Beside the internal micro and macro offences, from the early days, human community has permanently faced international offences and crimes such as war crimes, genocide, and crimes against humanity. During the past years, extensive efforts have been made to fight against such crimes and criminals. In this article, it is assumed that individuals and groups that are in charge of these crimes should be brought perpetrators to justice and punished based on their responsibilities. Because the international criminal law is still afflicted with some kinds of problems related to the lack of legality of penalties, in this study, some penalties that should be applied for such cases are investigated. It seems that the current system of international criminal penalties, does not match these crimes and it is necessary that the international community finds new remedies for this incompetence in order to establish justice and security in the world. For this purpose, the international community should either change current penalties or define theoretical basis and specific purposes for implemented penalties against international crimes.

Extended AbstractActus reus of a crime is one of the elements that has a special place in the organization of a crime. International crimes have different forms of material elements according to the complexity and multiplicity of the ways of committing them. This diversity in the material element will also make the methods of aiding different. In the procedure of international courts, based on different legal theories, they have issued rulings that state the basis of guarantee and separation between the people involved in the commission of the crime regarding the aiding and abetting of international crimes. Certain rulings, based on the theory of criminality, have put two objective and subjective theories as the basis of their reasoning behind the findings. Another group of opinions and judgments in line with part "d" paragraph 3 of Article 25 of the Rome Statute have put forward the theory of joint criminal actions and made it the basis of the guarantee and separation of the principal from the aider and abettor. The basis of the mentioned theory should be sought in the theory of absolute metaphorical criminality and the theory of equality in the rights of common law countries. Recently, the International Criminal Court has used the criterion of crime control, acknowledging the existence of a distinction between the main perpetrator and the aider and abettor. According to this criterion, the principal perpetrator is not limited to the person who has physically committed the crime, but also includes those who, despite not being present at the scene of the crime, have control and leadership over the commission of the crime, because they are the ones who ultimately decide to commit the crime. Considering the above theoretical foundations, Therefore, the question that is constantly raised is that how the material element of aiding and abetting in international crimes organized With the descriptive and analytical method in the form of studying and following the judgments and judicial procedures of international criminal courts and the opinions of jurists and searching in the original sources of international criminal law, it seems that, firstly, the behavior of the aider and abettor in international criminal law can be both an act and an omission. Negligence in committing the act fulfills the behavior required to commit the crime and makes it possible to fulfill the material element of aiding and abetting by omission. In addition, it is not necessary for the act to be tangible, but it can include omission, which often has a decisive effect on the commission of the crime, provided that the omission of the said act is necessary along with the mental element, as a result of the possibility of the omission of the act simply by presence or spiritual encouragement. To provide help, as an aider or abettor is realized when it is accompanied by will and knowledge; Secondly, The material element of the aider and abettor must be realized; Thirdly, the time of realization of the material element of the aiding and abetting in international criminal law includes before, after and during the crime; Fourthly, the condition of effect or effect is essential that there is no fixed procedure in the selection of each of the last mentioned conditions among international criminal courts. Referring to the second and third clauses of Article 25 of Clause 3 of the Statute of the International Criminal Court, it has not commented on the quantity of assistance and assistance and its amount, that is, how much of this act must be done in order for the title of aider and abettor to be included in this guilty person. . While, the military courts of Nuremberg in 1948, in the trial of Otto Ollendorff, according to Law No. 10 of the Council, stated: the assistance provided must have a substantial effect on the crime of the principal offender. Opinions of the ICTR, ICTY and the Special Court of Sierra Leone and Cambodia emphasize the latter statement. Further, the International Criminal Court and the Special Tribunal of Lebanon consider only the influence on the occurrence of the crime as the criterion of the aider and abettor. Therefore, international criminal courts, such as ICTR and ICTY, believe that the role of the aider and abettor in the commission of a crime must have a quantitative and qualitative threshold, and they have openly spoken about the "direct and fundamental" effect in committing a crime. The International Law Commission has deemed it necessary that the aider and abettor are directly and fundamentally involved in the commission of the crime. In addition, in the commentary on the draft of the 1996 plan, it is mentioned that the aider and abettor must provide the kind of assistance that directly and fundamentally assists in the commission of the crime. Therefore, between the ICTY and ICTR, the Nuremberg and Tokyo Military Courts, and the Sierra Leone and Cambodia Courts, the common point in the material element is the existence of the basic influence of the aider and abettor on the occurrence of the crime, and on the other hand, the International Criminal Court and the Special Tribunal of Lebanon on the lack of the need for substantial influence as a condition for the occurrence of the aiding and abetting.

