侵略罪“控制或指挥”认定标准的演进与挑战  

The Evolution and Challenge of the Leadership Requirement of the Crime of Aggression Under the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court

作　　者：陈澍桐 王佳[3,4] CHEN Shutong;WANG Jia

机构地区：[1]日内瓦高级国际关系与发展研究院 [2]荷兰莱顿大学 [3]澳门科技大学法学院,中国澳门 [4]爱尔兰国立大学(高威)人权研究中心

出　　处：《国际法学刊》2023年第1期79-105,156,157,共29页Journal of International Law

摘　　要：侵略罪与国际刑事法院管辖的其他三项犯罪的最主要区别在于它的“领导犯罪”条款,即只有“有效控制或指挥一国政治或军事行动的人”才符合此罪的主体要件。2010年在坎帕拉举行的《国际刑事法院罗马规约》第一次审查会议一致通过侵略罪个人刑事责任“控制或指挥”标准,但对该标准之解释并未在会议中得到明确,亟待完善。“控制或指挥”标准由二战后系列军事审判所确立之“塑造或影响”标准发展而来,而又有所差异。首先,通过梳理二战后系列军事审判对于反和平罪领导标准的认定,特别是通过考察东京审判中日本“下克上”的传统如何间接影响反和平罪“塑造或影响”标准,我们发现检察官团队和法官很重视对“有效控制”认定;其次,通过整理联合国侵略罪特别工作组针对“控制或指挥”的会议讨论文件,发现工作组对“塑造或影响”与“控制或指挥”的本质争议点在文字表述上,即对于实质的主体范围认定二者观点一致,而对“控制或指挥”的认定实际上是由该术语前的“有效”来决定的;同时,通过辨析“控制或指挥”标准之性质,认为该标准具备犯罪构成要件与责任模式的双重属性。基于以上讨论,建议法庭未来在遵守合法性原则的基础上,可以参照指挥官责任“有效控制”标准认定的八个因素,具体适用侵略罪“控制或指挥”标准。The main difference between the crime of aggression and the other three crimes(genocide,crimes against humanity and war crimes)under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court lies in its“leadership clause”,namely,only a person“in a position effectively to exercise control over or direct the political or military action of a State”can be held responsible for the crime of aggression.The interpretation of the standard was not clear at the meeting and urgently needs to be clarified,even though the First Review Conference of the Rome Statute held in Kampala in 2010 unanimously adopted the“control or direct”standard for individual criminal responsibility for the crime of aggression.Specifically,“Control or direct”was developed from the standard of“shape or influence”established by the series of military trials after World War II,but the two standards are not exactly the same.Given the above context,this article analyses the requirement for“leadership”applied in the series of military trials after World War II for crime against peace.In particular,it examines how the Japanese gekokujōphenomenon(“the low overcomes the high”)in the Tokyo trial indirectly influence the“shape or influence”standard in crime against peace,thus contributing to the importance of“effective control”determinations by the prosecution team and judges.The article then turns to the Special Working Group on the Crime of Aggression’s discussion about“control or direct”.Furthermore,this article suggests that this standard presents the nature of both the criminal elements and modes of liability,and thus argues that it is the most reasonable to compare the“control or direct”requirement with the“effective control”standard applied in command responsibility.

关 键 词：侵略罪 反和平罪 个人刑事责任 控制或指挥 塑造或影响 

分 类 号：D997.9[政治法律—刑法学]