Search results

Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor from 1975 until 2002. During this period, the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) and numerous militia groups perpetrated a number of abuses against the civilian population of East Timor, particularly those believed to be independence supporters.

The Accused, Gaspard Leki, was a TNI member. In September 1999, Leki was under orders to attack a Timorese village, to burn down the houses and to shoot the civilians. In the course of carrying out these orders, he and five militia members under his command came across a group of persons hiding out in a nearby cave. These persons were forced by Leki to abandon the cave and follow him to another village. During this movement, Leki fired a shot at a target some 200 metres away, believing it to be a pig. In fact, the target was a human being who died as a result of the shot. The Special Panels for Serious Crimes considered that the mistake made by Leki as to the identity of the target he was shooting at acquits him of murder as he did not possess the necessary intention to kill another individual, as required by the applicable law. However, he was convicted for negligence as the Panel considered that Leki should have exercised greater caution in shooting. He was sentenced to 11 months’ imprisonment. 

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, Jose Cardoso, was the Deputy Commander and subsequently the Commander of the pro-autonomy militia group Kaer Metin Merah Putih (KMMP). From May until September 1999, he issued a number of orders to attack both known and suspected independence supporters. These individuals were arrested, beaten and detained for months in cramped and extremely unhygienic conditions without regular access to food or water. One victim had his eat cut off and force fed to him on orders of the Accused. Two women were raped by the Accused. Two other individuals were murdered as a result of the Accused’s orders.

Cardoso was convicted for 9 counts of crimes against humanity by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes and sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment.

Anton Lelan Sufa, Agostinho Cloe, Agostino Cab, Lazarus Fuli, Lino Beno, Anton Lelan Simao and Domingos Metan were members of the ‘Sakunar’ militia, which was organised and controlled by the Armed Forces of the Republic of Indonesia (AFRI), operating within East Timor in 1999 to terrorize civilians who supported East Timor’s independence from Indonesia. The leader of the “Sakunar” militia for Bebo village was Anton Lelan Sufa. On 16 September 1999, in the village of Netensuan, Anton Lelan Sufa ordered the co-accused to attack Anton Beto, Leonardo Anin and Francisco Beto, civilians who supported independence. Anton Beto and Leonardo Anin were both killed by militia members, and Francisco Beto was tied up and severely beaten for about half an hour. These acts were part of a country-wide campaign of violence to intimidate and punish independence supporters.

All men were indicted with murder and inhumane acts as crimes against humanity. Lelan Sufa was charged with multiple forms of liability for these acts, namely both individual responsibility and superior responsibility, because he had ordered the acts. The Court held that Anton Lelan Sufa bears both individual as superior responsibility with regard to the crime of murder as crime against humanity. With regard to the inhumane acts as crime against humanity, he bears superior responsibility by failing to prevent the crime and to punish his subordinates while he had effective control over the militia members, individual responsibility by ordering the crime and individual responsibility by committing the crime.

All accused entered guilty pleas and were sentenced to prison terms ranging from 4 to 7 years. 

Julio Simón was a member of the Argentinean Federal Police during the military dictatorship of 1976-1983 and had been charged with kidnapping, torture, and forced disappearance of persons. Julio Simón argued as his defence that he benefited of immunity from prosecution under the Amnesty Laws of 1986-1987.

In 2001 a lower court had declared the Amnesty Laws unconstitutional. After successive appeals the issue came before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Amnesty Laws were unconstitutional and void for several reasons. First, since the adoption of the Amnesty Laws, international human rights law developed principles that prohibited states from making laws aimed at avoiding the investigation of crimes against humanity and the prosecution of the responsible people. By incorporating the ACHR and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights into the Constitution, Argentina assumed the duty to prosecute crimes against humanity under international law. Because the Amnesty Laws were designed to leave serious human rights violations unpunished, they violated these treaties and the Constitution of Argentina. Moreover, in the Barrios Altos v. Peru case the Inter-American Court of Human Rights held that states should not establish any measures that would prevent the  investigation and prosecution of serious human rights violations.

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni citizen, was Osama bin Laden’s driver. Captured in Afghanistan in 2001 by members of the United States Armed Forces, he was transferred to the United States detention centre at Guantanamo Bay in 2002. By an order of the President of the United States, Hamdan was designated to stand trial before a United States Military Commission for charges of conspiracy to commit multiple offenses, including attacking civilians and civilian objects, murder by an unprivileged belligerent, destruction of property by an unprivileged belligerent and terrorism. Hamdan’s counsel applied for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that the military commissions were unlawful and trial before them would violate Hamdan’s rights of access to a court.

The present decision by the Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia reversed an earlier decision of the District Court for the District of Columbia. The Court of Appeal found that the Geneva Convention was not judicially enforceable so Hamdan cannot rely on it before the federal courts. The Court continued that, even if it were, Hamdan was not entitled to its protection because the Convention did not apply to Al Qaeda members. Hamdan’s trial could proceed before a military commission.