Search results

On 20 June 1992 in the village of Hlapčevići, Ramić ordered a group of around eight soldiers to surround three Serb inhabitants’ houses. Following this, together with other soldiers, he took six individuals of Serb ethnicity out of the houses and ordered them to move toward the Youth Centre in the village of Hlapčevići. On their way to the Centre, Ramić stopped the group and called one person to step out and to inform him about the location of hidden weapons and minefields. After this person did not answer, Ramić shot him with an automatic firearm, and then turned to the other captured civilians and fired at them as well. As a consequence, four civilians were killed and two wounded. These acts constitute a violation of the rules of the laws of war, as set out in the Geneva Conventions.

Ramić pleaded not guilty. However on 17 July 2007 the Court sentenced him to 30 years imprisonment for War Crimes against Civilians. On 21 November 2007 the Appellate Panel issued the final verdict in the Ramić case, finding that the appeal was unfounded and that the Trial Panel’s verdict sentencing Ramić to 30 years of long-term imprisonment had to be upheld.

Dinko Ljubomir Šakić was born on 8 September 1921 in the village of Studenci in Perušić, Croatia. Šakić was the commander of the Jasenovac concentration camp from April until November 1944. During that time, more than 2,000 Serbs, Jews and Gypsies were killed under his command. Moreover, detainees were hanged, starved, brutally tortured and murdered. Šakić personally killed at least four detainees, two of them just for smiling.On 4 October 1999, he was found guilty for the crimes and was sentenced to 20 years in prison.

In July 2008, Šakić died at the age of 86 in a hospital in Zagreb.

Hissène Habré was the President of the Republic of Chad from 1982 until 1990. During that time, he established a brutal dictatorship which, through its political police, the Bureau of Documentation and Security (Direction de la Documentation et de la Sécurité (DDS)), caused the deaths of tens of thousands of individuals. Habré as well as members of the DDS, and its specialised branch the Special Rapid Action Brigade (Brigade Spéciale d'Intervention Rapide (BSIR)) were named in complaints filed by victims of the regime before the Court of First Instance in N’Djaména.

The Court of First Instance held that it was incompetent to hear the case as an Ordinance of 27 February 1993 provided that a special criminal curt of justice shall have jurisdiction. The victims appealed to the Constitutional Court for a finding that the Ordinance was unconstitutional as it purported to create a second judicial order in violation of the Constitution. The Constitutional Court accepted the arguments of the victims considering that the ordinance in question was indeed unconstitutional and should be repealed. This decision was the last in proceedings against Habré in his native Chad until 2008 when he would be tried and convicted in absentia. 

The Ad Hoc Tribunal acquitted the three defendants of the charges entered against them and found that the prosecution had not been able to establish a link between the TNI (Indonesian National Armed Forces) and Polri (Resort Police of the Police of Republic of Indonesia), on the one hand, and the BMP, on the other. The former were official governmental bodies, whereas the latter were militia. The judgment was publicly criticized as it was argued that the TNI and the riot police were indeed involved in the violence, including the killing of the 22 civilians.

The case arose as a result of three brutal firearm attacks upon unarmed protesters and innocent citizens in Nigeria between May 1998 and January 1999. The plaintiffs allege that in each instance, the Chevron Corporation acted in concert with the Nigerian military and police to plan, order and execute the attacks including through the participation of Chevron security personnel and equipment, the payment of funds to the military and police, and the purchase of equipment and materials including ammunition. The plaintiffs were either summarily executed, seriously injured, burned in a fire set during the attack or tortured by the military and police thereafter. Such acts were intended to force the plaintiffs to cease their protests against Chevron’s damage to the lands and the plaintiffs’ livelihood and discourage any further behaviour.