30 May 2013 - ICTY

49671
the plan be executed in the awareness of the substantial likelihood that it would lead to the
commission of the crime. 2206
1263. Ordering. Liability may be incurred by ordering the principal perpetrator to commit a
crime or to engage in conduct that results in the commission of a crime. 2207 The person giving
the order must, at the time it is given, be in a position of formal or informal authority over the
person who commits the crime. 2208 The person giving the order must intend that the crime be
committed or be aware of the substantial likelihood that the crime would be committed in the
execution of the order. 2209
1264. Aiding and abetting. Liability may be incurred by assisting, encouraging or lending
moral support to the commission of a crime where this support has a substantial effect on the
perpetration of the crime. 2210 Aiding and abetting by omission requires that the accused had
the means to fulfil his or her duty to act. 2211 Aiding and abetting may occur before, during, or
after the commission of the principal crime. 2212 When assessing whether the acts carried out
by the aider and abettor have a substantial effect on the perpetration of a crime, the Trial
Chamber must find that they are specifically directed to assist, encourage, or lend moral
support to the perpetration of that crime. 2213 The element of specific direction may be
considered explicitly or implicitly in the context of analyzing the substantial effect. 2214
However, specific direction must be analyzed explicitly in cases where the person is remote
from the crimes he or she is alleged to have aided and abetted. 2215 Factors defining remoteness
2206 Kordić and Čerkez Appeal Judgement, paras 29, 31; Nahimana et al. Appeal Judgement, para. 479;
Dragomir Milošević Appeal Judgement, para. 268.
2207 Kordić and Čerkez Appeal Judgement, para. 28; Galić Appeal Judgement, para. 176; Nahimana et al. Appeal
Judgement, para. 481.
2208 Kordić and Čerkez Appeal Judgement, para. 28; Semanza Appeal Judgement, para. 361; Galić Appeal
Judgement, para. 176; Nahimana et al. Appeal Judgement, para. 481; Dragomir Milošević Appeal Judgement,
para. 290; Boškoski and Tarčulovski Appeal Judgement, paras 160, 164; Kalimanzira Appeal Judgement, para.
213.
2209 Blaškić Appeal Judgement, para. 42; Kordić and Čerkez Appeal Judgement, paras 29-30; Nahimana et al.
Appeal Judgement, para. 481.
2210 Tadić Appeal Judgement, para. 229; Čelebići Appeal Judgement, para. 352; Vasiljević Appeal Judgement,
para. 102; Blaškić Appeal Judgement, paras 45-46, 48; Kvočka et al. Appeal Judgement, para. 89; Simić et al.
Appeal Judgement, para. 85; Blagojević and Jokić Appeal Judgement, para. 127; Nahimana et al. Appeal
Judgement, para. 482; Orić Appeal Judgement, para. 43; Mrkšić and Šljivančanin Appeal Judgement, paras 49,
81, 146, 159; Kalimanzira Appeal Judgement, paras 74, 86.
2211 Mrkšić and Šljivančanin Appeal Judgement, paras 49, 82, 154. See also Nyiramasohoko et al. Trial
Judgement, para. 5893 for a broad interpretation of the “duty to act”.
2212 Blaškić Appeal Judgement, para. 48; Simić et al. Appeal Judgement, para. 85; Blagojević and Jokić Appeal
Judgement, paras 127, 134; Nahimana et al. Appeal Judgement, para. 482; Mrkšić and Šljivančanin Appeal
Judgement, paras 81, 200.
2213 Tadić Appeal Judgement, para. 229; Perišić Appeal Judgement, para. 36, footnote 97.
2214 Blagojević and Jokić Appeal Judgement, para. 189; Perišić Appeal Judgement, para. 36, footnote 97.
2215 Perišić Appeal Judgement, para. 39.
Case No. IT-03-69-T 447
30 May 2013