Search results

Between April and July 1994, as much as ten percent of the entire Rwandan civilian population (75 percent of all Tutsis) was murdered in an ethnic conflict in which the Hutus sought to eliminate the Tutsis. At the same time, an armed conflict was fought between the Rwandan government army (FAR) and the armed forces of the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF). The RPF were a rebel army primarily composed of descendants of Rwandan Tutsi who fled from Rwanda in preceding years.

The accused, Joseph Mpambara, fled Rwanda for the Netherlands. He was arrested and brought before the Dutch courts on charges of war crimes, torture and genocide. While the Dutch courts deemed themselves without jurisdiction for genocide, the District Court of The Hague did convict Mpambara for torture.

The Court of Appeal also convicted him for war crimes - inter alia for his participation in a massacre against thousands of refugees in a church - and increased his 20 years' prison sentence to life imprisonment.

Anjem Choudary and Mohammed Mizanur Rahman were charged with inviting support for the Islamic State, which is designated as a proscribed organisation in the United Kingdom. Both men are well-known speakers who have publicly supported the Islamic State, including by attending protests at which Islamic State banners were displayed.

While Choudary and Rahman’s speeches did not explicitly invite violence, the Court found them to be clear statements of support for the Islamic State, based on the common-sense meaning of the word “support.” According to the Court, “support” is not limited only to assistance that is practical or tangible, but also extends to support in the form of endorsement of approval of a proscribed organisation.

Finally, the Court addressed the appellants’ contention that the law in question violated their right to freedom of expression. The Court found the right to freedom of expression to be not absolute, specifically when the law prescribes the criminalization of the conduct and its purpose is to respond to issues such as national security which are listed in the European Convention on Human Rights.

During the fighting between Indonesia and Malaysia, twelve Malaysian Chinese members of the Indonesian Air Force who were heavily armed, infiltrated into Malaysia (ten by parachute and two by boat). They were arrested, convicted pursuant to Malaysian law and sentenced to death. The Federal Court of Malaysia held that two members were protected pursuant to international law, in particular the Geneva Prisoners of War Convention of 1949. On appeal, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council decided that they were not protected under the 1949 Geneva Convention because they were nationals of Malaysia (the state that detained them). Therefore, they could be prosecuted under national law for offences against that law.

The main reason for proceedings against Jeffrey Kennett, the then Premier of Victoria, appears to have been the Premier’s refusal to recognise the Gunai under Booran as a sovereign people and the Land Titles Validation (Ammended) Act, which was passed under the government of Kennett in 1998. This Act confirmed and validated property titles. According to Robbie Thorne, Aboriginal activist, this Act ‘extinguished all the native title the Victorian Aboriginal people ever had’. Arguing that these conditions would lead to mental harm and that these measures were calculated to destroy the Aboriginals, Thorne requested that Kennett would be charged with genocide.

However, Thorne faced the brick wall that many faced before and after him: the Judge ruled that genocide was not a crime under national law. Specifically, the Judge rejected the argument made by some (including a dissenting judge in a previous case) that in some instances, international law can be incorporated into domestic law. With regard to the merits of the case, the judge ruled that the evidence presented by Thorpe did not in itself demonstrate genocidal intent, which is an essential element of genocide. 

Unlike the politically motivated crimes that are usually dealt with by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes as a result of Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002, the present case holds no links to these events. A father who suspected his daughter’s illness to be the result of black magic ordered the Accused, Carlos Soares Carmona, and others, to find the man responsible and bring him to his home. The man is brought back and, by placing saliva on the girl’s forehead, wakes her from a state of unconsciousness. The man is tied to a chair, questioned and beaten by the Accused on the orders of the father. He confesses to practising black magic, particularly against children, but resolves never to do so again. A reconciliation occurs and two bottles of a local alcoholic drink are consumed. After everyone departs the home, the Accused returns to find the man alone and proceeds to stab him in the chest. He dies as a result of his wounds. The Accused is convicted by the Special Panels for murder and sentenced to 11 years’ imprisonment. His defence of intoxication is dismissed absent evidence to the contrary.