The crimes of murder and manslaughter as well as any statutorily created offences involving the death of a person, such as dangerous driving causing death or assaults causing death are homicides in the sense of unlawful killings. Homicides may, however, be lawful insofar as being justified by, for example, self-defence or acting in the defence of another person; or being excused as a result of duress. They may be the consequence of an accident or an accused may not be criminally responsible because they suffer from a mental illness.This chapter will explore and analyse the crimes of murder, manslaughter and various statutory crimes involving particular types of conduct which cause the death of another person, including assaults, driving vehicles and administering drugs or other acts to hasten death. Murder is the most serious form of unlawful homicide and, with culpability rooted largely in the intentional nature of the killing, it attracts severe punishment up to a maximum of imprisonment for life. This penalty may be mandatory and may mean for the term of the offender’s natural life in some jurisdictions or in specific circumstances.

The question of how politics and ethics connect, if at all, in our societies is crucial, especially given today’s socio-economic and geopolitical challenges. Commentators have sought answers in Kant’s texts: the relation between the Categorical Imperative (CI) as the fundamental principle of ethics, and the Universal Principle of Right (UPR) as the fundamental principle of politico-legal norms, has been variously interpreted as one of simple dependence, simple independence, or complex dependence. Recent interpretations increasingly agree that Kant was not a simple independentist. However, questions persist about the philosophical significance of Kant’s account, specifically whether certain aspects of his thought inconsistently commit him to simple independentism. One aim of this chapter is to illustrate this critical strategy starting from a specific interpretation of the UPR. It is argued that, although robust, this interpretation is not the most accurate. While this strategy opens new avenues for further objections to Kant, the chapter concludes that the complex dependentist reading is philosophically the most convincing to date.