Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T10:23:57.612Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Better a war criminal or a terrorist? A comparative study of war crimes and counterterrorism legislation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2021

Kelisiana Thynne
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article poses the question as to whether and why States overlook the prosecution of people for war crimes rather than terrorist offences, where war crimes would be preferred. It looks at whether a diverse range of States (Afghanistan, Australia, Mali, the Netherlands and the Russian Federation) are able through their domestic legislation to prosecute people for war crimes or for terrorist offences. It considers what the value of prosecutions is theoretically and legally, and what the impact of prosecutions is practically in a State. It proposes that prosecutors, police and judges should ask the question whether an alleged offender should be prosecuted for war crimes and/or terrorist offences with war crimes being the preferred option where there is evidence that they have been committed.

Keywords

war crimescounterterrorismterroriststerrorismforeign fighterslegislationprosecutioncomparative studies
Type
Relationship between counterterrorism law and IHL
Information
International Review of the Red Cross , Volume 103 , Issue 916-917: Counterterrorism, sanctions and war , April 2021 , pp. 237 - 266
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the ICRC.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The views expressed in this article do not necessarily represent those of the ICRC. Many thanks to research assistance from Harriet Macey, Geneva Academy, and from colleagues, particularly Nele Verlinden, Nailia Mirsaitova, Pelagie Manzan Dekou and Yari Yar Mohammed.

References

1 See, e.g., the work of the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Terrorism/Pages/Issues.aspx (all internet references were accessed in September 2021).

2 For a more detailed analysis, refer to Tristan Ferraro's article, “Counterterrorism, Sanctions and International Humanitarian Law: ICRC Perspectives on Finding the Right Balance”, International Review of the Red Cross, 2021, this edition.

3 Lydia Khalil and Rodger Shanahan, “Foreign Fighters in Syria and Iraq: The Day After”, Lowy Institute for International Policy, 2016, pp. 2 and 3, available at: https://www.lowyinstitute.org/publications/foreign-fighters-syria-and-iraq-day-after.

4 See, e.g., Peter Cephas Dahabreh, “The International Tribunal for the Prosecution of Foreign Fighters Responsible for Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law and International Human Rights Law Committed in the Territory of the Syrian Arab Republic since 2011”, SSRN, 11 March 2019, available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3350683 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3350683.

5 Kaikobad, Kaiyan Homi, “Crimes against International Peace and Security, Acts of Terrorism and Other Serious Crimes: A Theory on Distinction and Overlap”, International Criminal Law Review, Vol. 7, No. 2–3, 2007, p. 213CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Geneva Convention (I) for the Amelioration of the Condition of the Wounded and Sick in Armed Forces in the Field of 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 31 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC I), Art. 50; Geneva Convention (II) for the Amelioration of the Condition of Wounded, Sick and Shipwrecked Members of Armed Forces at Sea of 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 85 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC II), Art. 51; Geneva Convention (III) Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War of 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 135 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC III), Art. 130; Geneva Convention (IV) Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Times of War of 12 August 1949, 75 UNTS 287 (entered into force 21 October 1950) (GC IV), Art. 147.

7 K. H. Kaikobad, above note 5, p. 214.

8 Henckaerts, Jean-Marie and Doswald-Beck, Louise (eds), Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. 1: Rules, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005CrossRefGoogle Scholar (ICRC CIL Study), Rule 158, available at: https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/customary-ihl/eng/docs/v1_rul_rule158.

9 “Interview with Fionnuala D. Ní Aoláin”, available at: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-review-of-the-red-cross/article/interview-with-fionnuala-d-ni-aolain/747258EE107B2FF85708C62649907C8C.

10 The United Kingdom and the United States which have well-developed counterterrorism laws and have also prosecuted a considerable number of individuals with terrorism offences in relation to Islamic State in Iraq and Syria before their courts are not considered here as they have been well covered elsewhere: see, e.g., Landman, Todd, “Imminence and Proportionality: The U.S. and U.K. Responses to Global Terrorism”, California Western International Law Journal, Vol. 38, No. 1, 2007Google Scholar; Trapp, K. N., “The Interaction of the International Terrorism Suppression Regime and IHL in Domestic Criminal Prosecutions: The UK Experience”, in Jinks, D., Maogoto, J. and Solomon, S. (eds), Applying International Humanitarian Law in Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Bodies, T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, 2014Google Scholar.

