Preview

Московский журнал международного права

Расширенный поиск

Правосудие от имени шести миллионов обвинителей: дело «The Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Adolf Eichmann» в контексте международного права

https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2021-4-70-107

Полный текст:

Аннотация

ВВЕДЕНИЕ. Уголовное преследование Адольфа Эйхмана, одного из наиболее разыскиваемых военных преступников, фигурировавшего в числе главных «архитекторов» «окончательного решения еврейского вопроса», вызвало целый ряд проблем политического, правового характера и этического характера. При этом судебное разбирательство по делу А. Эйхмана было беспрецедентным в долгой истории международного уголовного права в силу целого ряда обстоятельств. Хотя многие лидеры нацистского режима предстали перед Международным военным трибуналом в Нюрнберге, массовые убийства и другие вопиющие преступления против Еврейского народа не стали основным предметом уголовного разбирательства, а некоторым организаторам систематического истребления евреев населения удалось скрыться от ответственности. В этом отношении преследование и наказание одного из главных виновников геноцида еврейского населения явилось одной из самых важных задач государства Израиль.
МАТЕРИАЛЫ И МЕТОДЫ. Теоретическую основу исследования составили работы ведущих юристовмеждународников, специализирующихся в области международного уголовного права, а также международной выдачи преступников; аналитическую базу – решения Нюрнбергского международного военного трибунала, национальных судов государства Израиль, включая знаковое решение The Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Adolf Eichmann, а также решения национальных судов США, приведенных в статье в целях компаративного анализа. Основными методами исследования являются: исторический метод, методы формальной логики, включая анализ, синтез и аналогию, а также системный, сравнительно-правовой методы.
РЕЗУЛЬТАТЫ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ. На основе исследования международно-правовых актов, международной судебной практики, а также национального законодательства и практики судебных органов государства Израиль, автором формируются выводы, связанные с установление видов уголовной юрисдикции, похищением обвиняемых с территории иностранных государств, его последствия в виде нарушения суверенитета государства. Вместе с тем, в статье указывается, что обстоятельства ареста и способ доставки не рассматриваются в качестве релевантных обстоятельств, которые могли бы препятствовать осуществлению уголовной юрисдикции. В контексте осуществления правосудия на А. Эйхманом автор анализирует отдельные положения Конвенции о статусе беженцев от 14 декабря 1951 г.
ОБСУЖДЕНИЕ И ВЫВОДЫ. В ходе проведенного исследования автор проанализировал значительный объем материалов, обобщил доктринальные позиции, выдвинутые рядом выдающихся ученыхмеждународников, а также сформировал вывод о том, что суд над Адольфом Эйхманом ознаменовал собой не только осуществление правосудия над геноцидарием, но и предоставил еще одну возможность широкой международной огласки вопиющих преступлений нацистского режима и необходимость объединения коллективных усилий государств для избавления будущих поколений от подобных злодеяний. 

Об авторе

Н. А. Сафаров
Национальное Собрание Азербайджанской Республики Парламентский проспект
Азербайджан

Низами Абдуллаевич Сафаров, Доктор юридических наук

Парламентский проспект, д. 1, д. 1, Баку, AZ 1152



Список литературы

1. Глотова С. В. 2016. Преступления против человечности: генезис и современное понимание концепции. – Журнал зарубежного и сравнительного законодательства. № 3. C. 101-109.

2. Звягинцев А. Г. 2006. Нюрнбергский набат: репортаж из прошлого, обращение к будущему. М.: ОЛМА Медиа Груп. 1120 с.

3. Сафаров Н.А. 2005. Экстрадиция в международном уголовном праве: проблемы теории и практики. М.: Волтерс Клувер. 415 c.

4. Сафаров Н.А. 2006. Насильственное похищение обвиняемых: теория и практика западной юриспруденции. – Российский ежегодник уголовного права. № 1. С. 392-410.

5. Сафаров Н.А. 2011. Преследование международных преступлений: универсальная юрисдикция против дипломатического иммунитета. – Государство и право. № 9. C. 81-92.

6. Черниченко С.В. 2018. Максима «право не возникает из правонарушения» и сменяемость императивных норм международного права. – Правоведение. № 1. C. 6-19.

