169 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 29 of
34
next >
last >>
A. and B. v. State of Israel
Judgment, 11 Jun 2008, The Supreme Court of Israel sitting as the Court of Criminal Appeals, Israel
Two Palestinians living in Gaza, referred to as A and B, were detained in 2002 and 2003, respectively, due to their purported association with Hezbollah. They brought a complaint at the Israeli District Court stating that their detention was unlawful because the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law of 2002, on which their detention orders were based, was not in accordance with the Basic Laws of Israel and infringed principles of international humanitarian law.
After having their case dismissed by the District Court, the plaintiffs appealed at the Israeli Supreme Court. In its decision, the Supreme Court held that the Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law was in conformity with the Basic Laws of Israel. In addition, the Supreme Court held that their detention was lawful because there was a chance that they would reconnect with Hezbollah and they could therefore pose a risk to Israel’s national security.
El Hage et al.: United States of America v. Mohamed Sadeek Odeh, Mohamed Rashed Daoud Al-’Owhali, Wadih El Hage
Appeals Decision, 24 Nov 2008, Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Unites States of America, United States
Wadih El-Hage, 40, is a naturalised American citizen who was born in Lebanon. He was Osama bin Laden's personal secretary. He was accused of being the key organiser of the Kenya cell and of setting up front companies in Kenya for Al Qaeda. He left Kenya almost a year before the bombings, after being questioned by the FBI in Africa. At the time of the bombings, he was living in Arlington, Texas, with his wife, April, and seven children. El Hage claimed he only worked for bin Laden in legitimate businesses and had no contact with him since 1994. El Hage was charged with conspiracy to murder Americans.
On 29 May 2001, El Hage was convicted for conspiracy to kill United States officers and employees engaging in official duties and conspiracy to destroy buildings and property of the United States. In addition, he was found guilty of giving false statements to a federal jury (perjury). On the basis of this conviction, El Hage was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of being released.
On 24 November 2008, the Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction of El Hage and returned the judgment for reconsideration of the sentence because the District Court made procedural errors. El Hage was sentenced again to life imprisonment.
Doe v. Saravia: J. Doe v. Alvaro Rafael Saravia et al.
Judgment, 24 Nov 2004, United States District Court Eastern District of California, United States
On 24 March 1980, Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero was killed in the Chapel of the Divine Providence Hospital in San Salvador. The killing was planned and coordinated by officers of the Salvadoran military, including Alvaro Rafael Saravia. As a result of the influence of these persons, no one was convicted for the killing of Archbishop Romero.
In 2003, the Center for Justice and Accountability (CJA) filed a suit on behalf of relatives of Archbishop Romero against Alvaro Rafael Saravia, who went into hiding after he was served with the complaint.
In November 2004, the U.S. District Court Eastern District of California found Saravialiable for the assassination of Archbishop Romero and awarded a total of $10,000,000.00 in damages.
Lipietz et al.: Société Nationale des Chemis de Fer Francais v. Georges Lipietz and A
Judgment, 27 Mar 2007, Administrative Court of Appeal of Bordeaux, France
Georges Lipietz and his half-brother were arrested in southern France in 1944 on account of their Jewish descent. They were deported to an internment camp at Drancy via Toulouse and Paris.
Although the internment camp was liberated in August 1944 and the Lipietz brothers were freed, they sued the French state and the French National Railway Company (SNCF) for complicity in their deportation, as they had been transported by French rail and detained at the authority of the Home Secretary. Having initially won their case before the Administrative Court of Toulouse and having been awarded 61 000 Euros in damages, the decision was reversed on appeal by the Administrative Court of Appeal of Bordeaux. In the present decision, the Court held that the SNCF were acting under the command of the German authorities and could not therefore be held responsible.
Glavaš: Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Branimir Glavaš
Verdict, 29 Nov 2010, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Section I for War Crimes, Panel of the Appellate Division, Bosnia and Herzegovina
The case of Branimir Glavaš marks the first time that a high-ranking Croatian politician was sentenced for war crimes committed during the Croatian war of independence (1991-1995).
Glavaš has always denied any wrongdoing and he protested his detention and trial in Croatia by going on a 40-day hunger strike in 2006. He considered his case to be politically motivated and Nikica Grzić, his defence attorney, alleged that the trial was based on “political, not legal statements.” Nevertheless, after several appeals, on 2 June 2010, the Croatian Supreme Court sentenced Glavaš to eight years’ imprisonment for the war crimes of murder and torture of civilians. Glavaš attempted to evade sitting out his sentence by fleeing to Bosnia, but to no avail: there, he was arrested as well and the Bosnian courts upheld the verdict issued by their Croatian colleagues.
<< first
< prev
page 29 of
34
next >
last >>