Search results

Predrag Kujundžić was born on 30 January 1961 in the village of Suho Polje in the municipality of Doboj, Bosnia and Herzegovina. Kujundžić was the commander of the Predini vukovi military unit, which functioned as part of the army of the Republika Srpska.

The Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina alleged that on 12 June 1992, Kujundžić occupied the village of Čivčije Bukovačke, and subsequently blew up the village’s mosque, plundered and set on fire some houses, and ordered that all Bosniak men gathered in front of the village’s culture center. After the men (160 in total) were gathered, they were exposed to a several hours’ long physical and mental abuse by Kujundžić and his unit members. Subsequently, all men were taken to the Perčin disco camp located in the place of Vila in the Doboj municipality, where they were confined on inadequate premises and exposed to every-day abuses by various groups of soldiers who could freely enter the camp. 

On 4 October 2010, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Kujundžić guilty and sentenced him to 17 years imprisonment.

During the Rwandan genocide of 1994, Gaspard Kanyarukiga was a businessman who owned a pharmacy in the Nyange Trading Centre, located in Nyange secteur (area). He also owned a business in Kigali.

On 6 April 1994, following the death of President Habyarimana, thousands of Tutsi civilians took refuge at the Nyange Parish, located in the Kivumu community, and were subsequently attacked. These attacks culminated in the destruction of the Nyange Parish Church on 16 April 1994. At the time of the destruction of the Church, about 2000 Tutsi civilians were allegedly confined to the church and were killed during the destruction of the church.

On 6 June 2008 the Prosecution’s request to transfer Kanyarukiga’s case to the courts of Rwanda was denied due to fears that he would not receive a fair trial there.

For the role he played in these events, the Accused was charged by the Prosecutor of the ICTR with genocide or, alternatively, complicity in genocide, and extermination as a crime against humanity. The Trial Chamber convicted him for genocide and extermination and sentenced him to thirty years’ imprisonment.  

Colonel Abdi Aden Magan, the defendant, was a member of the Marehan sub-clan of the Darod clan and held high positions (as Colonel and Chief) at the National Security Service (NSS) of Somalia. The plaintiff, Abukar Hassan Ahmed, was a human rights attorney and law professor at the Somali National University. He was detained at the NSS for approximately three months. During his detention, he suffered severe physical and psychological injuries.  Ahmed claimed that, as a Chief of NSS Investigations, Colonel Magan was responsible for ordering and participating in his interrogation and torture.

In the period between January and June 1999, the Serb forces conducted a campaign of attacks against the Albanian population of Kosovo, with the aim to remove them from the region. The bodies of the Kosovo Albanians were concealed in centers near Belgrade and later buried in secret mass graves. Ðorđević, who was the head of the police forces, was charged with war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The Chamber came to the conclusion that Ðorđević participated in a common plan to eliminate the Albanian population of Kosovo, and that his role was indispensable for the fulfillment of the operation.

The Chamber found him guilty of aiding and abetting the charged crimes due to his direct involvement in the concealing of bodies murdered by the Serb forces. He also failed to conduct an investigation of these crimes, which was sufficient for his conviction. Ðorđević was sentenced to 27 years of imprisonment.

Several villagers from Aceh, Indonesia, filed a civil suit against oil and gas company Exxon Mobil. They argued that the company carried responsibility for human rights violations committed by Indonesian security forces by hiring these forces and because Exxon Mobil knew or should have known that human rights violations were being committed.

In an appeal against two previous rulings in this case, plaintiffs held that they should be allowed to sue Exxon for violations of the law of nations and for violations of state law. The question whether they were allowed to sue for violations of the law of nations hinged primarily on whether corporations can be sued for these violations and whether it is possible to sue for aiding-and-abetting international crimes. These questions were for the most part answered in the affirmative. The question whether they were allowed to sue for violations of state law hinged primarily on the question whether non-resident aliens could even bring a case before the Court. The Court stated that there was no absolute bar for non-residents aliens to sue and that this question had to be answered case-by-case. The Court of Appeals referred the case back to the District Court for further assessment.