7. Ambos K. 2021. Treatise of International Criminal Law. Vol.I: Foundations and General Part. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 656 p. DOI: 10.1093/law/9780199657926.001.0001

8. Annacker C. 1994. The Legal Regime of Erga Omnes Obligations in International Law. – Austrian Journal of Public and International Law. Vol. 46. No. 2. Р. 131-166.

9. Arendt H. 1963. Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil. New York: The Viking Press. 275 p.

10. Argentine Jews or Jewish Argentines? Essays of Ethnicity, Identity, and Diaspora. Ed. by R. Rein. 2010. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 312 p.

11. Asia: Middle East Record. Vol. 1. Ed. by Y. Oron. 1962. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. 582 p.

12. Bach G. 2011. Genocide (Holocaust) Trials in Israel. – The Nuremberg Trials: International Criminal Law Since 1945: 60th Anniversary International Conference. Ed. by H.R. Reginbogin, C. Safferling, W. de Gruyter. München: K.G. Sauer Verlag GmbX. P. 216-223.

13. Baker b., Röben V. 1993. To Abduct or to Extradite: Does a Treaty Beg the Question?. – Heidelberg International Law Journal. Vol. 53. P. 657-688.

14. Bassiouni C. 1996. International Crimes: Jus Cogens and Obligatio Erga Omnes. – Law and Contemporary Problems. Vol. 59. No. 4. P. 63-74.

15. Bassiouni C. 1999. Crimes against Humanity in International Criminal Law. 2nd ed. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. 652 p.

16. Bassiouni C. 2011. Crimes against Humanity: Historical Evolution and Contemporary Application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 884 p.

17. Bassiouni C. 2014. International Extradition: United States Law and Practice. 6th ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1233 p.

18. Bazyler M.J., Tuerkheimer F.M. 2014. Forgotten Trial of the Holocaust. New York: New York University Press. 390 p.

19. Bazyler M. J. 2016. Holocaust, Genocide, and the Law: A Quest for Justice in a Post-Holocaust World. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 281 p. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195395693.001.0001

20. Bazyler M.J., Scheppach J.Y. 2012. The Strange and Curious History of the Law Used to Prosecute Adolf Eichmann. – Loyola of Los Angeles International & Comparative Law Review. Vol. 34. P. 417-461.

21. Beigbeder Y. 2005. International Justice against Impunity: Progress and New Challenges. Boston; Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff. 247 p.

22. Bradley M. 2021. Jus Cogens’ Preffered Sister: Obligations Erga Omnes and the International Court of Justice – Fifty Years after the Barcelona Traction. – Peremptory Norms of General International Law (Jus Cogens): Disquisitions and Disputations. Ed. by D. Tladi. Leiden; Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. P. 193-226. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004464124_009

23. Ben-Naftali O., Tuval Y. 2006. Punishing International Crimes Committed by the Persecuted: The Kapo Trials in Israel (1950-1960). – Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol. 4. No. 1. P. 128-178.

24. Bryant M. 2012. Eichmann in Jerusalem and in West Germany: Eichmann Trial Witnesses and the West German Prosecution of Operation Reinhard Crimes, 1958–1966. – 2012. Loyola of Los Angeles International & Comparative Law Review. Vol. 34. P. 339-385.

25. Bilsky L. 2014. The Eichmann trial: Towards a jurisprudence of eyewitness testimony of atrocities. – Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol. 12. Issue 1. P. 27-57.

26. Bilsky L., Klagsburn R. 2018. Cultural Genocide: Between Law and History. – The Oxford Handbook of Legal History. Ed. by M. D. Dubber and Chr.Tomlins. Oxford: Oxford University Press. P. 1081-1094. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198794356.013.58

27. Bond J. 2013. Principled Exclusion: A Revised Approach to Article1(F)(a) of the Refugee Convention. – Michigan Journal of International Law. Vol. 35. Issue No. 1. P. 15-78.

28. Cassese A. 2009. Eichmann: Is Evil So Banal? - Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol. 7. Issue No. 3. P. 645-652.

29. Cassese’s International Criminal Law. 3rd ed. Ed. by A. Cassese [et. al.].2013. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 472 p.

