354 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 17 of
71
next >
last >>
Kambanda: Jean Kambanda v. The Prosecutor
Judgement, 19 Oct 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
The Accused in the present case was Jean Kambanda, the former Rwandan Prime Minister. On 4 September 1998, he had pleaded guilty to genocide and crimes against humanity (murder and extermination) and Trial Chamber I of the ICTR had sentenced him to life imprisonment. He appealed against that sentence and later requested that his guilty plea be quashed and that he stand trial.
Before the Appeals Chamber, Kambanda argued that he had not been assigned the lawyer of his choice and that even when he finally did receive legal representation the assignment of the lawyer was influenced by the Prosecution. He also accused his defense counsel, Mr. Oliver Michael Inglis, of inadequate representation. In addition, he claimed that the Registry had organized his detention in facilities where he was isolated from other detainees and that he felt oppressed by these arrangements. The Prosecution pointed out that, for a while, Kambanda had refused any legal representation until the Registry told him that in the interest of justice he had to be represented by counsel. He subsequently requested the Registry, in writing, to assign Mr. Inglis as his defence counsel.
The Appeals Chamber dismissed all the grounds advanced by the Accused and upheld his sentence.
Sikirica et al.: The Prosecutor v. Duško Sikirica, Damir Došen, and Dragan Kolundžija
Sentencing Judgement , 13 Nov 2001, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Trial Chamber, The Netherlands
The case against Duško Sikirica, Damir Došen and Dragan Kolundžija concerned the crimes committed against the Bosnian Muslim, Bosnian Croat and other non-Serb detainees of the Keraterm camp in the outskirts of the town of Prijedor (Bosnia and Herzegovina). The detainees were subjected to inhumane living conditions, beatings, and mistreatments. In the summer of 1992, Sikirica was the Commander of Security of the camp, Došen, and Kolundžija were both shift leaders. Sikirica, Došen and Kolundžija pleaded guilty to persecution as a crime against humanity, and the Trial Chamber found them guilty accordingly.
In order to determine the appropriate sentences, the Trial Chamber balanced several sentencing factors. The Trial Chamber considered that the positions of Sikirica, Došen and Kolundžija were of a limited authority and subsequently, it only attached a limited amount of aggravation to them. Sikirica’s failure of his duty to prevent outsiders from mistreating the detainees was considered a further aggravating factor.
Among the mitigating circumstances, the Trial Chamber took into consideration Sikirica, Došen and Kolundžija’s guilty pleas and expressions of remorse. Došen’s assistance to, and Kolundžija’s favourable treatment of some detainees were additional mitigating factors.
The Trial Chamber sentenced Sikirica to 15 years, Došen to 5 years, and Kolundžija to 3 years of imprisonment.
Papon v. France
Decision, 12 Apr 2002, Judicial Assembly, Council of State, France
Maurice Papon was a civil servant in Occupied France during World War II holding the position of Secretary-General of the Gironde prefecture.
The Assize Court of Gironde – a criminal trial court hearing cases of defendants accused with the most serious crimes – convicted Papon of complicity in crimes against humanity, sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment and ordered him to pay a sum in excess of 700 000 Euros in damages to the victims admitted as civil parties to the criminal proceedings. Papon brought his case before the Conseil d’Etat – France’s highest administrative court – on the grounds that French law provides that, where the State is also at fault in the events that lead to the civil servant’s conviction, then the State shall pay a portion of the damages to which the civil servant was sentenced.
In the present case, the Conseil d’Etat found that a personal fault attached to Papon himself for actively assisting in the arrest, internment and eventual deportation of Jewish individuals in Gironde from 1942 until 1944 but that the French administration was also at fault, independent of Papon’s actions, by adopting measures that would facilitate the deportation. Consequently, the Conseil d’Etat ordered the State to pay half of the damages.
Gonsalves et al.: The General Prosecutor of the Democratic Republic of East Timor v. Paulo Gonsalves, Marcelino Leto Bili Purificasao and Rosalino Pires
Indictment, 11 Jun 2002, District Court of Dili, Special Panel for Serious Crimes, East Timor
On 12 June 2002, the Special Panel for Serious Crimes of the Dili District Court, East Timor, issued an indictment against Paulo Gonsalves, Marcelino Leto Bili Purificasao and Rosalino Pires, respectively the commander, deputy commander, and a member of the Halilintar Merah Putih militia group based in the subdistrict of Atabae in East Timor. According to the allegations, several victims alleged to be supporters of East Timor’s independence from Indonesia were detained, beaten, and raped by the three members of Halilintar Merah Putih in the period between February and September 1999. In that period, numerous pro-Indonesian militia groups operated throughout East Timor attacking pro-independence supporters with the goal to gain autonomy within Indonesia.
Simić: The Prosecutor v. Milan Simić
Sentencing Judgment , 17 Oct 2002, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Trial Chamber II, The Netherlands
The events giving rise to the case have occurred in the municipality of Bosanski Šamac (Bosnia and Herzegovina) in 1992. After the Serb forces took over control, non-Serb civilians were detained at several prison camps throughout the municipality. One such facility was the primary school in Bosanski Šamac (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Milan Simić together with other Serb men severely beat and mistreated several detainees held at the primary school during the summer of 1992. In May 2002, Simić pleaded guilty to the crime against humanity of torture. Trial Chamber II entered a finding of guilt, and was left with the issue of determining the appropriate sentence for Simić.
With respect to the aggravating factors, Trial Chamber II accorded relevance to the gravity of the offence, Simić’s position of authority, the vulnerability and inferior status of the victims, and Simić’s discriminatory intent.
Trial Chamber II also took into consideration mitigating circumstances, including: Simić’s guilty plea, his remorse, his voluntary surrender, his lack of prior criminal conduct, his comportment at the Detention Unit and general co-operation with the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution.
After balancing these factors, Trial Chamber II sentenced Simić to 5 years of imprisonment.
<< first
< prev
page 17 of
71
next >
last >>