Prosecutor v. Akayesu. Case ICTR-96-4-T.

International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, September 2, 1998.

This pioneering opinion marks the first time an international criminal tribunal has tried and convicted an individual for genocide and international crimes of sexual violence. The case arose out of the massacres of perhaps a million Tutsi in Rwanda in 1994. At least two thousand died in Taba, a rural commune where defendant Jean-Paul Akayesu was mayor. A trial chamber of the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda concluded that, although Akayesu may at first have tried to prevent killings, he eventually donned a military jacket and participated in or ordered atrocities. The Tribunal found him guilty of one count each of genocide and incitement to commit genocide and seven counts of crimes against humanity. It acquitted Akayesu of five counts brought under common Article 3 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions and Protocol Additional II to those Conventions on the ground that he was not within the class of perpetrators contemplated by them.

After seventy-two days of NATO's air campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbia-Montenegro) (FRY), FRYPresident Slobodan Milošević on June 3, 1999 accepted an international peace proposal to end the conflict concerning Kosovo. The proposal was developed in Bonn after lengthy discussions between U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, EU envoy (and Finnish President) Martti Ahtisaari, and Russian envoy Viktor Chernomyrdin, and then presented to President Milosevic by President Ahtisaari and Mr. Chernomyrdin. Although it contained several elements previously unacceptable to the FRY, Mr. Milošević accepted the proposal due to a relentless bombing campaign against FRY tanks, artillery, and ground forces in Kosovo, as well as the destruction of oil refineries, bridges, and power stations elsewhere in Serbia; a resurgence of the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) as a ground force; and the decision of Russia to find common ground with NATO prior to a regular meeting in early June of the seven leading industrial countries (Group of Seven or “G-7”) and Russia.

Grant v. South-West Trains, Ltd. Case C-249/96. 1998 All England Law Reports (EC) 193.

Court of Justice of the European Communities, February 17, 1998.

Are employers within the European Community (EC or Community) forbidden from discriminating against their employees on the basis of sexual orientation? More generally, does the prohibition of “discrimination based on sex” contained in Article 119 of the Treaty of Rome and the Community directive requiring equal pay for men and women (Equal Pay Directive) encompass discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation? In Grant v. South-West Trains, Ltd., the European Court of Justice (ECJ) answered both questions in the negative, rejecting a strongly worded recommendation of the Court's Advocate General.

A. Racke GMBH & Co. v. Hauptzollamt Mainz. Case C-l 62/96.

Court of Justice of the European Communities, June 16, 1998.

The German Bundesfinanzhof (Federal Finance Court) asked the Court of Justice of the European Communities whether an EEC Council regulation suspending the trade concessions provided for by the 1980 Cooperation Agreement between the European Economic Community and the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was valid. The Court answered in the affirmative, holding that, in adopting the regulation, the Council had not acted contrary to the rules of customary international law concerning termination and suspension of treaty relations because of a fundamental change of circumstances.

Decision Concerning the Maastricht Treaty. 1998 Ugeskrift for Retsvaesen, H 800.

Supreme Court of Denmark, April 6, 1998.

In this case the Danish Supreme Court decided that the ratification and the incorporation into Danish law of the Maastricht Treaty creating the European Union are consistent with the Danish Constitution of 1953. It also reserved the right for Danish courts to review Community decisions for consistency with the Act on Denmark's accession to the EC Treaty. This decision is of vital importance to Denmark's relationship to the European Community (EC) and to the claims of direct effect and priority of EC law over national constitutions.

Prince of Liechtenstein v. Federal Supreme Court. Case 2 BvR 1981/97. 36 Archiv des Volkerrechts 198 (1998).

German Federal Constitutional Court (3d Chamber, 2d Senate), January 28, 1998.

On January 28, 1998, a chamber of the German Constitutional Court decided that the Court would not deal with a constitutional complaint brought before it by Prince Hans-Adam II of Liechtenstein, Head of State of die Principality of Liechtenstein. In effect, the chamber thus upheld the decisions made by the civil courts rejecting the Prince's attempt to recover a family painting confiscated by Czechoslovakia and currently on loan to a German museum.