Sexual violence against women has a deep and historical context,this violence stems from thoughts about the plurality of women and their reduction to the physical body. For decades, people have abused the conflict of sexual violence as a war tactic in order to intimidate, terrorize, and control the civilian population during domestic and international armed conflicts. Inadequate services for sexual assault, survivors during war time formal disregard for the harm inflicted on women and girls, and a lack of commitment to prosecuting sex offenders have made this fact more complicated. Despite the heinous nature of sexual crimes, these behaviors were a common and unavoidable consequence of hostilities, and therefore perpetrators were not prosecuted. Following the armed conflicts in the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda and all kinds of sexual violence against women and girls during these conflicts, the international community came up with an innovative way to prosecute sex offenders. Although since the early 1990s, international criminal courts have ruled more explicitly in these areas and prosecuted criminals, unfortunately, there are still many legal and administrative gaps in this matter. The present study responded to how to prevent such acts of violence and concluded the ICC Statute is the first legal instrument to include crimes of sexual violence against women,however, it’, s applicability and implementation faced numerous legal and practical gaps and challenges.

This article examines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC) over war crimes in both international and non-international armed conflicts. Focusing on the amendments to Article 8 of the Rome Statute adopted at the Kampala Review Conference (2010), the study highlights how these amendments expanded the Court’s jurisdiction to include the use of prohibited weapons in non-international conflicts. Using a descriptive-analytical method and library resources, the research confirms the hypothesis linking war crimes to armed conflicts and argues that the criminal responsibility of perpetrators aligns with the Court’s judicial authority. The paper also addresses challenges such as defining war crimes, legal distinctions between international and non-international conflicts, and the role of reforms in bridging these gaps. It concludes by suggesting that official interpretations or amendments to the Statute are necessary to clarify ambiguities and enhance the ICC’s effectiveness in prosecuting war crimes. The findings underscore the importance of ongoing legal reforms to ensure accountability and justice in the context of armed conflicts.

There are some countries that establish and utilize terrorist groups for interest of their own foreign policies, however, they are crippling the international system in fight against terrorism. The ISIL atrocities are one of the cases with its threatening nature and terrorist activities against international peace and security. Accordingly the paper aims at studying the nature and structure of ISIL with a comparative look at the atrocities it is committing; furthermore, the paper discusses possible legislative and criminalization acts of the UN Security Council that can establish terroristic acts of ISIL and pave the way to bring it to trail at international criminal courts.

A series of ongoing violence against Muslims in Myanmar has followed the innumerable international crimes. In the age of the accountability for the international crimes, this paper aims to answer this question which world community tools make the perpetrators be held accountable for these offences in Myanmar. At the international level, in the area of the individual criminal responsibility, the International Criminal Court (ICC) has prosecuted the crimes against humanity committed in Myanmar and the international liability of Myanmar related to the genocide against Muslims with the Gambia’ s official complaint in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) is to proceed. Also for the investigation and documentation of the human rights violations in Myanmar UN Human Right Council has applied the fact finding mechanism to record this genocide. In the national level, universal jurisdiction has provided a capacity for legal proceeding related to the massacres have been occurred in Myanmar. It has been applied in Argentina. The experience against impunity in Myanmar includes teachings for confronting the committed genocide in other crises that it is necessary to examine them.