696 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 10 of
140
next >
last >>
Physicians for Human Rights et al v. Prime Minister of Israel et al.: Physicians for Human Rights and others v. Prime Minister of Israel and others & Gisha Legal Centre for Freedom of Movement and others v. Minister of Defence
Judgment, 19 Jan 2009, The Supreme Court sitting as the High Court of Justice, Israel
When Hamas, a Palestinian armed resistance group, came into power in Gaza, southern Israel was increasingly subject to heavy missile attacks. On 27 December 2008, the Israeli Defence Forces (IDF) began a large-scale military operation that Israel initiated in the Gaza Strip in order to stop the shooting of mortars. During that operation, also known as “Operation Cast Lead”, the IDF entered the Gaza Strip and attacked targets used by Hamas. In January 2009, two organisations filed a complaint against Israel and claimed that during the operation, the IDF did not protect medical centres and personnel, did not help with the transfer of wounded people, and did not supply electricity to the Gaza Strip. The Israeli Supreme Court found that Israel was acting reasonably and had not violated any international rules.
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.
Soedjarwo: The Ad Hoc Prosecutor v. Lt. Col. Inf. Soedjarwo
Verdict, 27 Dec 2002, Ad Hoc Court on Human Rights, Central Jakarta State court, Indonesia
Lieutenant Colonel Soedjarwo was a military commander of the Indonesian National Army (TNI) in the district of Dili between 9 August 1999 and 20 December 1999. Soedjarwo was found guilty of crimes against humanity because he failed to prevent his troops from attacking the Diocese office of Dili and the residence of Archbishop Belo in Dili on 4 and 6 September 1999. At least 13 civilians who were seeking refuge at these two places were killed during the attack.
Brown et al. v. Rwanda: Vincent Brown aka Vincent Bajinja, Charles Munyaneza, Emmanuel Nteziryayo and Celestin Ugirashebuja v. The Government of Rwanda and The Secretary of State for the Home Department
Judgment (Appeal against extradition), 8 Apr 2009, High Court of Justice, Divisional Court, Great Britain (UK)
Vincent Brown aka Vincent Bajinya and three other men claimed asylum in the United Kingdom after the genocide in Rwanda in 1994. In 2006, Rwanda requested extradition of the four men for their alleged involvement in the genocide. On 28 December 2006, the four suspects were arrested in the United Kingdom.
The men appealed their extradition before the High Court. The judges determined that there is a real risk that the four men would not be granted a fair trial in Rwanda, and determined that the suspects could not be extradited to Rwanda.
Corrie v. Israel: Estate of the Late Rachel Corrie et al. v. The State of Israel - Ministry of Defense
Judgment, 28 Aug 2012, District Court of Haifa, Israel
On 16 March 2003 American Rachel Corrie, together with other International Solidarity Movement members, protested in the "Philadelphi Corridor" in the Rafiah area of the Gaza Strip against the demolition of Palestinian houses in the area. Two bulldozers and an Israel Defense Force (IDF) tank were present. When one of the bulldozers was driving towards a house in order to demolish it, Rachel stood in front of it to protect it and the inhabitants, meanwhile climbing the growing pile of dirt that was formed in front of the bulldozer. At a certain moment she slipped, fell and got stuck under the dirt and the bulldozer. After her fellow protesters made the bulldozer's operator aware of the situation, she was removed from underneath and taken to the hospital, where she died.
Rachel's parents filed a lawsuit against Israel and the IDF for killing or negligently causing the death of their daughter.
The Haifa District Court dismissed their claims, stating that the bulldozer's operator had never intended to kill Rachel and had also not been able to see her due to the "blind spot" in front of the bulldozer blade. Furthermore, it found, Rachel had taken the risk of entering the closed-off area and chose to climb the pile of dirt, thus putting herself in the dangerous situation. The Court concluded that she "was accidentally killed in the framework of a "war-related activity""; therefore, "the State bears no responsibility for the damages inflicted on the plaintiffs resulting from a war-related action".
<< first
< prev
page 10 of
140
next >
last >>