Search results

On 20 October 1965, Osman Bin Haji Mohamed Ali and Harun Bin Said, members of the Indonesian army, were found guilty for the murder of Susie Choo Kay Hoi, Juliet Goh Hwee Kuang and Yasin Bin Kesit. The deaths resulted from an explosion of the MacDonald House in Orchard Street, one of the main streets of Singapore. The accused were sentenced to death.

They appealed the decision by special leave to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The Judicial Committee dismissed the appeal. It held that the appellants were not entitled to the protection generally afforded to army members when captured by the opposing army (protection for prisoners of war). The protection was refused because the appellants had committed acts of sabotage and were dressed in civilian clothes (not in uniform) at the time they planted the explosives and detonated them, as well as when they were arrested.

Jean Bosco Barayagwiza was leader of the Rwandan Hutu political party known as the Coalition pour la Défense de la République (CDR). CDR militia, under his leadership, participated in the 1994 torture and massacre of thousands of Rwanda's Tutsi minority, as well as moderate members of the Hutu majority.

Barayagwiza was also the owner and board member of radio station RTLM, which encouraged the violence against the Tutsi by broadcasting messages of hate stating that the Tutsi were "the enemy", "traitors," and "deserved to die”.

A lawsuit for damages was filed against Barayagwiza by individuals related to persons who died in the massacres. On 9 April 1996, the District Court of New York ordered the award of $500,000 per relative for pain and suffering, $1,000,000 in punitive damages per relative victim, in addition to the $5,000,000 requested for each plaintiff.

Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor from 1975 until 2002. During this period, members of the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) and local militia groups perpetrated a number of attacks against the civilian population, particularly against those suspected of being independence supporters. In 1999, the crimes increased particularly in the wake of the referendum in which the majority of the Timorese people voted in favour of independence.

It was within this general climate of fear that the Accused, Francisco Soaeres, a member of the TNI, raped a woman on a beach. He had previously taken her away from the army base where she was being detained on the pretext of moving her to another town, but had instead taken her to the beach. The Special Panels for Serious Crimes convicted Soaeres of rape and sentenced him to 4 years’ imprisonment. The case was the first conviction for rape by the Special Panels. 

Post-apartheid South Africa continues to be faced with the difficult question on how to deal with past human rights violations. From 1999 until 2005, the South Africa Prosecution Authority attempted to have Wouter Basson convicted. Basson was head of the secret chemical and biological warfare project during the apartheid era. He was charged with a variety of crimes, including murder, fraud and dealing drugs. After several charges were dismissed and Basson was acquitted of all other charges, the prosecutor sought permission to appeal. He mainly held that the judge should have stepped back from this case, as the prosecution had accused him of being biased.

However, the Supreme Court of Appeal held that only the defendant could appeal against factual questions and the Court considered the question of bias to be a factual question. Other reasons given by the prosecutor for appeal were dismissed as well. For example, the Court held that the prosecutor should have appealed against the dismissal of several charges at an earlier stage. 

Post-apartheid South Africa continues to be faced with the difficult question on how to deal with past human rights violations. From 1999 until 2005, the South Africa Prosecution Authority attempted to have Wouter Basson convicted. Basson was head of the secret chemical and biological warfare project during the apartheid era. He was charged with a variety of crimes, including murder, fraud and dealing drugs. After several charges were dismissed and Basson was acquitted of all other charges, the prosecutor sought permission to appeal. The prosecutor argued that the trial judge should have stepped back from the case, as the prosecutor had accused him of being biased. Also, the prosecutor held that several charges should not have been dismissed and that the bail records should have been admitted during the trial proceedings. The Supreme Court of Appeal had denied this request, after which the prosecutor turned to the Constitutional Court.

In the preliminary ruling under review here, the Court refused to grant permission to appeal, although it did held that the issues raised by the prosecution were constitutional matters. Therefore, the Court ruled, these issues fell within the jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court.