<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.59704/4fdc8ab485e9d086</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/setting-it-in-stone/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>Setting It in Stone - How the Lafarge Ruling in France Could Cement a New Standard for Corporate Complicity</dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Khayyat, Sabeeh</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2026-03-04</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Criminal Law</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>France</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>Lafarge</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>Is "business as usual" in conflict zones officially a crime? As France’s Court of Cassation prepares to rule on the Lafarge case, the legal focus shifts from the company’s commercial motives to its operational awareness. By prioritizing "knowledge" over "criminal purpose," this landmark decision could dismantle the final legal shield for corporations operating alongside atrocity crimes.</dc:description>
</dc>
