Search results

Tihomir Blaškić was brought before the ICTY for his role as Commander of the armed forces of the Croatian Defence Council during the events that took place in the area of Lašva Valley (Bosnia and Herzegovina) between May 1992 and January 1994. During this time, the Croatian forces attacked several municipalities in the area of Lašva Valley (Bosnia and Herzegovina). As a result of the attack, hundreds of Bosnian Muslim civilians were killed, arrested, detained, mistreated or forced to leave their homes.

Trial Chamber I found that Tihomir Blaškić ordered a significant number of attacks and did not take measures to prevent or punish the crimes that were committed by his subordinates. Therefore, Trial Chamber I found him responsible for the crimes against humanity and war crimes occurred during those attacks. 

Furthermore, Blaškić was found guilty of inhuman and cruel treatment (as crimes against humanity) for the violence at the detention centres, for the forcing of detainees to dig trenches, for the taking of hostages, and for the use of human shields. 

Blaškić was sentenced to 45 years of imprisonment.

Zlatko Aleksovski was brought before the ICTY for his role in the commission of crimes against the detainees of the Kaonik prison in the Lašva Valley area of Bosnia and Herzegovina. During the hostilities between the Bosnian Croat and Bosnian Muslim forces, the facility was used as a detention place for Bosnian Muslims. The detainees were subjected to physical and mental mistreatments. Furthermore, they were used as human shields and for trench digging. Aleksovski was the commander of the Kaonik prison from January 1993 till May 1993. Trial Chamber I found him guilty of outrages upon personal dignity as a violation of the laws or customs of war.

The Appeals Chamber held that Trial Chamber I applied the wrong test for determining the nature of the armed conflict and the status of the protected persons. However, it did not reverse the acquittals on the two counts of grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions.

The Appeals Chamber also agreed with the Prosecution that Trial Chamber I should have found Aleksovski responsible not only for the mistreatments that occurred inside the Kaonik prison but also for those that occurred outside of it. The Appeals Chamber revised the sentence to 7 years of imprisonment.

When Rwandan President Habyariamana was killed on 6 April 1994, it reignited ethnic tensions in Rwanda between the Hutu and Tutsi populations, which had earlier in the same decade culminated in a bloody civil war.

Omar Serushago was the de facto leader of the civilian Interahamwe militia, one of the primary perpetrators of the crimes committed against Tutsis and moderate Hutus in the genocide of 1994. In his official capacity, Serushago led a group of militiamen in raids against Tutsis seeking refuge in parish churches, on commercial property, in bishop’s houses, and even those who were detained in the Gendarmerie station jail. Tutsis would then be summarily executed, some personally at the hands of Serushago. Having pleaded guilty to one count of genocide and three counts of crimes against humanity (assassination, extermination and torture), Serushago was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment by the Trial Chamber. By a decision of 14 February 2000, the Appeals Chamber dismissed Serushago’s arguments that the sentence against him was excessively long. The present decision contains the reasons of the Appeals Chamber for having reached this conclusion. 

We often associate genocide with the act of killing members of a specific group, of which there have been many devastating examples throughout history. However, according to the Genocide Convention, other acts can also be regarded as genocide, if they are committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, specific groups. In this case, the plaintiff had already sought (and failed to find) two interlocutory injunctions to prevent a bridge from being built to Hindmarsh in South Australia. It was held that this construction would impede on the culture and way-of-life of the Ngarrindjeri in such a dramatic way that it would lead to the destruction of this group. The judge did not agree that the construction would amount to genocide and reiterated earlier judgments that genocide was not a criminal act under Australian law. Treaties are not a direct source of law in Australia, and neither is customary international law.

In 2002, with the International Criminal Court Act 2002, genocide became a crime under Australian law.

In June 1944, German occupation forces in Greece massacred more than 300 inhabitants of the village of Distomo and burnt the village to the ground, as reprisal for a partisan attack on German troops. In 1995, proceedings against Germany were instituted before the Greek courts, by over 250 relatives of the victims of the massacre, claiming compensation for loss of life and property. The Court of Livadia, Greece, held Germany liable and ordered it to pay compensation to the claimants. Germany appealed to the Greek Supreme Court, on the ground that it was immune from the jurisdiction of the Greek courts, on the basis of state immunity.

The Greek Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and rejected Germany’s claim of jurisdictional immunity. The Court denied German immunity applying Article 11 of the European Convention on State Immunity, considered to correspond to customary international law. Moreover, the Court held that violation of peremptory norms would have the legal effect of implicitly waiving the jurisdictional immunity. It reasoned that torts in breach of rules of peremptory international law cannot be claimed to be acts jure imperii, concluding that Germany, by breaching jus cogens, had implicitly waived its immunity.