460 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 11 of
92
next >
last >>
Van Anraat: Frans Cornelis Adrianus van Anraat. v. The Netherlands
Decision as to Admissibility, 6 Jul 2010, European Court of Human Rights, France
Frans van Anraat was a Dutch businessman who, from 1984 until 1988, purchased large quantities of the chemical thiodiglycol from the United States and Japan. This chemical was then sold, through a number of different companies located in different countries, to Saddam Hussein’s government of Iraq. After 1984, Van Anraat was the government’s sole supplier of the chemical. The chemical is a key component in the manufacture of mustard gas and was in fact used for this purpose by Hussein’s government who then proceeded to employ the gas in attacks against Iranian military and civilians in the Iran-Iraq war and against the Kurdish population in northern Iraq. The effect was devastating, thousands of individuals were killed and many thousands more were injured with long-term effects including blindness and cancer. Van Anraat was convicted by the District Court of The Hague as accessory to war crimes committed by Hussein and his men. His conviction was upheld on appeal by the Court of Appeal of The Hague and the Supreme Court of The Netherlands. He was sentenced to 16 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.
The present decision is the result of Van Anraat's appeal to the European Court of Human Rights challenging the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts to try his case. His application was rejected as the European Court of Human Rights found, notably, that the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons in warfare was a crime under customary international law at the time the applicant supplied thiodiglycol to Iraq and he could therefore rightly be convicted of violations of this custom of war.
Jević et al.: The Prosecutor v. Jević et al.
Verdict at First Instance, 25 May 2012, State Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina (War Crimes Chamber), Bosnia and Herzegovina
In October 1991, the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina declared independence from Yugoslavia resulting in a civil war between the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) in order to gain control of territory. The enclave of Srebrenica, near the border with Serbia, became a refuge for Bosniak civilians from nearby areas a Bosnian Serb forces obtained greater control over the surrounding area. A UN peacekeeping compound was based at Potocari in Srebrenica composed of lightly armed Dutch peacekeepers who were entrusted with keeping the area free from attack.
From 6 to 8 July 1995, Bosnian Serb forces attacked the Srebrenica enclave and shelled the township and on 11 July 1995, Bosnian Serb troops entered Srebrenica unopposed.
The Bosnian Serb troops proceeded to separate the women, children and elderly men from the military aged and able bodied males. The former group were loaded onto buses and transported to areas under the control of the Bosnian Serb Army. The men were hoarded onto separate buses and, in the coming days, were detained and summarily executed by members of the VRS (Republika Srpska Army) and police units including the 1st Company of the Jahorina Training Center of the Special Police Brigade of the MUP RS (Republika Sprska Ministry of the Interior). Some 40,000 people were forcibly transferred and between 7000 and 8000 men were executed.
Duško Jević, Mendeljev Đurić, Goran Marković and Nedo Ikonić all occupied leadership positions within the Jahorina Training Center with Jević being the overall Commander. The War Crimes Chamber of the State Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina convicted Jević and Đurić of genocide for their participation in Srebrenica and sentenced them to 35 and 30 years’ imprisonment respectively. Marković and Ikonić were acquitted.
Ríos Montt: Rigoberta Menchu et al. v Ríos Montt et al.
Summary of Situation and Cases, 20 May 2013, Constitutional Court of Guatemala, Tribunal Primero A, Guatemala
General Efraín Ríos Montt was a former head of state of Guatemala.
In 2007, Montt was elected for a seat in the Congress. In 2012, his term of office as a member of the Congress came to an end. As a result, his immunity (heads of states are given protection from being suit without their consent) was lifted. Complaints were brought against Ríos Montt for crimes that resulted in the deaths of 1,771 indigenous Ixil people during his 17-month rule.
On 10 May 2013, Ríos Montt was found guilty of crimes committed against the indigenous Mayan population between 1960 and 1996 and was sentenced to 50 years in prison. On 20 May 2013, Guatemala’s Constitutional Court annulled the decision and set back the trial to the proceedings of 19 April 2013.
Ríos Montt is the first former head of state to be convicted of genocide by a court in his own country.
Larmond: R. v. Larmond
Comments on Sentence, 26 Aug 2016, Superior Court of Justice, Ontario, Canada
On 26 August 2016, the Larmond brothers and Suliman Mohamed pleaded guilty to terrorist offences related to the Islamic State and Syria. They had planned to travel to Syria to join the Islamic State and had attempted this travel on several occasions. One of the twin brothers, Ashton Larmond, was the group’s leader and had previously had his passport revoked prior to heading to Syria via Turkey. His twin brother, Carlos Larmond, was arrested at the airport on his way to Syria, via India. Suliman Mohamed had planned to travel to Syria but had not been able to obtain a passport. In their sentencing remarks, Judge McKinnon compared home grown terrorists, such as the defendants, to “a particularly virulent form of cancer that must be aggressively eradicated”. Ashton was sentenced to 17 years’ imprisonment, and Carlos and Suliman were both sentenced to 7 years’ imprisonment.
Sumner v. UK: Sumner v. United Kingdom of Great Britain and Others
Judgment No. S456, 27 Oct 1999, Supreme Court of South Australia, Australia
We often associate genocide with the act of killing members of a specific group, of which there have been many devastating examples throughout history. However, according to the Genocide Convention, other acts can also be regarded as genocide, if they are committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, specific groups. In this case, the plaintiff held that building a bridge to Hindmarsh in South Australia would impede on the culture and way-of-life of the Ngarrindjeri in such a dramatic way that it would lead to the destruction of this group. However, at that point, genocide was not a crime under Australian national law. The plaintiff therefore invoked legislation from the UK, arguing that application of this legislation was possible because of the fact that the UK preceded the current Commonwealth of Australia in governing the Australian continent and its adjacent islands. The judge did not accept this argument and reiterated that even when international law prohibits genocide, someone can only be found guilty of genocide if national legislation explicitly prohibits genocide. The claim was denied.
In 2002, with the adoption of the International Criminal Court Act 2002, genocide became a crime under Australian law.
<< first
< prev
page 11 of
92
next >
last >>