skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: herero genocide

> Refine results with advanced case search

223 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 41 of 45   next > last >>

Sarei v. Rio Tinto: Alexis Holyweek Sarei et al. v. Rio Tinto PLC and Rio Tinto Limited

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California, 7 Aug 2006, United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit, United States

After the civil war in Papua New Guinea, which led to Bougainville obtaining a more autonomous position, several inhabitants of that island sued the mining company Rio Tinto, basically for its role in the war and the process leading up to it. The plaintiffs claimed that Rio Tinto’s mining activities had harmed their health and the environment, and that they had helped the Papua New Guinea government in, among other things, setting up a blockade with disastrous results for the population. They relied on the Alien Tort Claims Act, an US Act which permits aliens to present a claim in a US court when, allegedly, the law of nations has been breached. The Court stated that it had jurisdiction to hear the majority of the claims. However, it dismissed the claim in entirety, based on the political question doctrine. If the judiciary would rule on the merits of the case, the Court stated, it would judge the policy of Papua New Guinea during the civil war and thereby tread on the exclusive domain of the executive branch of the government, which has the prerogative to decide on foreign policy. The Court of Appeals overturned this judgement, as it was confident that a judicial ruling in this case would not interfere with the duties and prerogatives of the executive branch.   


M.P. et al.: Public Prosecutor v. M.P. et al.

Verdict, 24 Apr 1997, District Court in Zadar, Croatia (Hrvatska)

The Zadar County Court of Croatia, in its verdict of 24 April 1997, convicted in absentia 19 officers of the so-called Yugoslav People’s Army (JNA) for the siege of the city of Zadar, which caused the death of at least 30 civilians and the destruction of significant parts of the city – including facilities and objects of large economic and cultural significance – without any military necessity to do so. The officers were found guilty of war crimes against civilians and crimes against humanity, and sentenced to prison sentences that ranged – depending on their military rank and degree of control over the campaign and, specifically, the targeting of unlawful targets – from ten to 20 years. However, as they had left Croatia before the initial indictment, the convicted persons have not yet been caught.


Kasa: The Prosecutor v. Leonardus Kasa

Judgement, 9 May 2001, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

The Indonesian occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002 gave rise to a number of attacks on the Timorese civilian population, particularly against those suspected of being independence supporters. 

The Accused, Leonardus Kasa, was a member of the pro-autonomy Laksaur militia group. He was brought before the Special Panels for Serious Crimes for having allegedly raped an East Timorese woman. He contended that the relationship was not based on coercion and in any event the Special Panels could not hear his case as it fell outside their jurisdiction, the alleged rape having been committed in West Timor. The Special Panels agreed, finding that under the constitutive instruments of the Panels and the applicable law, there was no jurisdiction to try the case. It would have to be dealt with by an Indonesian court. 


Silaen: Ad Hoc Prosecutors v. Timbul Silaen

Judgement , 15 Aug 2002, Ad Hoc Human Rights Tribunal at Central Jakarta District Court, Indonesia

Timbul Silaen worked as police chief in East Timor in 1999. As such, he was responsible for the security during the independence referendum held in the country on 30 August 1999. Before and after the referendum deadly incidents took place between people in favour of East Timor’s secession from the Republic of Indonesia and the pro-Indonesian supporters. Approximately 1000 people died, 80% of the territory was destroyed, and 250,000 people were forcibly evacuated to Indonesia.

Silaen was prosecuted because as a commander he allegedly failed to stop his subordinates from committing crimes and also failed to bring them to court in order to be prosecuted. In 2002, the Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor did not found Silaen guilty as a commander because it could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that his subordinates had committed the crimes.


Priyanto: The Ad Hoc Prosecutor v. Endar Priyanto

Judgment, 25 Nov 2002, The Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor, Indonesia

The Ad Hoc Tribunal acquitted the Accused of both charges, as it found none of his subordinates to have committed serious human rights abuses. In addition, the Tribunal found that the Accused has not disregarded important information and has acted in the best of his power to stop the human rights violations.

East Timor’s foreign minister described the judgment as ‘scandalous’, whereas activists in Indonesia considered the judgments of the Ad Hoc Tribunal to be “mock trials...[as] a result of pressure from the military.” Florendo de Jesus, one of the witnesses, testified that he had recognized several people among the attackers as TNI (Indonesian National Armed Forces) members, one of them being his own uncle. The public outrage, mostly taking place in East Timor, came as a consequence of a belief that the Ad Hoc Tribunal is failing to try the Indonesian commanders involved in the violence, as well as from the previous acquittals, specifically those of army Lieutenant Colonel Asep Kuswani, police Lieutenant Colonel Adios Salova and mayor Leonita Martins.


<< first < prev   page 41 of 45   next > last >>