen years for a measure of justice. Significantly, the acquittal also means that sixteen years after the Rome Statute came into force, and despite increasing recognition of the prevalence of sexual violence in the situations under the jurisdiction of the court, the ICC has yet to issue a single, final conviction for the crime of sexual violence. A number of commentators have critiqued various aspects of the judgment, including the standard of review used by the Appeals Chamber. However, with few exceptions, little of this commentary has focused on the impact of the Appeals Chamber’s analysis of command responsibility under Article 28 of the Rome Statute on sexual and gender-based crimes. We argue that the majority’s decision — in particular, its analysis of the necessary and reasonable measures that a commander is required to take to avoid liability under Article 28 — lacks the kind of insight that a critical gender analysis would have offered. We conclude that absent reconsideration, the Court’s jurisprudence on modes of liability will remain a major obstacle to the successful prosecution of cases of sexual and gender-based crimes at the ICC, especially for high-ranking accused who either did not clearly order the crimes or were not physically present during the commission of those crimes.

8 citations


Cited by
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: In this article, Browning reconstructs the final solution of the Jewish question at Lublin district in 1942, based on the materials from Federal Central Office for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes and Federal Archives set up in Koblenz.
Abstract: In his book Ch. Browning reconstructs the “final solution of the Jewish question” at Lublin district in 1942. Grounding his study on the materials from Federal Central Office for the Investigation of Nazi Crimes and Federal Archives set up in Koblenz, the author undertakes a socio-psychological analysis of the personalities and actions of the policemen from Reserve Police Battalion 101 of German Order Police.

107 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In this article, a wide range of scholars have rebuked some of these modes of liability for compromising basic concepts in liberal notions of blame attribution, thereby reducing international defendants to mere instruments for the promotion of wider socio-political objectives.
Abstract: Modes of liability, such as ordering, instigation, superior responsibility and joint criminal liability, are arguably the most discussed topics in modern international criminal justice. In recent years, a wide range of scholars have rebuked some of these modes of liability for compromising basic concepts in liberal notions of blame attribution, thereby reducing international defendants to mere instruments for the promotion of wider socio-political objectives. Critics attribute this willingness to depart from orthodox concepts of criminal responsibility to international forces, be they interpretative styles typical of human rights or aspirations associated with transitional justice. Strangely, however, complicity has avoided these criticisms entirely, even though it too fails the tests international criminal lawyers use as benchmarks in the deconstruction of other modes. Moreover, the source of complicity’s departures from basic principles is not international as previously suggested - it stems from international criminal law’s emulation of objectionable domestic criminal doctrine. If, instead of inheriting the dark sides of domestic criminal law, we apply international scholars’ criticisms across all modes of liability, complicity (and all other modes of liability) disintegrates into a broader notion of perpetration. A unitary theory could also attach to all prosecutions for international crimes, both international and domestic, transcending the long-endured fixation on modes of liability within the discipline.

47 citations

Book
23 May 2019
TL;DR: A detailed analysis of the ICC's practice in prosecuting gender-based crimes across all cases for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide up until mid-2018 is presented in this paper.
Abstract: The 1998 Rome Statute, the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court (ICC), includes a longer list of gender-based crimes than any previous instrument of international criminal law. The Statute's twentieth anniversary provides an opportunity to examine how successful the ICC has been in prosecuting those crimes, what challenges it has faced, and how its caselaw on these crimes might develop in future. Taking up that opportunity, this book analyses the ICC's practice in prosecuting gender-based crimes across all cases for war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide in the ICC up until mid-2018. This analysis is based on a detailed examination of court records and original interviews with prosecutors and gender experts at the Court. This book covers topics of emerging interest to practitioners in this field, including wartime sexual violence against men and boys, persecution on the grounds of gender and sexual orientation, and sexual violence against 'child soldiers'.

27 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: In a landmark trial judgment on April 26, 2012, the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) convicted Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia, of aiding and abetting and planning crimes against humanity and war crimes during the armed conflict in Sierra Leone.
Abstract: In a landmark trial judgment on April 26, 2012, the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL) convicted Charles Taylor, former President of Liberia, of aiding and abetting and planning crimes against humanity and war crimes during the armed conflict in Sierra Leone. Analysis of Taylor’s prosecution has tended to focus on issues such as his indictment while a Head of State and his link to ‘blood’ diamonds. Less attention has been paid, however, to gender issues arising in Taylor’s case. This article begins by exploring the gender-related charges against Taylor: the crimes against humanity of rape and sexual slavery, the war crime of outrages upon personal dignity, and the war crime of committing acts of terror (including through sexual violence). Next, the article explores how the Court viewed the issue of cumulative charges, especially with respect to rape and sexual slavery. Third, this article discusses the modes of liability used to find Taylor guilty and their link to the gender-related crimes. Finally, this article concludes with a positive evaluation of what the Taylor trial judgment has added to international criminal law’s understanding of gender-based crimes. For example, the judgment has shed light on the different ways in which sexual and gender-based crimes are used in armed conflict to assert power and control. It has also assisted in solidifying the international legal definition of sexual slavery. It raised important questions about whether forced marriage should instead be called ‘conjugal slavery’, and it clarified that an individual may be subject to convictions for the crimes against humanity of rape and sexual slavery or the war crimes of committing acts of terror and sexual violence.

24 citations