ipl-logo

Re Pinochet Case Summary

727 Words3 Pages

THE PINOCHET CASE In Re Pinochet spanning across three judgments, portrays a rather progressive view of sovereign immunity. By upholding human rights and conversely arguing in favor of the people, the House of Lords rejected the notion that a Head of State was free to act in any manner to rule his people. The irony of the situation was that it was Pinochet who signed the Torture Convention that he himself fell prey to . FACTS Pinochet Ugartewas the Head of the State of Chile from 11 September 1973 to March 1990. Pinochet was accused by the Spanish magistrate BaltasarGarzon of authorizing or knowingly allowing torture, disappearance of people, taking them hostage and murder in the decades following the 1973 violent overthrow of the democratically elected government of President Salvador Allende. Citizens of various nations including Chile, Spain and the U.K. were victims of his crimes. These crimes were alleged to have formed part of an international conspiracy to track …show more content…

PINOCHET II AND POSSIBILITY OF A BIAS The lawyers arguing on behalf of Pinochet demonstrated the possibility of a bias as Lord Hoffman’s wife worked for Amnesty International, who along with several other organizations had involved it in protecting human rights by joining the case as a party, after the first judgment. Additionally, Lord Hoffman himself was on the Board for Amnesty’s educational program due to which the possibility of a bias became apparent and the Court was compelled to call for a second judgment in the matter . A second change from the first to the third judgment was that Chile, which was earlier demanding for Pinochet to be extradited, had now joined as a party . PINOCHET III AND STATE IMMUNITY Several issues were raised in this case with respect to the crimes committed by Senator Pinochet. However, numerous of these were raised at earlier stages in the proceedings and were not found to be of international relevance

Show More
Related
364 Words | 2 Pages

In 1963, Ernesto Miranda was arrested in Pheonix, Arizona for the kidnapping and raping of a woman. When questioned by police officers, Miranda would eventually give a confession, and sign it, which wasn 't the case.. Before the court, this confession would be used against Miranda, and with it, the implication that it was received voluntarily and with the convicted knowing his rights. Miranda was convicted with a 20-30 year sentence. Upon eventually learning that his confession was obtained unlawfully, Miranda would appeal to the Arizona Supreme Court, asking for an overturn, and when that fell through, would turn to the United States Supreme Court, filing a habeas corpus.

Read More
2188 Words | 9 Pages

It was said that Pancho Villa killed the U.S. citizens and ordered the raid because he protested President Wilson for supporting General Carranza as the new President of

Read More
220 Words | 1 Pages

The Supreme Court stated, since the board gave no explanation behind the foreswearing of a conscientious objector exemption, and it is difficult to decide on which of the three grounds offered in the Justice's letter that board depended, Ali's 1967 conviction must be overturned. The Incomparable Court choice was passed on June 28, 1971. As per that record, Marshall had reaccused himself on the grounds that he had been U.S. Specialist General when the case started, and the staying eight judges at first voted 5 to 3 to maintain Ali's conviction. Nonetheless, Harlan, relegated to compose the lion's share assessment, got to be persuaded that Ali's case to be a noncombatant was genuine subsequent to perusing foundation material on Black Muslim

Read More
784 Words | 4 Pages

The best way to answer any question is to be clear about what is being asked and to look only for the facts of that question. We are not being asked whether Joseph Stalin was a good person. The question is, what are the accomplishments of Joseph Stalin that improved his country and made it great? From this point, we can clearly identify what he did, as seen in the articles. Was Stalin beneficial to the USSR?

Read More
1866 Words | 8 Pages

Chapter One: Introduction During the English Civil War, in the 1640s, the Earl of Clarendon came up with a novel wheeze: rather than allow those presumed to be parliamentarian enemies to claim the benefit of the rule of law, he would establish a prison on an island off the British shoreline. That way, he reasoned, they could be safely forgotten, buried along with their legal rights. When parliament later looked back on this dark chapter of British history, they passed the Habeas Corpus Act of 1679 to ensure that never again would an unpopular group of people be denied justice. Clarendon was impeached by the House of Commons and fled to France, where he died in exile.

Read More
1156 Words | 5 Pages

While Spain victimized two countries. They tortured and deprived Mexico and Venezuela.

Read More
584 Words | 3 Pages

First, it was acknowledged that every individual is protected against losing their citizenship according to the Fourteenth Amendment, in Afroyim v. Rusk. That the Constitution requires, “clear and convincing evidence” that citizenship was voluntary denounced, which Congress does not have the power to constitute the standard of. Secondly, the court recognized that even though in the case of Nishikawa v. Dulles it was ruled that Congress does have the right to supply the standard of evidential proof; the case was not a fair decision based on the Constitution. Proof was left to Terrazas to show that he did not mean to denounce his citizenship.