30. Cowles W. B. Universality of Jurisdiction over War Crimes. – California Law Review. 1945. Vol. XXXIII. N 2. P. 177-218.

31. Cryer R. 2005. Prosecuting International Crimes: Selectivity and International Criminal Law Regime. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 347 p.

32. Brown A. 2015. Judging “Privileged” Jews: Holocaust Ethics, Representation and the “Grey Zone”. New York: Berghahn. 222 p.

33. Carlisle J. 1993. Extradition of Governments Agents as Municipal Law Remedy for state-Sponsored Kidnapping. – California Law Review. Vol. 81. No.6. P. 1541-1586.

34. Cimiotta E. 2016. The Relevance of Erga Omnes Obligations in Prosecuting of International Crimes. – Heidelberg Journal of International Law. Vol. 76. P. 687-713.

35. Colangelo A. 2007. Constitutional Limits on Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: Terrorism and the Intersection of National and International Law. – Harvard International Law Journal. Vol. 48. No. 1. P. 121-201.

36. Douglas L. 2001. The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of the Holocaust. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 318 p.

37. Criddle E. 2013. Standing for Human Rights Abroad. – Cornell Law Review. Vol. 100. P. 269-333.

38. Cwik Сhr. 2009. The other Immigration to Argentina: The Case of Adolf Eichmann. – Clío América. Vol. 3. Issue 5. P. 85-103.

39. Ferdinandusse W.N. 2006. Direct Application of International Criminal Law in National Courts. The Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press. 338 p.

40. Czaplinski W. 1999. Concepts of Jus Cogens and Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law in the Light of Recent Developments. – Polish Yearbook of International Law. Vol. 23. P. 87-97.

41. Detter I. 2016. The Law of War. 3rd ed. London; New York: Routledge. 568 p.

42. De Vet E. 2013. Invoking Obligations Erga Omnes in the Twenty-First Century: Progressive Developments since Barcelona Traction. – South African Yearbook of International Law. Vol. 38. P. 1-19.

43. Dinstein Y. 1998. The Universality Principle and War Crimes. – International Law Studies. Vol. 71. P. 17-37.

44. Drumbl M. 2016. Victims who Victimise. – London Review of International Law. Vol. 4. Issue 2. P. 217-247. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/lril/lrw015

45. Feldestein A. 2006. Ben-Gurion, Zionism and American Jewry: 1948-1963. London: Routledge. 240 p.

46. Forlati S. 2001. Azioni dinanzi alla Corte internazionale di guistizia rispetto a violazioni di obblighi erga omnes. – Rivista di diritto internazionale. No. 1. P. 69-109.

47. Fournet C. 2007. The Crime of Destruction and the Law of Genocide: Their Impact on Collective Memory. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing. 175 p.

48. Fox F. 1999. The Pinochet Case No. 3. – The International and Comparative Law Quarterly. Vol. 48. Issue 3. P. 687-702.

49. Friedman J. 1994. Arendt in Jerusalem, Jackson at Nuremberg: Presuppositions of the Nazi War Crimes Trials. – Israel Law Review. Vol. 28. Issue 4. P. 601-625. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021223700011778

50. Frilling T. A. 2014. Jewish Kapo in Auschwitz: History, Memory, and the Politics of Survivor. Waltham: Brandeis University Press. 340 p.

51. Garrod M. 2012. The Protective Principle of Jurisdiction Over War Crimes and Hollow Concept of Universality. – International Criminal Law Review. Vol. 12. No. 5. P. 763-826.

52. Grabenwater C. 2014. European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms: Commentary. Oxford; Portland: C.H. Beck; Nomos; Hart. 600 p.

53. Green L. 1960. The Eichmann Case. – Modern Law Review. Vol. 23. P. 507-515.

54. Green L. 1963. The Maxim Nullum Crimen Sine Lege and the Eichmann Trial. – British Yearbook of International Law. Vol. 38. P. 457-471.

55. Hall C. K. 2006. Universal Jurisdiction: New Uses for an Old Tool. – Justice for Crimes against Humanity. Ed. by M. Lattimer and P. Sands. Oxford: Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing. P. 47-72.

