Search results

After the civil war in Papua New Guinea, which led to Bougainville obtaining a more autonomous position, several inhabitants of that island sued the mining company Rio Tinto, basically for its role in the war and the process leading up to it. The plaintiffs claimed that Rio Tinto’s mining activities had harmed their health and the environment, and that they had helped the Papua New Guinea government in, among other things, setting up a blockade with disastrous results for the population. They relied on the Alien Tort Claims Act, an US Act which permits aliens to present a claim in a US court when, allegedly, the law of nations has been breached. The Court stated that it had jurisdiction to hear the majority of the claims. However, it dismissed the claim in entirety, based on the political question doctrine. If the judiciary would rule on the merits of the case, the Court stated, it would judge the policy of Papua New Guinea during the civil war and thereby tread on the exclusive domain of the executive branch of the government, which has the prerogative to decide on foreign policy. The Court of Appeals overturned this judgement, as it was confident that a judicial ruling in this case would not interfere with the duties and prerogatives of the executive branch.   

Lieutenant Colonel Tharcisse Muvunyi was the former Commander of the Rwandan military school, École des sous-officiers (ESO). On 12 September 2006, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR found him guilty of genocide and crimes against humanity (other inhumane acts). The Chamber acquitted him of rape as a crime against humanity and of the alternative charge of complicity in genocide.

The Chamber took into account the gravity of the offences, the aggravating and mitigating factors and sentenced Muvunyi to 25 years of imprisonment.  Aggravating factors considered by the Chamber were the ethnic separation and subsequent killing of orphan children at the Groupe Scolaire by soldiers under the Muvunyi's command in collaboration with civilian militia. In addition, the fact that Muvunyi had chastised the bourgmestre (mayor) of the Nyakizu community for hiding a Tutsi man, who was later killed by an armed Hutu mob under Muvunyi’s instructions, was also considered an aggravating factor.

Mitigating factors taken into account were the good character of Muvunyi prior to 1994, his family status, the fact that he had spent most of his life working for the defence of his country and that he was regarded as a highly respected and devout person.