Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
PhD Student_Department of Law _UAE Unit _Islamic Azad University, Dubai, UAE
2
Professor, Law Department, UAE Branch, Islamic Azad University, Dubai, UAE
3
Professor of Law, UAE Branch, Islamic Azad University, Dubai, UAE
10.30510/psi.2022.319410.2793
Abstract
It can be said that the crimes enumerated in the Nuremberg Charter and the Tokyo Charter are somewhat different from international crimes in the sense we know today; For example, at that time, genocide was not an independent crime with a specific title, and the criterion for distinguishing war crimes from crimes against humanity was that the first category of crimes must have been committed in the occupied territories, while the second category of crimes included They were located in Germany or in the territories annexed to the Third Reich. Although the Nuremberg tribunal claimed to apply customary international law in its interpretation of the Nuremberg Charter, it must be said that if such rules were to be accepted at that time in relation to war crimes, it was certainly in the case of crimes against humanity or crimes. This has not been the case against peace. The fact that judges had to refer to their national criminal law in order to explain and interpret the rights prevailing in these courts cannot be ignored; For example, the judges of these courts, who had to determine the status of the reluctant agent, because there was no answer to the problem in international law, had to seek help from domestic law sources, as well as the courts that implemented German Supervisor Council Law No. 10. Generally accepted rules of law. They considered the punishment.
Keywords
)