skip navigation

Search results

Search terms: g extradition to india

> Refine results with advanced case search

692 results (ordered by relevance)

<< first < prev   page 75 of 139   next > last >>

Samardžija: The Prosecutor v. Marko Samardžija

Verdict, 3 Nov 2006, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina

Marko Samardžija was the commander of the 3rd Company of the Sanica Battalion within the 17th Light Infantry Brigade. He has been accused of ordering soldiers under his command that the Bosniak (Muslim) men from the settlements of Brkići and Balagića Brdo (in the Ključ Municipality) leave their houses. Men older than 18 and younger than 60 were then consequently murdered in groups of 5 to 10. This resulted in the deaths of at least 144 Bosniak men.

While taking into account the ICTY and ICTR case law, and while pointing out that the issue of legality was not violated, the Court determined that Samardžija assisted in the commission of crimes against humanity. As a result, on 3 November 2006, the Trial Panel of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Marko Samardžija guilty of crimes against humanity (murder) and sentenced him to 26 years’ imprisonment


Blagojević & Jokić: The Prosecutor v. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić

Appeals Judgment, 9 May 2007, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

The municipality of Srebrenica (Bosnia and Herzegovina) was attacked and taken under the control of the Army of the Republika Srpska (VRS) in July 1995. Bosnian Muslim men were separated from women, children and the elderly, and, subsequently, murdered. The others were removed from Srebrenica by buses. Vidoje Blagojević and Dragan Jokić played a crucial role in the commission of crimes by units of the VRS in the aftermath of the attacks on Srebrenica. Trial Chamber I convicted Blagojević of complicity in genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Jokić was also found guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The Appeals Chamber found that Trial Chamber I made an error in finding Blagojević guilty of complicity in genocide, since his knowledge of the forcible transfer operations, the mistreatments and the murders were not enough to establish that he knew of the genocidal intent (a special mental requirement for the crime of genocide) of the perpetrators. Therefore, the Appeals Chamber reversed his conviction for this crime and reduced his initial sentence of 18 years to 15 years of imprisonment.

All other grounds of Blagojević's appeal were rejected, together with the grounds adduced by Dragan Jokić and the Prosecution.


Janković (Zoran): Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Zoran Janković

Verdict, 23 Oct 2007, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Section I for War Crimes, Appellate Division, Bosnia and Herzegovina

In the second instance verdict in the Zoran Janković case, the Appellate Division found the appeal to be unfounded and upheld the first instance verdict, acquitting the accused of the charges entered against him. This decision was based on the lack of valid evidence that the accused participated in the incident or that he held any position which would have enabled him to issue orders with respect to the incident.


Belhas et al. v. Ya'alon: Ali Saadallah Belhas et al. v. Moshe Ya'alon

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 15 Feb 2008, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, United States

On 4 November 2005, a complaint was filed before the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on behalf of people injured or killed during the bombing of the UN compound (an area protected by the UN) in Qana on 18 April 1996 that killed more than 100 civilians and wounding hundreds. The plaintiffs claimed that General Moshe Ya’alon, the head of the IDF Army Intelligence who launched the bombing, should be held responsible for the decision to bomb the UN compound.

On 14 December 2006, the District Court dismissed the case, finding that Ya'alon could not be sued because the Court lacked jurisdiction to prosecute Ya’alon (as he enjoyed immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act) and denied the need for jurisdictional discovery.

On 15 February 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit upheld the decision of the District Court.


Bagaragaza: Public Prosecutor v. Michel Bagaragaza

Request for surrender, 21 Mar 2008, District Court of The Hague, The Netherlands

Until July 1994, Michel Bagaragaza was the managing director of OCIR-Tea, the controlling body for the tea industry in Rwanda. Bagaragaza is accused of conspiring with his employees in order to kill Tutsis in the Gisenyi Prefecture. In addition, he was a member of the local committee of the Republican Movement for Development and Democracy (MRND) for the Gisenyi Prefecture. Bagaragaza was indicted by the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda on charges of genocide, and in the alternative, war crimes. His case was referred to The Netherlands at the request of the Prosecutor of the ICTR.

However, a decision of the District Court of The Hague in a case against another Rwandan national, Joseph Mpambara, in which the Court held that the Dutch courts have no jurisdiction over genocide committed by non-Dutch nationals abroad prior to 2003, was released soon after Bagaragaza's surrender to The Netherlands. Fearing that the outcome would be the same and the case against him would not proceed in The Netherlands, the ICTR requested The Netherlands to surrender Bagaragaza back to the ICTR for prosecution. By a decision of 21 March 2008, the District Court of The Hague authorised the surrender. 


<< first < prev   page 75 of 139   next > last >>