skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: canadian association against impunity caai anvil mining ltd

> Refine results with advanced case search

683 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 30 of 137   next > last >>

Sarmento (Benjamin) & Tilman (Romeiro): The Prosecutor v. Benjamin Sarmento & Romeiro Tilman

Judgement, 16 Jul 2003, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

During Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, a number of pro-autonomy militia groups carried out attacks on the Timorese population, particularly targeting those suspected of being independence supporters.

The Accused, Benjamin Sarmento and Romeiro Tilman, were deputy commanders in the Tim Sasurat Ablai militia group, which operated in Same Sub-District of East Timor. They gave orders for the murder of all independence supporters in a number of villagers and participated directly in some of those murders, for example by stabbing victims with a spear or beating them with sticks. They also ordered the deportation of approximately 15 000 East Timorese villagers into West Timor, threatening them with death if they resisted. Their orders were carried out by the militia members under their authority. Although the Prosecutor initially charged both Accused with a greater number of offenses including unlawful imprisonment, the remaining charges were withdrawn after the Accused pleaded guilty: Sarmento to four counts of murder and one count of deportation as crimes against humanity, Tilman to one count of murder and one count of deportation. The Special Panels sentenced Sarmento to 12 years’ imprisonment and Tilman to 8 years’ imprisonment. 


Soares (Marcelino): The Prosecutor v. Marcelino Soares

Judgement, 11 Dec 2003, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

East Timor was occupied by Indonesia from 1975 until it achieved independence in 2002. Throughout this time, the Indonesian Armed Force (TNI) and numerous militia groups perpetrated a nationwide campaign to terrorise the civilian population, particularly independence supporters.

Soares was a village-level commander in the TNI, in command of Timorese members of the TNI. In April 1999, he and other TNI members encountered a group of anti-resistance supporters. The three that did not manage to escape were taken away on the orders of Soares and repeatedly beaten with iron bars, machetes and knives and burned with hot belt buckles. One victim died, a second succeeded in escaping, and a third was released following the intervention of a family member. Soares was convicted of the crimes against humanity of murder, torture and persecution and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment. His was the first trial of a TNI member by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes. 


Kamuhanda: The Prosecutor v. Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda

Judgement, 22 Jan 2004, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber II), Tanzania

On 22 January 2004, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR found Jean de Dieu Kamuhanda, former Rwandan Minister of Higher Education and Scientific Research, guilty on two counts of genocide and extermination as a crime against humanity. The Tribunal sentenced him to prison for the remainder of his life.

The Trial Chamber found the Accused not guilty of five counts in the nine counts indictment against him. They included conspiracy to commit genocide, rape and other inhumane acts as crimes against humanity, and two counts of violations of the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II. The Chamber also dismissed two counts of complicity in genocide and murder as a crime against humanity.

In reaching its guilty verdict on two counts, the Trial Chamber found that  Kamuhanda had the intent to destroy the Tutsi ethnic group in whole or in part and was individually criminally responsible for instigating, ordering, aiding and abetting genocide against Tutsi by virtue of his role in the killing of members of the Tutsi ethnic group in the Gikomero Parish Compound where he ordered Interahamwe militia, soldiers, and policemen to kill the Tutsis. The Trial Chamber also found that a large number of Tutsi were exterminated as a direct result of Kamuhanda’s participation by ordering, instigating, aiding and abetting the attack at the Gikomero Parish compound.


Perreira: The Prosecutor v. Francisco Perreira

Judgement, 27 Apr 2005, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

During Indonesia’s occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, the Indonesian armed forces and numerous militia groups in support of Indonesian autonomy perpetrated widespread abuses against the Timorese civilian population, targeting especially those suspected of being pro-independence supporters.

The Accused, Francisco Perreira, was a member of the Mahidi militia group who operated a detention camp where pro-independence supporters were routinely detained, beaten, and subject to harsh living conditions including lack of food, water and sleep. Perreira was convicted by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes for the persecution of four detainees at the camp, whom he had tortured or inflicted severe physical suffering upon.  He was further convicted of the attempted murder of another detainee who had succeeded in escaping. Perreira had pursued the victim with other militia members to a riverbank where, acting upon orders to kill, he stabbed the victim. However, his conduct was not the cause of death as the victim was also shot by another militia member. As a result, at sentencing, Perreira was only sentenced to 3 years’ imprisonment for both counts of crimes against humanity. 


Simón et al.: Julio Simón et al. v. Public Prosecutor

Corte Suprema: Fallo anulando las leyes de amnistia, 14 Jun 2005, Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación (Supreme Court), Argentina, Argentina

Julio Simón was a member of the Argentinean Federal Police during the military dictatorship of 1976-1983 and had been charged with kidnapping, torture, and forced disappearance of persons. Julio Simón argued as his defence that he benefited of immunity from prosecution under the Amnesty Laws of 1986-1987.

In 2001 a lower court had declared the Amnesty Laws unconstitutional. After successive appeals the issue came before the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court ruled that the Amnesty Laws were unconstitutional and void for several reasons. First, since the adoption of the Amnesty Laws, international human rights law developed principles that prohibited states from making laws aimed at avoiding the investigation of crimes against humanity and the prosecution of the responsible people. By incorporating the ACHR and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights into the Constitution, Argentina assumed the duty to prosecute crimes against humanity under international law. Because the Amnesty Laws were designed to leave serious human rights violations unpunished, they violated these treaties and the Constitution of Argentina. Moreover, in the Barrios Altos v. Peru case the Inter-American Court of Human Rights held that states should not establish any measures that would prevent the  investigation and prosecution of serious human rights violations.


<< first < prev   page 30 of 137   next > last >>