Search results

On 25 February 2010 the ICTR delivered its judgment on the case of Ephrem Setako, a former senior Rwandan military officer. Lieutenant Colonel Ephrem Setako was the head of the division of legal affairs at the Ministry of Defence in Kigali in 1994. The Prosecution charged him with six counts: genocide or complicity in genocide, murder and extermination as crimes against humanity, serious violations (violence to life and pillage) of common Article 3 to the Geneva Conventions and Additional Protocol II, for his role in the attacks against Tutsis in Ruhengeri and Kigali.

The Trial Chamber found Setako guilty of genocide, extermination as a crime against humanity and violence to life as a war crime for ordering the killings of between 30 to 40 ethnic Tutsi refugees at Mukamira military camp on 25 April 1994 and the death of nine or 10 Tutsis on 11 May 1994. The Chamber imposed on Setako a sentence of 25 years of imprisonment.

Frans van Anraat was a Dutch businessman who, from 1984 until 1988, purchased large quantities of the chemical thiodiglycol from the United States and Japan. This chemical was then sold, through a number of different companies located in different countries, to Saddam Hussein’s government of Iraq. After 1984, Van Anraat was the government’s sole supplier of the chemical. The chemical is a key component in the manufacture of mustard gas and was in fact used for this purpose by Hussein’s government who then proceeded to employ the gas in attacks against Iranian military and civilians in the Iran-Iraq war and against the Kurdish population in northern Iraq. The effect was devastating, thousands of individuals were killed and many thousands more were injured with long-term effects including blindness and cancer. Van Anraat was convicted by the District Court of The Hague as accessory to war crimes committed by Hussein and his men. His conviction was upheld on appeal by the Court of Appeal of The Hague and the Supreme Court of The Netherlands. He was sentenced to 16 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.

The present decision is the result of Van Anraat's appeal to the European Court of Human Rights challenging the jurisdiction of the Dutch courts to try his case. His application was rejected as the European Court of Human Rights found, notably, that the prohibition on the use of chemical weapons in warfare was a crime under customary international law at the time the applicant supplied thiodiglycol to Iraq and he could therefore rightly be convicted of violations of this custom of war.

Tharcisse Renzaho was a Rwandan army officer and waspromoted to the rank of Colonel in July 1992. During the Rwandan genocide in 1994, he was Prefect of Kigali-Ville prefecture.

The Prosecution had charged him with genocide, crime against humanity, and war crimes for his role in the relevant events of 1994. On 14 July 2009, the Trial Chamber of the ICTR convicted Renzaho for genocide, murder and rape as crimes against humanity, and murder and rape as war crimes. The Trial Chamber sentenced him to life imprisonment.

Renzaho appealed the judgment on thirteen grounds. He requested the Appeals Chamber to overturn the Trial judgment, acquit him on all counts of the indictment, and order his immediate release. In the alternative, Renzaho requested the Appeals Chamber to a lower sentence that would reflect his true level of responsibility.

The Appeals Chamber granted some of Renzaho’s grounds of appeal and dismissed others. It affirmed Renzaho’s sentence of life imprisonment, subject to credit being given to time already served.  

A Canadian human rights organization filed a complaint against a Canadian mining company which operated in the Democratic Republic Congo (DRC). It does so on behalf of several Congolese victims (and relatives of victims) of violence committed by the army of the DRC in October 2004. Allegedly, Anvil Mining Ltd. provided the army with, for example, jeeps and cars to reach the town of Kilwa, were the human rights violations were committed.

Anvil protested against the complaint filed, arguing that the Court in Québec did not have jurisdiction. The Court disagreed and stated that Anvil’s activities in Québec and the mining activities in the DRC were sufficiently linked for the Court to have jurisdiction. Moreover, the Court stated that it did not consider courts in either the DRC or Australia, were the main office was located, more suitable to deal with this case.

Between April and July 1994, as much as ten percent of the entire Rwandan civilian population (75 percent of all Tutsis) was murdered in an ethnic conflict in which the Hutus sought to eliminate the Tutsis. At the same time, an armed conflict was fought between the Rwandan government army (FAR) and the armed forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). The RPF were a rebel army primarily composed of descendants of Rwandan Tutsi who fled from Rwanda in preceding years.

The accused, Joseph Mpambara, fled Rwanda for the Netherlands. He was arrested and brought before the Dutch courts on charges of war crimes, torture and genocide. While the Dutch courts deemed themselves without jurisdiction for genocide, the District Court of The Hague did convict Mpambara for torture.

The Court of Appeal also convicted him for war crimes - inter alia for his participation in a massacre against thousands of refugees in a church - and increased his 20 years' prison sentence to life imprisonment.