skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: queen on application maya evans secretary state defence

> Refine results with advanced case search

696 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 106 of 140   next > last >>

Habré: Association des Victimes des Crimes et Répressions Politiques au Tchad (AVCRP) et al. v. Hissène Habré

Judgment, 20 Mar 2001, Supreme Court of Senegal, Senegal

Hissène Habré, currently a resident of Senegal, was the President of the Republic of Chad from 1982 until 1990. During that time, he established a brutal dictatorship which, through its political police, the Bureau of Documentation and Security (Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité (DDS)), caused the deaths of tens of thousands of individuals. He was indicted by the investigating judge in Senegal for complicity in crimes of torture committed in Chad.

The present decision of the Supreme Court upheld a decision of the Court of Appeal of Dakar barring criminal proceedings against Habré on the grounds that the Senegalese courts lacked jurisdiction to prosecute foreign nationals for acts of torture committed outside Senegal. The Supreme Court found that there was no provision in domestic legislation establishing jurisdiction over such offences.


Soares (Carlos Carmona): The Prosecutor v. Carlos Soares Carmona

Judgement, 25 Apr 2001, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

Unlike the politically motivated crimes that are usually dealt with by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes as a result of Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, the present case holds no links to these events. A father who suspected his daughter’s illness to be the result of black magic ordered the Accused, Carlos Soares Carmona, and others, to find the man responsible and bring him to his home. The man is brought back and, by placing saliva on the girl’s forehead, wakes her from a state of unconsciousness. The man is tied to a chair, questioned and beaten by the Accused on the orders of the father. He confesses to practising black magic, particularly against children, but resolves never to do so again. A reconciliation occurs and two bottles of a local alcoholic drink are consumed. After everyone departs the home, the Accused returns to find the man alone and proceeds to stab him in the chest. He dies as a result of his wounds. The Accused is convicted by the Special Panels for murder and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment. His defence of intoxication is dismissed absent evidence to the contrary. 


Valente: The Public Prosecutor v. Jose Valente

Judgement, 19 Jun 2001, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

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. 


Fernandez (Joao): The Prosecutor v. Joao Fernandez

Appeals Judgement, 29 Jul 2001, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

In the first appeals judgment from a case before the Special Panels for Serious Crimes, the Court of Appeal of East Timor was seized by Joao Fernandez, a member of the Dadurus Merah militia group, which operated in East Timor during Indonesia’s occupation of the latter. Fernandez had been convicted by the Special Panels and sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment for murder after he pleaded guilty to stabbing a village chief twice in the back with his samurai sword until the chief died.

On appeal, he argued that the fact that he was acting on the orders of the militia chief and the Indonesian Armed Forces should have secured his acquittal before the Special Panels. The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal finding that, on the basis of the proven facts, Fernandez did intentionally and with premeditation murder the village chief. The Indonesian Penal Code does not provide that superior orders may exclude criminal responsibility, unless those orders were given by a competent authority. Neither the militia chief nor the Indonesian Armed Forces had the legal competence to order the killing of individuals, nor was Fernandez under a legal obligation to follow those orders. The Court of Appeal also upheld his sentence. 


Kupreškić et al.: The Prosecutor v. Zoran Kupreškić, Mirjan Kupreškić, Vlatko Kupreškić, Drago Josipović, Vladimir Šantić

Appeal Judgement, 23 Oct 2001, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Zoran Kupreškić, Mirjan Kupreškić, Vlatko Kupreškić, Drago Josipović, and Vladimir Šantić were brought before the ICTY for their roles in the commission of crimes against the Bosnian Muslim population of the village of Ahmići in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In April 1993, the Bosnian Croat forces attacked the village, aiming to remove the Muslim inhabitants through the commission of crimes against them. The attack resulted in the deaths of over a hundred Muslim inhabitants, numerous others were wounded and Muslim houses and mosques were destroyed. Trial Chamber II convicted Zoran Kupreškić, Mirjan Kupreškić, Vlatko Kupreškić, Drago Josipović, Vladimir Šantić of crimes against humanity.

The Appeals Chamber found errors in Trial Chamber II’s assessment of certain key evidence and concluded that the remaining evidence was insufficient to uphold the convictions of Zoran, Mirjan, and Vlatko Kupreškić. Accordingly, the Appeals Chamber acquitted them of all charges.

The Appeals Chamber also found factual errors in Trial Chamber II’s assessment of the role and participation of Drago Josipović and Vladimir Šantić in the attacks. The implication of these errors warranted a reduction of sentence, and therefore, the Appeals Chamber sentenced Josipović to 12, and Šantić to 18 years of imprisonment. 


<< first < prev   page 106 of 140   next > last >>