Search results

Viktor Bout, a notorious international arms dealer also known as the Merchant of Death, was alleged of trafficking weapons to several African warlords, dictators in the Middle-East and the Colombian FARC. The US Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) decided to catch him through a sting operation in which DEA officers posed as FARC fighters and attempted to order about hundred anti-air missiles and weapons "to use against Colombian and United States nationals" in Colombia. The operation succeeded and Bout was caught by police forces in Thailand. In first instance, the Thai Criminal Court rejected the United States’ extradition request, stating that the charges did not fell within the scope of the extradition treaty. The US appealed.

The Court of Appeal found that extradition is possible, since the charged offenses were punishable both under Thai and US law. Also, the Court disagreed with the Criminal Court on the political nature of the charges. Even though both Courts considered the FARC to be a politically oriented organisation, Bout was not a member of the FARC. Therefore, his offences were ‘ordinary’ offences, the Court reasoned, which fell within the scope of the extradition treaty.

On 16 October 2009 Milorad Trbic was found guilty of genocide by way of joint criminal enterprise in relation to the events at Srebrenica by the Court of Bosnia Herzegovina. For criminal responsibility to arise via participation in a JCE there had to be a consistent and core group of actors with a common plan or purpose to commit a crime, with the accused to both intend and participate in the commission of that crime. The Court held that this was the case with Milorad Trbic. He was sentenced to 30 years in prison.

Trbic was acquitted of come charges, due to insufficient evidence. 

The Defence, Prosecution and victims appealed the Trial Verdict. The Prosecutor appealed on the grounds that the facts were not established correct and complete, and wanted the Appellate Panel to revoke the Verdict in its acquitting part, as well as to order a retrial. As for the sentence, the Prosecutor wanted the Trial Verdict to be reversed and for Trbic to be sentenced to the maximum sentence of 45 years imprisonment. The Defence appealed the Trial Verdict on the grounds that essential provisions of criminal procedure and the Criminal Code had been violated and that the facts were wrongly established and wanted the Panel to change the sentence and to review the facts and evidence again, eliminating the criminal procedure violations and acquit Trbic of the charges. A number of victims also appealed the verdict, specifically against the part of the Verdict on the costs and property claims.

On 17 January 2011, the Appellate Panel gave the Appellate Verdict, judging all appeals unfounded, and upholding the Trial Verdict of 16 October 2009 in its entirety.

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, he was unsuccessfully brought before the Senegalese courts in 2000-2001 at which time the Supreme Court of Senegal confirmed that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case as the acts allegedly committed by Habré were not criminalised under domestic law. In response to an African Union mandate to prosecute Habré, Senegal amended its legislation to provide for universal jurisdiction over crimes against humanity and acts of torture committed by foreign nationals outside of Senegalese territory.

Habré brought a complaint against Senegal before the Court of Justice of the Economic Community of States of West Africa alleging that the new legislation breached his human rights, including the principle of non-retroactivity of the criminal law. The Court held, in a decision that has been criticised for lack of legal basis, that Senegal would violate the principle of non-retroactivity if its tried Habré in its domestic courts. Instead, international custom mandates that Senegal establish a special tribunal to try and prosecute Habté. 

Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was arrested in July 2004 in Pakistan and transferred to the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba) in September 2006. He was charged with terrorism and war crimes (among other charges) in connection with the 1998 attacks on the US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. In June 2009, Ghailani became the first prisoner of Guantanamo Bay to be transferred to the United States for prosecution. On 17 November 2010, Ghailani was found guilty conspiring to destroy property and buildings of the United States and acquitted of all other charges.

Ghailani’s defense lawyers filed a motion for a judgment of acquittal, or in the alternative, for a new trial, arguing that in the light of the acquittals, it was inconsistent to enter a finding of guilt with respect to one count.

The District Court disagreed, finding that there is no requirement of consistency of verdicts. It also rejected the argument in the alternative, holding that the conviction was not a manifest injustice (which could give rise to a new trial).

In October 2012 a group of Somali pirates boarded the Iranian dhow "Mohsen" and took the Iranian and Pakistani crewmembers hostage. They were noted by Dutch navy vessel HNLMS Rotterdam (part of NATO's Ocean Shield anti-piracy operation). When Navy marines approached the ship in inflatable boats (RHIBs) they came under fire from both the Mohsen and ashore. The Rotterdam responded, causing the Mohsen to catch fire, after which it sank. 25 people were rescued out of the water, while at least one pirate died during the exchange of fire.

Of the 25 rescued people, at least four were accused of piracy. They were put on separate trials in the Netherlands and charged with piracy and attempted murder and manslaughter.

In the current case, accused V15 was ultimately acquitted of the piracy and attempted murder and manslaughter charges due to a significant lack of evidence. However, since it was clear that armed violence against the Navy personnel had occurred and taking into consideration that V15 did carry a weapon and had cooperated with the shooters, he was found guilty of complicity in the use of (armed) violence against persons aboard a ship. Considering the grave nature of shooting at unprotected persons in inflatable boats an aggravating factor and weighing this against the harsh living conditions in Somalia and the dire personal situation of V15, the Court sentenced the accused to two years' imprisonment.