Actus Reus Sample Clauses

Actus Reus. Once a tribunal determined that a defendant had knowledge of a criminal enterprise that had led to the commission of a crime, “the remaining question” was whether he had participated in the enterprise.55 The tribunals took an extremely broad approach to defendant‟s participation in a criminal enterprise, holding that it was immaterial to a defendant‟s responsibility for the enterprise‟s crimes whether he “originated or 47 Justice, III TWC 1038. 48 Xxxx, V TWC 995, 1015. 49 Ministries, XIV TWC 478. 50 Id. at 620-21. 51 Xxxx, Supplemental Judgment, V TWC 1171. 52 Id. at 1017-18. 53 Id. at 1171, Supplemental Judgment. 54 Id. at 998. 55 Justice, III TWC 981. executed them, or merely implemented them, justified them to the world, or gave aid and comfort to their perpetrators.”56 The tribunals did not, however, treat all participants in a criminal enterprise equally. On the contrary, they distinguished between defendants who were involved in creating the enterprise and defendants who simply executed an enterprise created by others: whereas creating an enterprise automatically satisfied the participation requirement, executing an enterprise satisfied it only if the defendant possessed a certain amount of authority and discretion in his professional activities. As the Ministries tribunal wrote, the question was whether the defendants “participated in the initiation or formulation of such spoliation program, or whether they… were vested with responsibility for execution thereof, and in such positions of responsibility, influenced or played a directing role in the carrying out of such criminal program.”57

Actus Reus. To be responsible for “ordering” a crime, a defendant also had to be involved in issuing, drafting, or transmitting an illegal order – the mode of participation‟s actus reus. The nature of those activities differed, however, depending on whether the order was military or civilian.