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 36 of 137   next > last >>

Musema: Alfred Musema v. The Prosecutor

Judgement, 16 Nov 2001, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania

The Accused, Alfred Musema, was formerly director of the Gisovu Tea Factory in Kibuye Prefecture during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. On January 27 2000, Trial Chamber I of the ICTR convicted him of genocide and crimes against humanity and sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Musema submitted six grounds of appeal against his conviction and argued that the sentence imposed by the Trial Chamber had been too severe.

On 16 November 2001, the Appeals Chamber confirmed Musema's conviction for genocide and for extermination as a crime against humanity. The Chamber also upheld the sentence of imprisonment for life for those crimes. Musema’s conviction for rape as a crime against humanity was set aside by the Appeals Chamber on the basis of new evidence which it heard.

With regard to the appeal against the sentence, the Appeals Chamber noted that the quashing of his conviction for rape could not affect the exceptional gravity of the crimes for which he had been convicted. The Accused failed to demonstrate that the Trial Chamber had committed any error that would invalidate the sentence of imprisonment for life. 


Sudrajat: The Prosecutor v. Yayat Sudrajat

Judgment, 27 Dec 2002, Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor, Indonesia

Following violent clashes between two groups, one in favor of independence of East Timor and one against it, approximately two thousand pro-independence activists seek refuge in the church of Liquiça. An attack by an anti-independence militia causes the death and injury of many. It is claimed that several soldiers took part in the attacks. The commander of some of these soldiers, Intelligence Task Force officer Sudrajat, was present in Liquiça. Can he be held responsible for what happened?

Not according to the Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor. The involvement of his personnel could not be established and the Tribunal considered the militia to be completely separate from the military. Thus, the Tribunal established that he had had no effective control over those who actually committed the crimes against humanity. Neither did it consider proven that he assisted in what happened. According to the Tribunal, he was there to look for a solution and tried to stop the actual attack to the best of his abilities. Sudrajat was acquitted, which added to the international community’s concern about the effectiveness of the Tribunal.


Suratman: Ad Hoc Public Prosecutor v. Tono Suratman

Judgment, 13 May 2003, Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor, Indonesia

Following violent clashes between two groups, one in favor of independence of East Timor and one against it, people of the former group sought refuge. In Liquiça, they hid in a church. In Diri, they hid in the house of one of their foremen. The attacks by an anti-independence militia caused the death and injury of many. It is claimed that several soldiers took part in the attacks. The question was whether the commander, Suratman, present in the area at time of both attacks, could be held responsible for what happened.

According to the Indonesian Ad Hoc Tribunal for East Timor, this could not be done. The involvement of his personnel could not be established and it considered the militia to be completely separate from the military. Thus, the Tribunal established that he had no effective control over those who actually committed the Crimes Against Humanity. The Tribunal could not conclude that Suratman had not taken enough action to prevent human rights violations from taking place. According to the Tribunal, he was there to look for a solution to the best of his abilities. Suratman was acquitted, which added to the international community’s concern about the effectiveness of the Tribunal.


M. v. al-Tikriti: M. v. Barzan al-Tikriti

Décision, 22 Dec 2003, Federal Department of Defence, Switzerland


De Carvalho: The Prosecutor v. Lino de Carvalho

Judgement, 18 Mar 2004, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor

During Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, the Indonesian Armed Forces and over 20 local militia groups operated perpetrated widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population, particularly targeting those individuals who were known to be or suspected of being independence supporters.

Saka Loromonu was one such pro-autonomy militia group who, in September 1999, abducted a known independence supporter from the home in which he was staying with his relatives. He was taken to militia headquarters where he was severely beaten, including with a machete. On the orders of the Deputy Commander of the militia, the Accused, Lino de Carvalho, and other militia members took the victim to a beach where he was repeatedly stabbed. His head was decapitated and brought back to the Commander as evidence of the execution. His body was left by the side of the road to serve as a warning to support Indonesian autonomy.

The Special Panels convicted Carvalho of murder as a crime against humanity and sentenced him to 7 years’ imprisonment.


<< first < prev   page 36 of 137   next > last >>