Search results

The Indonesian occupation of East Timor from 1975 until 2002 gave rise to a number of attacks on the Timorese civilian population, particularly against those suspected of being independence supporters.

The Accused, Joao Franca da Silva, was the Commander of the Kaer Metin Merah Putih militia (KMP) in Lolotoe. In May 1999, he participated in a number of attacks directed at independence supporters including the detention of numerous individuals at the KORAMIL military centre who were kept in small rooms without proper sanitation, and many of whom were beaten and interrogated about their connections. He also ordered the beating of a number of independence supporters, and in one vicious incident, he forced the victim to eat his own ear.

The Lolotoe case was one of the major trials before the Special Panels for Serious Crimes. Da Silva was sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment after pleading guilty to four counts of imprisonment or other severe deprivation of liberty as a crime against humanity and one count of torture as a crime against humanity. The remaining charges against him (persecution, other inhumane acts) were withdrawn by the Prosecutor. 

The island of Atauro, off the coast of East Timor, had been subject to illegal occupation by the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI), much as the rest of East Timor since 1975.

When the TNI departed in September 1999, a town meeting was held at which a fight broke out between the Accused, Victor Manuel Alves, and the former village chief. The latter was a pro-autonomy supporter who had collaborated with the TNI and towards whom many islanders felt animosity. He had arrived at the meeting and proceeded to provoke Alves, challenging the latter to shoot him with a rifle that Alves had brought to the meeting. Angered, Alves fired three shots as a warning; the third hit the victim and killed him.

Alves was indicted for murder contrary to the Indonesian Penal Code but the Special Panels for Serious Crimes found that the intent of the Accused to kill had not been established. He was convicted instead for the crime of causing death by negligence and sentenced to 1 year imprisonment. At sentencing, the Court took into consideration as mitigating factors the provocation of the Accused by the victim, as well as his previous role in ensuring the welfare of the islanders by successfully bribing the TNI to spare the lives of pro-independence supporters.  His sentence would not be executed in the event that he compensated the victim’s family and refrained from committing any crimes for a two-year period. 

The Chagos Archipelagos are a collection of small islands in the middle of the Indian Ocean. Under British administration since 1814, they were home to approximately 1000 inhabitants by the 1960s who lived on and cultivated the land, educated their children and raised their families.

In 1964, the British and the United States governments entered into secret negotiations the outcome of which was the establishment of a military base on Diego Garcia, the Chagos Archipelagos largest islands. In order to do so, from 1965 until 1971, the population of Chagos was forcibly relocated: those who had left on trips abroad were denied re-entry, an embargo was put in place preventing the delivery of crucial food supplies, and the remaining population was forcibly loaded onto ships and relocated to Mauritius and the Seychelles.

The present civil suit is brought by the indigenous peoples of Chagos, their survivors and their descendants against the United States and a number of high-ranking individuals within the US Government whom the plaintiffs consider responsible for their forcible relocation. By its memorandum opinion of 21 December 2004, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia dismissed the plaintiffs’ motion on the ground that the named individual defendants were all federal employees at the time (e.g. former Secretaries of Defense, Admirals) and therefore benefited from immunity from prosecution under US law. Alleged violations of the Alien Tort Claims Act do not fall within the accepted exception to immunity because the Act itself does not create substantive rights and obligations that can be violated. 

As part of the operation to erect a wall in the West Bank, Israel constructed a wall around the Alfei Menashe settlement between 2002 and 2003. This wall also circumscribed five Palestinian villages, the residents of which filed a petition to have the wall removed.

The Supreme Court stated that the military commander of the West Bank had the authority to decide on the erection of a fence, but only if this is necessary for security or military considerations. Also, these security or military considerations had to be proportionate to the infringement on the rights of the Palestinians. In this case, the effects of the wall on everyday life of the residents of the Palestinian villages were so severe that alternatives should have been considered. This had not been the case, the Court stated. Therefore, it ordered the respondents to consider alternatives. 

Several villagers from Aceh, Indonesia, filed a civil suit against oil and gas company Exxon Mobil. They argued that the company carried responsibility for human rights violations committed by Indonesian security forces by hiring these forces and because Exxon Mobil knew or should have known that human rights violations were being committed. The Court allowed the case to proceed in part. The plaintiffs had attempted to bring the suit under federal statutes which allow aliens to sue for violations of human rights. The Court dismissed these claims for several reasons, including that these claims could not be assessed without passing judgment on another country, Indonesia, which the Court refused to do. Also, claims were dismissed because they had not been pled adequately.

Claims based on state laws were allowed to proceed, although claims against a corporation in which Indonesia owned a majority interests were dismissed because ruling on this company would mean passing judgment on Indonesia. The Court also cautioned the parties to be careful not to intrude into Indonesian sovereignty during further proceedings.