What are These Cases All About?

                                             

During the 1980s, Somalia’s brutal military dictatorship led by Major General Siad Barré, committed human rights abuses against its own citizens on an unprecedented scale.  These atrocities included torture, rape, mass executions, aerial bombings, and prolonged prison terms in solitary confinement.  The intent was to terrorize civilians  who did not belong to clans that were part of the regime and to deter them from supporting the growing opposition movements.  The Somali Armed Forces and security forces committed these atrocities against ordinary Somalis including businessmen, teachers, high school students, and nomads simply tending their herds. 

 

In the case against General Mohamed Ali Samantar, six members of the Isaaq clan seek to hold him responsible for the abuses they suffered at the hands of soldiers directly under his command.  General Ali Samantar served as Somalia’s Minister of Defense from approximately 1980 to 1987 and as Somalia’s Prime Minister from approximately 1987 to 1990. The plaintiffs bring claims for torture; extrajudicial killing; attempted summary execution; cruel, inhuman degrading treatment or punishment; arbitrary detention; war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

In the case against Colonel Yusuf Abdi Ali ("Tokeh"), two members of the Isaaq clan seek to hold him responsible for the abuses he personally committed against them and for abuses they suffered at the hands of soldiers directly under his command.  Colonel Abdi Ali served as commander of the Fifth Battalion of the Somali National Army from approximately 1984 to 1989.  The plaintiffs bring claims for torture; attempted summary execution; cruel, inhuman degrading treatment or punishment; arbitrary detention; war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

The civil trials against General Ali Samantar and Col. Tokeh will mark the first time any members of the Barre government or military will stand trial for any of the human rights abuses committed by that brutal regime.

 

 

What is the Case Against Ali Samantar About? Who is he? And who are the Plaintiffs?

 

Mohamed Ali Samantar is a former senior officer in the Somali National Army and high-ranking member of the military dictatorship that ruled Somalia from 1969 to 1991.  He was among the Army officers who joined with Major General Siad Barre in October 1969 to overthrow Somalia’s first civilian government. 

 

During the 1970s, he held several high positions in the military government including commander of the Armed Forces.  He served as Vice President and Minister of Defense of Somalia from about 1980 to 1987.  He also served as Prime Minister of Somalia from 1980 to 1990.  He currently lives in Fairfax, Virginia.

 

The plaintiffs in the case against him are individuals who were victims of human rights abuses committed between 1980 and 1990 by the Somali National Army or security forces,   who were under Ali Samantar’s command and control. 

 

Bashe Abdi Yousuf currently resides in Atlanta, Georgia. He was a young businessman at the time he was arrested in 1981 for being a member of UFFO, a community organization seeking to improve conditions at the local schools and hospital.  He was charged with high treason, a crime that carried a mandatory death sentence by hanging.  He was severely tortured, tried before a kangaroo court, and then spent nearly seven years in solitary confinement in a small cell in a maximum security prison outside Mogadishu. 

 

Other plaintiffs against General Ali Samantar include:

 

• A farmer who was arrested with his two brothers by Somali Army soldiers while tending the family’s camels.  He and his brothers were tortured, and his brothers were murdered. 

 

• A woman who was arrested when she was just a high school student because of her alleged political activities against the government.  She was tortured and raped at regional Army headquarters and sentenced by a “kangaroo court” to life in prison.  She was held in solitary confinement for over 3 years.

 

• A Somali Army officer who was detained – along with other Isaaq officers – and sent to be killed because the Army feared that he and the other officers would defect to, and assist, the groups opposing the government.  He was shot by a firing squad at the notorious Malko DurDuro execution site but received only a flesh wound and hid himself under the bodies of his dead friends until the soldiers left and he was able to escape.

 

• A college student who was also shot and left for dead by Army soldiers and security forces during a mass execution of Isaaq men on a beach near the Somali city of Jezira.  He allowed himself to be buried alive by the soldiers and remained in the sand until the soldiers left the beach and he was able to escape.

 

• A man whose four brothers were murdered during the Jezira Beach massacre.

 

 

What role do Plaintiffs allege Defendant Ali Samantar played in the human rights abuses committed against them?

 

Plaintiffs do not allege that Ali Samantar directly or personally committed torture and other atrocities against them or their family members.  Liability in this case hinges on proof of his responsibility as commander of the Somali Armed Forces for abuses committed by these forces under his command. Under the internationally recognized doctrine of "command responsibility," a military commander may be held responsible for abuses by subordinates if the commander knew, or should have known, about the abuses, and failed to take all reasonable measures to prevent the abuses or punish the offenders.  He is also accused of conspiring with and aiding and abetting subordinates in abuses.

 

 

What is the Case Against Tokeh About? Who is he? And who are the Plaintiffs?

 

Tokeh was a notoriously brutal military leader in the Gebiley region of northern Somalia.  Soldiers under his direct command routinely tortured and murdered alleged opponents of the government, killed and looted livestock, blew up water reservoirs and destroyed homes.   He personally ordered the torture and murder of civilians he claimed were helping the political opposition to the Barré government. In 1986, he graduated from a training program for foreign military officers at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. Tokeh was deported from Canada in 1992 because of evidence of involvement in human rights violations. He was accused, among other brutal acts, of burning prisoners to death and of dragging one young man behind a military vehicle, shredding his body to pieces.

