Connect with us

News

Deadly 2007 Dutch attack on Afghan compound illegal, court rules

Published

on

A court in the Netherlands orders the country to compensate families of the 20 victims killed in the air strike.

(Al Jazeera) A court in the Netherlands has ruled that a 2007 bombing of a residential compound in Afghanistan by Dutch forces was unlawful, and it ordered the country to pay compensation to the victims’ families.The District Court of The Hague on Wednesday found that the nighttime attack that killed about 20 civilians violated international humanitarian law.

On June 17, 2007, Dutch F-16 fighter jets dropped 28 guided bombs in the central Afghan province of Uruzgan. Eighteen of them landed on walled compounds near the strategic town of Chora.Dutch forces were part of the United States-led coalition that intervened in Afghanistan in the wake of 2001’s deadly 9/11 suicide hijackings of passenger planes. Afghanistan’s Taliban rulers were accused of harbouring al-Qaeda, which was blamed for the attacks in the US.

The Dutch Ministry of Defence had asked prosecutors almost two years ago to look into the Uruzgan bombing after a report by a war veteran questioned its legitimacy.The ministry had argued the buildings were being used by Taliban fighters when the military hit the compound. The court on Wednesday found otherwise.

“The Netherlands was responsible for the shelling of the houses,” it said in a statement. “It was known these houses were inhabited by civilians. The State invoked the fact the Taliban used the houses for military purposes … and thus that the bombing was not unlawful.”

“But the court rules that the State hasn’t sufficiently made clear on what basis it came to the conclusion that these houses were being used by the Taliban; … therefore, the bombing is illegal,” it ruled.

The court sided with four survivors of the attack who brought a civil suit against the Dutch state for compensation. They were not named in court documents.The victims included the wife, two daughters, three sons and a daughter-in-law of one of the claimants, court papers said.

Dutch government lawyers argued that the Taliban used the compound for military purposes and, although civilians lived there, the attack was justified.But judges said there had been no firing around the compound for at least 15 hours before the bombing.

“The most recent information was already 15 hours old,” the claimants’ lawyer Liesbeth Zegveld told the AFP news agency.

“The intelligence is not of a nature in which one could say, ‘Well, yes please, go ahead with seven bombs,’” the lawyer said.

Judges also ruled on Wednesday that victims should be compensated but amounts would be determined at a later stage.The Dutch defence ministry said it would study the verdict.



Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

News

Showers about 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central, Uva, Southern, North-western, Northern and North-central provinces and in Trincomalee district.

Published

on

By

WEATHER FORECAST FOR 11 MAY 2026
Issued at 05.30 a.m. on 11 May 2026 by the Department of Meteorology

 

The low-level atmospheric disturbance in the vicinity of Sri Lanka is likely to develop into a low-pressure area around the next 36 hours. Therefore, the prevailing showery conditions over the island are expected to continue during the next few days.

Showers or thundershowers will occur at times in most parts of the island and Cloudy skies are expected, under the influence of the aforementioned system. Heavy showers about 100 mm are likely at some places in the Western, Sabaragamuwa, Central, Uva, Southern, North-western, Northern and North-central provinces and in Trincomalee district.

The general public is kindly requested to take adequate precautions to minimize damage caused by temporary localized strong winds and lightning during thundershowers.

Continue Reading

News

Treasury theft: Speaker’s conduct brought to IPU’s attention: SJB  

Published

on

Dayasiri

SJB MP Dayasiri Jayasekera has sought the intervention of the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) to pressure the JVP-NPP government to respect the rights of the Opposition.

MP Jayasekera told The Island that they wouldn’t allow the NPP to suppress the truth regarding the theft of Treasury funds amounting to USD 2.5 million. He accused Speaker Dr. Jagath Wickremaratne of depriving the Opposition of its legitimate rights, at the behest of the government.

Jayasekera said that the Speaker’s conduct regarding the action taken against Deputy Secretary General of Parliament Chaminda Kularatne, too, had been brought to the notice of IPU and other international associations.

