This article discusses the icc’s Bemba et al. Trial and Appeal Judgments concerning aiding and abetting under Article 25(3)(c) of the Rome Statute. It analyses three issues that were addressed at trial and some of which were considered on appeal: (i) the actus reus contribution threshold; (ii) encouragement or moral support and the principal perpetrators; and (iii) the mens rea of ‘purpose’. It concludes that the Bemba et al. Trial Judgment provided clarity on the mens rea under Article 25(3)(c), while the Bemba et al. Appeal Judgment settled the question of whether a principal perpetrator needs to be aware of the aider and abettor’s encouragement or moral support for it to have an effect on the crime. However, the Bemba et al. Appeal Judgment ignored the question of whether there is a minimum contribution threshold for the actus reus of aiding and abetting, despite the issue being clearly raised.

本文讨论了icc的Bemba等人。根据《罗马规约》第25条第3款（c）项有关协助和教be的审判和上诉判决。它分析了分别在审判解决，其中一些被认为在上诉三个问题：（一）犯罪行为贡献阈值; （ii）鼓励或道义上的支持以及主要犯罪者；（iii）“目的”的实质。结论是，本巴等人。试判断设置在清晰度犯罪意图第25条（3）（c）根据，而本巴等人。上诉判决解决了主要肇事者是否需要了解助手和教tor者的鼓励或道义上的支持，以使其对犯罪产生影响的问题。然而，本巴等。尽管该问题已明确提出，但上诉判决忽略了有关协助和教act行为的最低捐款门槛的问题。