By the end of the two major World Wars, which can be considered as a source of shame for huma-nity, states have taken some protective measures in terms of how the international community should live toget-her and have expanded the definition and scope of crimes in the context of international law. In particular, the individual criminal responsibility of state officials or individuals who committed international crimes was accep-ted and they were tried for the international crimes they committed. These trials have created an environment in which the victims of the war have received a modicum of justice. Undoubtedly, the institutions that made the greatest contribution to the development of individual criminal responsibility in the international arena were the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals and ad hoc tribunals. The jurisprudence developed in these specialised tribunals provided the impetus for the development of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. In particular, it is recognised that the concrete perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity are human beings and that the punishment of individuals who commit such heinous crimes is necessary for the effective functioning and implementation of international law.
Individual Criminal Responsibility Nuremberg Tokyo Ad Hoc Tribunals International Criminal Court
The history of humanity, from the past to the present, has been an inevitable element of wars and conflicts. These conflicts between different communities, nations or ideologies have been one of the decisive factors shaping the evolution and history of humanity. The conflicts experienced in this long-term process have been the precursors of a series of important events such as the interaction of cultures, political changes and social transformations. Therefore, the traces of wars and conflicts have constituted one of the fundamen-tal elements of the complex story of humanity. With the end of the two great World Wars, which can be considered as a source of shame for humanity, states have taken some protective measures on how the international community should live together and have expanded the definition and scope of crimes in the con- text of international law. It has been decided that not only states but also individuals acting on behalf of the state should be punished for the crimes committed. In particular, the individual criminal responsibility of state officials or individuals who committed international crimes was accepted and they were tried for the international crimes they committed. These trials have created an environment in which the victims of the war have received a modicum of justice. Undoubtedly, the institutions that made the greatest contribution to the deve-lopment of individual criminal responsibility in the international arena were the Nuremberg, Tokyo and Ad Hoc tribunals. In the aftermath of World War II, a deeper understanding of both the traditional responsibility of states and the personal responsibility of individuals to pursue serious violations of the laws of war emerged in the international community. The appalling crimes committed by the Nazi and Japanese regimes led to rapid agreements between the Allied Powers and the subsequent establishment of the Nuremberg and Tokyo International Military Tribunals “for the prosecution of war criminals, individually or as members of organisa-tions or groups, with no specific geographical location”. These specialised judicial bodies included new catego-ries, such as crimes against humanity and crimes against peace, and addressed individual responsibility as well as war crimes. Individual criminal responsibility was first explicitly raised at the international level at the Nuremberg Tribunals and these tribunals are considered to be the first recognised examples of such responsibility in international law. The jurisprudence developed in these special tribunals provided the impetus for the deve-lopment of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Today’s wars are often not fought between two states, but rather as internal conflicts between parties within states, often led by irresponsible leaders. This situation shows that states have to emphasise the need for international criminal justice in order to raise uni-versal awareness and strengthen the national legal system in order to eradicate their own impunity. In this context of widespread internal conflicts, it has become inevitable for the international community to develop an approach to such problems. This approach has been characterised by the establishment of ad hoc tribu-nals in the aftermath of crises such as the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda. These tribunals made significant contributions to the development of international criminal law and led to the shaping of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court through diplomatic conferences and court decisions. This process is seen as a step towards a more effective legal framework for conflicts between states. The trend towards internationali-sation supports the establishment of international criminal mechanisms to strengthen the responsibility of leaders and criminal accountability. This is a milestone in the evolution of international law, enabling the international community to play a more effective role in combating human rights violations caused by internal conflicts. In sum, it is recognised that the concrete perpetrators of war crimes and crimes against humanity are human beings and that the punishment of individuals who commit such heinous crimes is essential for the effective functioning and implementation of international law.
