Search results

In one of the first cases concerning (potential) foreign fighters, Omar H., a Dutch citizen, was found guilty of preparing to commit arson and/or an explosion, and of incitement to commit a terrorist crime on 23 October 2013. The District Court of Rotterdam found that Omar H.’s actions of searching online for information about how to make homemade bombs, visiting certain websites, and his purchase of the necessary objects to make a bomb demonstrated he was preparing to commit an act of arson and/or explosion. However, the Court rejected the Prosecutor’s submission that this constituted training for a terrorist crime as there was a need for actual preparation or execution in order to speak of training. Omar H. was also found guilty of inciting terrorist crimes as he had put a film and text about terrorist attacks online, and he had started an online discussion about jihad in a public forum. Omar H. was sentenced to 12 months in prison, four of which were suspended. 

The Prosecutor v. Radovan Karadžić case before the ICTY concerned events which occurred from October 1991 to November 1995 in the former Republic of Yugoslavia. These conflicts have been estimated to be the cause of a death toll of approximately 100,000 people, and to over 2,000,000 people being displaced.The victims in this case were the ethnic groups of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats residing in the targeted municipalities. The crimes in question (such as murder) were committed by Bosnian Serb Forces and Bosnian Serb Political and Governmental Organs, as per orders issued by government leaders, one of whom was Mr. Karadžić. 

Mr. Karadžić was the President of the Republika Srpska (RS) and Supreme Commander of the RS armed forces during the conflicts. In his leadership position, Mr. Karadžić, together with other leaders, aimed to create an ethnically pure Bosnian Serb State by territorially dividing Bosnia and Herzegovina. Mr. Karadžić’s leadership position leveraged his power in ordering the RS armed forces and facilitating the commission of crimes against humanity, genocide, and violations of rules and customs of war. Therefore, Mr. Karadžić was indicted by the ICTY of 11 counts of crimes, including crimes against humanity, violations of rules and customs of war, and genocide. On 24 March 2016, Mr. Karadžić was found guilty of most of the counts and acquitted of one genocide count. As a result, Mr. Karadžić was sentenced to 40 years of imprisonment.

Mashudur Choudhury is the first person to be convicted of terrorism charges in relation to the ongoing war in Syria. Mr. Choudhury, who is from Portsmouth, was found guilty of travelling to Syria to join a jihadi training camp. His intention to become a martyr was evident throughout his conversations with another foreign fighter and his posts on social media. He was arrested and charged upon his return to the UK a few weeks after his departure. Mr. Choudhury has been sentenced to 4 years’ imprisonment. 

The Prosecutor v. Ratko Mladić case before the ICTY concerns the events which occurred from October 1991 to November 1995 in the former Republic of Yugoslavia. The conflicts in the former Republic of Yugoslavia have been estimated to be the cause of a death toll of approximately 100,000 people, leading to over 2,000,000 people being displaced. The present case was tried before the ICTY’s Trial Chamber I, and the victims of the crimes were the ethnic groups of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats residing in the targeted municipalities, U.N personnel, and residents of Sarajevo.  

At the time when these events occurred, Mr. Mladić was a Commander of the Bosnian Serb Army (VRS) Main Staff in the territories of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), including Srebrenica. In his leadership position, Mr. Mladić took control of municipalities in the so-called Serbian Republic of BiH, mainly in the Northwestern and Eastern regions of BiH. In these municipalities, the Bosnian Serb Forces participated in a campaign of persecution to drive the non-Serb populations from these territories, aiming to create an ethnically pure Bosnian Serb State by territorially dividing BiH. 

Mr. Mladić was initially charged together with Mr. Karadžić; however, the judgement in the case of Mr. Mladić was delivered a year later than that of Mr. Karadžić. Mr. Mladić was indicted for 11 charges, 10 of which he was found guilty of, including several charges of crimes against humanity and violations of the laws or customs of war, and one charge of genocide. The Chamber sentenced Mr. Mladić to life imprisonment.

The principle of non-refoulement prohibits deportation of a person if there is a significant risk of that person being subjected to torture in the country of arrival. The principle has been repeatedly in the spotlights since 2001, as states came under increasing obligation to deny safe havens to terrorists. However, as this case proves, the principle was an issue even before September 11, 2001.

Manickavasagam Suresh fled from Sri Lanka to Canada, was granted a refugee status there, but was ultimately denied a permanent status as it was alleged that he supported the Tamil Tigers. Since Canada considered the Tamil Tigers to be a terrorist organisation, it started the procedure to deport Suresh to Sri Lanka. Suresh went to court, stating, among other things, that deportation would violate the principle of non-refoulement. The Court disagreed, stating, most importantly, that the Minister was allowed to enter into a balancing act between national security and Suresh’s individual rights. The Court did not consider the result of this balancing act to be unreasonable, given the evidence of the Tamil Tigers’ activities and Suresh role therein. Also, the Court stated that Suresh had not established ‘substantial grounds’ that he would be subjected to torture.