I examine the criminal responsibility of companies for crimes committed with their exported weapons, even if that export was authorised by national authorities. Responsibility may rise directly from the national export control law and/or from (international) criminal law (icl) concerning (international) crimes committed. While (transnational) corporations have a due diligence obligation to prevent serious human rights violations, it is unclear how a national authorisation relates to this. Does it displace it, or is the authorisation overridden by the obligation? To better understand how a national authorisation procedure works, before analysing this issue from an icl perspective, I analyse German law regarding a recent case of weapons supply to Mexico. The situation under icl law is then examined regarding the Yemen complaint submitted to the International Criminal Court (icc). The article attempts some thoughts on dealing with this and similar cases, hoping to serve as a starting point for further debate.

我审查了公司对使用其出口武器所犯的罪行的刑事责任，即使该出口是经国家当局批准的。责任可能直接来自国家出口管制法和/或有关（国际）犯罪的（国际）刑法（icl）。虽然（跨国）公司有尽职调查的义务，以防止严重侵犯人权，但尚不清楚国家授权与这有何关系。它会取代它，还是授权被义务覆盖？为了更好地了解国家授权程序的作品，从分析这个问题之前ICL的角度看，我分析关于最近的一个案例武器提供给墨西哥德国法律。情况下然后针对提交给国际刑事法院（icc）的也门申诉，对icl法律进行审查。本文尝试着处理这种情况和类似情况的一些想法，希望以此作为进一步辩论的起点。