Search results

Between April and July 1994, as much as ten percent of the entire Rwandan civilian population (75 percent of all Tutsis) was murdered in an ethnic conflict in which the Hutus sought to eliminate the Tutsis. At the same time, an armed conflict was fought between the Rwandan government army (FAR) and the armed forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). The RPF were a rebel army primarily composed of descendants of Rwandan Tutsi who fled from Rwanda in preceding years.

The accused, Joseph Mpambara, fled Rwanda for the Netherlands. He was arrested and brought before the Dutch courts on charges of war crimes, torture and genocide. While the Dutch courts deemed themselves without jurisdiction for genocide, the District Court of The Hague did convict Mpambara for torture.

The Court of Appeal also convicted him for war crimes - inter alia for his participation in a massacre against thousands of refugees in a church - and increased his 20 years' prison sentence to life imprisonment.

Grégoire Ndahimana was Mayor of Kivumu commune (community)in Rwanda in April 1994. Following the death of President Habyarimana, a common plan was realised in Kivumu commune. The purpose of this plan was to exterminate the Tutsis who lived there.

After the President’s death, one to two thousand Tutsi civilians sought refuge at Nyange parish. Only a very small number of these civilians survived the attacks on the parish that occurred on 15 and 16 April 1994.

The Prosecutor of the ICTR charged Ndahimana with genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity for his role in the massacres of Tutsis that took place in Kivumu commune over ten days from 6 April 1994 to 16 April 1994. He was found guilty of genocide and extermination by aiding and abetting as well as by virtue of his command responsibility over the communal police. Ndahimana was sentenced to 15 years of imprisonment.  

Both the Prosecution and the Defence have lodged appeals against the judgment.

On 17 April 1992, the Serb forces gained control over the municipality of Bosanski Šamac (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Following the takeover, they launched a series of attacks aiming to remove the Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Muslim inhabitants from the area. As a result, the Bosnian Croats and Bosnian Muslims were murdered, beaten, sexually assaulted, deported and those who were unlawfully confined, were subjected to various mistreatments. During this time, Stevan Todorović acted as the Chief of Police in Bosanski Šamac (Bosnia and Herzegovina).

On 19 January 2001, Todorović pleaded guilty to the crime against humanity of persecution, and, subsequently, the Trial Chamber entered a finding of guilt on the same day. 

Trial Chamber III balanced the gravity of the crimes, the aggravating and mitigating circumstances in order to determine the appropriate sentence for Todorović. Trial Chamber III considered that the offences perpetrated by Todorović were of serious gravity, and the underlying cruelty of the commission was an aggravating factor. Similarly, Todorović’s position as Chief of Police was further an aggravating factor. Trial Chamber III also took the following mitigating circumstances into consideration: Todorović’s guilty plea, his cooperation with the Prosecution, and his remorse. 

Todorović was sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment. 

In May 1961, Malaya proposed the formation of the Federation of Malaya by amalgamating Malaya, Singapore and the British colonies in Borneo (Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei). Whilst Indonesia did not initially oppose the Federation, it did following the outbreak in 1962 of revolt in Brunei by a radical Muslim movement. From 1962 until 1966, a state of armed conflict existed between Indonesia and the Federation of Malaysia (of which Singapore was part since its merger in September 1963), otherwise known as the Indonesia-Malaysian Confrontation.

It was in the context of this armed conflict that on 14 April 1965, Stanislaus Krofan and Andres Andea set foot on Singapore/Malay soil carrying explosives with the intention of setting them off. Upon apprehension, they claimed that they were members of the Indonesian Armed Forces and had been ordered by their superiors to set off the explosives in Singapore. They were convicted by the High Court in Singapore for unlawful possession of explosives in a security area.

On appeal, the Federal Court of Singapore was asked to determine the applicability of the 1949 Geneva Conventions to Singapore at the time of the offence and determine whether Krofan and Andea were entitled to protections as prisoners of war under the Convention. By its judgment of 5 October 1966, the Court assumed that the 1949 Geneva Conventions were applicable and concluded that the appellants were not entitled to protection as prisoners of war. Although members of the Indonesian Armed Forces, they had been caught in civilian clothing acting as saboteurs. 

Between April and July 1994, as much as 10% of the entire Rwandan civilian population was murdered in an ethnic conflict in which the Hutus sought to eliminate the Tutsis. At the same time, an armed conflict was fought between the Rwandan government army (FAR) and the armed forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). The RPF were a rebel army primarily composed of descendants of Rwandan Tutsi who fled from Rwanda in preceding years.

The accused, Joseph Mpambara, fled Rwanda for The Netherlands. He was arrested and brought before the Dutch courts on charges of war crimes, torture and genocide. Although the Dutch courts deemed themselves without jurisdiction for genocide, Mpambara was initially convicted for torture. The Court of Appeal also found him guilty of war crimes and increased his 20 years' prison sentence to life imprisonment. Mpambara appealed at the Supreme Court, arguing that the previous judgment - especially the use of evidence from witnesses he could not examine and the issuance of a life sentence - was in violation of his fundamental rights (as found in the European Convention on Human Rights, ECHR), namely his rights to a fair trial and to protection against inhumane treatment.

The Supreme Court found the grounds of appeal unfounded, dismissed Mpambara's appeal, and confirmed the Court of Appeals' judgment and sentence.