56. Hall C. K. 2003. Contemporary Universal Jurisdiction. – Human Rights and Criminal Justice for Downtrodden: Essays in Honour of Asbjorn Eide. Ed. by M. Bergsmo. Leiden;Boston: Martinuss Nijhoff Publishers. P. 111-138.

57. Harel I. 1975. The House on Garibaldi Street. London: Routledge. 287 p.

58. Harris D.J. 1998. Cases and Materials on International Law. London: Sweet&Maxwell.779 p.

59. Hierarchy in International Law: The Place of Human Rights. Ed. by E. de Wet, J. Vidmar. 2012. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 330 p. DOI: DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199647071.001.0001

60. Human Rights and Criminal Justice for the Downtrodden: Essays in Honour of Asbjørn Eide. Ed. by M. Bergsmo. Leiden;Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 2003. 825 p.

61. Inazumi M. 2005. Universal Jurisdiction in Modern International Law. Utrecht: Intersentia. 274 p.

62. Iraola R. 2011. Jurisdiction, Treaties, and Due Process. – Buffalo Law Review. Vol. 59. No. 3. P. 693-714.

63. Ireland-Piper D. 2017. Accountability in Extraterritoriality: A Comparative and International Law Perspective. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. 208 p.

64. Jaspers K. Who Should Have Tried Eichmann? - Journal of International Criminal Justice. 2006. Vol. 4. No. 4. 853-858.

65. Jockusch L. 2021. Prosecuting “Crimes against Jewish People”: The Eichmann Trial and the History of a Legal Concept. – Eichmann Trial Reconsidered. Ed. by R. Wittmann. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. P. 75-103.

66. Kelsen H. 1943. Collective and Individual Responsibility in International Law with Particular Regard to Punishment of War Criminals. – California Law Review. Vol. 31. No. 5. P. 530-571.

67. Kelsen H. 1945. General Theory of State and Law. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 516 p.

68. Keren M. 1991. Ben-Gurion’s Theory of Sovereignty: The Trial of Adolf Eichmann. – David Ben-Gurion: Politics and Leadership in Israel. Ed. by R.W. Zweig. New York: Routledge. P. 38-51.

69. Kittichaisaree K. 2018. The Obligation to Extradite or Prosecute. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 400 p.

70. Kittrie N. 1964. A Post Mortem of the Eichmann Case - The Lessons for International Law. – Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. Vol. 55. No.1. P. 16-28.

71. Kolb R. 2003. Théorie du Jus Cogens International. – Revue Belge de Droit Internationale. Vol. 36. No. 1. P. 5-55.

72. Koskenniemi M. 2002. Between Impunity and Show Trial. – Max-Planck Yearbook of UN Law. Vol. 6. P. 1-21.

73. Kovac M.A. 2002. Apprehension of War Crimes Indictees: Should the United Nations' Courts Outsource Private Actors to Catch Them? – Catholic University Law Review. Vol. 51. No. 2. P. 619-653.

74. Kress С. 2006. Universal Jurisdiction over International Crimes and the Institute de droit International. – Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol. 4. No. 3. P. 561–585.

75. Lagerwall A. 2016. Le principe ex injuria jus non obitur en droit international. Bruxelles: Bruylant. 634 p.

76. Landis K.T. 1991. The Seizure of Noriega: A challenge KerFrisbie Doctrine. – American University International Law and Policy Journal. Vol. 6. Issue 4. P. 571-607.

77. Landsman S. 2012. The Eichmann Case and the Invention of the Witness-Driven Atrocity Trial. – Columbia Journal of Transnational Law. Vol. 51. No. 1. P. 77-87.

78. Lasok D. 1962. The Eichmann Trial. – International & Comparative Law Quarterly. Vol. 11. Issue 2. P. 355- 374. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/iclqaj/11.2.355

79. Lepard B. 2010. Customary International law: A New Theory with Practical Application. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 440 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804717

80. Linton S. 2009. The Role of Judges in Dealing with the Legacies of the Past. - The Global Community Yearbook of International Law and Jurisprudence. 2009. Vol. I. New York: Oceana. P. 203-248.

81. Lippert D. 1962. The Eichmann Case and the Nuremberg Trials. – American Bar Association Journal. Vol. 48. No. 8. P. 738-741.