11 The Genocide Network – a network of prosecutors in Europe – has produced a report discussing opportunities for investigating and prosecuting foreign terrorist fighters and other members of terrorist organizations not only for terrorist offences but also for war crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide: “Cumulative Prosecution Of Foreign Terrorist Fighters For Core International Crimes And Terrorism-Related Offences”, Eurojust, May 2020, available at: https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Partners/Genocide/2020-05_Report-on-cumulative-prosecution-of-FTFs_EN.PDF.

12 ICRC CIL Study, above note 8, Rule 156.

13 GC I, Arts 3 and 50; GC II, Arts 3 and 51; GC III, Arts 3 and 130; GC IV, Arts 3 and 147; Protocol Additional (I) to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, 1125 UNTS 3, 8 June 1977 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (AP I), Arts 11 and 85; Protocol Additional (II) to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and Relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, 1125 UNTS 609, 8 June 1977 (entered into force 7 December 1978) (AP II).

14 ICRC CIL Study, above note 8.

15 Ibid., Rule 158.

16 PAP I, Art. 51(2); AP II, Art. 13(2); ICRC CIL Study, above note 8, rule 2.

17 ICTY, Prosecutor v. Stanislav Galic, Case No.: IT-98-29-T, Judgement and Opinion, Trial Chamber, 5 December 2003.

18 Ibid., para. 133.

19 Rome Statute of the ICC, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9, 17 July 1998 (entered into force 1 July 2002) (Rome Statute).

20 Ibid., Arts 8(2)(b)(i) and 8(2)(e)(i).

21 For the war crimes, see, for the possibility of them having been committed in these contexts, ICC, Situation in the Republic of Mali, ICC-01/12, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/mali; ICC, Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, ICC-02/17, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/afghanistan; for Syria, see Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, UN Doc. A/HRC/45/31, available at: https://undocs.org/A/HRC/45/31; for Iraq, see Letter Dated 17 May 2019 from the Special Adviser and Head of the United Nations Investigative Team to Promote Accountability for Crimes Committed by Da'esh/Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/2019/407*, 17 May 2019, available at: https://www.unitad.un.org/sites/www.unitad.un.org/files/general/17.05.2019_0.pdf.

22 UN Human Rights Council, Report of the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic, UN Doc. A/HRC/25/65, 14 February 2014, available at: https://undocs.org/A/HRC/25/65, p. 1.

23 Letter Dated 17 May, above note 21.

24 L. Khalil and R. Shanahan, above note 3, pp. 2 and 3.

25 ICC, Office of the Prosecutor, Situation in Mali: Article 53(1) Report, 16 January 2013, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/itemsDocuments/SASMaliArticle53_1PublicReportENG16Jan2013.pdf.

26 ICC, The Prosecutor of International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda, Requests Judicial Authorisation to Commence an Investigation into the Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, 20 November 2017, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/Pages/item.aspx?name=171120-otp-stat-afgh; ICC, Afghanistan: Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, ICC-02/17, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/afghanistan.

27 See T. Ferraro, above note 2.

28 A Dutch technical report found: “The preoccupation with and the limited focus on one specific organization (IS), during one period (2013–present), in one geographic area (the caliphate) and for only one of the international crimes (genocide) leaves a wide range of possible international crimes untouched and potentially with impunity.” Thijs B. Bouwknegt, Investigation, Prosecution and Trial of International Crimes in the Netherlands, 26 August 2019, p. 8. Australia has also launched a war crimes investigation into actions of its Special Forces in Afghanistan, and it would be impossible to charge such offences as terrorist offences: Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force, Afghanistan Inquiry Report, 2020, available at: https://afghanistaninquiry.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/IGADF-Afghanistan-Inquiry-Public-Release-Version.pdf.

29 Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (as amended) Schedule Criminal Code, Division 268, section 268.121.

30 Hood, Anna and Cormier, Monique, “Prosecuting International Crimes in Australia: The Case of the Sri Lankan President”, Melbourne Journal of International Law, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2012, p. 7Google Scholar.

