skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: mothers srebrenica netherlands & un

> Refine results with advanced case search

354 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 32 of 71   next > last >>

V15: The Prosecutor v. V15

Judgment, 10 Jan 2014, District Court of Rotterdam, The Netherlands

In October 2012 a group of Somali pirates boarded the Iranian dhow "Mohsen" and took the Iranian and Pakistani crewmembers hostage. They were noted by Dutch navy vessel HNLMS Rotterdam (part of NATO's Ocean Shield anti-piracy operation). When Navy marines approached the ship in inflatable boats (RHIBs) they came under fire from both the Mohsen and ashore. The Rotterdam responded, causing the Mohsen to catch fire, after which it sank. 25 people were rescued out of the water, while at least one pirate died during the exchange of fire.

Of the 25 rescued people, at least four were accused of piracy. They were put on separate trials in the Netherlands and charged with piracy and attempted murder and manslaughter.

In the current case, accused V15 was ultimately acquitted of the piracy and attempted murder and manslaughter charges due to a significant lack of evidence. However, since it was clear that armed violence against the Navy personnel had occurred and taking into consideration that V15 did carry a weapon and had cooperated with the shooters, he was found guilty of complicity in the use of (armed) violence against persons aboard a ship. Considering the grave nature of shooting at unprotected persons in inflatable boats an aggravating factor and weighing this against the harsh living conditions in Somalia and the dire personal situation of V15, the Court sentenced the accused to two years' imprisonment.


Mendonca: The Prosecutor v. Domingos Mendonca

Judgement, 13 Oct 2003, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. The occupation was characterised by violence against the civilian population of East Timor, particularly against those perceived or known to be independence supporters.

The Accused, Domingos Mendonca, was a member of a pro-autonomy militia group known as Tim Sasurat Ablai. Through his involvement with the militia, he participated in attacks on the villages of Orluli and Surirema. At the former, he participated in the beating of two individuals with other militia members; both victims died. In the latter, he participated in a number of acts against the villagers including forcing them to drink a mixture of animal and human blood, destroying their homes and leaving almost 300 individuals homeless, forcing them to cook under threat of death and interrogating them as to their political allegiances.

The Special Panel for Serious Crimes convicted Mendonca of one count of murder and one count of persecution as crimes against humanity. He was sentenced to 10 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.


Habyarimana: Mme Agatha Habyarimana (born Kanziga)

Decision, 15 Feb 2007, Appeals Commission for Refugees (2nd Division), France

Agathe Habyarimana (maiden name: Agathe Kanziga) is the widow of former Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana, whose death on 6 April 1994 marked the beginning of the Rwandan genocide that was to result in the death of some 500,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus within the lapse of a few months. Agathe Habyarimana is frequently regarded as one of the powers behind Juvénal habyarimana’s Presidencey and as part of the inner circle responsible for the planification and organisation of the Rwandan genocide. On 9 April 1994, she was airlifted to France.

In July 2004, she applied for refugee status but her application was denied by the French Office of Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA). By the present decision, the Appeals Commission for Refugees confirmed the rejection and concluded that she had participated in the planning, organising and direction of the genocide in Rwanda since 1990. 


Case of Ahorugeze v. Sweden

Judgment, 27 Oct 2011, European Court of Human Rights, France

Sylvère Ahorugeze was a Rwandan national and former director of the Rwandan Civil Aviation Authority and Kigali international airport. An international arrest warrant was issued against him on the basis of his alleged participation in the crime of genocide (intentional destruction of a national, racial, ethnical or religious group or part of it) and crimes against humanity (crimes committed on large scale including but not limited to murder, rape, torture) committed in Rwanda in 1994. On 16 July 2008, Ahorugeze was arrested in Sweden and on 7 July 2009, the Swedish government decided that he could be extradited to Rwanda. 

Subsequently, Ahorugeze filed an application at the ECtHR.  He claimed that his health was poor, and that his Hutu ethnic background, the prison conditions in Rwanda, and a lack of impartiality and independence of the judiciary were factors that should prevent his extradition to Rwanda. The Court dismissed his case and held that there were no reasons to believe that Ahorugeze would be subjected to inhumane or unfair treatment in Rwanda and that he would not receive a fair trial.


Barbie: The Prosecutor v. Klaus Barbie

Arrêt , 6 Oct 1983, Supreme Court (Criminal Law Chamber), France

Klaus Barbie was a member of the German SS and later the head of the Gestapo in Lyon, Occupied France in 1942. He was wanted by the French authorities for charges of crimes against humanity committed during World War II, during which time he earned the nickname the ‘Butcher of Lyon’ in recognition of his notorious interrogation style.

After the war, he was recruited by the Army Counter Intelligence Corps of the United States, which later helped him emigrate to Bolivia. When the French authorities became aware of his residence in Bolivia, an arrest warrant was issued. Bolivia expelled Barbie and, as he was disembarking a plane in French Guyana, he was picked up by French authorities and detained.

The present decision was his final appeal against the French authorities for having illegally detained him on the basis of a dissimulated extradition. The Supreme Court of France, Criminal Law Chamber rejected his appeal finding that his expulsion was not null and there was no obstacle to proceedings against him. Furthermore, his detention was in the interests of the international community which, through the UN, had agreed to help facilitate the return of individuals suspected of having committed war crimes and crimes against humanity to the countries where they had perpetrated such offences for the purposes of being brought to justice. 


<< first < prev   page 32 of 71   next > last >>