skip navigation

(Photo provided courtesy of the American University Washington College of Law, War Crimes Research Office)

(Photo provided courtesy of the American University Washington College of Law, War Crimes Research Office)

The Deputy Prosecutor-General for Serious Crimes Against Domingos Metan

Court Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
Case number 4c/2003
Decision title Judgement
Decision date 16 November 2004
Parties
  • The Deputy Prosecutor-General for Serious Crimes
  • Domingos Metan
Categories Crimes against humanity
Keywords crimes against humanity, Murder
Links
back to top

Summary

Indonesia had illegally occupied East Timor since 1975 in a climate of tension between the Indonesians who favoured continued occupation and the Timorese who favoured independence. Following the referendum of 1999 in which an overwhelming majority of Timorese voted in favour of independence, hostilities escalated between the Indonesian Armed Forces and associated militias, and the independence supporters.

In the context of these hostilities, the Accused (a member of the Sakunar militia) intentionally stabbed a suspected independence supporter and watched as two other militia members proceeded to stab and stone the victim who died as a result of his wounds. The Accused pleaded guilty to the crime of murder as a crime against humanity, and the Court sentenced him to 5 years’ imprisonment. 

back to top

Procedural history

On 15 February 2003, the Prosecutor indicted Metan and seven others on charges of crimes against humanity, specifically murder and torture.

On 11 March 2004, the Court requested the Prosecution to amend the indictment as it did not consider that the facts alleged sufficiently supported the charge of torture. The Prosecution amended the charges by replacing the count of torture with a count of other inhumane acts.

On 27 October 2004, the Accused pleaded guilty to the charge of murder, but not to the other charge of other inhumane acts. The Court severed his case from the other persons indicted. The Prosecution withdrew the second charge of other inhumane acts. The Court delivered its judgement on 16 November 2004.

back to top

Related developments

The Accused testified as a witness in the connected case of the Prosecutor v. Lino Beno (Case 4b/2003, Judgment, 16 November 2004).

back to top

Legally relevant facts

The Accused was a member of the Sakunar militia, organised and controlled by the Armed Forces of the Republic of Indonesia who had illegally occupied East Timor since 1975. The militia’s purpose was to terrorise the civilian population of East Timor who were suspected of being independence supporters (para. 10).

On 16 September 1999, the Accused acted upon orders from the leader of the Sakunar militia for one of the Timorese villages and proceeded to intentionally stab a suspected indepedence supporter with a large knife. The victim was also attacked by two other members of the militia. He died as a result of his wounds (para. 10).

back to top

Core legal questions

  • Would a conviction for the crime against humanity of murder violate the principle of nullum crimen sine lege due to the fact that Regulation 2000/15 criminalising the offense did not exist at the time of the commission of the alleged acts?
  • What is the mens rea requirement for the crime against humanity of murder?
  • Do the violent conditions under which the Accused was forced to join the militia amount to coercion to commit the crime to which he has pleaded guilty and therefore excuses his criminal responsibility?

back to top

Specific legal rules and provisions

  • Sections 5.1(a), 14.3(a) and 19.1(d) of UNTAET Regulation 2000/15.
  • Section 9.1 of the Constitution of East Timor.

back to top

Court's holding and analysis

The offense of murder as a crime against humanity is a crime under customary international law that has been criminalised for more than half a century. Consequently, the non-existence of Regulation 2000/15 at the time of commission of the criminal acts would not render a conviction for this offence a violation of the principle of nullum crimen sine lege as customary law is as much law as written law (paras. 13-14).

Unlike the offense of murder under the national law of most countries, the crime against humanity of murder does not require deliberate intent or premeditation. It suffices that the perpetrator intended to cause grievous bodily harm with the knowledge that it was likely to cause death (para. 14).

That the Accused was forced to join the militia by incurring a severe beating has no bearing on his commission of the crime. Coercion requires an imminent threat of death, which was not present in the case of the Accused (para. 15).

The Court sentenced the Accused to 5 years’ imprisonment (para. 24).

back to top

Further analysis

back to top

Instruments cited

back to top

Related cases

back to top

Additional materials