Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Problematic Discourse of State Crime

  • Chapter
The Legacy of Punishment in International Law

  • 122 Accesses

Abstract

We come finally to contemporary efforts to bring back the classical practice of international punishment in its nearly complete form; as we will see, the only significant way in which what is advocated today differs from the old practice is in the lack of reliance on Natural Law metaphysics. Contemporary discussion of the criminalization of state behavior and the punishment of states for the commission of international crimes effectively brings us full circle to Grotius and Locke.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Nicholas Onuf, World of Our Making (Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1989);

    Google Scholar 

  2. Onuf, “Constructivism: A User’s Manual,” in Vendulka Kubálkova, Nicholas Onuf and Paul Kowert, eds, International Relations in a Constructed World (Armonk: M.E. Sharpe, 1998), 58–78.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alexander Wendt, Social Theory of International Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 193–245;

    Book  Google Scholar 

  4. Patrick Thaddeus Jackson, “Is the State a Person? Why Should We Care?” Review of International Studies 30 (2004): 255–258;

    Google Scholar 

  5. Iver Neumann, “Beware of Organicism: The Narrative Self of the State,” Review of International Studies 30 (2004): 259–267;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Colin Wight, “State Agency: Social Action without Human Activity?” Review of International Studies 30 (2004): 269–280;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Patrick Thaddeus Jackson, “Hegel’s House, or ‘People are States Too’,” Review of International Studies 30 (2004a): 281–287;

    Google Scholar 

  8. Alexander Wendt, “The State as Person in International Theory,” Review of International Studies 30 (2004): 289–316;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Peter Lomas, “Anthropomorphism, Personification and Ethics: A Reply to Alexander Wendt,” Review of International Studies 31/2 (2005): 349–355;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Alexander Wendt, “How Not to Argue Against State Personhood: A Reply to Lomas,” Review of International Studies 31 (2005): 357–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. David Miller, “Holding Nations Responsible,” Ethics, 114 (2004): 240–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Toni Erskine, “Assigning Responsibilities to Institutional Moral Agents: The Case of States and Quasi-States,” Ethics and International Affairs, 15 (2001): 72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. David Boucher, “Resurrecting Pufendorf and Capturing the Westphalian Moment,” Review of International Studies, 27 (2001): 566–567.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. G.W.F. Hegel, “Philosophy of Right and Law,” in Carl J. Friedrich, ed., The Philosophy of Hegel (New York: Random House, 1954), 320.

    Google Scholar 

  15. James Crawford, The International Law Commission’s Articles on State Responsibility (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 91–123;

    Google Scholar 

  16. James Crawford and Simon Olleson, “The Nature and Forms of International Responsibility,” in Malcolm Evans, ed., International Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 454–458;

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hans Kelsen, Pure Theory of Law 2nd ed. (Clark: The Lawbook Exchange, Ltd., 2005 (1967)), 292;

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hans Kelsen, General Theory of Law and State (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 1949 (2006)), 106.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Nina Jørgensen, The Responsibility of States for International Crimes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), 79, 279–280.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Joseph Weiler, Antonio Cassese and Marina Spinedi, eds, International Crimes of State: A Critical Analysis of the ILC’s Draft Article 19 on State Responsibility (New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1989), 7–138.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Luis Molina, “Can States Commit Crimes? The Limits of Formal International Law,” in Ross, ed., Controlling State Crime (New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers, 2000), 349–388.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Georges Abi-Saab, “The Uses of Article 19,” European Journal of International Law 10 (1999): 345–346.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Eric Wyler, “From ‘State Crime’ to Responsibility for Serious Breaches of Obligations under Peremptory Norms of General International Law,” European Journal of International Law 13 (2002): 1148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Alain Pellet, “Can a State Commit a Crime? Definitely, Yes!” European Journal of International Law 10 (1999): 432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Giorgio Gaja, “Should all References to International Crimes Disappear from the ILC Draft Articles on State Responsibility?” European Journal of International Law 10 (1999), 365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mortimer Sellers, “International Legal Theory,” Jus Gentium 11 (2005): 67.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lon L. Fuller, Legal Fictions (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1967);

    Google Scholar 

  28. RW Duff, Personality in Roman Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1938), 28.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Peter French, Collective and Corporate Persons (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984), 34;

    Google Scholar 

  30. Andrew Borkowski and Paul du Plessis, Textbook on Roman Law 3rd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 87;

    Google Scholar 

  31. Barry Nicholas, An Introduction to Roman Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996 (1962)), 60.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ulrike Malmendier, “Roman Shares,” in William N. Goetzman and K. Gert Rouwenhorst, eds, The Origins of Value (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), 38;

    Google Scholar 

  33. Michael Oakeshott, “On the Character of a Modern European State,” in Michael Oakeshott, ed., On Human Conduct (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975), 199–266.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Philip Wiener, ed., Dictionary of the History of Ideas, volume 1 (New York: Scribner & Sons. 1974), 68–70.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ernst H. Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997 (1957)), 195–196;

