Search results

In 2003, bulldozers manufactured by the American company Caterpillar were used by the Israeli IDF to destroy several houses on the Gaza Strip, killing several Palestinians and an American peace activist in the process. The relatives of the victims and those who lost their homes filed a suit against Caterpillar, arguing that by providing the Israeli military with bulldozers, they were liable for, among other things, war crimes and extrajudicial killing.

The District Court dismissed the claim, most importantly because it considered that selling products to a foreign government does not make the seller liable for subsequent human rights violations. Also, the Court stated that it could not prohibit Caterpillar to sell bulldozers to Israel, as this would infringe upon the government’s executive branch’s exclusive right to decide on trade restraints regarding Israel.   

Abimael Guzmán was the founder of the Shining Path, a guerrilla group in Perú. The aim of the Shining Path was to overthrow the Peruvian government. Between 1980 and 2000, the Shining Path was responsible for an extensive campaign of violence, including the killings of thousands of people.

Guzmán was arrested in 1992, and in the same year, a secret military court sentenced him to life imprisonment. This decision was found to have been based on unconstitutional laws in 2003, and resulted in the retrial of Guzmán and the other Shining Path leaders. The charges included terrorism, murder and other offences. The lower Peruvian court found Guzmán guilty of terrorism and other offences, sentencing him, and his second in command, Elena Iparraguirre, to life imprisonment. The other ten co-defendants were also found guilty, and received sentences between 24 and 35 years of imprisonment.

In 2003, bulldozers manufactured by the American company Caterpillar were used by the Israeli IDF to destroy several houses on the Gaza Strip, killing several Palestinians and an American peace activist in the process. The relatives of the victims and those who lost their homes filed a suit against Caterpillar, arguing that by providing the Israeli military with bulldozers, they were liable for, among other things, war crimes and extrajudicial killing.

The District Court dismissed the claim. The plaintiffs appealed, but the Court of Appeals affirmed the lower Court’s verdict. In its ruling, it devoted most attention to the ‘political question doctrine’ which disallows Courts from exercising jurisdiction over cases which should remain within the realm of other governmental branches. Since the bulldozers had been paid for by the US, the Court reasoned, a ruling on the merits would also be a judicial opinion about important aspects of US foreign policy. Foreign policy should be decided on by the executive branch of the government, not the judiciary, the Court reasoned.    

Abimael Guzmán was the founder of Shining Path, a guerrilla group in Perú. The aim of Shining Path was to overthrow the Peruvian government. Between 1980 and 2000, Shining Path was responsible for an extensive campaign of violence, including the killings of thousands of people.

Guzmán was arrested in 1992, and in the same year, a secret military court sentenced him to life imprisonment. This decision was found to have been based on unconstitutional laws in 2003, and resulted in the retrial of Guzmán and the other leaders of Shining Path. The charges included terrorism, murder and other offences. The lower Peruvian court found Guzmán guilty of terrorism and other offences, sentencing him, and his second in command, Elena Iparraguirre, to life imprisonment. The other ten co-defendants were also found guilty, and received sentences between 24 and 35 years of imprisonment. 

The Supreme Court of Justice upheld the life sentence against Abimael Guzmán and Elena Iparraguirre. The Supreme Court also increased the sentences of some of the co-defendants up to 35 years of imprisonment, and confirmed the sentences of others.

The case relates to eight Guantanamo detainees who challenged the determination of the Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) that they are “enemy combatants”. The case comprises the petitions of Haji Bismullah on the one hand, and of Huzaifa Parhat and six other men on the other.

On 20 July 2007, the US Court of Appeals ruled that that, in order to perform a meaningful review of the CSRT determination, it must have access to the information that was available to the CSRT as well. The US Government requested a rehearing or, in the alternative, a rehearing en banc (before all judges of the Court). On 3 October 2007, the Court of Appeals denied the US Government’s request. Once more, the Government petitioned for a rehearing en banc.

The Court of Appeals denied the Government’s request for a rehearing en banc. The Court granted, however, the Government’s motion for a leave to file ex parte (which means legal proceedings conducted in the absence of one of the parties) and in camera (that is, legal proceedings conducted in private without the public or the press being present) declarations which can be reviewed by the judges only.