This introduction lays out various aspects concerning robots' entanglement with substantive law, including an all-round view of the criminal liability of humans for robots, the criminal responsibility of robots themselves, self-defense against robots, and robots as victims of crime. While Janneke de Snaijer and Marta Bo in their chapter discuss specific aspects of criminal liability and exemptions therefrom, Thomas Weigend analyzes the looming “responsibility gap” and the option of expanding the idea of corporate criminal responsibility to cover harm caused by AI devices. This is one aspect of a preventive, repressive, and long-term perspective on how criminal law can shape human–robot interaction, but also possibly an example of how the wish to regulate robots could affect criminal law itself.

The chapter discusses the position of victims in international criminal justice and the evolution of their status and modalities of their involvement in the administration of justice by international criminal jurisdictions, with a particular focus on the legal regime of the International Criminal Court (ICC). The chapter highlights the centrality of victims as the core constituency of international criminal law and the mismatch between this aspiration and the limited recognition of their agency and rights before the UN ad hoc tribunals. It then examines how the ICC’s architects have sought to bridge this gap in the Court’s Statute and Rules of Procedure and Evidence. The ICC’s legal framework is unprecedented in this respect. Over and above the protective measures necessary on account of their engagement in the proceedings, it granted victims extensive rights to participate and be legally represented at different stages the ICC proceedings as well as the autonomous right to obtain reparations. The chapter surveys the key challenges this ambitious scheme has raised, as far as the admission of victims to participate, the organisation of their legal representation, and the implementation of reparations are concerned, and solutions that have been developed in the Court’s practice to date.

Ordinary civilians are assumed to panic or freeze in crises, but research has shown that this is a myth. In many crises, civilians provide life-saving help to those in need. They may even form emergent groups, which are temporary organizations that are involved in crisis response activities. Their actions can be of major importance to the crisis response efforts, but professionals are often reluctant to include volunteers in formal crisis structures out of distrust and because it requires considerable adaptation. By excluding volunteers, responders are sure that trained professionals provide high-quality support to affected communities. The attitude of frontline responders to volunteers poses a dilemma. It is important to anticipate the presence of well-intentioned volunteers and build relations with them, so that their skills and intentions can be rapidly identified and potential coordination can be established early on. Civilians can be given a variety of tasks, depending on the crisis, but it should not foreclose the recognition of their possible victimhood. Open engagement enables the adaptive incorporation of civilians in frontline crisis response efforts.

The International Criminal Court seeks to end impunity for the world’s worst crimes, in order to contribute to their prevention. But what is its impact to date? This book takes an in-depth look at four countries under scrutiny of the ICC: Afghanistan, Colombia, Libya and Uganda. It puts forward an analytical framework to assess the impact of the ICC on four levels: on the domestic legal systems (systemic effect); on peace negotiations and agreements (transformative effect); on victims (reparative effect); and on the perceptions of affected populations (demonstration effect). It concludes that the ICC, through its expressive function, is having a normative impact on domestic legal systems and peace agreements, but it has brought little reparative justice for victims and it does not necessarily correspond with affected populations view justice priorities. The book concludes that justice for the world’s worst crimes has no “universal formula” that can easily be captured in law.

The International Criminal Court seeks to end impunity for the world’s worst crimes, in order to contribute to their prevention. But what is its impact to date? This book takes an in-depth look at four countries under scrutiny of the ICC: Afghanistan, Colombia, Libya and Uganda. It puts forward an analytical framework to assess the impact of the ICC on four levels: on the domestic legal systems (systemic effect); on peace negotiations and agreements (transformative effect); on victims (reparative effect); and on the perceptions of affected populations (demonstration effect). It concludes that the ICC, through its expressive function, is having a normative impact on domestic legal systems and peace agreements, but it has brought little reparative justice for victims and it does not necessarily correspond with affected populations view justice priorities. The book concludes that justice for the world’s worst crimes has no “universal formula” that can easily be captured in law.

Chapter 5 analyses the impact of the ICC on peace negotiations in Colombia and Uganda, including impact of the ICC (and the role of the Prosecutor) on the process of negotiations, on the role of the parties, on victims, and on the content of peace agreements arising from these negotiations (including the Ugandan Agreement on Accountability and Reconciliation and the Legal Framework for Peace and Havana Peace Agreement in Colombia). The chapter concludes that there was a transformative effect in peace processes in Colombia and Uganda. These agreements adopted accountability provisions. However, they provided for alternative penalties for perpetrators rather than lengthy prison terms. They incorporated the views of victims into negotiations and allowed for various victim-oriented mechanisms in the agreements. In Uganda, however, unlike in Colombia, the final peace agreement was never fully implemented. The Colombian agreement may set new standards on how peace agreements may approach the balance between peace and justice in the future.

This chapter discusses information-sharing, including with victims of crime committed by persons with mental disorders. In general, a patient’s treatment is confidential and, unless the patient consents to information being shared, this limits the information that can be disclosed. However, information about a patient can be disclosed to a third party such as a victim if other statutes, such as the Domestic Violence and Mental Health Acts, permit this. Information can also be disclosed if another person is at risk of harm if the information is not disclosed. Furthermore, the victims of specific violent and sexual offences have certain rights to information about the offender. This includes offenders subject to the MHA and detained in hospital or subject to compulsion in the community. Patients can be victims as well as perpetrators of crime, and professionals working in health, social care and the justice system require a robust understanding of when to share confidential information. The first half of the chapter provides information on relevant legislation and guidance to be considered when sharing information about patients in general. The second half is focused on legislation and guidance on information sharing by organisations supporting victims of crimes committed by mentally disordered offenders.

This chapter introduces the first framing contest under examination in the book: victims versus perpetrators. The chapter starts with the story of Diana, who joined the FARC to escape abusive stepbrothers, only to fall into an abusive relationship with a commander, whom she later fled. Diana never enrolled in a government reintegration program, and after the peace process, she was welcomed back into the FARC reintegration in order to receive benefits. However, she did not stay long, soon leaving to take her chances in Bogotá, where she could be anonymous and not expose her children to what she saw as toxic rhetoric in the FARC camp. This chapter examines three key components that build resonance in the guerrillas’ victimhood frame: the campesino identity, gendered victimhood, and the concept of self-defense. Using supporting quotes and stories from the other 112 interviews, this chapter examines in detail the guerrilla frame of victimhood in Colombia, illustrating how collective victimhood works as a cohesive force to keep members inside the group and is especially effective at convincing women that they have nowhere else to go.

In this chapter, the author examines clinical psychological, traumatic developmental, and sociocultural perspectives of a serial murder. This includes media dynamics and feminist perspectives. The author discusses malingering, or the faking of mental illness. The case of female serial killer (FSK) Aileen Wuornos is revisited to illustrate clinical psychological issues. The cases of male serial killers (MSKs) Ronald Dominique and Dennis Rader (BTK Strangler) highlight phenomena from the chapter.