The text of MP Jayasekera’s letter to the Secretary general of IPU: “I respectfully submit this petition seeking the attention and intervention of the Inter-Parliamentary Union concerning a matter affecting parliamentary accountability, the rights of elected representatives, and the proper functioning of constitutional oversight within the Parliament of Sri Lanka.

On 06 May 2026, I Dayasiri Jayasekara MP submitted a formal request to the Hon. Speaker of Parliament seeking permission, under the Parliament (Powers and Privileges) Act No. 21 of 1953 and Standing Order 29(1), to raise a question of privilege regarding alleged constitutional and parliamentary violations by Mr. Harshana Suriyapperuma, Secretary to the Treasury of Sri Lanka.

The proposed privilege motion raised matters including:

1. Alleged violations of Articles 148, 149, and 150 of the Constitution of Sri Lanka concerning parliamentary control over public finance;

2. Alleged failure to report to Parliament concerning a controversial and unlawful transfer of approximately USD 2.5 million from the Treasury;

3. Alleged non-compliance with parliamentary committee procedures under the Standing Orders of Parliament;

4. Questions relating to constitutional eligibility under Article 91(1)(d)(xiii) of the Constitution concerning dual citizenship and qualification to sit and vote in Parliament;

5. A request that the matter be referred to the Parliamentary Ethics and Privileges Committee established under Standing Order 118.

 Despite the seriousness of the constitutional and parliamentary issues raised, the Hon. Speaker declined permission for the privilege issue to be raised in Parliament.

It is respectfully submitted that this refusal has the effect of:

•  Preventing an elected Member of Parliament from exercising his parliamentary oversight function;

• Restricting parliamentary scrutiny over matters involving public finance and constitutional accountability;

•  Undermining the privileges of Members of Parliament to raise matters of urgent public importance;

•  Limiting institutional transparency concerning allegations involving senior state officials.

The right of parliamentarians to raise questions of privilege and matters relating to constitutional governance is an essential component of parliamentary democracy and legislative independence. The refusal to permit even the presentation or preliminary consideration of such a matter raises serious concerns regarding parliamentary accountability mechanisms in Sri Lanka.

Accordingly, I respectfully request that the Inter-Parliamentary Union:

1.Take cognizance of this matter as one affecting the rights and functions of Members of Parliament;

2.Seek clarification from the relevant parliamentary authorities in Sri Lanka regarding the grounds upon which the privilege motion was disallowed;

3.Consider whether the refusal is compatible with internationally recognised principles of parliamentary democracy, accountability, and freedom of parliamentary speech;

4. Encourage the Parliament of Sri Lanka to ensure fair and transparent procedures governing parliamentary privilege motions and constitutional oversight.

I further request that this communication be placed before the appropriate committee or mechanism within the IPU dealing with the rights and duties of parliamentarians.”

Continue Reading

News

Navin calls for formal alliance between UNP and SJB

Published

on

UNP Vice President and Kandy District Leader, Navin Dissanayake, on Saturday, stressed that any proposed merger between the UNP and the SJB must be carried out formally rather than in an ad hoc manner.

Addressing a media briefing in Kandy, Dissanayake said a structured framework was essential to ensure the successful reunification of the two parties ahead of future elections.

“A formal mechanism must be established for the unification of the UNP and the SJB. This process cannot be confined to personal verbal assurances given to suit individual interests. We must build a strong framework to contest future elections as a united force,” he said.

He added that the UNP could only regain political strength by reuniting with factions that had broken away from the party.

Dissanayake also claimed that the Government would be compelled to hold Provincial Council elections amid mounting international and domestic pressure.

“India is exerting pressure to conduct these elections, while the people in the North are also demanding governance under the Provincial Council system. They are awaiting the polls,” he said.

Announcing his own political intentions, Dissanayake said he hoped to contest as the Chief Ministerial candidate for the Central Province at the next Provincial Council election.

“I intend to contest as the Chief Ministerial candidate for the Central Province. Having served as a Governor, I understand the extent of service that can be delivered to the people through a Provincial Council,” he said.

Recalling the history of constitutional devolution, Dissanayake said his late father, Gamini Dissanayake, had played a significant role in the introduction of the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of Sri Lanka.

by SK Samaranayake

Continue Reading

Trending