skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: g extradition to india

> Refine results with advanced case search

697 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 103 of 140   next > last >>

Aleksovski: The Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski

Judgment, 24 Mar 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Zlatko Aleksovski was brought before the ICTY for his role in the commission of crimes against the detainees of the Kaonik prison in the Lašva Valley area of Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the hostilities between the Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Muslim forces, the facility was used as a detention place for Bosnian Muslims. The detainees were subjected to physical and mental mistreatments. Furthermore, they were used as human shields and for trench digging. Aleksovski was the commander of the Kaonik prison from January 1993 till May 1993. Trial Chamber I found him guilty of outrages upon personal dignity as a violation of the laws or customs of war.

The Appeals Chamber held that Trial Chamber I applied the wrong test for determining the nature of the armed conflict and the status of the protected persons. However, it did not reverse the acquittals on the two counts of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.

The Appeals Chamber also agreed with the Prosecution that Trial Chamber I should have found Aleksovski responsible not only for the mistreatments that occurred inside the Kaonik prison but also for those that occurred outside of it. The Appeals Chamber revised the sentence to 7 years of imprisonment.


Furundžija: The Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija

Judgment, 21 Jul 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Anto Furundžija was the commander of a special unit of the Croatian Defence Council called the “Jokers.” He was brought before the ICTY for the commission of crimes against Bosnian Muslims who were interrogated at the headquarters of the “Jokers” (in Nadioci, Bosnia and Herzegovina) in May 1993. During the interrogations, those detained were subjected to sexual assaults, rape and other physical and mental suffering. Trial Chamber II found Furundžija guilty of torture and outrages upon personal dignity including rape (as violations of the laws or customs of war). Subsequently, he was sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment.

Furundžija appealed against the judgment of Trial Chamber II, arguing that he was denied the right to a fair trial; that the evidence was insufficient to convict him; that the reliance on evidence of acts that were not charged in the indictment was improper; that the presiding judge should have been disqualified; and that the imposed sentence was excessive. 

The Appeals Chamber, unanimously, dismissed all grounds of appeal of Furundžija and affirmed his sentence of 10 years of imprisonment. 


Silaen: Ad Hoc Prosecutors v. Timbul Silaen

Judgement , 15 Aug 2002, Ad Hoc Human Rights Tribunal at Central Jakarta District Court, Indonesia

Timbul Silaen worked as police chief in East Timor in 1999. As such, he was responsible for the security during the independence referendum held in the country on 30 August 1999. Before and after the referendum deadly incidents took place between people in favour of East Timor’s secession from the Republic of Indonesia and the pro-Indonesian supporters. Approximately 1000 people died, 80% of the territory was destroyed, and 250,000 people were forcibly evacuated to Indonesia.

Silaen was prosecuted because as a commander he allegedly failed to stop his subordinates from committing crimes and also failed to bring them to court in order to be prosecuted. In 2002, the Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor did not found Silaen guilty as a commander because it could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that his subordinates had committed the crimes.


Plavšić: The Prosecutor v. Biljana Plavšić

Sentencing Judgment , 27 Feb 2003, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Netherlands

The case encompasses the persecution of Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats and other non-Serbs in 37 municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992, and the role played by Biljana Plavšić therein, as a high level political figure. On 2 October 2002, Plavšić pleaded guilty to the crime against humanity of persecutions and the Trial Chamber found him guilty accordingly. 

In order to determine the appropriate sentence for Biljana Plavšić, the Trial Chamber balanced the gravity of the crimes as well as the aggravating and mitigating circumstances. 

With respect to the gravity of the crimes, the Trial Chamber attached weight to the massive scope and extent of the persecutions; the numbers killed, deported and forcibly expelled; the grossly inhumane treatment of detainees; and the scope of the wanton destruction of property and religious buildings. 

Although the Trial Chamber accepted Biljana Plavšić’s superior position as an aggravating factor, it also took into consideration the following mitigating circumstance: Biljana Plavšić’s guilty plea (together with remorse and reconciliation); her voluntary surrender and post-conflict conduct; as well as her age of 72 years.

Balancing all these factors, the Trial Chamber determined that the appropriate sentence for Biljana Plavšić is 11 years’ imprisonment.


Guterres: The Prosecutor v. Aparicio Guterres a.k.a. Mau Buti

Judgement, 28 Feb 2005, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

Indonesia had illegally occupied East Timor since 1975. Members of its armed forces (TNI) along with approximately 20 militia groups perpetrated a countrywide campaign to terrorise the civilian population, in particular alleged supporters of Timorese independence.

The Accused was a member of the DMP (Dadurus Merah Putih) militia which, in September 1999, was ordered to accompany a Sergeant in the TNI to kill persons who had escaped from a previous massacre. However, the Prosecution was unable to find any witnesses who could attest to the murder of any individuals or the Accused’s involvement. The only eyewitness changed his story multiple times. Consequently, the Special Panel acquitted the Accused of the crime against humanity of murder. 


<< first < prev   page 103 of 140   next > last >>