Ambos, Kai

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","552"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Zeitschrift für internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","564"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","11"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-10T08:13:20Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-10T08:13:20Z"],["dc.date.issued","2009"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/5862"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/61208"],["dc.language.iso","de"],["dc.notes.intern","Migrated from goescholar"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.access","openAccess"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.subject","Alberto Fujimori"],["dc.subject.ddc","340"],["dc.title","Politische und rechtliche Hintergründe des Urteils gegen den ehem. peruanischen Präsidenten Alberto Fujimori"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","223"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","1/3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Criminal Law Forum"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","228"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","23"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2013-04-09T08:49:05Z"],["dc.date.accessioned","2021-10-27T13:14:12Z"],["dc.date.available","2013-04-09T08:49:05Z"],["dc.date.available","2021-10-27T13:14:12Z"],["dc.date.issued","2012"],["dc.format.mimetype","application/pdf"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s10609-012-9167-3"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/8840"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/91843"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Migrated from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","Springer Netherlands"],["dc.publisher.place","Dordrecht"],["dc.relation.eissn","1572-9850"],["dc.relation.issn","1046-8374"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Juristische Fakultät"],["dc.relation.reviewof","Ruth Mackenzie, Kate Malleson, Penny Martin and Philippe Sands, Selecting International Judges: Principle, Process, and Politics (Oxford: OUP, 2010), 300 pp., ISBN: 978-0199580569"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.access","openAccess"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Book Review"],["dc.type","review"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","504"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft : ZStW"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","520"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","122"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-10T08:13:49Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-10T08:13:49Z"],["dc.date.issued","2010"],["dc.description.abstract","Cesare Beccarias Forderung nach Abschaffung der Folter kann nicht isoliert, sondern nur im Zusammenhang mit seinem legendären Werk „Von den Verbrechen und den Strafen“1 und der darin zum Ausdruck kommenden kontraktualistisch- utilitaristischen Strafrechtskonzeption gewürdigt werden. Bevor wir uns deshalb seiner eigentlichen Kritik der Folter zuwenden (III.) und ihre aktuelle Bedeutung beurteilen wollen (IV.), ist zunächst die Beccaria-Rezeption im Allgemeinen (I.) und die Entstehungsgeschichte des Werks im Besonderen (II.) zu untersuchen.Die kleineUntersuchung erbringt imWesentlichen drei Ergebnisse, die ihr zugleich als Thesen vorangestellt werden können: 1. Beccarias Werk hat eine bis heute anhaltende Bedeutung als kriminalpolitischesManifest zur utilitaristisch begründeten Ersetzung des grausamen, religiösen mittelalterlichen Strafrechts durch ein säkulares und (damit) im Ergebnis humaneres Strafrecht. 2. Beccarias reiht sich insoweit in die Reihe zahlreicher anderer aufklärerischer Denker ein, vermag aber seine – durchaus nicht neuartigen – Thesen so populär zuzuspitzen, dass sie sich rasanter Verbreitung in zahlreichen Sprachen erfreuen. Dies erklärt Beccarias bis heute anhaltende Popularität. Seine fehlende Anerkennung der geistigen Vorläufer seiner Thesen und insbesondere der erheblichen Mitwirkung der Gebrüder Verri an der Entstehung seines Werks, gerade auch des Kapitels zur Folter, lassen allerdings Zweifel an seiner Originalität und wissenschaftlichen Redlichkeit aufkommen. 3. Die heutige praktische Bedeutung des Werks ist aufgrund der umfassenden normativen (völker- und verfassungsrechtlichen) Absicherung eines humaneren Strafrechts und eines fairen Strafverfahrens als gering zu veranschlagen. Auch per se inhumane und voraufklärerische Strafrechtssysteme bedürfen angesichts der menschenrechtlichen lex lata keiner Beccaria-Lektüre, um von der Notwendigkeit humanisierender Reformen überzeugt zu werden; sie sind zu diesen verpflichtet. Führen sie diese trotzdem nicht durch, wird Beccaria daran auch nichts ändern. Was insbesondere die von Beccaria mit neun Argumenten bekämpfte Folter angeht, so stellt sich die Lage nicht anders dar, wobei freilich seine Konzentration auf die im inquisitorischen Strafverfahren angewendete (repressive) Überführungsfolter den Blick auf die heute diskutierten Probleme im Zusammenhang mit der (präventiven) Rettungsfolter vollkommen verstellt."],["dc.identifier.fs","575088"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/7498"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/61345"],["dc.language.iso","de"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Juristische