82. Lippman M. 2002. Genocide: The Trial of Adolf Eichmann and the Quest for Global Justice. – Buffalo Human Rights Law Review. Vol. 8. P. 45-121.

83. Liskofsky S. 1961. The Eichmann Case. – The American Jewish Year Book. Vol. 62. P. 199-208.

84. Longerich P. 2010. Holocaust: The Nazi Persecution and Murder of the Jews. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 645 p.

85. Macoto S. 2015. Expanding the Scope of Universal Jurisdiction through Municipal Law: From Piracy to the Crime of Aggression via Eichmann Trial. – Historical Origins of International Criminal Law. Volume 4. Ed. by M. Bergsmo [et. al.] Oslo: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher. P. 339-366.

86. Mann I. 2010. The Dual Foundation of Universal Jurisdiction: Towards a Jurisprudence for the “Court of Critique”. – Transnational Legal Theory. Vol. 1. Issue 4. P. 485-521.

87. Maogoto J. 2009. The Work of National Military Tribunals under Control Council Law 10. – The Legal Regime of the International Criminal Court: Essays in Honour of Professor Igor Blishchenko. Ed. by J. Doria, H.-P. Gasser, C. Basiouni. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. P. 51-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004163089.i-1122.21

88. Minerbi S. 2011. The Eichmann Trial Diary: A Chronicle of the Holocaust. New York : Enigma Books. 256 p.

89. Mitsilegas V. 2014. Article 49 – Principle of Legality and Proportionality of Criminal Offences and Penalties. – The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: A Commentary. Ed. by S. Peers [et al.]. Oxford; Portland: BECK-Hart-Nomos. P. 1394-1415.

90. Mohit A. 2006. The Customary Law of International Abductions: Limits and Boundaries. – Asian Yearbook of International Law. Vol. 11. P. 123-146.

91. Mulish H. 2009. Criminal case 40/61, the of Adolf Eichmann: an Eyewitness Account. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 208 p.

92. Musmanno M. 1961. The Eichmann Kommandos. Philadelphia: Macrae Smith. 288 p.

93. Mystris D. 2021. An African Union’s Rethinking of International Criminal Justice. Leiden;Boston:Brill Nijhoff. 328 p.

94. O’Keefe R. 2015. International Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 678 p.

95. Orakhelashvili A. 2003. Peremptory Norms and reparation for Internationally Wrongful Acts. – Baltic Yearbook of International Law. Vol. 3. P. 19-56.

96. Orakhelashvili A. 2008. Peremptory Norms in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 660 p.

97. Orakhelashvili A. 2015. Audience and Authority – The Merit of Doctrine. – Netherlands Yearbook of International Law. Vol. 46. P. 115-145.

98. O’Sullivan A. 2017. Universal Jurisdiction in İnternational Criminal Law: The Debate and Battle foe Hegemony. - London; New York: Routledge. 234 p.

99. Parvikko T. 2000. Positivists Versus Moralists: The Eichmann Trial and International Law. – Finnish Yearbook of Political Thought. Vol. 4. P. 223–50. DOI: http://doi.org/10.7227/R.4.1.11

100. Paulussen C. 2010. Male Captus Bene Detentus? Surrendering Suspects to the International Criminal Court. Antwerp: Intersentia. 1195 p.

101. Pearlman M. 1963. The Capture and Trial of Adolf Eichmann. New York: Simon and Schuster. 666 p.

102. Powderly J. 2011. The Trials of Eichmann, Barbie and Finta. – Routledge Handbook of International Criminal Law. Ed. by W. Schabas, N. Bernaz. London; New York: Routledge. P. 33-50.

103. Pusse H. 2006. The Relationship between International Humanitarian Law and International Criminal Tribunals. – International Review of the Red Cross. Vol. 88. No. 861. P. 65-86.

104. Ragazzi M. 1997. The Concept of International Obligations Erga Omnes. Oxford: Clarendon Press. 264 p.

105. Randall K. 1998. Universal Jurisdiction under International Law. – Texas Law Review. Vol. 66. P. 785-810.

106. Reiss R. H. 1987. The Extradition of John Demjanjuk: War Crimes, Universality Jurisdiction, and the Political Offence Doctrine. – Cornell International Law Journal. Vol. 20. Issue 2. P. 281-315.

