Search results

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. 

Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač, and Zoran Vuković were brought before the ICTY for their roles in the commission of crimes against the Bosnian Muslim civilians between April 1992 and February 1993. During this time, an armed conflict existed between the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims, and the Bosnian Serb Army and paramilitary groups detained Bosnian Muslim women and subjected them to repeated rapes, torture and other mistreatments.

The Trial Chamber found that Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač, and Zoran Vuković were guilty of crimes against humanity and violations of laws or customs of war, sentencing them to 28, 20, and 12 years of imprisonment, respectively.

The three Appellants raised several grounds of appeal, arguing that the Trial Chamber erred in several of its factual and legal findings. Among others, the Appellants argued that the Trial Chamber erroneously assessed the contextual elements of crimes against humanity and war crimes as well as the separate definitions of the charged offences of enslavement, rape, torture, and outrages upon personal dignity.

The Appeals Chamber rejected all grounds of appeal adduced by the Appellants. Subsequently, it affirmed the sentences imposed by the Trial Chamber.

From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. Throughout this period, a number of pro-independence groups formed in order to fight for Timorese independence and combat the abuses perpetrated by members of the Indonesian armed forces and the pro-autonomy militia groups with whom they allied themselves.

One such pro-independence group was the Forcas Armadas de Libertacao Nacional de Timor Leste (FALINTIL). In September 1999, three members of the group, imcluding Carlos Soares, were travelling under orders to a village when they were joined by a fourth individual. Seemingly randomly and without reason, Soares stabbed the fourth member of the group through the back using his spear. The victim died. The Special Panels for Serious Crimes convicted Soares of premeditated murder contrary to the Indonesian Penal Code. His sentence was reduced to 4 year 6 months’ impirosnment, however, on account of his diminished mental capacity at the time of the act. The Court took into consideration his sense of grief, loneliness and sadness as a result of the deaths of 6 of his relatives one or two days prior to the murder. 

In August 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by terrorists loyal to Osama bin Laden. In retaliation, President Clinton ordered a missile strike on the El-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, arguing that it was a base for terrorism. Later, it was proven that the plant had no ties to terrorists. Therefore, El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries brought complaints against the United States in the US Court of Federal Claims.

In March 2003, the US Court of Federal Claims dismissed the complaints as non-justiciable based on the ‘political question doctrine’ (which foresees that courts have no authority to hear or adjudge on matters that raise political, rather than legal, questions).

In August 2004, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the decision of the Court of Federal Claims, finding that the complaints raised a non-justiciable political question. The Court reached this conclusion on the basis of the fact that the President is entrusted by the Constitution to render as enemy property the private property of an alien situated in a foreign country.

On 24 March 1980, Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero was killed in the Chapel of the Divine Providence Hospital in San Salvador. The killing was planned and coordinated by officers of the Salvadoran military, including Alvaro Rafael Saravia. As a result of the influence of these persons, no one was convicted for the killing of Archbishop Romero.

In 2003, the Center for Justice and Accountability (CJA) filed a suit on behalf of relatives of Archbishop Romero against Alvaro Rafael Saravia, who went into hiding after he was served with the complaint.

In November 2004, the U.S. District Court Eastern District of California found Saravialiable for the assassination of Archbishop Romero and awarded a total of $10,000,000.00 in damages.