Search results

In August 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by terrorists loyal to Osama bin Laden. In retaliation, President Clinton ordered a missile strike on the El-Shifa pharmaceutical plant in Khartoum, Sudan, arguing that it was a base for terrorism. Later, it was proven that the plant had no ties to terrorists. Therefore, El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries brought complaints against the United States in the US Court of Federal Claims.

In November 2005, the District Court found that El-Shifa Pharmaceutical Industries failed to show that the US waived its sovereign immunity regarding the asserted claims. This meant that the District Court did not have jurisdiction to hear the plaintiff’s claims. Accordingly, the District Court dismissed the complaint.

In March 2007, the District Court denied the plaintiff’s motion to alter judgment, in which it sought to the reinstate their defamation and law of nations claims. The District Court based its decision on the fact that the plaintiffs did not adduce any new evidence or arguments to support that an error of law was made during the earlier decision of November 2005.

Radoslav Brđanin, the president of the Crisis Staff of the Autonomous Region of Krajina (ARK) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, was found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity by Trial Chamber II for his role in the perpetration of crimes against the non-Serb population of the ARK in 1992.

The Appeals Chamber accepted Brđanin's ground of appeal with respect to alleged errors made in his conviction for torture in the trial judgment. Lacking sufficient evidence, it could not be proven that he aided and abetted the commission of this crime. Furthermore, the Appeals Chamber concluded that Trial Chamber II made an error with regard to the facts of the attack on the town of Bosanska Krupa. Subsequently, Brđanin's conviction for this crime had to be reversed.

The Appeals Chamber also allowed two of the Prosecution’s grounds of appeal. It held that Trial Chamber II made errors when assessing the requirements for a joint criminal enterprise (JCE) (a mode of responsibility in the jurisprudence of the ICTY), particularly the role of the principal perpetrators within the JCE and their relation to the accused, Brđanin.

Following the coup by members of the Revolutionary United Forces in Sierra Leone, the democratically elected government of President Kabbah was replaced by a military junta headed by the Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) in 1997.

The Accused, Brima, Kamara and Kanu, were leading members of the fighting forces of the AFRC throughout the armed conflict until the hostilities ended with the Lomé Peace Accord in July 1999. Trial Chamber II of the Special Court for Sierra Leone found all three Accused responsible for ordering, committing, planning the crimes perpetrated by AFRC forces against civilians, including murder, rape, enslavement, collective punishment, mutilation, burning of civilian property and use of child soldiers in the hostilities. The Accused were also liable as the superiors in charge of AFRC forces for failing to prevent the rapes committed by their subordinates. 

The Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC) represented the rebel opposition group to the government of President Kabbah who was overthrown following a coup by the AFRC and Revolutionary United Front, the RUF, which formed a military junta to rule the people of Sierra Leone.

Brima, Kamara and Kanu were members of the AFRC, convicted by Trial Chamber II for commission of war crimes, crimes against humanity and other serious violations of international humanitarian law. Their crimes were characterised by a particular brutality: children were abducted from their homes, drugged and recruited as child soldiers; young women were raped and sexually assaulted; civilians had limbs amputated; others still were beaten and beheaded. The Trial Chamber imposed a sentence of 50 years each on Brima and Kanu, and 45 years for Kamara. In reaching this determination, the Chamber took into account the large number of victims, their particular vulnerability, the brutality of the crimes, the positions of authority occupied by the Accused. It found there to be no mitigating circumstances in favour of any of the Accused. 

Fofana and Kondewa were leaders in the Civil Defense Forces (CDF), an armed group that was participating in the conflict in Sierra Leone in order to restore the democratically elected government of President Kabbah who had been ousted by a coup of the Revolutionary United Forces (RUF) and Armed Forces Revolutionary Council (AFRC). The Accused were charged with eight counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity, committed throughout the Southern and Eastern provinces of Sierra Leone including murder, cruel treatment (mutilation, hacking of limbs), terrorising the civilian population, burning and looting civilian property, using child soldiers in the hostilities and collective punishments.

Trial Chamber I found that the Accused were not guilty of crimes against humanity as it could not be proven that the attacks were directed primarily against the civilian population. The Accused were found guilty of aiding and abetting CDF forces in their commission of the war crimes of murder, cruel treatment, pillage and collective punishments; Kondewa was additionally guilty of enlisting child soldiers. The Trial Chamber did not consider that they were guilty either for participating in a common plan to defeat the RUF/AFRC forces or as superiors responsible for the acts committed by their CDF subordinates.