730 results (ordered by date)
<< first
< prev
page 49 of
146
next >
last >>
South African Apartheid Litigation: Lungisile Ntsebeza et al. v. Citigroup, Inc., et al.
Memorandum Opinion and Order , 29 Nov 2004, United States District Court Southern District of New York, United States
Who can be held responsible in a Court of law for human rights violations? In this case, victims and relatives of victims of the South African apartheid regime sued several corporations for their involvement in South Africa in the period between 1948 and 1994. They were liable, the plaintiffs reasoned, because the police shot demonstrators “from cars driven by Daimler-Benz engines”, “the regime tracked the whereabouts of African individuals on IBM computers”, “the military kept its machines in working order with oil supplied by Shell”, and so forth. The main legal issue to be solved by the District Court was whether it had jurisdiction over this case under the Alien Tort Claims Act (ATCA), which allows non-Americans to sue in federal Court for a violation of a small group of international norms. The District Court ruled that this case did not fall within the scope of the ATCA for several reasons. They could not be qualified as state agents carrying out illegal state actions, business activities in South Africa during the apartheid era could not be defined as a breach of the ‘law of nations’ under the ATCA and neither could aiding and abetting to an international norm violation.
Soares (Marculino): The Deputy General Prosecutor for Serious Crimes v. Marculino Soares
Julgamento (Judgement), 1 Dec 2004, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
During the outbreak of violence before, during and after the referendum on independence of East Timor from Indonesia, Marculino Soares was a Besi Merah Putih (BMP) militia commander from the village of Guico, in the district of Liquiça. The BMP militia was an anti-independence militia. On 17 April 1999, the house of Manuel Carrascalão, a pro-independence leader, was attacked, resulting in the death of 12 persons, and serious injuries to 9 others. On that day, Marculino Saores had ordered his men to go to a rally in Dili, from where the attack was launched. The group led by Marculino Soares joined the attack. Marculino Soares was indicted on 25 July 2003 by the Special Panel for Serious Crimes for participating in the attack, and charged with crimes against humanity, on the basis of individual and command responsibility.
The Court found that it had been proven that Marculino Soares personally participated in the organization and execution of the attack. Marculino Soares was convicted of crimes against humanity (murder, other inhumane acts and persecution) and sentenced to 15 years in prison (13 for the count of murder and 2 years for the count of other inhumane acts).
Lao: The Prosecutor v. Mateus Lao a.k.a. Ena Poto
Judgement, 3 Dec 2004, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
During Indonesia’s illegal occupation of East Timor from 1975 until Timorese independence in 2005, members of the Indonesian Armed Forces along with a number of militia groups perpetrated attacks designed to terrorise the civilian population of East Timor who supported Timorese independence.
In the context of these attacks, the Accused, Mateus Lao, was a member of the Sakunar militia group. In 1999, he and other members of the militia encountered a family of two adults (including a pregnant mother) and four children attempting to cross from East Timor into West Timor. The father was singled out by the militia, taken away from his family and hacked with a machete by Lao. He died as a result of his injuries. The Court sentenced him to 8 years’ imprisonment for murder as a crime against humanity.
Doe I et al. v. Qi et al.: Jane Doe I, et al. v. Liu Qi, et al.
Default Judgment, 8 Dec 2004, United States District Court for the Northern District of California, United States
The plaintiffs, Jane Doe I, Jane Doe II, Helene Petit, Martin Larsson, Leeshai Lemish, and Roland Odar, all practitioners of Falun Gong, were beaten, sexually assaulted and tortured by police forces in the period before the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
On 7 February 2002, the plaintiffs brought a claim against Liu Qi, who was the mayor of Beijing at that time. The plaintiffs accused him of failing to supervise and discipline the police officers who offended them. In addition, they claimed that Qi also formulated a policy that authorised such offences and incited police forces to violently repress the Falun Gong religious movement.
Qi did not reply or appear after he was served with the complaint. As a result, the plaintiffs filed a request for default judgment (a judgment issued as a result of defendant’s failure to respond). On 8 December 2004, the District Court entered a default judgment against Qi upholding only the claims of Doe I, Doe II, and Petit.
Tacaqui: The Prosecutor v. Florencio Tacaqui
Judgement, 9 Dec 2004, Special Panels for Serious Crimes (District Court of Dili), East Timor
Indonesia illegally occupied East Timor from 1975 until 2002. Members of the Indonesian Armed Forces (TNI) worked together with local police forces and pro-autonomy militia groups to perpetrate a campaign of violence against suspected independence supporters.
The Accused, Florencio Tacaqui, was an advisor and member of the Sakunar militia group, which operated in Passabe. In 1999, both prior to and after s referendum in August in which the Timorese people voted overwhelmingly in favour of independence, it carried out a number of attacks. In particular, the Tacaqui was involved in the abduction, detention and beating of approximately 40 independence supporters at the home of a Sakunar chief. He was also involved in the attack on a village in which numerous individuals died, homes were burnt down and livestock stolen. He was convicted for 4 counts of crimes against humanity and sentenced to 12 years’ imprisonment. The Special Panel was unable to convict him for the Passabe massacre in which 47 individuals were marched from their homes to a remote area and executed. Witness testimony was contradictory and the evidence inconclusive to support his presence at the scene. The remaining 10 individuals with whom Tacaqui was indicted remain at large.
<< first
< prev
page 49 of
146
next >
last >>