skip navigation

Search results

> Refine results with advanced case search

725 results (ordered by date)

<< first < prev   page 92 of 145   next > last >>

Sesay et al.: The Prosecutor v. Issa Hassan Sesay, Morris Kallon and Augustine Gbao

Judgement, 25 Feb 2009, Special Court for Sierra Leone (Trial Chamber I), Sierra Leone

The armed conflict in Sierra Leone, from 1991 until 2002, opposed members of the Revolutionary United Front and Armed Forces Revolutionary Council to Civil Defense Forces, loyal to the ousted President Kabbah. The hostilities were characterised by brutality as civilians and peacekeepers were targeted. In particular, young women were forced to become ‘bush wives’ for rebels, and children were recruited not only to fight in the hostilities, but also as bodyguards, cooks, cleaners, and spies.

Trial Chamber I of the Special Court for Sierra Leone convicted Sesay, Kallon and Gbao, as high-ranking members of the RUF, for multiple counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity. In particular, this decision was the first time that an international criminal tribunal entered convictions for forced marriage as a crime against humanity separate from sexual slavery. The Chamber also defined active participation in hostilities broadly so that the crime of using children to actively participate in the hostilities would extend to more children in different roles, for which their perpetrators could be punished. 


Rukundo: The Prosecutor v. Emmanuel Rukundo

Judgement, 27 Feb 2009, International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (Trial Chamber II), Tanzania

Emmanuel Rukundo was born on 1 December 1959 in Mukingi Community, Rwanda. In February 1993, Rukundo, an ordained priest, was appointed as a military chaplain for the Rwandan army, a position he maintained throughout the genocide in 1994.

On 27 February 2009, Trial Chamber II of the ICTR found him guilty of genocide, murder and extermination as crimes against humanity and sentenced him to 25 years' imprisonment. The conviction was based on the participation of the Accused in the killings of Tutsi civilians in the Gitarama prefecture. In mid-April 1994, Rukundo, with soldiers of the Rwandan army abducted and killed Madame Rudahunga and severely beat and injured her two children. He was present during the commission of this crime and the soldiers acted under his authority. In addition, between mid-April and the end of May 1994, on at least four occasions Rukundo was found to have played an integral role in the abduction and subsequent killing of Tutsi refugees from the St. Léon Minor Seminary. He was also found guilty of sexually assaulting a young Tutsi woman.

Rukundo’s stature as a well-known priest in the community and the fact that he was an educated person were considered by the Chamber as aggravating factors. He was sentenced to 25 years' imprisonment.


Krajišnik: The Prosecutor v. Momčilo Krajišnik

Judgement (public), 17 Mar 2009, International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Appeals Chamber, The Netherlands

Momčilo Krajišnik was found guilty by Trial Chamber I on multiple counts of crimes against humanity for his role in the 1991-1992 events in municipalities of Bosnia and Herzegovina. He appealed the decision, representing himself. The Appeals Chamber appointed a counsel as amicus curiae (friend of the Court) to assist his case through the filing of an additional appeal in order to represent Krajišnik's interests.

The Appeals Chamber held that Trial Chamber I made errors with respect to the expansion of the crimes forming part of the joint criminal enterprise of the perpetrators and the manner in which Krajišnik could be held liable for them. Therefore, it acquitted Krajišnik of murder, extermination and persecution as crimes against humanity.

The Appeals Chamber rejected the arguments of the Prosecution, in which the latter argued that the sentence was not properly determined by Trial Chamber I, and should be raised to life imprisonment.

In light of the acquittals on several counts, the Appeals Chamber reduced Krajišnik's sentence from 27 years to 20 years of imprisonment.


Chavez v. Carranza: Ana Chavez, Cecilia Santos, Jose Calderon, Erlinda Franco and Daniel Alvarado v. Nicolas Carranza

Opinion, 17 Mar 2009, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, United States

Colonel Nicholas Carranza served nearly thirty years as an officer in the armed forces of El Salvador. Later, he was El Salvador’s Vice-Minister of Defence and Public Security from October 1979 until January 1981. In this period, the Salvadoran Security Forces carried out systematic repression and human rights abuses against opponents of the military dictatorship that ruled the country at the time.

On 10 December 2003, the Center for Justice and Accountability and the Tennessee law firm of Bass, Berry & Sims filed a complaint against Carranza on behalf of five plaintiffs.

On 18 November 2005, a jury found Carranza guilty for the abduction, torture, insult, imprisonment and killing of the plaintiffs. He was ordered to pay $6 million in damages.

On 19 March 2009, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the jury’s verdict.


Chessani: United States of America v. Jeffrey Chessani

Opinion of the Court, 17 Mar 2009, United States Navy-Marines Corps Court of Criminal Appeals (NMCCA), United States

What happened after a makeshift bomb ended the life of a US Navy Marines Corporal near the village of Haditha on 19 November 2005? After increasing media attention, the US army launched an investigation and charged eight marines, as raids against the population of Haditha allegedly resulted in the death of 24 civilians. Proceedings were initiated against Jeffrey Chessani, a commander who had not been present during the explosion and its aftermath, but had allegedly failed to adequately report and investigate the incident.

However, by the time the case reached the Navy-Marines Corps of Criminal Appeals, the legal question did not revolve around Chessani’s role during the incidents, but around the question whether there was an appearance of unacceptable influence on the case by Colonel Ewers, an important figure in military legal circles. The NMCCA confirmed the previous ruling by the Trial Judiciary, stating that the US government had failed in refuting the appearance of ‘unlawful command influence’. According to the NMCCA, the government had only attempted to disprove that Ewers directly influenced key figures in the circle of the prosecutor, while not addressing whether the prosecution’s legal advisors might have been influenced by Ewers. 


<< first < prev   page 92 of 145   next > last >>