Fakultät"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.subject.ddc","340"],["dc.title","Cesare Beccaria und die Folter – Kritische Anmerkungen aus heutiger Sicht"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","253"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","ICL Journal"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","287"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","14"],["dc.contributor.affiliation","Ambos, Kai;"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2022-11-28T10:33:02Z"],["dc.date.available","2022-11-28T10:33:02Z"],["dc.date.issued","2020-12-09"],["dc.date.updated","2022-11-27T10:14:00Z"],["dc.description.abstract","AbstractThe paper inquires, from a comparative (Canadian-German) and human rights perspective, whether the State’s right (or even obligation) to punish can be derived from the Constitution. It argues that Constitutions usually assume this right but do not explicitly provide, let alone explain it (infra 1). However, protective (affirmative) duties may be derived from the rights part of a constitution (2) and these protective duties may serve as a basis for criminalization (3). While this is the position of the case law (especially the German one) and finds support in human rights law (4), it is argued that the reasoning is not fully convincing (5.1) and therefore further reflections are needed (5). First, it is necessary to make explicit the basic assumptions on the role of constitutions and judges on which the acceptance of a (constitutional) ius puniendi is predicated (5.1). Then, in a second step, the combination of a victim-based and effective remedy reasoning which best supports an obligation or at least ius puniendi is, relying on the German discussion, to be elaborated further (5.2)."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1515/icl-2020-0008"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/117495"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.publisher","De Gruyter"],["dc.relation.eissn","1995-5855"],["dc.relation.issn","2306-3734"],["dc.title","Ius puniendi and Constitution: A Comparative (Canadian-German) Perspective"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","459"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","4"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Criminal Law Forum"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","460"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","22"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:53:21Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:53:21Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s10609-011-9152-2"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/7353"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/60406"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","Springer"],["dc.publisher.place","Dordrecht"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Preface to the Special Symposium in Honour of Professor Otto Triffterer’s 80th Birthday"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","389"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","3"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Criminal Law Forum"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","408"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","22"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:53:21Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:53:21Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s10609-011-9150-4"],["dc.identifier.fs","581240"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/7352"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/60405"],["dc.language.iso","en"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.publisher","Springer"],["dc.publisher.place","Dordrecht"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Amicus Curiae Brief Submitted to the Appeals Chamber of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon on the Question of the Applicable Terrorism Offence with a Particular Focus on “Special” Special Intent and/or a Special Motive as Additional Subjective Requirements"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","415"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","4"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Crime Law and Social Change"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","437"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","59"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.contributor.author","Stegmiller, Ignaz"],["dc.date.accessioned","2018-11-07T09:25:19Z"],["dc.date.available","2018-11-07T09:25:19Z"],["dc.date.issued","2013"],["dc.description.abstract","The authors analyze the so far published selection and strategy papers of the Office of the Prosecutor (\"OTP\") of the International Criminal Court (\"ICC\") with a view to their consistency, coherence and comprehensiveness. Given the high number of communications and referrals to the ICC a focused strategy setting out the criteria for situation and case selection and prioritization should be one of the priorities of the Prosecutor. Thus far the Office has developed a strategic framework guided by four fundamental principles: focused investigations, positive complementarity, the interests of the victims and the impact of the OTP's work. These four principles are critically evaluated by the authors in light of the ICC Statute and existing case law. In particular the positive complementarity approach, focusing on the cooperation with national jurisdictions and enhancing their own capacity to prosecute, is to be welcomed and reflects a realistic prosecutorial policy approach. The cooperation between the OTP and Germany in the prosecution of the leadership of the FDLR is a good case in point. Only such a close interaction with national jurisdictions enables the ICC to contribute to the further closing of the impunity gap. Yet, the OTP must still more precisely define its position with regard to the criteria used for the selection of situations and cases. Thus, a priority for the new Prosecutor should be the drafting of a more precise and comprehensive strategy, integrating the already existing policy and strategy papers as well as drawing on lessons learned."