725 results (ordered by date)
<< first
< prev
page 66 of
145
next >
last >>
Habyarimana: Mme Agatha Habyarimana (born Kanziga)
Decision, 15 Feb 2007, Appeals Commission for Refugees (2nd Division), France
Agathe Habyarimana (maiden name: Agathe Kanziga) is the widow of former Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana, whose death on 6 April 1994 marked the beginning of the Rwandan genocide that was to result in the death of some 500,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus within the lapse of a few months. Agathe Habyarimana is frequently regarded as one of the powers behind Juvénal habyarimana’s Presidencey and as part of the inner circle responsible for the planification and organisation of the Rwandan genocide. On 9 April 1994, she was airlifted to France.
In July 2004, she applied for refugee status but her application was denied by the French Office of Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA). By the present decision, the Appeals Commission for Refugees confirmed the rejection and concluded that she had participated in the planning, organising and direction of the genocide in Rwanda since 1990.
Boumediene v. Bush: Lakhdar Boumediene, et al. v. George W. Bush / Khaled A. F. Al Odah, et al. v. United States of America
Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 20 Feb 2007, United States Court of Appeal, District of Columbia, Unites States of America, United States
In October 2001, six men were arrested in Bosnia and Herzegovina for their alleged involvement in the bombing of the US Embassy in Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina). Later, they were handed over to the US and transferred to the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba).
In 2004, the men filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus (a legal action in which the petitioners challenge the legality of their detention). In 2005, the US District Court ruled that Guantanamo detainees do not have habeas corpus rights. The detainees appealed the decision. In the aftermath of the adoption of the Military Commissions Act in 2006, the US Government requested the dismissal of the case, arguing that the federal court no longer had jurisdiction to hear the case.
The Court of Appeals found that the Military Commissions Act indeed removed the jurisdiction of federal courts to hear habeas corpus petitions from Guantanamo detainees. Accordingly, the Court of Appeals dismissed the detainee’s petitions on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction.
Nzabirinda: The Prosecutor v. Joseph Nzabirinda
Sentencing Judgement , 23 Feb 2007, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber II), Tanzania
On 14 December 2006, following a plea agreement with the Prosecutor, Joseph Nzabirinda pleaded guilty to one count of murder as crime against humanity, for aiding and abetting the killing of Pierre Murara and Joseph Mazimpaka. The Trial Chamber accepted his guilty plea.
On 23 February 2007, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR sentenced the Accused to seven years' imprisonment. Nzabirinda was given credit for the time spent in detention since his arrest on 21 December 2001.
For the purpose of sentencing the Accused, the Chamber considered the fact that Nzabirinda was an educated person and the fact that he abused his moral authority over the youth and population of his commune as he was held in high esteem due to his positions as Youth Organiser and successful businessman as aggravating factors.
His guilty plea together with his public expression of remorse; his family situation as a married man with children; his good character prior to the events of 1994, the lack of criminal records; and his assistance either moral, financial or material, to certain Tutsi victims were considered mitigating factors.
Kouwenhoven: The Public Prosecutor v. Guus Kouwenhoven
Interlocutory Judgment, 19 Mar 2007, Court of Appeal of The Hague, The Netherlands
Guus Kouwenhoven was convicted in first instance for his involvement in supplying arms to Liberia and acquitted of having committed war crimes during the Second Liberian Civil War (1999-2003).
Both the prosecutor and Kouwenhoven appealed against this verdict. In an interlocutory appeal, the Court of Appeals most importantly rejected the motion of the defense to bar the prosecutor from prosecuting this case. Based on the information before it, the Court did not find grave violations of Kouwenhoven's right to a fair trial. The Court did sustain the defense’s motion to have more witnesses heard by the investigative judge. The Court foresaw this to be a lengthy process, and therefore suspended Kouwenhoven’s detention.
Lipietz et al.: Société Nationale des Chemis de Fer Francais v. Georges Lipietz and A
Judgment, 27 Mar 2007, Administrative Court of Appeal of Bordeaux, France
Georges Lipietz and his half-brother were arrested in southern France in 1944 on account of their Jewish descent. They were deported to an internment camp at Drancy via Toulouse and Paris.
Although the internment camp was liberated in August 1944 and the Lipietz brothers were freed, they sued the French state and the French National Railway Company (SNCF) for complicity in their deportation, as they had been transported by French rail and detained at the authority of the Home Secretary. Having initially won their case before the Administrative Court of Toulouse and having been awarded 61 000 Euros in damages, the decision was reversed on appeal by the Administrative Court of Appeal of Bordeaux. In the present decision, the Court held that the SNCF were acting under the command of the German authorities and could not therefore be held responsible.
<< first
< prev
page 66 of
145
next >
last >>