608 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 118 of
122
next >
last >>
Perreira: The Prosecutor v. Francisco Perreira
Judgement, 27 Apr 2005, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
During Indonesia’s occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, the Indonesian armed forces and numerous militia groups in support of Indonesian autonomy perpetrated widespread abuses against the Timorese civilian population, targeting especially those suspected of being pro-independence supporters.
The Accused, Francisco Perreira, was a member of the Mahidi militia group who operated a detention camp where pro-independence supporters were routinely detained, beaten, and subject to harsh living conditions including lack of food, water and sleep. Perreira was convicted by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes for the persecution of four detainees at the camp, whom he had tortured or inflicted severe physical suffering upon. He was further convicted of the attempted murder of another detainee who had succeeded in escaping. Perreira had pursued the victim with other militia members to a riverbank where, acting upon orders to kill, he stabbed the victim. However, his conduct was not the cause of death as the victim was also shot by another militia member. As a result, at sentencing, Perreira was only sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment for both counts of crimes against humanity.
Jean et al. v. Dorélien: Marie Jeanne Jean et al. v. Carl Dorélien
Final Judgment, 16 Aug 2007, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, United States
Lexiuste Cajuste, an elementary school teacher who was arbitrarily detained and tortured by Haitian military forces in 1993, and Marie Jeanne Jean, whose husband was killed during the Raboteau Massacre in April 1994, filed a claim against former Haitian Colonel Carl Dorélien. The plaintiffs claimed that Dorélien was one of the most powerful members of the military regime that ruled Haiti from October 1991 to September 1994 and that, despite Dorélien’s position and influence, he failed to prevent the abuses committed by the Haitian military. In addition, the plaintiffs claimed that Dorélien was responsible for the military discipline and justice but failed to punish his subordinates who committed crimes.
The jury trial found Dorélien culpable for torture, extrajudicial killing, arbitrary detention, and crimes against humanity; and the Court of District ordered him to pay $4.3 million in damages to the plaintiffs.
El-Shifa v. USA: El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries Company and Salah El Din Ahmed Mohammed Idris v. United States of America
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 01cv00731), 27 Mar 2009, United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia, United States
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 November 2005, the District Court found that El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries raised a non-justiciable political question (which foresees that courts have no authority to hear or adjudge on matters that raise political, rather than legal, questions) in asking the Court to adjudge on the President’s powers to designate as enemy property the private property of the chemical plant in Sudan.
In March 2009, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the District Court, holding that the case raised a political question, and therefore barring the court from hearing the matter. El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries attempted to exclude from its appeal the political question doctrine, however, the Court of Appeals found that the other raised claims were ‘inextricably intertwined’ with the political question doctrine and therefore, must be considered together. The Court of Appeal affirmed the District Court’s earlier finding that the raised issues are political questions and hence, non-justiciable.
Golubović : Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Blagoje Golubović
Verdict, 10 Jul 2009, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Section I for War Crimes, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Blagoje Golubović was born in Strganci, Bosnia and Herzegovina, on 18 April 1965. He was charged with participating in the plan of the forces of the Serb Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (later known as Republika Srpska) to kill the non-Serb civilians of the municipality of Foča. Golubović was charged with crimes against humanity.
On 6 July 2009, the Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina dropped the charges against Golubović. On 10 July 2009, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina passed a verdict dismissing the charges against Golubović.
Perković: Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Stojan Perković
Verdict, 24 Dec 2009, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Section I for War Crimes, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Stojan Perković was born on 3 October 1944 in the village of Lađevina located in the municipality of Rogatica. Between June and December 1992, Perković was Commander in the army of the so-called Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina (VRS). In that position, he committed crimes, including murder, beatings, and rape, against non-Serb civilians in the villages of Surovi, Mesici and Varosiste in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Moreover, Perković did not punish the members of his unit for participating in the commission of those crimes. On 24 December 2009, Perković was found guilty for the crimes and sentenced to 12 years in prison.
<< first
< prev
page 118 of
122
next >
last >>