31 Mali: Law n°08-025 of 23 July 2008; Law n°2016-008 of 17 March 2016; Netherlands: Criminal Code of the Kingdom of Netherlands (1881, amended 2012) and war crimes (Mali: Mali Penal Code (2001); Netherlands: Netherlands International Crimes Act (2003)).

32 Mali ratified the Rome Statute on 16 August 2000 and referred the situation in its territory since January 2012 to the ICC. The ICC may exercise its jurisdiction over crimes listed in the Rome Statute committed on the territory of Mali or by its nationals from 1 July 2002 onwards: ICC, Mali: Situation in the Republic of Mali, ICC-01/12, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/mali; on 5 March 2020, the Appeals Chamber of the ICC decided unanimously to authorize the Prosecutor to commence an investigation into alleged crimes under the jurisdiction of the Court in relation to the situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan: ICC, Afghanistan: Situation in the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, ICC-02/17, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/afghanistan.

33 ICTY, above note 17, para. 118.

34 Afghanistan Penal Code (2017): in an international armed conflict, Art. 339(22) and also arguably in a non-international armed conflict, Art. 340(1)(1) or (2). Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (as amended) Schedule Criminal Code, Division 268: in an international armed conflict, sections 268.59–268.64; in a non-international armed conflict, section 268.71. Mali Penal Code 2001: in an international armed conflict, Art. 31(i)(19); in a non-international armed conflict, Art. 31(i)(29). Netherlands International Crimes Act 2003: in an international armed conflict, section 5(3)(a); in a non-international armed conflict, section 6(2)(a).

35 Afghanistan Penal Code (2017): in an international armed conflict, Art. 339(10); in a non-international armed conflict, Art. 340(1)(1). Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (as amended) Schedule Criminal Code, Division 268: in an international armed conflict, section 268.47; in a non-international armed conflict, section 268.71. Mali Penal Code 2001: in an international armed conflict, Art. 31(i)(8). Netherlands International Crimes Act 2003: in an international armed conflict, section 5(2)(b)(ii); in a non-international armed conflict, section 6(1)(a).

36 Afghanistan Penal Code (2017): in both an international and non-international armed conflict, Art. 339(1)(1). Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (as amended) Schedule Criminal Code, Division 268: in an international armed conflict, section 268.35; in a non-international armed conflict, section 268.77. Mali Penal Code 2001, Art. 31(i)(1). Netherlands International Crimes Act 2003: in an international armed conflict, section 5(5)(a); in a non-international armed conflict, section 6(3)(a).

37 Afghanistan Penal Code (2017): in both an international and non-international armed conflict, Art. 339(1)(4). Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (as amended) Schedule Criminal Code, Division 268: in an international armed conflict, section 268.3; in a non-international armed conflict, section 268.79. Mali Penal Code 2001: Art. 31(i)(2). Netherlands International Crimes Act 2003: in an international armed conflict, section5(5)(o); in a non-international armed conflict, section 6(3)(c).

38 Afghanistan Penal Code (2017): in an international armed conflict, Art. 337(2); in a non-international armed conflict, Art. 340. Australian Criminal Code Act 1995 (as amended) Schedule Criminal Code, Division 268: in an international armed conflict, section 268.25; in a non-international armed conflict, section 268.73. Mali Penal Code 2001: Art. 31(b). Netherlands International Crimes Act 2003: in an international armed conflict, section 5(1)(b); in a non-international armed conflict, section 6(1)(a).

39 Decree on the Intention not to Become a Party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 16 November 2016, Russian Federation, ICC Legal Tools Database, available at: https://www.legal-tools.org/doc/02c22f-1/.

40 Available at: https://base.garant.ru/10108000/.

41 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN General Assembly, International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, 16 December 1966, United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 999, p. 171, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966 (entered into force 23 March 1976).

42 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, 10 December 1984, United Nations, Treaty Series, Vol. 1465, p. 85, adopted and opened for signature, ratification and accession by General Assembly Resolution 39/46 of 10 December 1984 (entered into force 26 June 1987).