Read More
696 Words | 3 Pages

Ernesto Miranda, a suspect charged with rape, kidnapping and robbery, had his Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights violated during a police interrogation. These injustices lead to a United States Supreme Court trial, whose outcome forever imprints our justice system. Ernesto Miranda, a resident of Phoenix, was charged for rape, kidnapping, and robbery in 1963. Miranda was identified by the victim and he was detained and interrogated by police for two hours, where he allegedly conceded to the crimes he was charged of and signed a written statement included with a typed disclaimer, without any attorney present. The police neglected to apprise Miranda of his right to an attorney and his right to remain silent to avoid self-incrimination prior to police interrogation, which is a violation of the Fifth Amendment and Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Read More
719 Words | 3 Pages

The new decision led to a cyclone of accusations because people realized the possibility of their condemnation regardless they were guilty or innocent. Many helped that system by untrue confessions to save their lives. Miller, among others, refused to surrender to questioning. People who were revealed communists suffered greatly (Bly 2-5).

Read More
890 Words | 4 Pages

Arizona, Were his rights violated? It is obvious that Ernesto 's rights were not clear to him. Before his interrogation, Miranda was unaware of his rights and when he made his confession, they were entirely thrown out. In 1965, the court agreed to heir his case. Miranda 's case won 5-4 and a statement was made.

Read More
1053 Words | 5 Pages

These cases raise basic constitutional issues of the utmost concern. it also calls into question the role of the military under our system of government. it involves the power of Congress to expose civilians to trial by military tribunals, under military regulations and procedures, for offenses against the United States. And thereby depriving her of trial in civilian courts, under civilian laws and procedures and with all the safeguards of the Bill of Rights. Notwithstanding, she was tried by the court-martial with-out a grand jury, the dependent alleged that she was denied a right to a jury tried and so right to have her indictment presented to a grand jury pursuant to the constitution.

Read More
1588 Words | 7 Pages

During times of war, there is a national crisis to protect the country and the citizens living in it. Secrecy of military endeavors is of utmost importance, and disclosing facts about these topics could lose a war or risk millions of lives. The government takes away people 's rights in order to protect the country. Many people argue against the suspension of the writ of Habeas Corpus, and the Espionage and Sedition acts.

Read More
889 Words | 4 Pages

Extraterritorial criminal jurisdiction can in many circumstances be a useful and legitimate response to transnational crime. Criminal activity is not always confined to territorial boarders, and so the law may seek to follow the crime to prevent an offender from enjoying impunity. A number of states have included in their criminal legislature provisions allowing for the investigation and prosecution of international crimes, even when such crime is committed outside their national territory and whether or not the perpetrators or the victims are nationals of the state concerned”. The importance of extraterritorial jurisdiction was also seen in the Advisory Opinion of 11 April 1949 – Reparations for injuries suffered in the service of the United Nations. Personnel of the UN were targeted in Palestine which culminated in the assassination of

Read More
1658 Words | 7 Pages

Zac Andrus MGB 516 Feb. 27, 2018 Case Analysis Silvio Napoli at Schindler India Key Issues Below are a few of the main key issues that Silvio Napoli faced when starting at Schindler India. These issues are looked at in more depth in the following analysis section, showcasing why they may have surfaced and what they mean for Napoli in his current environment. 1. Market entry to India was based on a standardized elevator that didn’t meet customer needs (no customization options, cost-reduction was the top objective, and rapid urbanization in India was leading to higher quality technology expectations). 2.

Read More
955 Words | 4 Pages

Torture is universally prohibited in both national and International law worldwide. It is a fundamental violation of human rights that cannot be derogated from. Essentially, torture is said to constitute any physical and mental act by which severe pain or suffering is intentionally inflicted upon a person ( UNCAT).Torture is mainly used for purposes that are set out to degraded, embarrass, and induce destruction in the person being subjected to torture and those in close relation to the person being tortured .Torture is a mechanism used by those in authoritative positions to preserve themselves in power (Power, 2006:2). Despite the universal prohibition on torture, its use has been widespread throughout history, and especially of late in the wake of September 11 2001 and other recent terrorist atrocities to combat the aforementioned heinous terrorist attacks.

Read More

More about Re Pinochet Case Summary

Related Topics

Open Document