Search results

In 2003, bulldozers manufactured by the American company Caterpillar were used by the Israeli IDF to destroy several houses on the Gaza Strip, killing several Palestinians and an American peace activist in the process. The relatives of the victims and those who lost their homes filed a suit against Caterpillar, arguing that by providing the Israeli military with bulldozers, they were liable for, among other things, war crimes and extrajudicial killing.

The District Court dismissed the claim. The plaintiffs appealed, but the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower Court’s verdict. In its ruling, it devoted most attention to the ‘political question doctrine’ which disallows Courts from exercising jurisdiction over cases which should remain within the realm of other governmental branches. Since the bulldozers had been paid for by the US, the Court reasoned, a ruling on the merits would also be a judicial opinion about important aspects of US foreign policy. Foreign policy should be decided on by the executive branch of the government, not the judiciary, the Court reasoned.    

Viktor Bout, a notorious international arms dealer also known as the Merchant of Death, was alleged of trafficking weapons to several African warlords, dictators in the Middle-East and the Colombian FARC. The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) decided to catch him through a sting operation in which DEA officers posed as FARC fighters and attempted to order about hundred anti-air missiles and weapons "to use against Colombian and United States nationals" in Colombia. The operation succeeded and Bout was caught by police forces in Thailand. In the first instance verdict discussed here, the Thai Court denied the US petition to extradite Bout, stating that the crimes of which Bout was accused did not fall within the scope of the Extradition treaty between the United States and Thailand. Thailand did not consider the FARC to be a terrorist organisation and the Court held that the US accused Bout of a political offense, for which extradition was not possible. Moreover, the Court held that the crimes of which Bout was accused were not punishable in Thailand, as the offense was committed against ‘foreigners outside Thailand’.

Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor from 1975 until 2002 during which time members of the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) and a number of pro-autonomy militia groups perpetrated widespread crimes against the civilian population of East Timor, particularly those suspected of being independence supporters.

In September 1999, the Accused, Carlos Soares, was a member of the Darah Integrasi militia group. During an attack on a village in which the militia, alongside the TNI, burnt down civilian homes and killed the villagers who refused to run away, the Accused shot an elderly man through the neck, killing him. The Accused was convicted of murder as a domestic offence and sentenced to 15 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.

From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. Pro-autonomy militia groups, as well as the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) perpetrated a number of abuses against the Timorese civilian population, targeting particularly those individuals who were suspected of being pro-independence supporters. In September 1999, following a referendum in which the Timorese people voted overwhelmingly in favour of independence, members of the Team Alfa pro-autonomy militia were ordered to locate and kill independence supporters.

The Accused, Jose Valente, travelled with a number of militia members to an elementary school where they were to find and kill two suspected pro-independence supporters. These individuals were found and chased: one victim was shot in the leg by a militia member, and then shot again in the forehead by the Accused. The Accused was convicted of the domestic crime of murder and sentenced to 12 years 6 months’ imprisonment by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes. The Court found that the Accused acted with premeditation: he may not have had the intention to kill the victim as an individual, but he participated in the plan of the militia group to kill pro-independence supporters. 

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 crimes against humanity and sentenced him to 10 years’ imprisonment for having aided and abetted the unlawful arrest and detention of hundreds of Jewish persons from 1942 until 1944, who were eventually deported and exterminated at Auschwitz. Pursuant to French criminal law, Papon was under an obligation to surrender to the custody of the Court as a result. Having applied for an exemption to the obligation to surrender and having been denied, Papon left France for Switzerland. However, the Swiss authorities extradited Papon. Upon his arrival in France, the Court of Cassation held that Papon had forfeited his right to appeal his conviction on the grounds that he had failed to comply with the obligation to surrender.

Papon took his case to the European Court of Human Rights alleging that the provision in the French Code of Criminal Procedure, which provided the grounds upon which his right to appeal was forfeited, violated his right of access to a court under the European Convention on Human Rights. The Court agreed and ordered the French State to pay Papon damages.