Search results

On 26 February 2015, Syrian citizen Mouhannad Droubi was sentenced by the Södertörn District Court in Sweden to five years in prison for crimes against international law (war crime) and gross assault. Droubi, who fought for the Free Syrian Army against the pro-government forces in the Syrian conflict, had taken refuge in Sweden and was granted residency in 2013. In July 2014, the Swedish police discovered a video of him, along with at least five other FSA fighters, violently assaulting a man who appeared to be a pro-regime fighter with a truncheon and a whip. The decision was overturned several times on appeal, leading to the final judgment of 5 August 2016 in which the accused was sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment.    

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 that the Prosecution did not provide sufficient evidence to support that Aleksovski was responsible for the conditions at the Kaonik prison in the Lašva Valley area of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Accordingly, Aleksovski was found not guilty of the grave breaches of inhuman treatment and wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health. 

However, Trial Chamber I found Aleksovski guilty of outrages upon personal dignity (as a violation of the laws or customs of war) for his role in the infliction of violence on the Muslim detainees and for using them as human shields and for trench digging. Aleksovski was sentenced to two and a half years of imprisonment. 

From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. This period was characterised by a number of abuses perpetrated against independence supporters by members of the Indonesian Armed Forces and local militia groups.

The Accused, Joao Fernandez, was a member of the pro-autonomy Dadarus Merah militia. In September 1999, he (and others) were armed with samurai swords and received orders from the militia leader that they were to go to the district police station and kill all the males. In carrying out this order, the Accused murdered a known independence supporter by stabbing him twice in the back with his sword. This was done in full view of the victim’s daughters. Fernandez pleaded guilty to the charge of murder and he was sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment by the Special Panels. Interestingly, although a number of murders were committed that day in the militia attack, the Prosecutor claims that he did not charge the Accused with murder as a crime against humanity (a more serious offense) due to the lack of evidence.

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.