War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 - March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol.
8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
FREDERICK K. COX INTERNATIONAL LAW CENTER
WAR CRIMES PROSECUTION WATCH

Volume 8 - Issue 25 March 10, 2014
EDITOR IN CHIEF Hilarie Henry MANAGING EDITORS Audrey Balint Rachel Berman-Vaporis SENIOR TECHNICAL EDITOR Peter Beardsley
Founder/Advisor Michael P. Scharf
War Crimes Prosecution Watch is a bi-weekly e-newsletter that compiles official documents and articles from major news sources detailing and analyzing salient issues pertaining to the investigation and prosecution of war crimes throughout the world. To subscribe, please email warcrimeswatch@pilpg.org and type "subscribe" in the subject line.
Opinions expressed in the articles herein represent the views of their authors and are not necessarily those of the War Crimes Prosecution Watch staff, the Case Western Reserve University School of Law or Public International Law & Policy Group.
Contents
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

Central African Republic & Uganda
IJMonitor: Bembas Lawyer Seeks to Interview Anonymous Prosecution Informant
Democratic Republic of the Congo

ICC Press Release: Judgment in Katanga Case to Be Delivered on 7 March 2014: Practical information ICC Press Release: Bosco Ntaganda Case: Appeals Chamber Confirms the Decision Rejecting the Defence's Request for Interim Release International Justice Monitor: Waiting for Judgment: Communities in Ituri Await the Katanga Verdict with Impatience
http://publicinternationallawandpolicygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/WCPW_031014_Master_1.html Page 1 of 119
War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
International Justice Monitor: Fundamental Fair Trial Questions Remain Unanswered Ahead of Tomorrow's Judgment in the Katanga Case
Kenya
Standard Digital: Week When Joshua Arap Sang Turned Court Translator in his ICC Trial Standard Digital: ICC Prosecutor Fatau Bensouda Suffers Serious Jolt in Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto Trials Institute for War & Peace Reporting: First Expert Witness Called in Ruto Prosecution Standard Digital: ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda Seeks to Appeal William Rutos Excusal from Presence at Trial Standard Digital: ICC Witness: William Ruto Never Said Madoadoa Capital News: Ruto was not at Rallies Purported by ICC Witness Capital News: Phone Records Place ICC Witness in Nyanza, not Rift All Africa: Kenya: Uhuru and Ruto Out of Country the Same Time All Africa: Kenya: Stop Bensouda from Appealing my Excusal, Ruto Tells Icc All Africa: Kenya: Fergal Gaynor, the Man who Speaks for 20,000 Victims in Kenyatta Case Standard Digital: ICC Judges Hear of ODMs Pre-Poll Plan to Cause Chaos
Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast)

All Africa: Gbagbo's Party Recovers Political Might Ahead of Ivorian Elections
AFRICA
Chad
Human Rights Brief: ECOWAS Court Refuses to Suspend Case Against Hissene Habre
EUROPE
Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina: Public Session in the Case v. Zoran Dragi!evi" Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina: Trial Verdict to be Pronounced in the Case v. Najdan Mla#enovi" et al. Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina: Custody Terminated and Prohibiting Measures Ordered in the Case v. Ned$ad Hod$i" Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina: Najdan Mla#enovi" Received a Sentence of 3 years and 6 Months in Prison Savo %ivkovi" Acquitted of Charges Balkan Transitional Justice: Bosnia Jails Serb for Burning Houses in Bratunac International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Institute for War and Peace Reporting: Karadzic Witnesses Deny Camp Atrocities Institute for War and Peace Reporting: Mladic Prosecution Rests Its Case Institute for War and Peace Reporting: Karadzic Lobbies Judges Over "Immunity Deal" Domestic Prosecutions In The Former Yugoslavia
http://publicinternationallawandpolicygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/WCPW_031014_Master_1.html
Page 2 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Balkan Insight: Croatian Serb Leader Hadzics Acquittal Plea Rejected Balkan Insight: Bosnian Serbs Demand Acquittal Over Mosque Killings Balkan Insight: Witness Recalls School Beatings by Bosnian Croat Fighter Balkan Insight: Bosniak on Trial in Banja Luka for Killing Serb Balkan Insight: Four Bosnian Serbs Convicted of Smoluca Prisoner Abuse
MIDDLE EAST AND ASIA

Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia
The Phnom Penh Post: Chams' Long Wait Nearly Over The Phnom Penh Post: KRT Civil Party Co-Lawyer Simonneau-Fort to Bow Out The Phnom Penh Post: Doctors Centre Stage at KRT The Cambodia Daily: More Money Sought for KR Tribunal Reparations The Cambodia Daily: Ban on Ta An's Case File Upheld at KR Tribunal VOA Khmer: Tribunal Lacks Funding for Victims Reparations, Officials Say
Iraqi High Tribunal Syria

