474 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 76 of
95
next >
last >>
Hategekimana: The Prosecutor v. Ildephonse Hategekimana
Judgment and Sentence, 6 Dec 2010, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber II), Tanzania
Ildephonse Hategekimana was a lieutenant in the Rwandan Armed Forces and also the commander of the Ngoma military camp during the genocide that took place in Rwanda in 1994.
The Prosecutor of the ICTR charged Hategekimana with genocide, or, alternatively, complicity to commit genocide, murder and rape as crimes against humanity. The charges related to his role in the massacre of Tutsi refugees at Ngoma church and at Maison Généralice, as well as for his participation in the killings of several other Tutsis and the rape of Nura Sezirahiga. On 6 December 2010, he was convicted for genocide, murder and rape as crimes against humanity and was sentenced to life imprisonment.
Renzaho: Tharcisse Renzaho v. The Prosecutor
Judgement, 1 Apr 2011, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Tharcisse Renzaho was a Rwandan army officer and waspromoted to the rank of Colonel in July 1992. During the Rwandan genocide in 1994, he was Prefect of Kigali-Ville prefecture.
The Prosecution had charged him with genocide, crime against humanity, and war crimes for his role in the relevant events of 1994. On 14 July 2009, the Trial Chamber of the ICTR convicted Renzaho for genocide, murder and rape as crimes against humanity, and murder and rape as war crimes. The Trial Chamber sentenced him to life imprisonment.
Renzaho appealed the judgment on thirteen grounds. He requested the Appeals Chamber to overturn the Trial judgment, acquit him on all counts of the indictment, and order his immediate release. In the alternative, Renzaho requested the Appeals Chamber to a lower sentence that would reflect his true level of responsibility.
The Appeals Chamber granted some of Renzaho’s grounds of appeal and dismissed others. It affirmed Renzaho’s sentence of life imprisonment, subject to credit being given to time already served.
Setako: Ephrem Setako v. the Prosecutor
Judgement, 28 Sep 2011, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
On 25 February 2010, Trial Chamber I of the ICTR convicted Lieutenant Colonel Ephrem Setako for genocide, extermination as a crime against humanity and violence to life as a war crime for ordering the killings of between 30 to 40 ethnic Tutsi refugees at Mukamira military camp on 25 April 1994 and the death of nine or 10 Tutsis on 11 May 1994. The Chamber imposed on Setako a sentence of 25 years of imprisonment.
Setako and the Prosecution both appealed the Trial judgment. Setako alleged errors of law and errors of fact of the judgment. The Prosecution submitted three grounds of appeal.
On 28 September 2011, the Appeals Chamber dismissed Setako’s appeal in its entirety, while it partially granted the Prosecution’s appeal but it did not increase Setako’s sentence. Specifically, the Appeals Chamber convicted Setako for murder as a war crime for the killings committed against Tutsis on 11 May 1994.
Bagosora & Nsengiyumva: Théoneste Bagosora and Anatole Nsengiyumva v. The Prosecutor
Judgement, 14 Dec 2011, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Appeals Chamber), Tanzania
Anatole Nsengiyumva served as Head of the Intelligence Bureau of the Army General Staff and Commander of the Gisenyi Operational Sector from June 1993 to July 1994. He was initially found guilty by Trial Chamber I of the ICTR on 18 December 2008 of genocide, crimes against humanity (murder, extermination, persecution, and other inhumane acts), and violence to life for ordering the killings in Gisenyi town on 7 April, Mudende University, Nyundo Parish and aiding and abetting the killings in Bisesero. The Chamber later reversed some of these convictions and it set aside his sentence to life imprisonment imposing on him a sentence of 15 years imprisonment instead.
Théoneste Bagosora was appointed directeur de cabinet for the Ministry of Defence in June 1992, where he served until July 1994. The Trial Chamber I convicted him for genocide, crimes against humanity (murder, extermination, persecution, other inhumane acts, and rapes), and serious violations of Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions and of Additional Protocol II (violence to life and outrages upon personal dignity), for his participation in the events in Rwanda in 1994. The Appeals Chamber reversed some of these convictions, setting aside his sentence to life imprisonment and sentencing him to 35 years of imprisonment instead.
Lubanga: The Prosecutor v. Thomas Lubanga Dyilo
Decision on Sentence Pursuant to Article 76 of the Statute (Public), 10 Jul 2012, International Criminal Court (Trial Chamber I), The Netherlands
The armed conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo opposed numerous tribes of different ethnicities in their struggle to gain power and territory, particularly over the Ituri province in the north-eastern part of the DRC, an area rich in natural resources such as gold and diamonds. One such group, the Union Patriotique des Congolais, was established in 2000 and appointed Lubanga as its chairman. He was also the commander in chief of the armed wing of the UPC, the Front Patriotique pour la Libération du Congo. This armed group was well known for its use of young children to participate in the hostilities, from fighting, to cooking, cleaning, spying, and being used as sexual slaves.
Lubanga was convicted by Trial Chamber I in the International Criminal Court’s first verdict for the war crime of conscripting, enlisting or using children under the age of 15 to actively participate in hostilities. He was sentenced to 14 years’ imprisonment on 10 July 2012, with credit for the 6+ years he had spent in detention in the Netherlands during his trial. In determining the appropriate sentence, the Court assessed the gravity of the crimes by considering the age and particular vulnerability of the victims. However, it also considered that Lubanga’s cooperation with the Court and respectful attitude even despite the Prosecution’s conduct merited mitigation.
<< first
< prev
page 76 of
95
next >
last >>