608 results (ordered by relevance)
<< first
< prev
page 97 of
122
next >
last >>
Sipic: The Prosecutor v. Idhan Sipic
Verdict in First Instance, 22 Feb 2008, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber (Section I), Appellate Panel, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnia and Herzegovina
During the war in the Former Yugoslavia, Idhan Sipic was a member of the Reconnaissance and Sabotage Commando Company, which was part of the 5th Corps of the Army of Bosnia and Herzegovina. On an unspecified day in mid-September 2005, in the territory of the Kljuc Municipality, Sipic entered the house of an elderly woman of Serb ethnicity, Anja Banjac and killed her with a bayonet by stabbing her in the neck.
Sipic was charged with war crimes against civilians, specifically murder. The Court found him guilty of this crime. The Court reasoned that Anja Banjac was without a doubt a civilian, killing civilians is a violation of international humanitarian law; the crime was perpetrated during the war and had a clear connection to the war. Sipic was sentenced to 8 years’ imprisonment, which was a significantly mild sentence. The Court took as an extenuating circumstance that Sipic admitted to the crime.
Andrun: Prosecutor’s Office of Bosnia and Herzegovina v. Nikola Andrun
Verdict, 19 Aug 2008, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Section I for War Crimes, Appellate Division, Bosnia and Herzegovina
Nikola Andrun, born on 22 November 1957, was during the second half of 1993 a deputy head of the Gabela detention camp in the municipality of Čapljina (Bosnia and Herzegovina) where Bosniak civilians were detained. As deputy head, Andrun took detainees out of the Gabela detention camp on several occasions and subjected them to interrogations, beatings and acts of torture. Between July and September 1993, numerous incidents of detainee abuse took place during which Andrun was present, either as an observer or as a direct participant. Some of the detainees disappeared but their remains were later exhumed and identified.
Andrun was found guilty for war crimes against Bosniak civilians and was sentenced to 13 years in prison.
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.
Habyarimana: Mme H
Decision of the Conseil d’Etat, 16 Oct 2009, Conseil d’Etat, France
Agathe Habyarimana (maiden name: Agathe Kanzigas) is the widow of former Rwandan President Juvénal Habyarimana whose death on 6 April 1994 marked the beginning of the Rwandan genocide that was to result in the death of some 500,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus within the lapse of a few months. Agathe Habyarimana is frequently regarded as one of the powers behind Juvénal habyarimana’s Presidencey and as part of the inner circle responsible for the planification and organisation of the Rwandan genocide. On 9 April 1994, she was airlifted to France.
In July 2004, she applied for refugee status but her application was denied by the French Office of Protection of Refugees and Stateless Persons (OFPRA). The rejection was confirmed on appeal by the Appeals Commission for Refugees in February 2007.
On appeal to the Conseil d’Etat, the highest administrative court in France, Agathe Habyarimana sought to prove that the Appeals Commission had committed an error in law and in fact when it concluded that she had participated in the planning, organising and direction of the genocide in Rwanda since 1990 and ultimately denied her request to overturn the rejection of her request for refugee status. The Conseil d’Etat rejected the appeal by a decision of 16 October 2009.
Roy M. Belfast, Jr.: United States of America v. Roy M. Belfast, Jr.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, 15 Jul 2010, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, United States
Mr. Roy M. Belfast, Jr. (“Charles Taylor Jr.”), the first individual to be prosecuted under the Torture Act and the son of Former Liberian President and convicted war criminal Charles Taylor, was arrested and indicted in Florida, U.S., in December 2006 following a joint Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) / Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) investigation.
In the indictment, Belfast was charged for his role in numerous acts of torture and other atrocities in Liberia between 1999 and 2003 while he was the commander of the States Anti-Terrorism Unit (ATU). After hearing evidence from multiple witnesses describing the torture that the defendant had subjected them to, a jury convicted him on all counts and he was sentenced to 97 years in prison.
In 2010, he appealed that conviction before the United States Eleventh Circuit, arguing that Congress impermissibly expanded the prohibitions of the Convention Against Torture (CAT) through the Torture Act and that the Torture Act and U.S. firearms Statutes, under which he was convicted, could not apply to acts committed in Liberia before Liberia became a State Party to the CAT.
The Court rejected all of his arguments and upheld the conviction, finding that the U.S. Torture Act validly enacted CAT and he was convicted in line with the Constitution.
<< first
< prev
page 97 of
122
next >
last >>