551 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 48 of
111
next >
last >>
Thorpe v. Kennett
Judgment, 15 Nov 1999, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia
The main reason for proceedings against Jeffrey Kennett, the then Premier of Victoria, appears to have been the Premier’s refusal to recognise the Gunai under Booran as a sovereign people and the Land Titles Validation (Ammended) Act, which was passed under the government of Kennett in 1998. This Act confirmed and validated property titles. According to Robbie Thorne, Aboriginal activist, this Act ‘extinguished all the native title the Victorian Aboriginal people ever had’. Arguing that these conditions would lead to mental harm and that these measures were calculated to destroy the Aboriginals, Thorne requested that Kennett would be charged with genocide.
However, Thorne faced the brick wall that many faced before and after him: the Judge ruled that genocide was not a crime under national law. Specifically, the Judge rejected the argument made by some (including a dissenting judge in a previous case) that in some instances, international law can be incorporated into domestic law. With regard to the merits of the case, the judge ruled that the evidence presented by Thorpe did not in itself demonstrate genocidal intent, which is an essential element of genocide.
Da Silva: The Prosecutor v. Joao Franca da Silva alias Johni Franca
Judgement, 5 Dec 2002, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
The Indonesian occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002 gave rise to a number of attacks on the Timorese civilian population, particularly against those suspected of being independence supporters.
The Accused, Joao Franca da Silva, was the Commander of the Kaer Metin Merah Putih militia (KMP) in Lolotoe. In May 1999, he participated in a number of attacks directed at independence supporters including the detention of numerous individuals at the KORAMIL military centre who were kept in small rooms without proper sanitation, and many of whom were beaten and interrogated about their connections. He also ordered the beating of a number of independence supporters, and in one vicious incident, he forced the victim to eat his own ear.
The Lolotoe case was one of the major trials before the Special Panels for Serious Crimes. Da Silva was sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment after pleading guilty to four counts of imprisonment or other severe deprivation of liberty as a crime against humanity and one count of torture as a crime against humanity. The remaining charges against him (persecution, other inhumane acts) were withdrawn by the Prosecutor.
Sarmento (Benjamin) & Tilman (Romeiro): The Prosecutor v. Benjamin Sarmento & Romeiro Tilman
Judgement, 16 Jul 2003, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
During Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, a number of pro-autonomy militia groups carried out attacks on the Timorese population, particularly targeting those suspected of being independence supporters.
The Accused, Benjamin Sarmento and Romeiro Tilman, were deputy commanders in the Tim Sasurat Ablai militia group, which operated in Same Sub-District of East Timor. They gave orders for the murder of all independence supporters in a number of villagers and participated directly in some of those murders, for example by stabbing victims with a spear or beating them with sticks. They also ordered the deportation of approximately 15 000 East Timorese villagers into West Timor, threatening them with death if they resisted. Their orders were carried out by the militia members under their authority. Although the Prosecutor initially charged both Accused with a greater number of offenses including unlawful imprisonment, the remaining charges were withdrawn after the Accused pleaded guilty: Sarmento to four counts of murder and one count of deportation as crimes against humanity, Tilman to one count of murder and one count of deportation. The Special Panels sentenced Sarmento to 12 years’ imprisonment and Tilman to 8 years’ imprisonment.
Pedro: The Deputy Prosecutor-General for Serious Crimes v. Francisco Pedro
Judgement, 14 Apr 2005, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
During Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor form 1975 until 2002, the Indonesian Armed Forces and a number of militia groups perpetrated a countrywide campaign of abuse against the Timorese civilian population, targeting particularly those persons suspected of being independence supporters.
The Accused, Francisco Pedro, was a member of the Firmi Merah Putih (FIRMI) militia group. On 15 September 1999, he and other militia members abducted three suspected independence supporters from their homes, bundled them into a taxi and drove them to a dark clearing where they were to be killed. The Accused stabbed two of the victims, who died, whilst a third succeeded in escaping. The Accused on another event also acted as a guard at a FIRMI commander’s home where a number of independence supporters were detained and repeatedly punched, kicked and beaten. For his involvement, the Special Panels for Serious Crimes convicted the Accused of crimes against humanity of murder, attempted murder and other inhumane acts and sentenced him to 8 years’ imprisonment.
Habré: Hissène Habré
Opinion of the Court of Appeal of Dakar on the Extradition Request for Hissène Habré, 25 Nov 2005, Court of Appeal of Dakar, Senegal
Hissène Habré was the President of the Republic of Chad from 1982 until 1990. During that time, he established a brutal dictatorship which, through its political police, the Bureau of Documentation and Security (Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité (DDS)), caused the deaths of tens of thousands of individuals.
Residing in exile in Senegal, victims of Habré’s regime instituted proceedings against him in Belgium on the basis of Belgium’s universal jurisdiction law. In order to try Habré, Belgium requested Senegal to extradite him. By the present decision, the Court of Appeal of Dakar held that it was incompetent to grant the request as Habré enjoys immunity from jurisdiction by virtue of his position as the former Head of State of the Republic of Chad. This decision is the precursor to a line of litigation that will culminate in the decision of the International Court of Justice regarding Senegal’s obligation to prosecute or extradite Habré.
<< first
< prev
page 48 of
111
next >
last >>