Search results

In its self-declared “War on Terrorism,” the United States began the “High Value Detainee” program, where suspected terrorists would be subjected to special interrogation and detention. The program was managed by the CIA, which detained suspects in secret detention facilities (“black sites”) in cooperation with other foreign governments.

Lithuania cooperated with the program by allowing the transfer of suspected terrorists through its territory. An alleged member of al-Qaeda, Mr. Zayn Al-Abidin Muhammad Husayn (known as Abu Zubaydah) was held in a black site known as “Detention Site Violet” where he was subjected to solitary confinement, hooding, and other forms of ill-treatment.  

The European Court of Human Rights found that Lithuanian authorities clearly knew the purpose of the black site and the likelihood of Abu Zubaydah’s being tortured. The Court concluded that by enabling the transfer of Abu Zubaydah to and from the site, Lithuania was equally responsible for his ill-treatment.

Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor from 1975 until 2002 during which time members of the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) and a number of pro-autonomy militia groups perpetrated widespread crimes against the civilian population of East Timor, particularly those suspected of being independence supporters.

In September 1999, the Accused, Carlos Soares, was a member of the Darah Integrasi militia group. During an attack on a village in which the militia, alongside the TNI, burnt down civilian homes and killed the villagers who refused to run away, the Accused shot an elderly man through the neck, killing him. The Accused was convicted of murder as a domestic offence and sentenced to 15 years and 6 months’ imprisonment.

During Indonesia’s occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, a number of crimes were perpetrated by the Indonesian Armed Forces and pro-autonomy militia groups. These crimes were largely directed against the Timorese civilian population, in particular, against those individuals suspected of being independence supporters.

The Accused in the present case, Joseph Leki, was a member of the pro-autonomy Laksaur militia group. As part of his involvement with the militia, he took part in two attacks in September 1999 in which groups of Timorese individuals were surrounded and fired upon by the militia whilst they were resting. As a result of these attacks, four individuals were killed. 

The Special Panels for Serious Crimes convicted Leki for all four murders. Although in three of the four, he had not actually fired the shot, the Panels held him responsible for having contributed logistically and morally to the commission of the crimes by other members of the militia group. In the fourth instance, although Leki had fired the shot, the Panels excluded his responsibility as a principal perpetrator because he had been threatened with death if he did not follow the order to shoot. However, he remained liable on the same grounds as for the other three murders. The Special Panels sentenced Leki to 13 years’ imprisonment. The case is the first one in which the defence of duress was upheld although Leki was convicted anyway.

From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. Pro-autonomy militia groups, as well as the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) perpetrated a number of abuses against the Timorese civilian population, targeting particularly those individuals who were suspected of being pro-independence supporters.

In August 1999, Augusto Asameta Tavares was a member of the pro-autonomy Halilintar militia group who was ordered to burn down the houses in a village and murder the inhabitants. In particular, he was ordered, along with others, to locate and stab a known pro-independence supporter, Paulino Lopes Amarel. The order was carried out and the victim died. Tavares was convicted for the domestic crime of murder by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes and sentenced to 16 years’ imprisonment. The Panels did not accept the defence of duress, which required that the conduct was the result of a threat of imminent death or serious bodily harm. Although Tavares was forced to join the militia and was bound to follow orders, the Panels concluded that he could have left. Indeed, that he went along with the militia to the village and came armed with a knife demonstrated to the Panel that he shared the aim of furthering the militia’s criminal activity and contributed to the realisation of those aims.

What happened after a makeshift bomb ended the life of a US Navy Marines Corporal near the village of Haditha on 19 November 2005? After increasing media attention, the US army launched an investigation and charged eight marines, as raids against the population of Haditha allegedly resulted in the death of 24 civilians. Proceedings were initiated against Jeffrey Chessani, a commander who had not been present during the explosion and its aftermath, but had allegedly failed to adequately report and investigate the incident.

However, by the time the case reached the Navy-Marines Corps of Criminal Appeals, the legal question did not revolve around Chessani’s role during the incidents, but around the question whether there was an appearance of unacceptable influence on the case by Colonel Ewers, an important figure in military legal circles. The NMCCA confirmed the previous ruling by the Trial Judiciary, stating that the US government had failed in refuting the appearance of ‘unlawful command influence’. According to the NMCCA, the government had only attempted to disprove that Ewers directly influenced key figures in the circle of the prosecutor, while not addressing whether the prosecution’s legal advisors might have been influenced by Ewers.