Our authors

Our Books
More than 865 authors
from all continents

Historical Origins of International Criminal Law
Historical Origins of
International Criminal Law

pficl
Philosophical Foundations of
International Criminal Law

Policy Brief Series

pbs
Concise policy briefs on policy challenges in international law

Quality Control
An online symposium

Our Chinese and Indian authors

li-singh
TOAEP has published more than 80 Chinese and Indian authors

atonement
Art and the ‘politics
of reconciliation’

Integrity in international justice
Symposium on integrity
in international justice

HomeIcon  FilmIcon  FilmIcon  CILRAP Circulation List TwitterTwitter PDFIcon

Element:

M.3. Perpetrator did not abandon the effort to commit the crime or did not otherwise prevent the completion of the crime by completely and voluntarily giving up the criminal purpose

M.3.1. The perpetrator did not abandon the effort to commit the crime or did not otherwise prevent the completion of the crime.

The requirements for abandonment differ depending on how far the attempt has advanced. The Statute distinguishes abandonment by mere discontinuation of the efforts towards the accomplishment of the crime from cases where the perpetrator ‘otherwise prevents the completion of the crime’. Additionally, there is another potential case not covered by the Statute’s wording. These three cases are considered below.

M.3.2. The perpetrator did not completely or voluntarily give up the criminal purpose

Footnotes:

Lexsitus

Lexsitus logo

CILRAP Film
More than 530 films
freely and immediately available

CMN Knowledge Hub

CMN Knowledge Hub
Online services to help
your work and research

CILRAP Conversations

Our Books
CILRAP Conversations
on World Order

M.C. Bassiouni Justice Award

M.C. Bassiouni Justice Award

CILRAP Podcast

CILRAP Podcast

Our Books
An online symposium

Power in international justice
Symposium on power
in international justice

Interviewing
A virtual symposium