697 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 15 of
140
next >
last >>
Bouzari v. Iran: Houshang Bouzari, Fereshteh Yousefi, Shervin Bouzari and Narvan Bouzari v. Islamic Republic of Iran
Judgment on appeal from the judgment of Justice Katherine E. Swinton of the Superior Court of Justice dated May 1, 2002, 30 Jun 2004, Court of Appeal for Ontario, Canada
In June 1993, Houshang Bouzari was in Tehran for business when he refused to accept the assistance offered by the then Iranian President for bringing into effect a project in an oil and gas field in Iran. Following Bouzari’s refusal to accept the offer, agents of the state of Iran entered his apartment, robbed and abducted him. He was put into prison where he was held for several months. After Bouzari was released in 1994, he and his family fled to Europe and eventually ended up in Canada in 1998.
On 24 November 2000, the Bouzari’s brought an action before the Superior Court of Justice in Ontario against the Islamic Republic of Iran and asked for compensation for damages suffered. On 1 May 2002, the Court dismissed the case because it did not have authority (jurisdiction) to hear the case as the claim was made against a foreign state.
On 30 June 2004, the Court of Appeal affirmed the decision of the Superior Court of Justice.
Al Anfal
Special Verdict, 24 Jul 2007, Iraqi High Tribunal (Second Criminal Court), Iraq
In 1988 the Iraqi government, under the leadership of Saddam Hussein launched a military campaign against the Kurdish population residing in northern Iraq. In eight operations from February until September of that year, both conventional and chemical weapons were deployed against the citizens of Kurdish villages resulting in the deaths and injury of hundreds of thousands. Others were executed in the following raids, their homes were looted and entire villages were burned to the ground. Others still were transported to prison camps where they were starved and detained in inhumane conditions. This campaign became known as the Al Anfal campaign and was the subject of the Iraqi High Tribunal’s second case (the first one being the Al Dujail-trial).
Seven defendants, including Saddam Hussein and his cousin Ali Hassan Al-Majid ("Chemical Ali"), were brought before the Court. Charges against Hussein were dropped when he was executed in the course of the trial as a result of his conviction in another proceeding. By a verdict of 24 June 2007, the Tribunal convicted five of the remaining six defendants for charges of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes. One of defendant, Tahir Tawfiq Yusif Al-'Ani, was acquitted for lack of evidence. Chemical Ali and two military commanders were sentenced to death by hanging; the other two were sentenced to life imprisonment.
Twahirwa: Public Ministry v. François Twahirwa
Judgment, 16 Jun 1999, Tribunal of First Instance of Kibungo (Sake) (Special Chamber), Rwanda
François Twahirwa was a government official in Rukumberi. During the genocide in Rwanda in 1994, Twahirwa had engaged in organising, inciting and supervising the genocide. He had led meetings where the murder of Tutsi was the objective, he had given instructions to others to kill Tutsi and supervised the operations. Twahirwa was an advisor to the Minister of Public Service and member of the MRND political party and as such, was aware of the fact that Tutsi were being pursued and exterminated throughout the country.
He was charged with genocide, crimes against humanity, being a member, organiser and leader of a criminal organisation, premeditated murder, damage to property, committing an attack with the objective of devastation, pillage or slaughter and non-assistance to persons in danger.
The Court concluded that Twahirwa was “an organizer, inciter, supervisor and one who enlisted others”, and found evidence that he directed others to commit genocide and that he possessed the specific intent necessary for the crime of genocide. The Court convicted Twahirwa of genocide, criminal association and attacks with the objective of devastation, pillage or slaughter. He was acquitted from the other charges due to lack of evidence, but this did not help him: he was sentenced to death.
Maher H.: Prosecutor v. Maher H.
Judgment, 1 Dec 2014, District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands
Maher H.’s case is the first conviction in the Netherlands of a Dutch ‘foreign fighter’ returning from Syria. He was convicted on 1 December 2014 and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment by the District Court in The Hague. Although it was not exactly clear what Maher H. had done in Syria, the Court found enough evidence to determine, among other things, that he was guilty of preparing to commit terrorist crimes, including murder and manslaughter. The Court based its decision on the fact that he had actually been to Syria and participated in the armed conflict there as well as his support for the jihad. Factors such as Maher H.’s decision to join a jihadi armed group in Syria that aimed to destroy Syria’s political structure and establish an Islamic State were also considered relevant in showing his terrorist intent. The Court moreover convicted Maher H. of disseminating inciting videos, pictures and a document. However, he was acquitted of conspiring to commit a terrorist offence due to a lack of evidence. This decision was subsequently appealed by the defendant.
Akayesu: The Prosecutor v. Jean-Paul Akayesu
Judgement / Sentence, 2 Sep 1998, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber I), Tanzania
The present judgment constitutes the first-ever judgment by an international court for the crime of genocide. The Accused, Jean-Paul Akayesu, was the Bourgmestre (mayor) of Taba and was indicted on 15 counts of genocide, crimes against humanity and violations of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II thereto.
On 2 September 1998, Trial Chamber I of the ICTR unanimously found Akayesu guilty of nine out of the 15 counts on which he was charged, and not guilty of six counts in his Indictment. Specifically, he was found guilty of genocide, direct and public incitement to commit genocide, and crimes against humanity (extermination, murder, torture, rape, and other inhumane acts).
The Trial Chamber found that the aggravating factors far outweighed the mitigating factors, especially in light of the fact that Akayesu had consciously chosen to participate in the genocide. For this reason, the Chamber imposed several terms of imprisonment on Akayesu, noting that each sentence should be served concurrently. Hence, it directed that he should serve a single sentence of life imprisonment.
<< first
< prev
page 15 of
140
next >
last >>