skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: haagse stadspartij 'the hague city party' netherlands

> Refine results with advanced case search

716 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 26 of 144   next > last >>

Samardžija: The Prosecutor v. Marko Samardžija

Verdict, 15 Oct 2008, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Appellate Panel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Marko Samardžija was the commander of the 3rd Company of the Sanica Battalion within the 17th Light Infantry Brigade. He has been accused of ordering soldiers under his command, on 10 July 1992, that the Bosniak (Muslim) population from the settlements of Brkići and Balagića Brdo (in the Ključ Municipality) leave their houses, after which the men older than 18 and younger than 60 were brought to the primary school in Biljani. From there, the men were murdered in groups of 5 to 10, which led to the deaths of at least 144 Bosniak men.  

On Appeal, the Court found the Accused guilty of Crimes against Humanity for the deprivation of liberty of these men, since they were forcefully moved from their homes and taken to the primary school. The Court did not find him guilty of aiding in the murders, since this was not a clear and obvious consequence of his acts.

Therefore on 15 October 2008, the Appellate Division of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Marko Samardžija guilty of crimes against humanity (depriving of liberty) and sentenced him to seven years imprisonment. 


Bagaragaza: The Prosecutor v. Michel Bagaragaza

Sentencing Judgement , 17 Nov 2009, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber III), Tanzania

Until July 1994, Michel B. was the managing director of OCIR-Tea, the controlling body for the tea industry in Rwanda. B. is accused of conspiring with his employees in order to kill Tutsis in the Gisenyi Prefecture. In addition, he was a member of the local committee of the Republican Movement for Development and Democracy (MRND) for the Gisenyi Prefecture.

B. was indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda on charges of genocide and, in the alternative, war crimes. He pleaded guilty to complicity in genocide and he was sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment. The Tribunal found that B. had substantially assisted the military and the Interahamwe militia launch an attack against Tutsis at Kesho Hill and Nyundo Cathedral by authorising that vehicles and fuel from his tea factories be used to transport attackers, that personnel from the factories participate in the attacks and that the attackers be provided with heavy weapons. These weapons were then stored in his factory. The Accused also contributed financially by providing the Interahamwe with money to purchase alcohol so as to motivate them to continue with killings. 


Šljivančanin: The Prosecutor v. Veselin Šljivančanin

Review Judgement (Public), 8 Dec 2010, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Šljivančanin was in charge of a security force within the Yugoslav People’s Army that moved prisoners from the Vukovar hospital to Ovčara, where they were tortured and murdered. In the earlier phases of his trial, Šljivančanin was found guilty on counts of torture as a war crime and was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. Later, the Appeals Chamber extended his conviction to the count of murder as war crime and sentenced him to 17 years’ imprisonment. The reason behind this decision was a conversation between Šljivančanin and his superior which proved the former's intentions to contribute to the murdering of the prisoners.

In 2010, however, a new witness contacted the Defence team of Šljivančanin, expressing his intentions to testify about the conversation in question. According to his testimony, the conversation did not evidence that Šljivančanin had the required intention. 

The Appeals Chamber accepted the testimony of the witness as constituting a new fact for the purposes of the trial and allowed the review motion.

After closely considering the testimony and the arguments brought by the Prosecution against the testimony, the Chamber concluded that the statements of the witness were credible. Accordingly, it ruled that the conviction on the count of murder had to be vacated and the sentence was reduced to 10 years of imprisonment.


Perišić: The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Perišić

Judgment (public with confidential annex c), 6 Sep 2011, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Trial Chamber I, The Netherlands

Momčilo Perišić was a high-level military officer in the Yugoslav Army, which provided assistance both through sending weapons and through paying the salaries of the officers of the Army of Republika Srpska (VRS) and that of the Serbian Krajina (SVK). 

Three incidents were relevant for the purposes of his trial. The shelling and sniping in Sarajevo, the invasion of the town of Srebrenica, both perpetrated by the VRS, and the SVK's attacks in Zagreb.

The Chamber found Perišić guilty as aider and abettor to war crimes and crimes against humanity for his role in the incidents in Sarajevo and Srebrenica. 

The Chamber found him not guilty for his failure to punish the acts of the VRS in Sarajevo and Srebrenica due to the lack of his effective control over the conduct of the VRS. 

However, he was found guilty for the failure to punish the criminal behavior of the SVK, over the conduct of which he did possess effective control. Perišić was sentenced to 27 years of imprisonment.


A. and B. v. State of Israel

Judgment, 11 Jun 2008, The Supreme Court of Israel sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeals, Israel

Two Palestinians living in Gaza, referred to as A and B, were detained in 2002 and 2003, respectively, due to their purported association with Hezbollah. They brought a complaint at the Israeli District Court stating that their detention was unlawful because the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law of 2002, on which their detention orders were based, was not in accordance with the Basic Laws of Israel and infringed principles of international humanitarian law.

After having their case dismissed by the District Court, the plaintiffs appealed at the Israeli Supreme Court. In its decision, the Supreme Court held that the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law was in conformity with the Basic Laws of Israel. In addition, the Supreme Court held that their detention was lawful because there was a chance that they would reconnect with Hezbollah and they could therefore pose a risk to Israel’s national security.


<< first < prev   page 26 of 144   next > last >>