This article discusses Article 6 of the International Law Commission’s (ILC) draft articles on crimes against humanity, which deals with criminalization of crimes against humanity in national law. The provision uses neutral and generic terms to describe criminal responsibility. This is appropriate for a treaty like the one which could result from the ILC articles, where it would be left to state parties to enact legislation and to align criminal responsibility for crimes against humanity to existing legal concepts in domestic law. Article 6 is a broad provision, yet it leaves a few gaps. This contribution suggests the insertion and explicit recognition of conspiracy as entailing criminal responsibility for crimes against humanity. Moreover, it proposes a modification of the superior orders defence, allowing reliance on the defence for non-manifestly unlawful orders. The clause on liability of legal persons is welcomed, whereas the provision on superior responsibility is criticized. The latter, mirroring Article 28 of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) Statute, is at the moment vague and unclear. Thus, drafters are encouraged to adopt a ‘splitting solution’, recognizing a number of separate superior responsibility concepts.

中文翻译：

---

根据国家法律将危害人类罪定为刑事犯罪

本文讨论了国际法委员会 (ILC) 关于危害人类罪的条款草案的第 6 条，该条款涉及在国内法中将危害人类罪定为刑事犯罪。该条款使用中性和通用术语来描述刑事责任。这适用于类似国际法委员会条款可能产生的条约，在该条约中，由缔约国制定立法并使危害人类罪的刑事责任与国内法中的现有法律概念保持一致。第 6 条是一个宽泛的规定，但它留下了一些空白。这一贡献表明插入并明确承认共谋导致危害人类罪的刑事责任。此外，它还提议修改上级命令的防御，允许对非明显非法的命令依赖辩护。法人责任条款受到欢迎，而上级责任条款受到批评。后者反映了国际刑事法院（ICC）规约第 28 条，目前含糊不清。因此，鼓励起草者采用“拆分解决方案”，承认一些单独的上级责任概念。