The crime of aggression, as defined in the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, is only applicable to inter-state armed conflicts. There is, however, a gray area when an armed conflict erupts in the territory of a recognized state and initially looks like civil war, but has international elements such as the involvement of a quasi-state whose status and rights are disputed in international law. Resolving the issue of whether the crime of aggression is applicable to armed conflicts involving quasi-states is important because (1) there are many quasi-states throughout Europe, Asia, and Africa; and (2) quasi-states are a major source of war due to the inherent nature of their militarized society and the long-term tensions that exist between a quasi-state, its mother state, and its external patron state. The applicability of the crime of aggression to quasi-states depends on the interpretation of the meaning of “state” in the context of aggression. The meaning of “state” reflects a contradiction, because although state-like entities exist regardless of whether they receive recognition, recognition performs a function in determining which entities are qualified to join institutional clubs. Like recognized states, unrecognized quasi-states have been both perpetrators and victims of aggression. Yet, because they lack recognition, they have neither been protected nor prosecuted under the crime of aggression. This dissertation offers a suggestion for how “state” should be defined in the crime of aggression, and consequently, how the crime of aggression should be applied to armed conflicts involving quasi-states.
Ⅰ. 서 론
Ⅱ. 제1장 침략범죄의 역사적 발전: 뉘른베르그 재판소에서부터 국제형사재판소까지
Ⅲ. 제2장 침략범죄의 준국가 무력충돌에의 적용 가능성의 불분명성과 연구의 필요성
Ⅳ. 제3장 준국가 무력충돌을 규제함에 있어서 침략범죄규범의 필요성
Ⅴ. 제4장 침략범죄의 구성요건으로서 ʻ국가ʼ의 해석원칙–국제형사법의 해석원칙 중심으로
Ⅵ. 제5장 침략행위의 주체이자 대상으로서 ʻ국가ʼ의 의미
1. 침략범죄규범의 목적과 보호법익을 통해 살펴본 ʻ국가ʼ의 의미
2. ʻ침략ʼ을 정의하기 위한 국제사회의 논의과정을 통해 살펴본 ʻ국가ʼ의 의미
Ⅶ. 결 론
(0)
(0)