 

The case filed in U.S. court was initiated by two Somali farmers. Both still live in Somalia, both were detained by soldiers under Tokeh’s command, and both were tortured by these soldiers as well as by Tokeh himself. One, a woman, was four months pregnant in 1984 when she was detained. She lost her fetus as a result of the beatings she endured.  She spent six years in a crowded prison cell with no window and only a single toilet.  The second plaintiff was detained in December 1987 and severely tortured numerous times, often with Tokeh present. On one occasion, Tokeh shot him several times and ordered his bodyguards to bury the man.  

 

 

How did Ali Samantar and Tokeh get into the U.S. and why are they allowed to stay here?

 

Both Ali Samantar and Tokeh fled Somalia in 1991 after the Barré regime was toppled.

Gen. Samatar came to the U.S. after his wife was granted asylum.  This illustrates a problem with the U.S. immigration law – that spouses of persons granted asylum are automatically entitled to asylum as well, even if they have persecuted others.

Tokeh was deported from Canada in October 1992 based on evidence of his extreme brutality. He came to the U.S. and filed for permanent residency in 1993. In his visa application, he reportedly swore that he had not persecuted others. Shortly thereafter, the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) placed him in deportation proceedings on the ground that he had committed fraud in completing his visa application. He withdrew his application. The INS allowed him to voluntarily depart the U.S. and, in 1994, he left for Kenya. In 1996, he was permitted to return to the United States to join his wife, a U.S. citizen. In 1998, the INS arrested him on fraud charges, stemming from misstatements in his 1993 visa application.  However, an immigration judge dismissed the case on the ground that he had withdrawn the 1993 application and that his misrepresentation was therefore not “material”.  He has lived openly in Virginia since then.

 

 

What is the legal basis of the suit?

 

 The Alien Tort Claims Act, adopted in 1789, gives survivors of abuses which were committed anywhere in the world “in violation of the law of nations” the right to bring lawsuits in U.S. federal court against perpetrators who come to the United States.  Since 1980, the law has been used successfully in cases involving torture, extrajudicial killing, crimes against humanity, war crimes and arbitrary detention.  It was recently upheld by the Supreme Court in the case of Sosa v. Alvarez-Machain. The Torture Victim Protection Act, passed in 1991 and signed into law by President George H.W. Bush in 1992, gives similar rights to U.S. citizens and non-citizens alike to bring claims for torture and extrajudicial killing committed in foreign countries and “under the actual or apparent authority . . . of any foreign nation.” Under both laws, the perpetrator must be served with the lawsuit in the United States in order for the court to have jurisdiction.

 

 

What do plaintiffs and CJA hope to achieve with these cases?

 

The plaintiffs are seeking justice, first and foremost.  They seek official acknowledgement by a court of law that Defendants Ali Samantar and Tokeh were responsible for the abuses committed against them. The perpetrators of such crimes should not be able to find safe haven in the U.S. 

The plaintiffs will ask for punitive damages in order to deter other military commanders and high-ranking government officials from failing to take action when their subordinates commit atrocities and also to ensure that the generals forfeit any assets they may be holding over which the court can get jurisdiction.

The plaintiffs are also motivated by a strong desire to speak out on behalf of other victims of the Barre regime’s human rights abuses.  They seek to set the record straight about the massive scale on which those abuses were committed. They know they speak for many others who cannot themselves speak out - either because they were killed, or cannot talk about the terrible things that were done to them or that they witnessed because the pain of remembering is too great, or because they fear retaliation against them or their family members who still live in Somalia.

 

 

Why a civil suit? Why not a criminal prosecution?

Only the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has the authority to initiate criminal prosecutions for certain grave human rights abuses like torture, genocide, war crimes, and terrorism. The DOJ does not believe that it has the authority to bring criminal charges in this case. The U.S. law that gives jurisdiction to U.S. courts to hear criminal cases of torture wherever committed only entered into force in November 1994. The DOJ maintains, therefore, that it can only prosecute criminal acts committed after November 1994. The plaintiffs' claims against defendant Ali Samatar concern torture and other human rights abuses committed between 1981 and 1989.

To date, the DOJ has not brought any criminal prosecutions of torturers under the 1994 law.

 

 

If the Defendants are found liable, what can happen to them?

 

If Ali Samantar and Tokeh are found liable, they will be legally obligated to pay the plaintiffs whatever amount of damages the court assesses. The plaintiffs have not asked for any specific monetary award.  The plaintiff will have the right to take possession of any of their assets until the full amount of the judgment is paid off.  Unfortunately a finding of liability in this case will not result in jail time for neither Ali Samatar nor Tokeh.  We hope, however, that he will be detained by immigration authorities and deported.

 

 

What is CJA?

The Center for Justice and Accountability is a non-profit international human rights organization based in San Francisco that works to hold human rights abusers accountable. Among other activities, CJA brings civil lawsuits in U.S. courts against human rights violators who live, visit or keep assets in the U.S. CJA receives substantial pro bono support from law firms, lawyers, professors and private investigators around the country.