347 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 66 of
70
next >
last >>
Habré: Association des Victimes des Crimes et Répressions Politiques au Tchad (AVCRP) et al. v. Hissène Habré
Judgment, 20 Mar 2001, Supreme Court of Senegal, Senegal
Hissène Habré, currently a resident of Senegal, 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. He was indicted by the investigating judge in Senegal for complicity in crimes of torture committed in Chad.
The present decision of the Supreme Court upheld a decision of the Court of Appeal of Dakar barring criminal proceedings against Habré on the grounds that the Senegalese courts lacked jurisdiction to prosecute foreign nationals for acts of torture committed outside Senegal. The Supreme Court found that there was no provision in domestic legislation establishing jurisdiction over such offences.
El Hage: United States of America v. Wadih El Hage, Mohamed Sadeek Odeh, Mohamed Rashed Daoud Al-'Owhali, Khalfan Khamis Mohamed
Verdict, 29 May 2001, United States District Court Southern District of New York, United States
Wadih El-Hage, 40, is a naturalised American citizen who was born in Lebanon. He has admitted being Osama bin Laden's personal secretary. He was accused of being the key organiser of the Kenya cell and of setting up front companies in Kenya for Al-Qaeda. He left Kenya almost a year before the bombings, after being questioned by the FBI in Africa. At the time of the bombings, he was living in Arlington, Texas, with his wife, April, and seven children. El Hage claimed he only worked for bin Laden in legitimate businesses and had no contact with him since 1994. El Hage was charged with conspiracy to murder Americans.
On 29 May 2001, El Hage was convicted for conspiracy to kill United States officers and employees engaging in official duties and conspiracy to destroy buildings and property of the United States. In addition, he was found guilty of giving false statements to a federal jury (perjury). On the basis of this conviction, El Hage was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of being released.
Valente: The Public Prosecutor v. Jose Valente
Judgement, 19 Jun 2001, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. Pro-autonomy militia groups, as well as the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) perpetrated a number of abuses against the Timorese civilian population, targeting particularly those individuals who were suspected of being pro-independence supporters. In September 1999, following a referendum in which the Timorese people voted overwhelmingly in favour of independence, members of the Team Alfa pro-autonomy militia were ordered to locate and kill independence supporters.
The Accused, Jose Valente, travelled with a number of militia members to an elementary school where they were to find and kill two suspected pro-independence supporters. These individuals were found and chased: one victim was shot in the leg by a militia member, and then shot again in the forehead by the Accused. The Accused was convicted of the domestic crime of murder and sentenced to 12 years 6 months’ imprisonment by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes. The Court found that the Accused acted with premeditation: he may not have had the intention to kill the victim as an individual, but he participated in the plan of the militia group to kill pro-independence supporters.
Kunarac et al.: The Prosecutor v. Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač and Zoran Vuković
Judgement, 12 Jun 2002, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands
Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač, and Zoran Vuković were brought before the ICTY for their roles in the commission of crimes against the Bosnian Muslim civilians between April 1992 and February 1993. During this time, an armed conflict existed between the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims, and the Bosnian Serb Army and paramilitary groups detained Bosnian Muslim women and subjected them to repeated rapes, torture and other mistreatments.
The Trial Chamber found that Dragoljub Kunarac, Radomir Kovač, and Zoran Vuković were guilty of crimes against humanity and violations of laws or customs of war, sentencing them to 28, 20, and 12 years of imprisonment, respectively.
The three Appellants raised several grounds of appeal, arguing that the Trial Chamber erred in several of its factual and legal findings. Among others, the Appellants argued that the Trial Chamber erroneously assessed the contextual elements of crimes against humanity and war crimes as well as the separate definitions of the charged offences of enslavement, rape, torture, and outrages upon personal dignity.
The Appeals Chamber rejected all grounds of appeal adduced by the Appellants. Subsequently, it affirmed the sentences imposed by the Trial Chamber.
Plavšić: The Prosecutor v. Biljana Plavšić
Sentencing Judgment , 27 Feb 2003, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, The Netherlands
The case encompasses the persecution of Bosnian Muslims, Bosnian Croats and other non-Serbs in 37 municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1992, and the role played by Biljana Plavšić therein, as a high level political figure. On 2 October 2002, Plavšić pleaded guilty to the crime against humanity of persecutions and the Trial Chamber found him guilty accordingly.
In order to determine the appropriate sentence for Biljana Plavšić, the Trial Chamber balanced the gravity of the crimes as well as the aggravating and mitigating circumstances.
With respect to the gravity of the crimes, the Trial Chamber attached weight to the massive scope and extent of the persecutions; the numbers killed, deported and forcibly expelled; the grossly inhumane treatment of detainees; and the scope of the wanton destruction of property and religious buildings.
Although the Trial Chamber accepted Biljana Plavšić’s superior position as an aggravating factor, it also took into consideration the following mitigating circumstance: Biljana Plavšić’s guilty plea (together with remorse and reconciliation); her voluntary surrender and post-conflict conduct; as well as her age of 72 years.
Balancing all these factors, the Trial Chamber determined that the appropriate sentence for Biljana Plavšić is 11 years’ imprisonment.
<< first
< prev
page 66 of
70
next >
last >>