    Google Scholar 

  36. Anton-Herman Chroust, “The Corporate Idea and the Body Politic in the Middle Ages,” The Review of Politics 9 (1947): 431.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Jan Klabbers, “The Concept of Legal Personality,” Jus Gentium 11 (2005): 45.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hannah Pitkin, “Hobbes’s Concept of Representation—I,” American Political Science Review 58 (1964): 328–340;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hannah Pitkin, “Hobbes’s Concept of Representation—II,” American Political Science Review 58 (1964): 902–918;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Quentin Skinner, “Hobbes and the Purely Artificial Person of the State,” in Quentin Skinner, Visions of Politics v. III: Hobbes and Civil Science (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), 177–208;

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  41. Quentin Skinner, “Hobbes on Representation,” European Journal of Philosophy 13 (2005): 155–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. David Runciman, Pluralism and the Personality of the State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), 6–33

    Book  Google Scholar 

  43. David Runciman, “Moral Responsibility and the Problem of Representing the State,” in Toni Erskine, ed., Can Institutions Have Responsibilities? Collective Moral Agency and International Relations (Basingstoke: Pal-grave, 2003), 41–48

    Google Scholar 

  44. David Copp, “Hobbes on Artificial Persons and Collective Action,” The Philosophical Review, 89 (1980): 579–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Torbjørn Knutsen, A History of International Relations Theory 2nd ed. (Manchester: Manchester University Press. 1997), 105.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kinch Hoekstra, “Hobbes on the Natural Condition of Mankind,” in Patricia Springborg, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes’ Leviathan (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 120–121.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Larry May, Crimes Against Humanity: A Normative Account (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), 17–18.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Richard Tuck, The Rights of War and Peace (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999), 158–165.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Arthur Machen, “Corporate Personality,” Harvard Law Review 24 (1911): 263. Emphasis added.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Mark M. Hager, “Bodies Politic: The Progressive History of Organizational ‘Real Entity’ Theory,” University of Pittsburgh Law Review 50 (1989): 578.

    Google Scholar 

  51. John Dewey, “The Historic Background of Corporate Legal Personality,” Yale Law Journal 35 (1926): 655;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. H.L.A. Hart, “Definition and Theory in Jurisprudence,” in H.L.A. Hart, Ethics in Jurisprudence and Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983), 43.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Frederic Maitland, “Moral Personality and Legal Personality,” Journal of the Society of Comparative Legislation 6 (New Series) (1905), 195.

    Google Scholar 

  54. William S. Laufer, Corporate Bodies and Guilty Minds (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2006), 11.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  55. Morton Horwitz, The Transformation of American Law 1870–1960: The Crisis of Legal Orthodoxy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992), 72.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Morris Cohen, “Communal Ghosts and Other Perils in Social Philosophy,” The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 16 (1919): 678–681;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Harold Laski, “The Personality of Associations,” Harvard Law Review 29 (1916): 406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Ernst Freund, The Legal Nature of Corporations (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1897), 52.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Eric Colvin, “Corporate Personality and Criminal Liability,” Criminal Law Forum 6 (1995): 5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Ann Foerschler, “Corporate Criminal Intent: Toward a Better Understanding of Corporate Misconduct,” California Law Review 78 (1990): 1291; Hart (1983), 45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Jørgensen, 75; Lee, 9; R.E. Ewin, “The Moral Status of the Corporation,” Journal of Business Ethics 10 (1991): 749–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. J. Andrews, “Reform in the Law of Corporate Liability” Criminal Law Review 20 (1973): 91–92.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Larry May, The Morality of Groups (South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press, 1987) 41.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Celia Wells, Corporations and Criminal Responsibility 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001), 71.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  65. Brent Fisse and John Braithwaite, “The Allocation of Responsibility for Corporate Crime: Individualism, Collectivism and Accountability” Sydney Law Review 11 (1988): 483.

    Google Scholar 

  66. C.M.V. Clarkson, “Kicking Corporate Bodies and Damning Their Souls,” The Modern Law Review 59 (1996): 557–572.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Anthony Lang, “Crime and Punishment: Holding States Accountable” Ethics and International Affairs 21 (2007): 239–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Donald Davidson, “Intending,” in Davidson, Essays on Actions and Events (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1980), 83–102.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Noel Malcolm, Reason of State, Propaganda, and the Thirty Years’ War (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007), 92–123.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Maurizio Viroli, From Politics to Reason of State (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992);

    Book  Google Scholar 

  71. Richard Tuck, Philosophy and Government: 1572–1651 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993), 31–64;

    Google Scholar 

  72. Peter Burke, “Tacitism, Scepticism, and Reason of State,” in J.H. Burns and Mark Goldie, eds., The Cambridge History of Political Thought 1450–1700 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991), 479–498;

    Google Scholar 

  73. Edward Keene, International Political Thought: A Historical Introduction (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2005), 98–118;

    Google Scholar 

  74. Jonathan Haslam, No Virtue Like Necessity: Realist Thought in International Relations since Machiavelli (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2002), 17–88.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Amy E. Eckert, “Peoples and Persons: Moral Standing, Power, and the Equality of States,” International Studies Quarterly 50 (2006): 841–859;

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. Amy E. Eckert, “National Defense and State Personality,” Journal of International Political Theory 5 (2009), 161–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Hans Kelsen, “Collective and Individual Responsibility in International Law with Particular Respect to the Punishment of War Criminals” California Law Review 31 (1942–1943): 530, 533.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Harry D. Gould
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2010 Harry D. Gould

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Gould, H.D. (2010). The Problematic Discourse of State Crime. In: The Legacy of Punishment in International Law. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230113077_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation