skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: mothers srebrenica netherlands %26 un

> Refine results with advanced case search

474 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 23 of 95   next > last >>

Ostojić: Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Jovan Ostojić

Indictment, 12 Mar 2008, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Preliminary Hearing Judge), Bosnia and Herzegovina

The accused Jovan Ostojić is suspected of having committed crimes against humanity, war crimes against civilians and war crimes against prisoners of war in the period between 14 July 1992 and 31 December 1992 in the so-called Serb Municipality of Bosanska Krupa.

He was acquitted of all charges together with Gojko Kličković and Mladen Darljača on 5 November 2010.


Pinčić : The Prosecutor v Zrinko Pinčić

Verdict, 28 Nov 2008, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Appellate Panel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina

During the conflict in the Former Yugoslavia, Zrinko Pinčić was a member of the Croat Defense Council (HVO). Between November 1992 and March 1993, he came to a house in the village of Donje Selo, Konjic Municipality, were Serb civilians were detained. During this time, Pinčić repeatedly took one woman from the room where other civilians were detained, and forced her to sexual intercourse, holding his rifle by the bed and threatening her that he would bring another 15 soldiers to rape her and other detainees, if she refused him.

The Court found Zrinko Pinčić guilty of the criminal offence of War Crimes against Civilians and sentenced him to 9 years imprisonment. The Court first determined that the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina was applicable to the case, and not the Criminal Code of Yugoslavia (SFRY) that was in place at the time. Next, the Court determined that Pinčić had committed a war crime against a civilian. This was the case, as the criminal acts of Pinčić were committed in violation of international law as the victim was a civilian and was raped; they were committed in time of armed conflict; the act was connected with the armed conflict as Pinčić was a soldier and lastly because Pinčić committed the offence with premeditated intent and wanted to commit it. In determining the sentence, the Court primarily considered the gravity of the criminal offence and the degree of his criminal liability. The Court considered as extenuating circumstances that Pinčić is father of two children, his fair conduct before the Court, his old age and the fact that he was an 80 per cent disabled veteran.


Karera: François Karera v. The Prosecutor

Judgement, 2 Feb 2009, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania

During the Rwandan genocide, François Karera was prefect of Kigali-Rural and member of the MRND.

On 7 December 2007, Trial Chamber I of the Tribunal found Karera guilty of genocide and extermination and murder as crimes against humanity, for his participation in the killing of Tutsis in Nyamirambo sector, at Ntarama Church, and in Rushashi commune. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. 

Karera appealed his convictions and the sentence imposed on him. On 2 February 2009, the Appeals Chamber granted Karera’s appeal in part. It reversed his conviction for aiding and abetting genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity, based on the killing of Murekezi, and for instigating murder as a crime against humanity, based on the murder of Gakuru. The Chamber dismissed all the other grounds of appeal and affirmed the sentence of life imprisonment.


Pinčić: The Prosecutor v Zrinko Pinčić

Appellate Verdict, 2 Dec 2009, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Section II, Panel of the Appellate Division), Bosnia and Herzegovina

During the conflict in the Former Yugoslavia, Zrinko Pinčić was a member of the Croat Defense Council (HVO). Between November 1992 and March 1993, he came to a house in the village of Donje Selo, Konjic Municipality, were Serb civilians were detained. During this time, Pinčić repeatedly took one woman from the room where other civilians were detained, and forced her to sexual intercourse, holding his rifle by the bed and threatening her that he would bring another 15 soldiers to rape her and other detainees, if she refused him.

On 28 November 2008 the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Zrinko Pinčić guilty of War Crimes against Civilians and sentenced him to 9 years in prison. Both the Prosecutor’s Office and the Defence appealed the decision. The Prosecutor appealed the sentencing part of the Verdict, finding the sentence too lenient. The Defence appealed the Trial Verdict because of: essential violations of the criminal procedure provisions; violations of the Criminal Code; erroneously and incompletely established state of facts and the decision on the costs of the criminal proceedings.

The Appellate Panel of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina dismissed all Appeals as unfounded and upheld the Trial Verdict in its entirety.


Mousa v. USA: Ali Zaki Mousa and others, claimants, v. Secretary of State for Defence, defendant, and Legal Services Commission, interested party

Judgment, 16 Jul 2010, High Court of Justice, Queen’s Bench Division, Divisional Court, Great Britain (UK)

This case marks the beginning in a series of proceedings before the British courts with regard to the (existence of a) duty to investigate alleged widespread torture and abuse of Iraqis by British troops during Iraq’s occupation, lasting from 2003 until 2008. The claimant in Mousa v. UK, Ali Zaki Mousa, represents about 100 Iraqis – with the possible addition of 100 more after intervention – who were allegedly tortured or otherwise ill-treated during their detention at British military bases in Iraq, often without being charged (many of them were allegedly released after a period of time without any information on the reasons for either their detention or release). The claimants asked the High Court of Justice to order the Secretary of State for Defence to start investigations into the alleged misconduct. The Court agreed with him, finding that the current investigating bodies were too much intertwined with the army itself and did not constitute independent bodies of judicial review, as required by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). Therefore, the Secretary of State was ordered to initiate proper investigations.


<< first < prev   page 23 of 95   next > last >>