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1007/s10611-012-9407-9"],["dc.identifier.isi","000317977900003"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/10346"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/30036"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.notes.status","zu prüfen"],["dc.notes.submitter","Najko"],["dc.publisher","Springer"],["dc.relation.issn","0925-4994"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Prosecuting international crimes at the International Criminal Court: is there a coherent and comprehensive prosecution strategy?"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.status","published"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","874"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","11"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","JURA - Juristische Ausbildung"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","878"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","33"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.contributor.author","Bock, Stefanie"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-09T11:54:15Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-09T11:54:15Z"],["dc.date.issued","2011"],["dc.description.abstract","Der folgende Sachverhalt wurde im Wintersemester 2010/ 2011 an der Georg-August-Universität Göttingen als Abschlussklausur in der StPO-Vorlesung ausgegeben. Die als leicht bis mittel-schwer einzustufende Zwischenprüfungsklausur ist sehr gut ausgefallen, der Notendurchschnitt lag bei 8,3 Punkten, die Durchfallquote bei unter 5%. Die Bewertung der Arbeiten orientierte sich an folgenden Grundsätzen: Insgesamt konnten maximal 54 Punkte erreicht werden. Dabei entfielen 48 Punkte auf die Beantwortung der Fragen (zur genauen Aufteilung s. Lösungsskizze), die verbleibenden sechs Punkte auf den Gesamteindruck, insbesondere Argumentationsvermögen der Bearbeiter. Die erzielte Punktzahl geteilt durch drei ergab die Gesamtnote."],["dc.identifier.doi","10.1515/jura.2011.168"],["dc.identifier.fs","581206"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/8657"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/60603"],["dc.language.iso","de"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","1612-7021"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.title","Übungsklausur StR : Beim Strafrecht hört die Freundschaft auf"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","198"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Zeitschrift für internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","199"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.volume","5"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.contributor.author","Radtke, Henning"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-10T08:13:21Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-10T08:13:21Z"],["dc.date.issued","2009"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/5868"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/61214"],["dc.language.iso","de"],["dc.notes.intern","Migrated from goescholar"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.access","openAccess"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.subject","Prof. Loos; 70. Geburtstag"],["dc.subject.ddc","340"],["dc.title","Einführung zur Sonderausgabe für Prof. Loos zum 70. Geburtstag"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.peerReviewed","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]

[["dc.bibliographiccitation.firstpage","196"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.issue","Sonderheft"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.journal","Zeitschrift für internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik"],["dc.bibliographiccitation.lastpage","197"],["dc.contributor.author","Ambos, Kai"],["dc.date.accessioned","2019-07-10T08:13:27Z"],["dc.date.available","2019-07-10T08:13:27Z"],["dc.date.issued","2009"],["dc.identifier.fs","390130"],["dc.identifier.purl","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gs-1/5946"],["dc.identifier.uri","https://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/61248"],["dc.language.iso","es"],["dc.notes.intern","Merged from goescholar"],["dc.relation.issn","1863-6470"],["dc.relation.orgunit","Juristische Fakultät"],["dc.rights","Goescholar"],["dc.rights.uri","https://goescholar.uni-goettingen.de/licenses"],["dc.subject.ddc","340"],["dc.title","Presentación a la edición especial para el Prof. Loos en homenaje a sus 70 años"],["dc.type","journal_article"],["dc.type.internalPublication","yes"],["dc.type.version","published_version"],["dspace.entity.type","Publication"]]