43 See footnotes 34–38 and discussion on Russian Federation above.

44 See, e.g., UNSC Letter and Annexes, Guiding Principles on Foreign Terrorist Fighters, UN Doc. S/2015/939, 23 December 2015; UNSC Letter and Annex, Addendum to the Guiding Principles on Foreign Terrorist Fighters, UN Doc. S/2018/1177, 28 December 2018.

45 TRIAL International, Universal Jurisdiction Annual Review 2020: Terrorism and International Crimes: Prosecuting Atrocities for What They Are, 30 March 2020, available at: https://trialinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/TRIAL-International_UJAR-2020_DIGITAL.pdf, p. 14.

46 Draft Comprehensive Convention against International Terrorism, Appendix II, Letter Dated 3 August 2005 from the Chairman of the Sixth Committee addressed to the President of the General Assembly, UN Doc. A/59/894, 12 August 2005 (Draft Comprehensive Convention).

47 Hmoud, Mahmoud, “Negotiating the Draft Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism Major Bones of Contention”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, Vol. 4, No. 5, 2006, p. 1035CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

48 See Draft Comprehensive Convention, above note 46, Art. 20.

49 Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism, Report of the Working Group, Sixth Committee of the General Assembly, UN Doc. A/C.6/60/L.6, 14 October 2005, available at: https://undocs.org/en/A/C.6/60/L.6, p. 6.

50 Cassese, Antonio, “The Multifaceted Criminal Notion of Terrorism in International Law”, Journal of International Criminal Justice, Vol. 4, No. 5, 2006, p. 944CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

51 See, e.g., Ambos, Kai, “Judicial Creativity at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon: Is There a Crime of Terrorism under International Law?”, Leiden Journal of International Law, Vol. 24, 2011CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

52 Special Tribunal for Lebanon, Interlocutory Decision on the Applicable Law: Terrorism, Conspiracy, Homicide, Perpetration, Cumulative Charging, STL-11-01/I/AC/R176bis, 16 February 2011, para. 85.

53 Ibid., para. 86.

54 Ibid., para. 89.

55 According to the International Crimes Database, there were twenty-five terrorism convictions between 2015 and 2020, available at: http://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/SearchResults/?q=&cat=10&fy=2015&ty=2020&p=5&a=1#results; however, Table 1 demonstrates many more from individual country sources.

56 Sources: TRIAL International Database, available at: https://trialinternational.org/resources/universal-jurisdiction-database; International Crimes Databases, available at: http://www.internationalcrimesdatabase.org/; TRIAL International Universal Jurisdiction Annual Review, available at: https://trialinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/TRIAL-International_UJAR-2020_DIGITAL.pdf, https://trialinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Universal_Jurisdiction_Annual_Review2019.pdf, https://trialinternational.org/latest-post/make-way-for-justice-4-momentum-towards-accountability/, https://trialinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/UJAR-MEP_A4_012.pdf, https://trialinternational.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/UJAR_2016.pdf.

57 ICC, The Prosecutor v. Ahmad Al Faqi Al Mahdi, 27 September 2016, Trial Chamber, Doc No. ICC-01/12/-01/15-171, available at: https://www.icc-cpi.int/CourtRecords/CR2016_07244.PDF; Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia, Case 002/02, Judgement, Trial Chamber, 16 November 2018, Doc. No. 002/19-09-2007/ECCC/TC, available at: https://www.eccc.gov.kh/en/document/court/case-00202-judgement.

58 Sources: Russian Federation Statistical databases, available at: http://eng.rosstat.gov.ru/.

59 Based on research on file with the author.

60 It was challenging to find any comprehensive information of court judgements from Mali and Afghanistan, other than in the US country report. NGO reports also make reference to efforts by the courts but do not provide any specific statistics that would be worth including. Hence, these numbers are not complete.

61 Based on US Country Reports on Terrorism. For 2016, see https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/crt_2016.pdf, pp. 39–41, for 2017, see https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/crt_2017.pdf, p. 29; for 2018, see https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/11/Country-Reports-on-Terrorism-2018-FINAL.pdf, p. 30; for 2019, see https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Country-Reports-on-Terrorism-2019-2.pdf. The 2016 (p. 238) and 2017 (p. 169) reports note that the Attorney-General's office prosecutes a number of terrorist offences and highlights six particular cases in total; the subsequent reports do not mention specific cases, but imply there are numerous cases (2019 report, p. 152).

