Search results

The Bemba case represents a significant milestone in international law, particularly concerning the doctrine of command responsibility. Mr. Jean-Pierre Bemba, a former Vice-President of the Democratic Republic of Congo, was charged with two counts of crimes against humanity (murder and rape) and three counts of war crimes (murder, rape, and pillaging). These charges were linked to the actions of the Movement for the Liberation of Congo (MLC), a militia group under his command, in the Central African Republic (CAR) between 2002 and 2003. 

Mr. Bemba's trial was groundbreaking in several aspects. It was one of the first major ICC trials focusing on sexual violence as an international crime, setting a precedent for how such crimes are prosecuted globally. The prosecution argued that Mr. Bemba had effective command and control over the MLC troops and failed to take necessary and reasonable measures to prevent or repress the commission of these crimes, nor did he submit the matter to the competent authorities for investigation and prosecution. 

The defense contended that Mr. Bemba had limited means to control his forces once they were deployed in CAR and that he was not directly responsible for the atrocities committed. They argued for his inability to exercise control over the troops due to communication challenges and logistical constraints. 

The judgment and the legal reasoning behind it delved into the nuances of command responsibility, assessing the extent of a military leader's liability for the actions of their subordinates. The trial also addressed complex issues of jurisdiction, admissibility, and the participation of victims in the proceedings, making it a landmark international criminal law case. 

This case was closely watched by international legal experts and human rights advocates, as it had significant implications for how commanders at all levels are held accountable for war crimes and crimes against humanity. The verdict was seen as a test of the ICC's ability to bring high-ranking officials to justice and a statement on the international community's commitment to addressing grave human rights violations. 

From April 1975 to January 1979 the Khmer Rouge committed numerous crimes to create their socialist state. Case 002/02 was limited to prosecuting the crimes that occurred at security centers and worksites, including the executions of enemies and elites, forced marriages, and other inhumane treatment. In addition, the case included the genocide of the Vietnamese, who were fighting the Khmer Rouge forces, and the Cham peoples, who were persecuted for their religious and ethnic identity.

On 16 November 2018 the Trial Chamber found Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan guilty of crimes against humanity (including rape, forced marriage, and murder), grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions and genocide of the Vietnamese. The Chamber also convicted Nuon Chea of the genocide of the Cham peoples.

The accused were found guilty based on their leadership roles within the Communist Party of Kampuchea; Khieu Samphan had various roles, including President of the State Presidium, and Nuon Chea was the Deputy Secretary of the party. The Trial Chamber ruled that the accused failed to prevent and punish the crimes that occurred, even though they knew or had reason to know the crimes were being carried out.

Both accused were sentenced to life imprisonment.

The claimants in this case claimed that they were victims of severe atrocities at the hands of the colonial government during the struggle for independence in Kenya. They argued that the British government carried responsibility for this, while the British government argued that they could not be held responsible for atrocities which, if proven, were committed by the Colonial government in the 1950s. Therefore, the British government requested the Court to dismiss the case before it would come to a trial. The Court refused to do this, stating that evidence existed of torture in pre-independence Kenya and of some UK involvement. This evidence, the Court reasoned (without establishing the liability of the British government), should be assessed in Court. 

Indonesia had illegally occupied East Timor since 1975 in a climate of tension between the Indonesians who favoured continued occupation and the Timorese who favoured independence. Following the referendum of 1999 in which an overwhelming majority of Timorese voted in favour of independence, hostilities escalated between the Indonesian Armed Forces and associated militias, and the independence supporters.

In the context of these hostilities, the Accused (a member of the Sakunar militia) intentionally stabbed a suspected independence supporter and watched as two other militia members proceeded to stab and stone the victim who died as a result of his wounds. The Accused pleaded guilty to the crime of murder as a crime against humanity, and the Court sentenced him to 5 years’ imprisonment.