skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: kilwa incident adémar ilunga

> Refine results with advanced case search

40 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 4 of 8   next > last >>

Slough et al.: United States of America v. Paul A. Slough, et al.

Memorandum Opinion, 31 Dec 2009, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, United States

In September 2007, 14 Iraqi civilians were killed and 20 wounded by employees of Blackwater, a private security company hired by the US to protect government employees. They stated that it was self-defence, but were charged with manslaughter.

They alleged they had made statements under pressure (as they were threatened to be fired if they would not do so). Under US law, these statements are ‘compelled’ and can therefore not be used in criminal proceedings. As these statements appeared in the press, both the prosecution team and witnesses were influenced by them. Therefore, the Court ruled that the rights of the defendants have been inexcusably breached. It dismissed the charges against the defendants. 


Abtan et al. v. Prince et al.: Estate of Himoud Saed Abtan et al. v. Prince et al.

Order, 6 Jan 2010, United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, United States

The case was filed by 22 injured Iraqi nationals and the families of eight individuals who died in the Nisoor Square shooting in Bagdad on 16 September 2007. The complaint was brought against the private security contractor Blackwater (now known as “Academic LLC”) and its founder Erik Prince.

On 1 January 2010, the Iraqi nationals agreed to sign a settlement agreement with Blackwater and Erik Prince, and to withdraw their complaint. The details of the agreement were not made available to the public.


Serbia v. Ganić : The Government of the Republic of Serbia v. Ejup Ganić

Decision on extradition, 27 Jul 2010, City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court, Great Britain (UK)


Silan et al. v. The Netherlands: Wisah Binti Silan et al. v. The State of The Netherlands (Ministry of Foreign Affairs)

Judgment (Court ruling), 14 Sep 2011, District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands

The District Court of The Hague ruled that the Dutch State acted unlawfully by executing a large amount of the male population in Rawagedeh without trial on 9 December 1947, during the Indonesian War for Independence. It required the Dutch State to award compensations to plaintiffs 1 to 7, but not to plaintiff 8 and the Foundation.

This was a landmark ruling, as it marked the first time that the Dutch government has been held responsible by a court for a committed massacre. On 9 December 2011, the Dutch government publicly apologised to Indonesia for the massacre through Tjeerd de Zwaan, the Dutch ambassador in Indonesia. None of the soldiers involved in the massacre have ever been prosecuted. Both sides have given different estimations regarding the amount of people killed, with the Netherlands stating that 150 people were killed, whereas the victims’ association puts this number as high as 431.


Simić: The Prosecutor v. Milan Simić

Sentencing Judgment , 17 Oct 2002, International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Trial Chamber II, The Netherlands

The events giving rise to the case have occurred in the municipality of Bosanski Šamac (Bosnia and Herzegovina) in 1992. After the Serb forces took over control, non-Serb civilians were detained at several prison camps throughout the municipality. One such facility was the primary school in Bosanski Šamac (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Milan Simić together with other Serb men severely beat and mistreated several detainees held at the primary school during the summer of 1992. In May 2002, Simić pleaded guilty to the crime against humanity of torture. Trial Chamber II entered a finding of guilt, and was left with the issue of determining the appropriate sentence for Simić.

With respect to the aggravating factors, Trial Chamber II accorded relevance to the gravity of the offence, Simić’s position of authority, the vulnerability and inferior status of the victims, and Simić’s discriminatory intent.

Trial Chamber II also took into consideration mitigating circumstances, including: Simić’s guilty plea, his remorse, his voluntary surrender, his lack of prior criminal conduct, his comportment at the Detention Unit and general co-operation with the Trial Chamber and the Prosecution.

After balancing these factors, Trial Chamber II sentenced Simić to 5 years of imprisonment.


<< first < prev   page 4 of 8   next > last >>