62 On the basis of field experience of the author in Afghanistan specifically working on criminal processes.

63 For Australia and The Netherlands (the two countries for which there were the most accurate court reports) the prosecutions were for conduct related to an armed conflict situation, i.e. as an alleged member of a “terrorist” organization in territory where an armed conflict was taking place. Other prosecutions not included are prosecutions such as financing of terrorism, conspiracy to commit domestic terror attacks or actual participation in a domestic terrorist attack.

64 Cases from October 2017 to 2020, available at: https://csd.njca.com.au/recent-cases/#PID_8118; cases from 2015 to 2017 from search of all Australian case law, available at: http://www.austlii.edu.au/advanced_search.shtml.

65 See above note 60.

66 Based on US Country Reports on Terrorism, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, above note 61. In 2017, it was reported that “[i]n 2017, the government opened 69 terrorism-related cases and detained 30 people for terrorism-related crimes. Resource constraints, a lack of training in investigative techniques, and inexperience with trying terrorism cases plagued a weak judicial system. The Malian government has never investigated, prosecuted, and sentenced any terrorists from start to finish.” (p. 29)

67 On the basis that all the other instances covered are 0 and that the ICC is investigating Mali, and no domestic cases have been reported in that context which is otherwise public.

68 See above note 63.

69 Statistics from January 2015 to April 2018 from declarations made by the Netherlands to Eurojust Terrorism Convictions Monitor (issues 22–32). These stopped being published after this date. For Issue 22, January–April 2015, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2015-06_TCM-22_EN.pdf (six convictions); for Issue 23, May–August 2015, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2015-10_TCM-23_EN.pdf (two convictions); for Issue 24, September–December 2015, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2016-02_TCM-24_EN.pdf (nine convictions); for Issue 25, January–April 2016, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2016-06_TCM-25_EN.pdf (six convictions); for Issue 26, May–August 2016, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2016-10_TCM-26_EN.pdf (fifteen convictions); for Issue 27, September–December 2016, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2017-03_TCM-27_EN.pdf (twelve convictions); for Issue 28, January–April 2017, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2017-05_TCM-28_EN.pdf (six convictions); for Issue 29, May–August 2017, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2017-10_TCM-29_EN.pdf (eight convictions); for Issue 30, September–December 2017, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2018-04_TCM-30_EN.pdf (twelve convictions); for Issue 31, January–April 2018, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2018-07_TCM-31_EN.pdf (six convictions); for Issue 32, May–August 2018, see https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Publications/Reports/2018-12_TCM-32_EN.pdf (twenty-two convictions).

70 Tjitske Lingsma, “First Dutch Islamic State Fighter Convicted For War Crimes”, Justice Info Net, 25 July 2019, available at: https://www.justiceinfo.net/en/42008-first-dutch-islamic-state-fighter-convicted-for-war-crimes.html; Oussama Achraf Akhlafa, Guus K Court of Appeal, 21 April 2017; Eshetu Alam, District Court of the Hague 2 March 2018, Case No. 09/748003-18v.

71 Indeed, the Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison has declared that persons will not be able to return: see Prime Minister of Australia, Transcript - Radio Interview with Oliver Peterson, 6PR, Media Release, 22 October 2019, available at: https://www.pm.gov.au/media/transcript-radio-interview-oliver-peterson-6pr.

72 Carl Lampe, “Russia's Repatriation of ISIS Members”, Foreign Policy Research Institute, 12 April 2019, available at: https://www.fpri.org/article/2019/04/russias-repatriation-of-isis-members/.

73 Muslim Ibragimov and Alexander Ivanov, “Chechen Fighters Enter Syria through Azerbaijan, Interior Ministry Spokesman Says”, Caucasian Knot, 20 September 2013, available at: https://www.kavkaz-uzel.eu/articles/230371?redirected=www.kavkaz-uzel.ru.

74 Center for Security Studies, Foreign Fighters: An Overview of Responses in Eleven Countries, Zurich, March 2014, available at: https://css.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/gess/cis/center-for-securities-studies/pdfs/Foreign_Fighters_2014.pdf, p. 14.

