skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: amnesty international canada bccla canada chief defence staff

> Refine results with advanced case search

613 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 15 of 123   next > last >>

Hamdan: Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense et al.

Decision on Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 29 Jun 2006, Supreme Court, United States

Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a Yemeni citizen, was Osama bin Laden’s driver. Captured in Afghanistan in 2001 by members of the United States Armed Forces, he was transferred to the United States detention centre at Guantanamo Bay in 2002. By an order of the President of the United States, Hamdan was designated to stand trial before a United States Military Commission for charges of conspiracy to commit multiple offenses, including attacking civilians and civilian objects, murder by an unprivileged belligerent, destruction of property by an unprivileged belligerent and terrorism. Hamdan’s counsel applied for a writ of habeas corpus alleging that the military commissions were unlawful and trial before them would violate Hamdan’s rights of access to a court.

In this decision, the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Court of Appeal for the District of Columbia and held that Hamdan’s trial by military commission would be unlawful for a number of reasons: conspiracy, with which he is charged, is not a crime against the laws of war, the commissions do not conform to the requirements of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, nor with the rights guaranteed to Hamdan under the 1949 Geneva Conventions.


Mpambara: Public Prosecutor v. Joseph Mpambara

Judgment, 21 Oct 2008, Supreme Court of The Netherlands, The Netherlands

In 1994, an armed conflict between the Rwandese government forces and the Rwandese Patriotic Front and the genocide perpetrated against the Tutsis claimed the lives of hundreds of thousands of citizens in Rwanda and the elimination of approximately 75% of the Tutsi population.

Joseph Mpambara was a member of the interahamwe militia who fled Rwanda for Kenya and finally the Netherlands after 1994. He is charged with having murder, rape, kidnapping, hostage taking and torture against several Tutsi individuals including young children who were hacked with machetes after being forced out of an ambulance with their mother. Since the Accused is a non-Dutch national and the crimes with which he is charged did not occur on Dutch territory and did not implicate Dutch nationals in any way, the question of jurisdiction arose.

In the present decision, the Supreme Court of The Netherlands rejected the appeal of the Public Prosecutor against the earlier decision of the Court of Appeal of The Hague. The Supreme Court confirmed that Dutch Courts have no jurisdiction over the crime of genocide allegedly committed by the Accused. This does not, however, bar prosecution of the Accused for war crimes and torture.


Judgment in the Case of Salih Mustafa

Judgment, 16 Dec 2022, Kosovo Specialist Chambers, The Netherlands

Mr Salih Mustafa, a former commander of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA), was accused of four war crimes including arbitrary detention, cruel treatment, torture, and murder. For three weeks in August of 1999, Mr Mustafa and his subordinates imprisoned six civilians in a barn at a compound held by the KLA in Zllash, Kosovo.  

The court found, through the testimony of the five detainees who survived, that Mr Mustafa and his men subjected the detainees to inhumane conditions and treatment. The detainees were beaten with batons and hatchet handles, burned, electrocuted, threatened, and given urine when they complained of thirst. The court found that Mr Mustafa and his subordinates committed these acts against these victims together as part of a joint criminal enterprise. Their actions and refusal to provide medical care to the victims even led to the death of one of the detainees.

The court convicted Mr Mustafa of the war crimes of arbitrary detention, torture, and murder. The court found that the crime of cruel treatment is included in the crime of torture so it would be unnecessary to convict the accused of both crimes. The court sentenced Mr Mustafa to 26 years imprisonment  and ordered him to pay reparations of €207,000 to the victims.


Case concerning the Arrest Warrant of 11 April 2002 (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Belgium)

Judgment, 14 Feb 2002, International Court of Justice, The Netherlands

On 11 April 2000, a Belgian investigating judge of the Brussels Tribunal of First Instance issued an arrest warrant in absentia against the incumbent Minister for Foreign Affairs of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Abdulaye Yerodia Ndombasi, charging him with offences constituting grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions I–IV (1949); Geneva Conventions Additional Protocol I (1977); Geneva Conventions Additional Protocol II (1977), and crimes against humanity. In the warrant, Mr Yerodia was accused of inciting racial hatred in various speeches in the DRC in August 1998, which had contributed to the massacre of several hundred persons and, thus, he was charged as perpetrator or co-perpetrator of these crimes. The arrest warrant, which asked States to arrest, detain, and extradite Mr Yerodia to Belgium, was transmitted to the DRC in June 2000 and simultaneously circulated internationally through Interpol. On 14 February 2002, the International Court of Justice ruled that the issuance and circulation of the arrest warrant violated Belgium’s international obligations towards the DRC in that Belgium failed to respect, and infringed, Mr Yerodia’s immunity as Minister for Foreign Affairs and the inviolability enjoyed by him under international law. The Court required Belgium to cancel the arrest warrant and inform as such the authorities to whom it was circulated.


Brđanin: The Prosecutor v. Radoslav Brđanin

Judgment, 1 Sep 2004, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Trial Chamber II, The Netherlands

The Assembly of the Serbian People in Bosnia and Herzegovina proclaimed the Serbian Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina in January 1992. Shortly afterwards, a strategic plan was created with the aim to remove the non-Serb population from the newly proclaimed Bosnian Serb state. To this extent, the local police, the newly created army and Serb paramilitary groups engaged in a campaign of attacks resulting in the commission of crimes against the non-Serb population. During this time, Brđanin was the President of the Autonomous Region of Krajina (ARK) Crisis Staff, which functioned as a center for cooperation between the Serb forces committing the crimes.

Trial Chamber II held that there was insufficient evidence to prove that the crime of genocide was committed in the territory of the ARK. Therefore, Brđanin could not be found guilty on such charges.

However, the ARK Crisis Staff's decision to disarm the non-Serbs was found to have assisted and substantially contributed to the commission of the crime of torture, which led Trial Chamber II to find Brđanin guilty of aiding and abetting torture both as a crime against humanity and as a grave breach of the 1949 Geneva Conventions.

Trial Chamber II furthermore found Brđanin guilty of other crimes against humanity and war crimes. He was sentenced to 32 years' imprisonment.


<< first < prev   page 15 of 123   next > last >>