669 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 83 of
134
next >
last >>
Al Bihani: Ghaleb Nassar Al Bihani, Appellant, v. Barack Obama, President of the United States, et al., Appellees
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 5 Jan 2010, United States Court of Appeal, District of Columbia, Unites States of America, United States
Al Bihani, Yemeni citizen and Saudi Arabian national, travelled to Afghanistan in May 2001 on jihad (holy war). He became a member of the 55th Arab Brigade and, by his own admission, acted as a cook. The Brigade carried out a number of operations in support of the Taliban against the United States and its allies in the Northern Alliance. Al Bihani was transferred to the custody of the United States Armed Forces and thereafter to Guantanamo Bay following the surrender of his unit. Alleging the illegality of his detention at Guantanamo, al Bihani petitioned the District Court for the District of Columbia for a writ of habeas corpus. His petition was denied on the grounds that he was an “enemy combatant” within the meaning of the definition of such decided by the Court in its earlier case of Boumedienne v. Bush. On appeal, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia dismissed Al Bihani’s appeal.
Đukić (Novak): Novak Đukić
Verdict, 6 Apr 2010, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Appellate Panel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina
The Appellate Panel dismissed the appeal and the requests submitted by both the prosecutor and the defence, and upheld the first instance verdict of 12 June 2009. It found that the verdict was consistent with the relevant provisions of procedural law and that the long-term imprisonment of 25 years was properly imposed. The incident, also referred to as the Tuzla massacre, took place on 25 May 1995, on the day of General Tito’s birthday and the Relay of Youth in the former Yugoslavia.
Duško Tomić, Novak Đukić’s lawyer, stated that his client is a victim, used for the purpose of concealing the truth about those who are truly responsible for the incident. In a very controversial statement in 2009, Milorad Dodik, the prime minister of Republika Srpska, stated that the Tuzla attack had been staged. As a result, criminal charges were filed against him for abuse of power and inciting ethnic, racial and religious hatred.
Glavaš: Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Branimir Glavaš
Verdict, 2 Jun 2010, Supreme Court, Croatia (Hrvatska)
The case of Branimir Glavaš marks the first time that a high-ranking Croatian politician was sentenced for war crimes in relation to the Croatian war of independence.
Glavaš has denied any wrongdoing and protested his detention and trial in Croatia by going on a 40-day hunger strike in 2006. He considered his case to be politically motivated and Nikica Grzić, his defence attorney, alleged the Appellate Division Panel’s findings were based on “political, not legal statements.”
R. v. UK: R (on the application of Smith) (FC) (Respondent) v Secretary of State for Defence (Appellant) and another
Judgment, 30 Jun 2010, Supreme Court, Great Britain (UK)
Ghailani: United States of America v. Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani
Opinion, 12 Jul 2010, United States District Court, S.D. New York, United States
Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani was arrested in July 2004 in Pakistan and transferred to the US Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba) in September 2006. He was charged with terrorism and war crimes (among other) in connection with the 1998 attacks on the US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya. In June 2009, Ghailani became the first prisoner of Guantanamo Bay to be transferred to the United States for prosecution.
In November 2009, Ghailani’s lawyers filed a motion for dismissal of the case of his case arguing that the nearly five years that Ghailani spent in secret CIA prisons and at Guantanamo Bay (Cuba) violated his constitutional right to a speedy trial under the Sixth Amendment.
In July 2010, the District Court found that Ghailani’s Sixth Amendment right to a speedy trial was not violated becase, considering all circumstances, the delay did not infringe upon any interest protected by this constitutional right.
<< first
< prev
page 83 of
134
next >
last >>