75 Prosecutor v. Maher H., District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands, 09/767116-14, 2 December 2014.

76 District Court of The Hague, 23 July 2019, reference 09/748003-18 and 09/748003-19.

77 Treatment of Foreign Fighters in Selected Jurisdictions: Country Surveys, available at: https://www.loc.gov/law/help/foreign-fighters/country-surveys.php.

78 Center for Security Studies, above note 74, p. 18.

79 Braun, Kerstin, “‘Home, Sweet Home’: Managing Returning Foreign Terrorist Fighters in Germany, The United Kingdom and Australia”, International Community Law Review, Vol. 20, No. 3–4, 2018, p. 318CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

80 Ibid., p. 328.

81 Roshan Noorzai, “Afghanistan to Discuss Fate of Foreign IS Prisoners with Their Countries”, VOA News, 3 May 2021, available at: https://www.voanews.com/extremism-watch/afghanistan-discuss-fate-foreign-prisoners-their-countries.

82 Drumbl, Mark A., Atrocity, Punishment and International Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007, p. 2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

83 Ibid., p. 3.

84 Nemitz, Jan Christoph, “The Law of Sentencing in International Criminal Law: The Purposes of Sentencing and the Applicable Method of Determining the Sentence”, Yearbook of International Law, Vol. 4, 2001, p. 89Google Scholar.

85 Ibid.

86 Ibid.

87 Ibid., p. 91.

88 Hafetz, Jonathan, “Diminishing the Value of War Crimes Prosecutions: A View of the Guantanamo Military Commissions from the Perspective of International Criminal Law”, Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law, Vol. 2, No. 4, 2013, p. 808CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

89 Editorial, “Responding to Terrorism: Crime, Punishment, and War”, Harvard Law Review, Vol. 115, No. 4, 2002, p. 1229.

90 Ibid., p. 1231.

91 Gerhard Werle and Aziz Epik, “Theories of Punishment in Sentencing Decisions of the International Criminal Court”, in Florian Jeßberger and Julia Geneuss (eds), Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities? Purposes of Punishment in International Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020, pp. 326–327; Michael Moore, Placing Blame: A Theory of Criminal Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1997, p. 8; J. G. Murphy, “Legal Moralism and Retribution Revisited”, Criminal Law and Philosophy, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2007, p. 11.

92 Frank Neubacher, “Criminology of International Crimes”, in F. Jeßberger and J. Geneuss (eds), Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities? Purposes of Punishment in International Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020, p. 28.

93 Mark Tunick, Punishment: Theory and Practice, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1992, p. 95.

94 Drumbl, Mark A., “Victims who Victimise”, London Review of International Law, Vol. 4, No. 2, 2016, p. 240CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

95 Clark, Michael and Cave, Peter, “Nowhere to Run?: Punishing War Crimes”, Res Publica, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2010, p. 200CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

96 Ibid., p. 201.

97 J. C. Nemitz, above note 84, p. 91.

98 Ibid., p. 92.

99 Claire Finkelstein, “A Contractarian Approach to Punishment”, in Martin P. Golding and William A. Edmunson (eds), Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal Theory, Blackwell Publishing, London, 2005, p. 208.

100 K. Braun, above note 79, p. 329.

101 M. Clark and P. Cave, above note 95, p. 201.

102 Ashworth, Andrew, Sentencing and Criminal Justice, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010, p. 84CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

103 UN Office of Drugs and Crime, Investigation, Prosecution and Adjudication of Foreign Terrorist Fighter Cases for South and South-East Asia, 2018, available at: https://www.unodc.org/documents/terrorism/Publications/FTF%20SSEA/Foreign_Terrorist_Fighters_Asia_Ebook.pdf, p. 31.

104 Rape and sexual violence victimizing women are also regulated by the Special Law for Women, the 2009 Law on Elimination of Violence against Women, and the sentence is more severe: more than twenty to thirty years of imprisonment or death sentence.

105 Center for Security Studies, above note 74, p. 12.

106 K. Braun, above note 79, p. 326.

107 Højfeldt, H., “Prohibiting Participation in Armed Conflict”, Military Law & Law of War Review, Vol. 54, 2015, p. 30Google Scholar.

