skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: amnesty international canada bccla canada chief defence staff

> Refine results with advanced case search

613 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 29 of 123   next > last >>

Aleksovski: The Prosecutor v. Zlatko Aleksovski

Judgment, 24 Mar 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Zlatko Aleksovski was brought before the ICTY for his role in the commission of crimes against the detainees of the Kaonik prison in the Lašva Valley area of Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the hostilities between the Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Muslim forces, the facility was used as a detention place for Bosnian Muslims. The detainees were subjected to physical and mental mistreatments. Furthermore, they were used as human shields and for trench digging. Aleksovski was the commander of the Kaonik prison from January 1993 till May 1993. Trial Chamber I found him guilty of outrages upon personal dignity as a violation of the laws or customs of war.

The Appeals Chamber held that Trial Chamber I applied the wrong test for determining the nature of the armed conflict and the status of the protected persons. However, it did not reverse the acquittals on the two counts of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.

The Appeals Chamber also agreed with the Prosecution that Trial Chamber I should have found Aleksovski responsible not only for the mistreatments that occurred inside the Kaonik prison but also for those that occurred outside of it. The Appeals Chamber revised the sentence to 7 years of imprisonment.


Serushago: Omar Serushago v. The Prosecutor

Reasons for Judgement, 6 Apr 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, Tanzania

When Rwandan President Habyariamana was killed on 6 April 1994, it reignited ethnic tensions in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi populations, which had earlier in the same decade culminated in a bloody civil war.

Omar Serushago was the de facto leader of the civilian Interahamwe militia, one of the primary perpetrators of the crimes committed against Tutsis and moderate Hutus in the genocide of 1994. In his official capacity, Serushago led a group of militiamen in raids against Tutsis seeking refuge in parish churches, on commercial property, in bishop’s houses, and even those who were detained in the Gendarmerie station jail. Tutsis would then be summarily executed, some personally at the hands of Serushago. Having pleaded guilty to one count of genocide and three counts of crimes against humanity (assassination, extermination and torture), Serushago was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment by the Trial Chamber. By a decision of 14 February 2000, the Appeals Chamber dismissed Serushago’s arguments that the sentence against him was excessively long. The present decision contains the reasons of the Appeals Chamber for having reached this conclusion. 


Furundžija: The Prosecutor v. Anto Furundžija

Judgment, 21 Jul 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Anto Furundžija was the commander of a special unit of the Croatian Defence Council called the “Jokers.” He was brought before the ICTY for the commission of crimes against Bosnian Muslims who were interrogated at the headquarters of the “Jokers” (in Nadioci, Bosnia and Herzegovina) in May 1993. During the interrogations, those detained were subjected to sexual assaults, rape and other physical and mental suffering. Trial Chamber II found Furundžija guilty of torture and outrages upon personal dignity including rape (as violations of the laws or customs of war). Subsequently, he was sentenced to 10 years of imprisonment.

Furundžija appealed against the judgment of Trial Chamber II, arguing that he was denied the right to a fair trial; that the evidence was insufficient to convict him; that the reliance on evidence of acts that were not charged in the indictment was improper; that the presiding judge should have been disqualified; and that the imposed sentence was excessive. 

The Appeals Chamber, unanimously, dismissed all grounds of appeal of Furundžija and affirmed his sentence of 10 years of imprisonment. 


Kambanda: Jean Kambanda v. The Prosecutor

Judgement, 19 Oct 2000, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania

The Accused in the present case was Jean Kambanda, the former Rwandan Prime Minister. On 4 September 1998, he had pleaded guilty to genocide and crimes against humanity (murder and extermination) and Trial Chamber I of the ICTR had sentenced him to life imprisonment. He appealed against that sentence and later requested that his guilty plea be quashed and that he stand trial.

Before the Appeals Chamber, Kambanda argued that he had not been assigned the lawyer of his choice and that even when he finally did receive legal representation the assignment of the lawyer was influenced by the Prosecution. He also accused his defense counsel, Mr. Oliver Michael Inglis, of inadequate representation. In addition, he claimed that the Registry had organized his detention in facilities where he was isolated from other detainees and that he felt oppressed by these arrangements. The Prosecution pointed out that, for a while, Kambanda had refused any legal representation until the Registry told him that in the interest of justice he had to be represented by counsel. He subsequently requested the Registry, in writing, to assign Mr. Inglis as his defence counsel.

The Appeals Chamber dismissed all the grounds advanced by the Accused and upheld his sentence.


Jelisić: The Prosecutor v. Goran Jelisić

Judgment, 5 Jul 2001, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Jelisić was brought before the ICTY for his role in the commission of crimes in the municipality of Brčko (Bosnia and Herzegovina) in 1992. 

Jelisić pleaded not guilty to genocide and guilty to war crimes and crimes against humanity. With respect to genocide, Trial Chamber I found him not guilty due to insufficient evidence to sustain his responsibility. For the crimes to which he pleaded guilty, Trial Chamber I sentenced him to 40 years of imprisonment. Therefore, Trial Chamber I’s acquittal of genocide was appealed by the Prosecutor, and Jelisić was allowed to respond.

The Appeals Chamber allowed the Prosecution’s first two appeals, in which it upheld the argument that Trial Chamber I erred when entered an acquittal without first hearing the Prosecution, and when applied an erroneous legal standard which led it to incorrectly assess the evidence.

The Appeals Chamber was unable to conclude that Jelisić did not possess the special intent required for genocide (the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group). However, the Appeals Chamber declined to reverse the acquittal on genocide.

The Appeals Chamber found an error in Trial Chamber I’s finding that Jelisić was guilty of two murders, when in fact he pleaded guilty to only one.

Jelisić’s sentence was affirmed.


<< first < prev   page 29 of 123   next > last >>