Search results

In March 2003, a military coalition led by the U.S. invaded Iraq and toppled the regime of President Saddam Hussein. Coalition forces remained in Iraq as an occupying force, engaging in the process of rebuilding the country. During the occupation, the US military contracted with several private military contractors for a wide array of services the US military simply had no manpower for, due to the implications of the occupation and rebuilding process. The use of these contractors has led to certain controversy, mainly because of multiple instances where they were hired to supervise detention centres or to provide security services and ended up torturing or unlawfully killing civilians. These practices led to three big law suits by groups of Iraqis who had allegedly been tortured in prisons guarded and/or maintained by private contractors: Saleh v. Titan Corp., Al-Shimari v. CACI Inc., and the current case Al-Quraishi v. Nakhla & L-3 Services Inc.

The current case revolves around L-3 Services, Inc., a U.S. company that was hired to provide civilian translators of Arabic in connection with military operations. These translators worked at, among other places, military prisons and detention facilities in Iraq, such as the Abu Ghraib prison – notorious for the torturing of detainees – just outside of Baghdad. Adel Nakhla, a U.S. citizen from Egyptian origin, was one of the translators working for L-3 Services at Abu Ghraib. Plaintiffs – 72 Iraqis who were arrested between July 2003 and May 2008 by coalition forces and held for periods varying from less than a month to more than four years at various military-run detention facilities in Iraq, including the Abu Ghraib prison – alleged that they were innocent and that they were eventually released from custody without being charged with any crimes. They filed a complaint before the U.S. District Court for Maryland, accusing L-3 Services and its employees (including Nakhla) of war crimes, torture and other (systematic) maltreatment committed against them during their custody. These abuses included beatings, hanging by the hands and feet, electrical shocks, mock executions, dragging across rough ground, threats of death and rape, sleep deprivation, abuse of the genitals, forced nudity, dousing with cold water, stress positions, sexual assault, confinement in small spaces, and sensory deprivation. They also alleged that their individual mistreatment occurred as part of a larger conspiracy involving L-3 Services and its employees, certain members of the military, and other private contractors. L-3 Services and Nakhla responded with motions to dismiss, arguing that they were immune from prosecution and, relying on the political question doctrine, that the Court had no competence to hear the complaint.

The Court disagreed with defendants. On 29 June 2010, it rejected the motions to dismiss, noting that the alleged behaviour violated national and international law and that defendants, who were private contractors, could not rely on the political question doctrine. The case was deferred for further review under Iraqi law.

During the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Gaspard Kanyarukiga was a businessman who owned a pharmacy in the Nyange Trading Centre, located in Nyange secteur (area). He also owned a business in Kigali.

On 6 April 1994, following the death of President Habyarimana, thousands of Tutsi civilians took refuge at the Nyange Parish, located in the Kivumu community, and were subsequently attacked. These attacks culminated in the destruction of the Nyange Parish Church on 16 April 1994. At the time of the destruction of the Church, about 2000 Tutsi civilians were allegedly confined to the church and were killed during the destruction of the church.

On 6 June 2008 the Prosecution’s request to transfer Kanyarukiga’s case to the courts of Rwanda was denied due to fears that he would not receive a fair trial there.

For the role he played in these events, the Accused was charged by the Prosecutor of the ICTR with genocide or, alternatively, complicity in genocide, and extermination as a crime against humanity. The Trial Chamber convicted him for genocide and extermination and sentenced him to thirty years’ imprisonment.  

The death of Rwandan President Habyariamana on 6 April 1994 reignited ethnic tensions in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi populations that had previously resulted in a civil war in the early 1990s. An Interim Government was established, which developed a plan to eradicate the Tutsi “enemy” with the use of the armed forces and various civilian militia groups including the feared Interahamwe.

The six Accused in the present case all represented military, political or civilian authorities in Butare commune: Nyiramasuhuko was the Minister of Family and Women’s Development; Nsabimana served as the prefect of Butare from April until 17 June 1994; Nteziryayo was a member of the Ministry of the Interior; Kanyabashi was the mayor of Ngoma commune; Ndayambaje was the mayor of Muganza commune and Ntahobali was a leader of a unit of the Interahamwe. Following the replacement of the former prefect of Butare by Nsabimana on 20 April 1994, large scale massacres of Tutsi took place in Butare commune. Thousands were slaughtered with machetes and grenades at Mugombwe Church, Kabuye Hill, Kabakobwe Hill and Matyazo Clinic. In line with the Interim Government’s policy, roadblocks were set up at which Tutsi could be identified, separated, abducted, raped and killed by soldiers and Interhamwe alike. Megaphone announcements were heard throughout Butare town encouraging the Hutu to flush out and eradicate their Tutsi enemy.

The International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda convicted each of the Accused variously for genocide, cnspiracy to commit genocide, direct and public incitement of genocide, the crimes against humanity of extermination, persecution and rape and the war crimes of violence to life and outrage supon personal dignity. Nyiramasuhuko, Ntahobali and Ndayambaje were sentenced to life imprisonment; Kanybashi, Nteziryayo and Nsabimana to 35, 30 and 25 years’ imprisonment respectively.

The case is currently on appeal before the Appeals Chamber of the ICTR. 

Following the 1994 genocide in Rwanda and the success of the Rwandan Patriotic Front in gaining control of the country, members of the former Rwandan Armed Forces (FAR) and the Interahamwe militia who were widely considered to be responsible for the genocide, fled to the Kivu provinces in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. These exiled forces organised themselves into political and military groups designed to oppose the new Rwandan government.

One of these groups was the Forces Démocratiques pour la Liberation du Rwanda (FDLR) led by Ignace Murwanashyaka. The FDLR, composed of a military and a political wing, was coordinated by its Steering Committee of which the Suspect, Callixte Mbarushimana, was a member. The Office of the Prosecutor at the International Criminal Court (ICC) alleges that Mbarushimana was responsible for the FDLR’s perpetration of attacks against the civilian populations in the Kivu provinces throughout 2009. The objective of these attacks, which included murder, rape, torture, mutilation and pillage, was to create a humanitarian catastrophe that would place pressure on the international community and draw attention to the FDLR’s political demands.

Pre-Trial Chamber I of the ICC declined to confirm the charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity against Mbarushimana thereby refusing to allow the case to continue to trial on the grounds that the Prosecution had not proved a number of key elements including the existence of a policy to attack the civilian population, and the existence of a group of persons acting with the common purpose of perpetrating crimes. Mbarushimana was subsequently released from the custody of the ICC and returned to France where he had been living since fleeing Rwanda. 

The armed conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo opposed numerous tribes of different ethnicities in their struggle to gain power and territory, particularly over the Ituri provence in the north-eastern part of the DRC, an area rich in natural resources such as gold and diamonds. One such group, the Union Patriotique des Congolais, was established in 2000 and appointed as its chairman, the Accused, Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. He was also the commander in chief of the armed wing of the UPC, the Front Patriotique pour la Libération du Congo. This armed group was well-known for its use of young children to participate in the hostilities, from fighting, to cooking, cleaning, spying, and being used as sexual slaves.

Trial Chamber I, in the International Criminal Court’s first verdict, convicted Thomas Lubanga of the offense of conscripting, enlisting or using children to actively participate in hostilities. In defining active participation, the Chamber adopted a broad definition so as to include children involved even indirectly, so long as their contribution placed them in real danger as a potential target. Unfortunately, the Chamber did not discuss whether sexual violence against these children also fell within the scope of the offense.