Search results

Momčilo Mandić, who was Assistant Minister of the Interior of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) in April 1996, was indicted before the Court of BiH in 2006 on allegations of involvement in war crimes against civilians and crimes against humanity committed during the armed conflicts that broke out in the former Yugoslavia in 1991, and which lasted until 1995. Mandić was accused of directing the attack against the Training Centre for Personnel of the BiH Ministry of Interior – one of the events that sparked the war – and of ordering (or at least failing to take reasonable measures against) subordinates to detain and mistreat several non-Serb civilians.

Mandić was acquitted by the Court in first instance, as it could not be proved beyond reasonable doubt that he had been involved in these acts, and neither could it be established that he was, indeed, a superior with the possibility to either order such acts to be committed or to take measures against subordinates who were about to or had committed the acts. The prosecution appealed, but to no avail; on 1 September 2009, the Appellate Panel upheld the acquittal.

In the present case, the Court refused the appeals filed by both the Prosecutor’s Office and the aggrieved party Anđa Obradović and upheld the first instance verdict of 29 June 2009. In this verdict, the accused Ferid Hodžić was acquitted of the charges for war crimes against civilians and prisoners of war in the period between May 1992 and 26 January 1993 taking place in the municipality of Vlasenica.

Al Bihani, Yemeni citizen and Saudi Arabian national, travelled to Afghanistan in May 2001 on jihad (holy war). He became a member of the 55^th Arab Brigade and, by his own admission, acted as a cook. The Brigade carried out a number of operations in support of the Taliban against the United States and its allies in the Northern Alliance. Al Bihani was transferred to the custody of the United States Armed Forces and thereafter to Guantanamo Bay following the surrender of his unit. Alleging the illegality of his detention at Guantanamo, al Bihani petitioned the District Court for the District of Columbia for a writ of habeas corpus. His petition was denied on the grounds that he was an “enemy combatant” within the meaning of the definition of such decided by the Court in its earlier case of Boumedienne v. Bush. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dismissed Al Bihani’s appeal.

Al Bihani appealed the decision arguing that he was entitled to a rehearing. A seven-member panel of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the rehearing and upheld the decision that international law does not limit the President’s powers of detention and consequently al Bihani’s detention is lawful. However, all seven Circuit judges appended opinions demonstrating the importance of the question at hand and their separate reasoning.

During the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Gaspard Kanyarukiga was a businessman who owned a pharmacy in the Nyange Trading Centre, located in Nyange secteur (area). He also owned a business in Kigali.

On 6 April 1994, following the death of President Habyarimana, thousands of Tutsi civilians took refuge at the Nyange Parish, located in the Kivumu community, and were subsequently attacked. These attacks culminated in the destruction of the Nyange Parish Church on 16 April 1994. At the time of the destruction of the Church, about 2000 Tutsi civilians were allegedly confined to the church and were killed during the destruction of the church.

On 6 June 2008 the Prosecution’s request to transfer Kanyarukiga’s case to the courts of Rwanda was denied due to fears that he would not receive a fair trial there.

For the role he played in these events, the Accused was charged by the Prosecutor of the ICTR with genocide or, alternatively, complicity in genocide, and extermination as a crime against humanity. The Trial Chamber convicted him for genocide and extermination and sentenced him to thirty years’ imprisonment.  

On 14 February 2005, a bomb in downtown Beirut exploded, killing 22 people, including the former Prime Minister of Lebanon, Rafik Hariri. The Special Tribunal for Lebanon was established by the Security Council in order to prosecute persons responsible for the bombing.

In its interlocutory decision, the Appeals Chamber interpreted the STL Statute to require application of substantive Lebanese law as applied by Lebanese courts, but not before noting that binding international obligations, including customary international law, should inform any such interpretation. The Appeals Chamber held, inter alia, that not only does a customary rule exists between states to suppress terrorist act, but that terrorism is an individual international crime under customary law.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon Appeals Chamber examined state practice and binding international covenants to assert that the crime of terrorism is “commonly accepted at the international level.” As such, the Chamber derived the key components in formulating a general definition of terrorism: (1) the perpetration of a criminal act; (2) the intent to spread fear among the population or coerce a national or international authority to take some action; (3) and the act involves a transnational element.  For the first time, a tribunal of international character has established the existence of a customary rule of international law recognizing an international crime of terrorism in times of peace.