107. Reydams L. 2004. Universal Jurisdiction: International and Municipal Legal Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 286 p. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199274260.001.0001

108. Roht-Arriaza N. 2001. The Pinochet Precedent and Universal Jurisdiction. – New England Law Review. Vol. 35. No. 2. P. 311-319.

109. Rosenbaum E.M. 2012. The Eichmann Case and the Distortion of History. – Loyola of Los Angeles International & Comparative Law Review. Vol. 34. P.387-400.

110. Ryngaert C. 2015. Jurisdiction in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 262 p.

111. Schabas W. 2012. Unimaginable Atrocities: Justice, Politics, and Rights at the War Crimes Tribunals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 240 p. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199653072.001.0001

112. Schabas W. Retroactive Application of Genocide Convention. – University of St. Thomas Journal of Law and Policy. 2010. Vol. 4. N 2. P. 36-59.

113. Schabas W. 2015. The European Convention on Human Rights: A Commentary. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1308 p.

114. Scharf M. Customary International Law in Times of Fundamental Change: Recognizing Croatian Moments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2013. 228 p.

115. Schwabach A., Patchett S.A. 1993. Doctrine or Dictum: The Ker-Frisbie Doctrine and Official Abductions which Breach International Law. – University of Miami InterAmerican Law Review. Vol. 25. No. 4. P. 20-56.

116. Schwarzenberger G. 1962. The Eichmann Judgment: An Essay in Censorial Jurisprudence. – Current Legal Problems. Vol. 15. Issue 1. P. 248–265. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/clp/15.1.248

117. Sclütter B. 2010. Developments in Customary International Law: Theory and the Practice of the International Court of Justice and the International ad hoc Criminal Tribunals for Rwanda and Yugoslavia. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. 370 p.

118. Shani Y. 2009. The Road to the Genocide Convention and Beyond. – The UN Genocide Convention: A Commentary. Ed. by P. Gaeta. Oxford: Oxford University Press. P. 3-26.

119. Simentić J. 2019. To exclude or not to exclude, that is the question. Developments regarding bases for exclusion from refugee status in the EU. – German Law Journal. Vol. 20. Issue 1. P. 111-124. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2019.5

120. Singer I. 2013. Reductio ad Absurdum: The Kapo Trial Judgments’ Contribution to International Criminal Jurisprudence and Customary International Law. – Criminal Law Forum. Vol. 24. No. 3. P. 235-258.

121. Söyler Y. 2015. Barcelona Traction davası ve uluslararası hukuka etkisi. – Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi. Vol. XIX. P. 207-247.

122. Staker K. 2014. Jurisdiction. – International Law. Ed. by M. Evans. Oxford: Oxford University Press. P. 289-315.

123. Straschnov A. 1999. The Judicial System in Israel. - Tulsa Law Journal. Vol. 34. P.527-535.

124. Tams C. 2005. Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 424 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511494116

125. Tams C., Tzanakopoulos A. 2010. Barcelona Traction at 40: The ICJ as an Agent of Legal Development. – Leiden Journal of International Law. Vol. 33. Issue 4. P. 781-800. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156510000361

126. Tan Y. 2021. The Rome Statute as Evidence of Customary International Law. Leiden;Boston: Brill Nijhoff. 488 p.

127. Tanaka Y. 2021. The Legal Consequences of Obligation Erga Omnes in International Law. – Netherlands International Law Review. Vol. 68. No.1. P. 1-33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40802-021-00184-9

128. The 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of refugees and Its 1967 Protocols: A Commentary. Ed. by A. Zimmermann. 2011. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1675 p. DOI: 10.1093/actrade/9780199542512.001.0001

129. The Arc of Due Process in American Constitutional Law. Ed. by E.T. Sullivan, T.M. Masarro. 2013. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 272 p.

130. The Law of War Crimes: National and International Approaches. Ed. by T. MacCormack, G. Simpson. 1997. The Hague: Kluwer Law International. 254 p.

