CONTROL OVER THE CRIME THEORY IN THE ROME STATUTE—CRITICAL ANALYSIS

Abstract

The paper critically analyzes the Control Over the Crime theory under the Rome Statute, focusing on its application in holding high-ranking officials accountable for mass atrocities. Highlighting the Lubanga case, it examines the strengths, limitations, and critiques of this theory, including concerns about its status as customary international law and its reliance on the essential contribution standard. The article also explores modes like co-perpetration, indirect perpetration, and indirect co-perpetration to address hierarchical and organizational control. It argues for improvements to strengthen the theory, such as codifying “planning” as principal liability and adopting a cluster of factors approach. Ultimately, the study advocates refining this framework to enhance the International Criminal Court’s ability to prosecute leaders orchestrating crimes remotely.