520 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 64 of
104
next >
last >>
United States of America v. Nader Elhuzayel and Muhanad Badawi
Jury Verdict, 21 Jun 2016, District Court for the Central District of California, United States
Two men, Mr. Nader Elhuzayel and Mr. Muhanad Badawi, were found guilty by a jury of conspiring to support the Islamic State on 21 June 2016 after earlier pleading not guilty. In particular, Mr. Elhuzayel, who was arrested prior to boarding a flight to Israel via Turkey at Los Angeles International Airport, was found to have encouraged others to support and join the Islamic State, and to have vowed to travel to Syria to fight for the terrorist group himself. Both were also convicted of financial fraud charges, the proceeds of which were used to fund the travel. A decision with regard to sentencing is anticipated later this year.
Maher H.: Prosecutor v. Maher H.
Judgment, 1 Dec 2014, District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands
Maher H.’s case is the first conviction in the Netherlands of a Dutch ‘foreign fighter’ returning from Syria. He was convicted on 1 December 2014 and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment by the District Court in The Hague. Although it was not exactly clear what Maher H. had done in Syria, the Court found enough evidence to determine, among other things, that he was guilty of preparing to commit terrorist crimes, including murder and manslaughter. The Court based its decision on the fact that he had actually been to Syria and participated in the armed conflict there as well as his support for the jihad. Factors such as Maher H.’s decision to join a jihadi armed group in Syria that aimed to destroy Syria’s political structure and establish an Islamic State were also considered relevant in showing his terrorist intent. The Court moreover convicted Maher H. of disseminating inciting videos, pictures and a document. However, he was acquitted of conspiring to commit a terrorist offence due to a lack of evidence. This decision was subsequently appealed by the defendant.
Saric: The Prosecutor v. Refik Saric
Judgment, 25 Nov 1994, 3rd Chamber of the Eastern Division of the Danish High Court, Denmark
Refik Saric came to Denmark in 1994 as a Croat refugee. Other refugees at a Red Cross refugee center recognized him as a guard at the Dretelj camp in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Police investigations revealed that Saric had been a Muslim prisoner at the camp, where he was eventually promoted to guard duty. The original indictment included 25 counts of "causing grievous bodily harm of a grave nature". These acts included, amongst other acts, kicking and punching several persons, dealing a number of blows to persons’ backs with sticks, rifles, chains and metal pipes as well as blows to the head, which in some cases resulted in death of persons. The indictment was based on both the Danish Penal Code and the Geneva Conventions. Since the Accused’s mental condition was in question, the Court determined that he needed to be placed in a mental hospital until his sentence could be served. The Accused was found guilty on 14 counts and not guilty on 6 counts. The jury also granted the request for a more severe sentence because of aggravated circumstances. The Accused was sentenced to eight years in prison and permanently barred from entering Denmark after his sentence.
Rutaganda: Georges Anderson Nderubumwe Rutaganda v. The Prosecutor
Judgement, 26 May 2003, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Following the death of Rwandan President Habyariamana on 6 April 1994, ethnic tensions in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi populations reignited. President Habyariamana’s political party, the Mouvement Républicain National pour le Développement et la Démocratie (MRND) and its youth militia wing, the Interahamwe, began perpetrating a number of widespread abuses against Tutsis and moderate Hutu’s as punishment for what many perceived to be the deliberate death of the former Hutu president.
Georges Rutaganda was a member of the MRND and the Second Vice President of the Interahamwe since 1991. The Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda found that he had used his position of authority over the Interahamwe to distribute weapons, order the separation of the Hutu from the Tutsi and direct the massacre of thousands of Tutsis, particularly in connection with incidents at the Amgar garage and the Technical College, ETO. He was convicted of genocide and murder and extermination as crimes against humanity and sentenced to life imprisonment.
On appeal by both the Prosecution and counsel for Rutaganda, the Appeals Chamber had the occasion to clarify the law applicable to the special intent for the crime of genocide and the nexus requirement for war crimes. As a result of its findings in the latter area, the Appeals Chamber entered two new convictions for murder as a war crime, the first conviction of this kind before the Tribunal. Rutaganda’s sentence was confirmed and he was transferred to Benin where he died in prison on 11 October 2010.
Rasul v. Bush: Shafiq Rasul et al v. George W. Bush, President of the United States/Fawzi Khalid Abdullah Fahad Al Odah et al v. George W. Bush
Opinion, 28 Jun 2004, Supreme Court, United States
In this landmark case, fourteen Guantanamo detainees petitioned for habeas corpus, requesting judicial review of their indefinite detention without charges.
Revisiting the holding in Johnson v. Eisentrager (1950), the Supreme Court decided 6-3 that US courts have jurisdiction to consider challenges to the legality of the detention of foreign nationals captured abroad in the course of armed conflict and subsequently detained outside the sovereign territory of the United States at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. Rasul was found to differ from Eisentrager in the “plenary and exclusive jurisdiction” held by the US over Guantanamo; the Court ruled that US courts have jurisdiction to hear habeas challenges from Guantanamo detainees under the terms of the general federal habeas statute.
<< first
< prev
page 64 of
104
next >
last >>