108 Rome Statute, above note 19, Preamble.

109 Marnie Lloydd, “Challenges in the Application of the Obligation to Ensure Respect for IHL – Foreign Fighting as an Example”, in Eve Massingham and Annabel McConnachie (eds), Ensuring Respect for International Humanitarian Law, Routledge, London, 2020, p. 241.

110 J. Hafetz, above note 88, pp. 816–817.

111 ICTY, Prosecutor v. Delalic et al., Case No.: IT-96-21-T, Trial Chamber Judgment of 16 November 1998, para. 1234.

112 ICC, Prosecutor v. Katanga Art. 76 Decision ICC-01/04-01/07-3484, 25 May 2014, para. 38; Sergey Vasilev, “Punishment Rationales in International Criminal Jurisprudence”, in F. Jeßberger and J. Geneuss (eds), Why Punish Perpetrators of Mass Atrocities? Purposes of Punishment in International Criminal Law, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020, p. 70.

113 Letter Dated 17 May 2019, above note 21, p. 4.

114 ICTY, above note 111.

115 Ibid., p. 241.

116 Ibid.

117 M. Lloydd, above note 109, pp. 233–234.

118 K. Braun, above note 79, p. 327.

119 T. B. Bouwknegt, above note 28, p. 20.

120 Mark Lattimer, Shabnam Mojtahedi and Lee Anna Tucker, A Step Towards Justice: Current Accountability Options for Crimes Under International Law Committed in Syria, Ceasefire Centre for Civilian Rights and Syria Justice and Accountability Centre, May 2015, p. 24.

121 T. B. Bouwknegt, above note 28, p. 39.

122 Ibid.

123 K. Braun, above note 79, pp. 328–329.

124 Vasko Nastevski, “The Australian Experience of Conducting War Crimes Trials”, in Jadranka Petrovic (ed.), Accountability for Violations of International Humanitarian Law: Essays in Honour of Tim McCormack, Routledge, London, 2016, p. 222.

125 Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force, above note 28.

126 Adam Cooper, “Safety Fear for Afghan Villagers Raised in Ben Roberts-Smith Case”, Sydney Morning Herald, 7 May 2021, available at: https://www.smh.com.au/national/safety-fear-for-afghan-villagers-raised-in-ben-roberts-smith-case-20210507-p57pv6.html.

127 M. Lattimer, S. Mojtahedi and L. A. Tucker, above note 120.

128 TRIAL International, above note 45, p. 14.

129 Saul, Ben, “Crimes and Prohibitions of ‘Terror’ and ‘Terrorism’ in Armed Conflict: 1919–2005”, Humanitäres Völkerrecht – Informationsschriften / Journal of International Law of Peace and Armed Conflict, Vol. 4, 2005, p. 276Google Scholar.

130 TRIAL International, above note 45, p. 14.

131 See T. Ferraro, above note 2.

132 See Thomas Van Poecke, Frank Verbruggen and Ward Yperman, “Terrorist Offences and the International Humanitarian Law Exclusion Clause: Belgium as the Odd One Out”, International Review of the Red Cross, 2021, in this edition.

133 M. Lloydd, above note 109, p. 241.

134 K. H. Kaikobad, above note 5, p. 228.

135 Ashley Deeks, “Domestic Humanitarian Law: Developing the Law of War in Domestic Courts”, in Derek Jinks, Jackson N. Maogoto and Solon Solomon (eds), Applying International Humanitarian Law in Judicial and Quasi-Judicial Bodies: International and Domestic Aspects, Springer, London, 2014, p. 138.

136 TRIAL International, above note 45, p. 13.

137 See, e.g., Whealy, Anthony, “A Judicial Perspective: Surveillance Evidence and the Right to a Fair Trial”, in Davis, Fergal, McGarrity, Nicola and Williams, George (eds), Surveillance, Counter-Terrorism and Comparative Constitutionalism, Routledge, London, 2013Google Scholar; Walker, Clive, “Terrorism Prosecutions and the Right to a Fair Trial”, in Saul, Ben (ed), Research Handbook on International Law and Terrorism, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, 2020Google Scholar.

138 K. H. Kaikobad, above note 5, p. 276.

139 TRIAL International, above note 45, p. 13.