  | You have information to share ?
Or mistakes to correct ?
click here...
|
|
| |  | | Herve Madeo | | | context : | Burma (Myanmar)  | | judgement place : | Belgium | | status : | Dismissal - lack of jurisdiction | | particulars : | Charged in 2002 with complicity in crimes against humanity in Myanmar | | position : | Director of the TMEP (1992-1999), responsible for the management of a pipeline project in the region of Yadana, Myanmar. |
|
| | | | On 25 June 2002, charges were brought against Hervé Madeo in Bruxelles by four victims of human rights violations, which had taken place in Myanmar.
The claimants accused Madeo of participating to crimes against humanity. According to them, Madeo would have been the accomplice of the crimes committed by the military battalions that were in charge of the security of the pipeline project.
On 5 August 2003, economic and diplomatic pressures obliged Belgian legislators to modify the law of universal jurisdiction of 1993. From now on, at least one of the plaintiffs should be Belgian.
All the cases filed during the past ten years had to be reviewed by the Court and only those complying with the new legislation would be treated.
On 5 May 2004, the Court of Cassation, that was examining all the files on abuses of human rights in Myanmar, asked the Cour d’Arbitrage to determine if it was contrary to the Belgian Constitution to deprive a refugee, recognized as such and resident in Belgium, of an action that was properly brought in front of the Belgian courts.
On 13 April 2005, the Cour d’Arbitrage answered this question affirmatively because under the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, a refugee has the right to bring a claim in front of a court of law just like any other citizen of the concerned state (art.16). Because one of the plaintiffs was a recognized refugee, the case had to be treated the same way as for a Belgian citizen.
However, on 29 June 2005, and contrary to this decision, the Belgian Court of Cassation held that the case against TOTAL was not admissible according to the art.29 paragraph 3 of the Act of August 5, 2003, replacing the “universal jurisdiction law”.
On 21 June 2006, the Cour d’Arbitrage, on request of the plaintiffs, annulled the disposition that leads the Court of Cassation to stop investigating the case in Belgium. The Court also confirmed its precedent decision according to which not allowing a refugee to bring a claim like any other Belgian citizen would constitute a breach of art.16 of the 1951 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees.
Following an instruction from the Department of Defense, the federal prosecutors in Belgium announced on 1st October 2007, the reopening of the case.
In October 2007, a procedure was opened in front of the “Chambre des mises en accusation” in Bruxelles to know if the case could be tried once again in front of the Belgian jurisdictions. On 5 March 2008, the Chambre decided not to submit the case to the instruction because it had already been tried.
The Birmese refugees have lodged an appeal in Cassation.
On 29 October 2008, the Court of Cassation confirmed the decision of the “Chambre des mises en accusation”, refusing to reopen a case on which the Belgian courts had already ruled. | |    | | Trial Watch would like to remind its users that any person charged by national or international authorities is presumed innocent until proven guilty. | |  |  | | period of charges : | | | 01.01.1988 - 31.12.1996 | | | charges : | | | Crimes against humanity | | | profile last modified : | | | 17.03.2010 |
| |
| | |
|
|
