Scrutinising the modes of responsibility under the Rome statute : settling the dust

Abstract

Under international criminal law (ICL), there are factual and legal intricacies. Of these intricacies, the issues concerning the modes of responsibility, which are enshrined under Article 25(3) of the ICC Statute, have been the preponderant focus. Specifically, besides the incongruity on the approaches of distinguishing among each other, there is no unanimity on the question of degrees of blameworthiness. Put differently, under ICL, there is uncertainty on how to draw a line among the modes of responsibility and the raison d'etre behind their enumeration. These ambivalences have caused various arguments both in and outside the ICC.