Strasbourg, 15 September 2011 CDL(2011)073* Opinion No. 634 / 2011 Engl. only EUROPEAN COMMISSION FOR DEMOCRACY THROUGH LAW (VENICE COMMISSION) COMMENTS ON THE CASE SANTIAGO BRYSÓN DE LA BARRA ET AL (ON CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY) AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF FOR THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF PERU by Ms Anne PETERS (Substitute Member, Germany) ---------------------------------------------------- *This document has been classified restricted on the date of issue. Unless the Venice Commission decides otherwise, it will be declassified a year after its issue according to the rules set up in Resolution CM/Res(2001)6 on access to Council of Europe documents. This document will not be distributed at the meeting. Please bring this copy. www.venice.coe.int CDL(2011)073 - 2 - Content A. Legal Bases: Codifications.................................................................................................3 Control Council Law No. 10 of 20 Dec. 1945 ......................................................................3 Art. 5 c of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East Charter (IMTFE) of 19 January 1946......................................................................................................................3 Art. 6 c Nuremberg Statute of 8 August 1949 .....................................................................3 ICTY-Statute (Annex to Security Council Res. 808 (1993) of 25 May 1993) .......................4 ICTR-Statute (Annex to Security Council Res. 955 (1994) of 8 Nov. 1994) ........................4 ICC-Statute of 17 July 1998................................................................................................4 Soft Law .............................................................................................................................5 Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1954, Art. 2 ...........5 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1991, Article 21 ........5 Draft Code of Crimes against the Peace and Security of Mankind 1996,........................5 B. The elements of a crime against humanity.........................................................................6 I. The context of the crime: Inside and outside an armed conflict........................................6 II. “Chapeau requirement”/contextual element: “Attack”......................................................6 1. The “acts” and the contextual element (the “attack”) can be one and the same ( uno actu )...............................................................................................................................6 2. “Attack” need not be a military attack..........................................................................7 3. The attack can be one single action ...........................................................................7 4. The targeted group of the attack: “any civilian population”..........................................8 5. The quantity and quality of the attack: “widespread or systematic” ............................9 6. No additional “policy element” required ....................................................................10 III. The conduct/acts .........................................................................................................10 1. Murder......................................................................................................................10 2. Extermination ...........................................................................................................10 IV. The mental (subjective) element .................................................................................10 1. General ....................................................................................................................10 2. Discriminatory grounds.............................................................................................11 C. The customary law status of the crime in 1986................................................................11 D. The non-limitation of prosecution of the crime .................................................................11 E. Criminalised conduct and sentencing practice of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda ....................................................................................12 I. Sentences .....................................................................................................................12 1. Overview ..................................................................................................................12 2. Sentences between life imprisonment and three years.............................................12 II. Conduct which has been qualified as amounting to a crime against humanity by the ICTY and the ICTR (examples).........................................................................................12 ICTY.............................................................................................................................12 ICTR.............................................................................................................................19 Annex: Important judicial decisions ......................................................................................20 ICTY.............................................................................................................................20 ICTR.............................................................................................................................21 ICC...............................................................................................................................21 National Courts.................................................................................................................21 France..........................................................................................................................21 Canada ........................................................................................................................21 Israel ............................................................................................................................21 Netherlands..................................................................................................................21 Former German Democratic Republic ..........................................................................21 Follow-up cases of Nuremberg.....................................................................................22 Bibliography .........................................................................................................................22 - 3 - CDL(2011)073 I. Memorial on crimes against humanity Anne Peters This memo consists of six parts: A. Texts of the most important codified norms on the crime B. Analysis of those elements of a crime against humanity which seem to be relevant for the Fronton case C. Discussion of the customary law status of the crime in 1986 D. The non-limitation of prosecution of the crime E. Conduct qualified as crimes against humanity, and sentencing practice of the International Criminal Tribunals for the Former Yugoslavia and Rwanda Annex: List of important cases and bibliography The full refererences of all cases and literature quoted in the footnotes are given in the annex to this memo. II. A. Legal Bases: Codifications In this section, the “hard law” norms on crimes against humanity are given in chronological order, followed by the most important soft law texts. A brief comment highlights the most important divergences in the texts. A. Control Council Law No. 10 of 20 Dec. 1945 Article II: 1. Each of the following acts is recognized as a crime: (…) “(c) Crimes against Humanity. Atrocities and offenses, including but not limited to murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, imprisonment, torture, rape, or other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population , or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds whether or not in violation of the domestic laws of the country where perpetrated.” Comment : No link to an armed conflict. Nevertheless, the term “civilian population”, a term of international humanitarian law, is used. B. Art. 5 c of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East Charter (IMTFE) of 19 January 1946 Art. 5: Jurisdiction over persons and offences “The Tribunal shall have the power to try and punish Far Eastern war criminals who as individuals or as members of organizations are charged with offences which include Crimes against Peace. The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal for which there shall be individual responsibility: (…) c) Crimes against Humanity: Namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population , before or during the war , or persecutions on political or racial grounds in execution of or in connection with any crime within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated. (…) “ Comment: Identical to the Nuremberg statute, which was enacted later. C. Art. 6 c Nuremberg Statute of 8 August 1949 “6(c) CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY: namely, murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population , before or during the war ; or persecutions on political, racial or religious grounds in execution of