In July 2020 the International Criminal Court opened the trial in the Al Hassan case. For the first time in the history of international criminal justice a defendant is being tried with the charge of the war crime of sentencing or execution without due process in the context of a non-international armed conflict. Together with its equivalent in international armed conflicts – the war crime of denying a fair trial – this offence falls within the category of the war crimes of denying judicial guarantees. Although there are differences in their constitutive elements, both offences prohibit states and armed non-state actors from depriving prisoners of war and civilians of certain minimum judicial guarantees. The provisions that regulate these two crimes, however, present interpretative and practical issues which, so far, have not received sufficient consideration. Most notably, the material elements of the offences raise a range of interpretative doubts and are of cumbersome application. The objectives of the article are (i) to identify the issues posed by the material elements of the war crimes of denying judicial guarantees, (ii) to warn of the pitfalls hidden by the interpretation of the offences, and (iii) to trigger the debate on the issues that the crimes raise.

中文翻译：

---

否认司法保障的战争罪及其物质要件的不确定性

2020 年 7 月，国际刑事法院在哈桑案子。在国际刑事司法历史上，第一次有被告在非国际性武装冲突的背景下未经正当程序以战争罪被审判或处决。连同其在国际武装冲突中的类似行为——拒绝公平审判的战争罪——这一罪行属于拒绝司法保障的战争罪的范畴。尽管在构成要素上存在差异，但这两种罪行都禁止国家和武装非国家行为者剥夺战俘和平民的某些最低限度的司法保障。然而，规范这两种罪行的条款提出了解释性和实际问题，迄今为止尚未得到充分考虑。最为显着地，这些罪行的物质要件引起了一系列解释上的疑虑，而且应用繁琐。该条的目的是 (i) 确定否认司法保障的战争罪的物质要件所带来的问题，(ii) 警告对罪行解释所隐藏的陷阱，以及 (iii) 触发就罪行引发的问题进行辩论。