679 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 125 of
136
next >
last >>
Ameziane: Djamel Ameziane v. Barack Obama et al.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. 1:05-cv-00392-UNA), 8 Jan 2010, United States Court of Appeals, United States
Djamel Ameziane is an Algerian national who has been detained at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba) since 2002. In 2005, he filed for a petition for a writ of habeas corpus (a legal action allowing the person to challenge the legality of his/her detention). In May 2009, the US Government filed a motion requesting the designation as ‘protected’ (meaning that it can be shared only with the counsel of the detainee and the Court) of the decision of the Guantanamo Review Task Force approving Ameziane for a transfer from Guantanamo Bay (Cuba).
On 30 June 2009, the District Court denied the request of the US Government since the Government failed to explain why the disclosure of “this one piece of information”, referring to the Task Force decision, would be harmful.
On 8 January 2010, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit overturned this decision on the grounds that the District Court applied inappropriately the standard for determining whether the Task Force decision should be designated as ‘protected’. The Court of Appeals considered that the US Government has met the required standard and, therefore, the District Court should have granted its motion for designation. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals reversed the District Court’s decision.
Muvunyi: The Prosecutor v. Tharcisse Muvunyi
Judgement, 11 Feb 2010, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber III), Tanzania
During the Rwandan genocide, Tharcisse Muvunyi was a Lieutenant Colonel in the Rwandan army and was stationed at the École des Sous-Officiers (ESO) in Butare prefecture.
On 12 September 2006, Muvunyi was convicted by Trial Chamber II of this Tribunal for several acts of genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, and other inhumane acts and sentenced to 25 years imprisonment.
On 29 August 2008, the Appeals Chamber set aside all convictions and the sentence, but ordered a retrial on one count of direct and public incitement to commit genocide.
This is the summary of the retrial. According to the indictment, Muvunyi had spoken at a meeting at the Gikore Centre in Nyaruhengeri commune, Butare prefecture, in early May 1994 and had incited the killing of Tutsis by using Kinyarwanda proverbs that had been understood by the local population as a call to exterminate the Tutsis, violating Article 2(3)(c) of the Statute.
The Trial Chamber found the Accused guilty of direct and public incitement to commit genocide and sentenced him to 15 years of imprisonment.
Abdah et al.: Mahmoad Abdah et al., Petitioners, v. Barack H. Obama et al., Respondents
Memorandum Opinion, 21 Jul 2010, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, United States
Adnan Farhan Abdul Latif, a Yemeni national, was arrested in Pakistan together with other Yemeni citizens as part of a dragnet seizure of Yemeni nationals in 2001 and 2002. They were transferred to the United States Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay (Cuba) in January 2002. In 2004, the men filed for writs of habeas corpus (a legal action requiring a court to determine the legality of the detention of an arrested person).
After partially rejecting a motion to dismiss submitted by the Government of the United States, the District Court stayed the proceedings in order to give the possibility to the Petitioners to appeal the decision. In the meantime, the Petitioners filed for a preliminary injunction (which is a court order requiring a party to do or refrain from doing certain acts), requiring the US Government to provide a 30 days’ notice of any intention to remove the Petitioners from the Naval Base at Guantánamo Bay (Cuba). The District Court granted the motion.
In the present decision of 21 July 2010, the US District Court for Columbia ordered the release of Latif for lack of evidence. According to Judge Henry Kennedy, the US government failed to meet the evidence standard to prove that Latif was part of a terrorist organisation, concluding that his continued detention was unlawful. The case is the first time that the standard laid out in Bensayah v. Obama et al. has been applied concerning the requirement for the government to demonstrate evidence that an enemy combatant is “part of” a terrorist organisation.
Trbic: Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Milorad Trbic
Second Instance Verdict, 21 Oct 2010, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Appellate Panel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina
On 16 October 2009 Milorad Trbic was found guilty of genocide by way of joint criminal enterprise in relation to the events at Srebrenica by the Court of Bosnia Herzegovina. For criminal responsibility to arise via participation in a JCE there had to be a consistent and core group of actors with a common plan or purpose to commit a crime, with the accused to both intend and participate in the commission of that crime. The Court held that this was the case with Milorad Trbic. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison.
Trbic was acquitted of come charges, due to insufficient evidence.
The Defence, Prosecution and victims appealed the Trial Verdict. The Prosecutor appealed on the grounds that the facts were not established correct and complete, and wanted the Appellate Panel to revoke the Verdict in its acquitting part, as well as to order a retrial. As for the sentence, the Prosecutor wanted the Trial Verdict to be reversed and for Trbic to be sentenced to the maximum sentence of 45 years imprisonment. The Defence appealed the Trial Verdict on the grounds that essential provisions of criminal procedure and the Criminal Code had been violated and that the facts were wrongly established and wanted the Panel to change the sentence and to review the facts and evidence again, eliminating the criminal procedure violations and acquit Trbic of the charges. A number of victims also appealed the verdict, specifically against the part of the Verdict on the costs and property claims.
On 17 January 2011, the Appellate Panel gave the Appellate Verdict, judging all appeals unfounded, and upholding the Trial Verdict of 16 October 2009 in its entirety.
Glavaš: Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Branimir Glavaš
Verdict, 29 Nov 2010, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Section I for War Crimes, Panel of the Appellate Division, Bosnia and Herzegovina
The case of Branimir Glavaš marks the first time that a high-ranking Croatian politician was sentenced for war crimes committed during the Croatian war of independence (1991-1995).
Glavaš has always denied any wrongdoing and he protested his detention and trial in Croatia by going on a 40-day hunger strike in 2006. He considered his case to be politically motivated and Nikica Grzić, his defence attorney, alleged that the trial was based on “political, not legal statements.” Nevertheless, after several appeals, on 2 June 2010, the Croatian Supreme Court sentenced Glavaš to eight years’ imprisonment for the war crimes of murder and torture of civilians. Glavaš attempted to evade sitting out his sentence by fleeing to Bosnia, but to no avail: there, he was arrested as well and the Bosnian courts upheld the verdict issued by their Croatian colleagues.
<< first
< prev
page 125 of
136
next >
last >>