556 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 74 of
112
next >
last >>
Suresh v. Canada: Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Judgment, 18 Jan 2000, Federal Court of Appeal, Canada
The principle of non-refoulement prohibits deportation of a person if there is a significant risk of that person being subjected to torture in the country of arrival. The principle has been repeatedly in the spotlights since 2001, as states came under increasing obligation to deny safe havens to terrorists. However, as this case proves, the principle was an issue even before September 11, 2001.
After the Federal Court rejected Manickavasagam Suresh’s complaint against the decision to deport him, the Court of Appeal reassessed this rejection. It concluded that while torture is prohibited in all cases, there can be circumstances in which a person is removed to a country where he/she is at risk of being subjected to torture. On several places, the Court reiterated that a Minister sometimes has to subordinate the interests of one person to societal interests like national security. In this case, Suresh support of the Tamil Tigers justified the Minister’s appraisal. Such a decision increases public confidence in an adequate application of immigration law, according to the Court. Suresh’s appeal was rejected.
Marques et al.: The General Prosecutor v. Joni Marques, Manuel de Costa, Joao da Costa, Paolo da Costa, Amelio da Costa, Hilario da Silva, Gonsalo Dos Santos, Alarico Fernandes, Mautersa Monis and Gilberto Fernandes
Judgement, 11 Dec 2001, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
From 1975 until 2002, Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor. Members of the Indonesian Armed Forces worked together with local pro-autonomy militia groups to perpetrate a campaign of violence against the civilian population, particularly against those perceived to be independence supporters.
The ten accused in the present case were all members of or otherwise affiliated with the pro-autonomy Team Alpha militia group. In 1999, they directed a number of attacks against the civilian population including the torture of one individual, the shooting of a car full of civilians including nuns and journalists, as well as the burning down of civilian homes and the transfer of the population to refugee bases or to West Timor.
The Special Panels convicted all of the Accused for various crimes against humanity and handed down sentences that ranged from 33 years and 4 months’ imprisonment to 4 years’ imprisonment, depending on the degree of the Accused’s involvement in the crimes. It was the first case before the Special Panels to involve crimes against humanity.
Suresh v. Canada: Suresh v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration)
Judgment, 1 Nov 2002, Supreme Court of Canada, Canada
The principle of non-refoulement prohibits deportation of a person if there is a significant risk of that person being subjected to torture in the country of arrival. The principle has been repeatedly in the spotlights since 2001, as states came under increasing obligation to deny safe havens to terrorists. However, as this case proves, the principle was an issue even before September 11, 2001.
The Federal Court and the Court of Appeal rejected Suresh’s complaint against the decision to deport him. The Supreme Court held that the Minister of Citizenship and Immigration should reassess that decision, most importantly because both the Canadian constitution and international law rejects deportation to torture, as there would be a clear connection between the deprivation of someone’s human rights and the Canadian decision to expulse that person. Still, the Court did not exclude the possibility that in some cases, Canada may deport despite risk of torture. Also, the Court held that the Immigration Act had not provided Suresh with sufficient procedural safeguards.
Cardoso: The Prosecutor v. Jose Cardoso
Judgement, 5 Apr 2003, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
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, Jose Cardoso, was the Deputy Commander and subsequently the Commander of the pro-autonomy militia group Kaer Metin Merah Putih (KMMP). From May until September 1999, he issued a number of orders to attack both known and suspected independence supporters. These individuals were arrested, beaten and detained for months in cramped and extremely unhygienic conditions without regular access to food or water. One victim had his eat cut off and force fed to him on orders of the Accused. Two women were raped by the Accused. Two other individuals were murdered as a result of the Accused’s orders.
Cardoso was convicted for 9 counts of crimes against humanity by the Special Panels for Serious Crimes and sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment.
Atolan: The Prosecutor v. Agustinho Atolan alias Quelo Mauno
Judgement, 9 Jun 2003, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
Indonesia’s invasion of Timor-Leste in 1975 marked the beginning of almost 25 years of immense atrocities and human rights abuses, resulting in the deaths of nearly one third of the population of Timor-Leste from starvation, disease, and the use of napalm. Indonesia eventually withdrew in 1999 following international pressure; Timor-Leste achieved full independence in 2002. The Special Panels for Serious Crimes was established to prosecute persons responsible for the serious crimes committed in 1999, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, sexual offenses and torture.
The accused was a former farmer and a leader of the Sakunar militia group in the village of Naetuna. He was indicted for the murder of an independence supporter who was beaten and stabbed repeatedly on his orders as part of a raid carried out against a village housing such supporters. The accused pled guilty to the charge. The Special Panel, after establishing the facts of the case and the validity of the guilty plea, entered a sentence of 7 years’ imprisonment after considering that admitting to guilt merits a substantial reduction in the usual sentence handed out by Timorese courts for murder, which ranges from 12 to 16 years.
<< first
< prev
page 74 of
112
next >
last >>