131. The Nuremberg Trial and International Law. Ed. by G. Ginsburgs, V.N. Kudriavtsev. 1990. Dodrecht; Boston;London: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.288 p.

132. The Oxford Companion to International Criminal Justice. Ed. by A. Cassese. 2009. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1096 p.

133. The Travaux Préparatoires of the Crime of Aggression. Ed. by S. Barriga, C. Kress and L. Grover. 2012. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 835 p.

134. The United Nations Principles to Combat Impunity: A Commentary. Ed. by F. Haldemann, T. Unger. 2018. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 471 p. DOI: 10.1093/law/9780198743606.001.0001

135. Thirlway H. 2014. The Sources of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 272 p.

136. Tomuschat Chr. 2006. The Legacy of Nuremberg. – Journal of International Criminal Justice. Vol. 4. Issue 4. P. 830-844. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jicj/mql051

137. Trunk I. 1972. Judenrat: The Jewish Council in Eastern Europe Under Nazi Occupation. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. 663 p.

138. Ukabiala N., Pickard D., Yamamoto A. 2021. Erga Omnes Partes before the International Court of Justice: From Standing to the Judgment on the Merits. – ILSA Journal of International & Comparative Law. Vol. 27. Issue 2. P. 234-250

139. Universal Jurisdiction and the Prosecution of Serious Crimes under International Law. Ed. by S. Macedo. 2004. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press. 392 p.

140. Urs P. 2021. Obligations Erga Omnes and the Question Standing before the International Court of Justice. – Leiden Journal of International Law. Vol. 34. Issue 2. P. 505-525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0922156521000091

141. Van Siedregt E. 2012. Individual Criminal Responsibility in International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 330 p. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199560363.001.0001

142. Vlasic M., De Sousa J. P. 2015. The Use of Force by Private Parties against Suspect Pirates. – Prosecuting Maritime Piracy: Domestic Solution to International Crimes. Ed. by M. Scharf, M. Newton, M. Sterio. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. P. 119-149.

143. Webb P. 2020. House of Lords, Judgment, R. v Bow Street Metropolitan Stipendiary Magistrate, Ex Parte Pinochet Ugarte (Amnesty International Intervening) (No 3), 1999. - British Contribution to International Law (1915-2015). Ed. by J. Barrett, J.-P. Gauci. Leiden;Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. P. 1539-1560.

144. Weitz Y. 2009. In the Name of Six Million Accusers: Gideon Hausner as Attorney General and His Place in the Eichmann Trial. – Israel Studies. Vol.14. No. 2. P. 26-49.

145. Wenig J.M. 1997. Enforcing the Lessons of History: Israel Judges the Holocaust. – The Law of War Crimes: National and International Approaches. The Hague/Boston/London: Kluwer Law International. P. 103-122.

146. Wilson R. 2006. A History of the Role of Defense Counsel in International Criminal and War Crimes Tribunals. – Defenses in International Criminal Proceedings. Ed. by M. Bohlander, R. Boed, R. Wilson. New York: Transnational Publishers. Р. 31-66.

147. Woodhouse D. 2000. The Pinochet Case: A Legal and Constitutional Analysis. Oxford: Hart Publishing. 304 p.

148. Wright Q. 1947. The Law of the Nuremberg Trial. – American Journal of International Law. Vol. 41. Issue 1. P. 38-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2193853

149. Yablonka H., Tlamim M. 2003. The Development of Holocaust Consciousness in Israel: The Nuremberg, Kapos, Kastner, and Eichmann Trial. – Israel Studies. Vol. 8. No. 3. Р. 1-24.


Рецензия

Для цитирования:


Сафаров Н.А. Правосудие от имени шести миллионов обвинителей: дело «The Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Adolf Eichmann» в контексте международного права. Московский журнал международного права. 2021;(4):70-107. https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2021-4-70-107

For citation:


Safarov N.A. Justice in the Name of Six Million Accusers: the Case of the Attorney General of the Government of Israel v. Adolf Eichmann in the Context of International Law. Moscow Journal of International Law. 2021;(4):70-107. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24833/0869-0049-2021-4-70-107

Просмотров: 511


Creative Commons License
Контент доступен под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.


ISSN 0869-0049 (Print)
ISSN 2619-0893 (Online)