Search results

During the Rwandan genocide, Simon Bikindi was a singer, composer and leader of a ballet troupe called the “Irindiro”.

On 2 December 2008, Trial Chamber III of the ICTR had found Bikindi guilty of direct and public incitement to commit genocide based on public exhortations to kill Tutsis, which he made on the Kivumu-Kayove road in Gisenyi prefecture in late June 1994. The Trial Chamber had sentenced him to 15 years of imprisonment.

Bikindi appealed his convictions, and the sentence was challenged by both the Accused and the Prosecution. The Appeals Chamber dismissed the appeals of both Bikindi and the Prosecution in their entirety and affirmed the sentence of 15 years of imprisonment.   

Fawzi Khalid Abdullah Fahad Al Odah was captured in Afghanistan for his involvement with the Taliban. Since 2002, Al Odah has been detained at the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba). He filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus (a legal action allowing the detained person to challenge the legality of his detention) in May 2002. In 2008, the Supreme Court in the consolidated cases of Boumediene v. Bush and Al-Odah v. United States, considered that US federal courts have jurisdiction to hear petitions of habeas corpus. The District Court denied Al Odah’s petition on the grounds that the evidence adduced by the US Government was enough to permit his detention. 

Al Odah appealed the District Court’s judgment raising challenges with respect to the procedure admitting evidence as well as the sufficiency of evidence to support that he was part of the al Qaeda and Taliban forces.

The Court of Appeals dismissed both grounds of appeal since it did not find any errors either in the District Court’s procedure on admitting evidence or in the sufficiency of the evidence presented by the US Government. In this light, the Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Al Odah’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.

Dominique Ntawukulilyayo was the sub-prefect of Gisaraga sub-prefecture in Butare prefecture in 1994. On 20 April 1994, hundreds of thousands of Tutsis and their families escaped attacks and sought refuge at Gisaraga market in Ndora commune. Some of these people were prevented from leaving the market that evening and the following morning by law enforcement personnel and were forced to return to Gisaraga market. From 21 April through 23 April many of the Tutsi refugees left Gisaraga market for Kabuye hill. There, an extensive assault on the refugees was carried out by armed civilians, police and military personnel resulting in the death or serious injury of hundreds, and possibly thousands of men, women, children and the elderly.

On 23 April 1994 the Accused had promised the Tutsi refugees that they would be protected at Kabuye hill, prompting them to go there. Yet, later that day, he transported soldiers to Kabuye hill to participate in the attack against them. For these reasons, Ntawukulilyayo was found guilty of genocide (Count I) and not guilty of complicity (Count II) and incitement (Count III) charges. He was sentenced to 25 years of imprisonment. 

The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited was involved in extracting and development of oil in the Ogoni region of Nigeria. Concerned over the devastating environmental impact that Shell’s activities were having on the region, a group of individuals known collectively as the Ogoni Nine, protested against Shell’s activities. The Ogoni Nine were detained by the Nigerian military junta on spurious charges, held without charge, tortured and hanged following a sham trial before a Special Tribunal in November 1995.

The present dispute is a class action filed by 12 Nigerian individuals, now US residents, seeking compensation from Shell for having aided and abetted the Nigerian government to summarily execute the activists in an effort to suppress protests against Shell’s oil operations. Specifically, they allege that Shell bribed and tampered with witnesses and paid Nigerian security forces that attacked Ogoni villages. In 2006, the District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed the charges against the defendants for extrajudicial killing and violations of the right to life, security and association. On appeal by both parties, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the Alien Tort Statute does not provide jurisdiction over claims for violations of international law committed by corporations and not individual persons. Accordingly, the suit against the defendants could not continue and all charges are to be dismissed.    

Šljivančanin was in charge of a security force within the Yugoslav People’s Army that moved prisoners from the Vukovar hospital to Ovčara, where they were tortured and murdered. In the earlier phases of his trial, Šljivančanin was found guilty on counts of torture as a war crime and was sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. Later, the Appeals Chamber extended his conviction to the count of murder as war crime and sentenced him to 17 years’ imprisonment. The reason behind this decision was a conversation between Šljivančanin and his superior which proved the former's intentions to contribute to the murdering of the prisoners.

In 2010, however, a new witness contacted the Defence team of Šljivančanin, expressing his intentions to testify about the conversation in question. According to his testimony, the conversation did not evidence that Šljivančanin had the required intention. 

The Appeals Chamber accepted the testimony of the witness as constituting a new fact for the purposes of the trial and allowed the review motion.

After closely considering the testimony and the arguments brought by the Prosecution against the testimony, the Chamber concluded that the statements of the witness were credible. Accordingly, it ruled that the conviction on the count of murder had to be vacated and the sentence was reduced to 10 years of imprisonment.