Reuters: World Powers Responsible for Failing to Stop Syria War Crimes: U.N.
Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Naharnet: Lebanon First Bloc to Ask Ban to Refer Political Assassinations to STL The Daily Star: STL Adjourns Hariri Trial Until Mid-May The Daily Star: March 14 Calls on STL to Probe More Assassinations The Daily Star: STL Gives Merhi Defense Team More Time to Work
Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal

The Daily Star: Justice Enayetur Rahim New ICT-1 Chairman The Dhaka Tribune: Tribunal Calls for Nizami's Re-argument The Daily Star: Prosecutors Miss Attendance at ICT
War Crimes Investigations in Burma

DVB: UN Envoy Remains 'Convinced' of Maungdaw Killings DVB: Burmese React to Fortify 'Persecution' Report
NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA

United States
Miami Herald: Lawyers, Judge Hold Secret Hearing on CIA Black Sites Miami Herald: Guantnamo Judge Pushes USS Cole Trial to Dec. 4
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
The Washington Post: U.S. Prepared to Place Unilateral Sanctions on Russian Officials, Businesses Associated Press :US Asks UN to Act Against NKorea for Missile Tests The Washington Post: Trial of Osama Bin Ladens Son-in-Law Begins
South & Central America

Chile The Santiago Times: Piera Pushes for Use of Anti-Terrorism Law in Land Dispute Cases The Santiago Times: Human Remains Found Near Notorious Former-Nazi Compound Colombia Colombia Reports: 15 Members of Colombia Military Wanted for Arms Trafficking Colombia Reports: Former Paramilitary Commander Asks Forgiveness for Torture and Killing

Haiti UN News Centre: UN Expert Applauds Haitian Decision to Probe Alleged Abuses by Baby Doc Duvalier

Mexico Reuters: Mexico Kingpins Arrest a Victory That May Fuel Violence
TOPICS
Terrorism
Columbus Dispatch: Terrorism Case in Military Court The Washington Post: N.Y. Mans Prosecution in Terrorism Case Relied Partly on Surveillance Done Without a Warrant Los Angeles Times: Terrorism Trial to Begin Blocks from Former World Trade Center New York Daily News: Trial of Osamas Son-in-Law Starts Monday, Serving as a Major Test for Federal Court System USA Today: Michigan Man Gets up to 40 Years for Highway Shootings
Piracy
The Economic Times:Italian Marines Case: Law Ministry Concurs with MEA on NonApplicability of Anti-Piracy Law Marine Link:U.S. Anti-Piracy Ship Crew Treatment in India 'An Outrage'
Gender-Based Violence
Page 4 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
BBC:Sudan Court Convicts Ethiopian Woman Over Gang-Rape AllAfrica:Namibia: To Withdraw or Not Gender-Based Violence Cases International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics:
REPORTS
UN Reports
Business Standard:North Korea Refutes UN Report Likening it to Nazi Press TV: India Likely to Back UN War Crimes Investigation of Sri Lanka The Telegraph: Sri Lanka Rejects UN War Crimes Probe as More Bodies Found in Mass Grave Global Post: UN Rights Boss Seeks International Probe into Sri Lanka War Crimes
NGO Reports
Human Rights Watch:Razed to the Ground
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSIONS

Sri Lanka
Deutsche Welle: Doubts over Sri Lanka's Reconciliation Efforts
Nepal
EKantipur: The Rights Debate
Argentina
InSerbia: Argentina Ready to Nix AMIA Truth Commission Pact With Iran
COMMENTARY AND PERSPECTIVES

Justice in Conflict: Should Ukraine be on the International Criminal Courts Radar? Justice in Conflict: Justice in the Central African Republic: A Role for the ICC Justice in Conflict: Ukraine and the International Criminal Court: Out of Africa and Into Europe? Communis Hostis Omnium: New ISO Standard for Private Maritime Security Companies Opinio Juris: Chinese Victims of Forced Labor Sue Japanese Companies in Chinese Courts; They Might Even Win Opinio Juris: Mueller on Kenya and the ICC New York Times: Let the U.N. Unmask the Criminals of Sri Lankas War Justice in Conflict: Healing Wounds, Fostering Change: Reparations for Women Victims of
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
International Crimes EJIL: Talk!: ICJ Opens Hearings in Croatia v. Serbia
WORTH READING
Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 14-6: Charging War Crimes: Policy & Prognosis from a Military Perspective American Society of International Law Proceedings, Forthcoming: International Law in U.S. State Courts: Extraterritoriality and False Conflicts of Law Pluralism in International Criminal Law, Elies van Sliedregt and Sergey Vasiliev, eds (Oxford University Press, 2014 Forthcoming): The Nature of International Crimes and Evidentiary Challenges: Preserving Quality While Managing Quantity
INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
Central African Republic & Uganda

Official Website of the International Criminal Court ICC Public Documents - Cases: Central African Republic ICC Public Documents - Situation in Uganda
Bembas Lawyer Seeks to Interview Anonymous Prosecution Informant IJMonitor By Wakabi Wairagala February 26, 2014 Jean-Pierre Bembas lawyers have asked International Criminal Court (ICC) judges to permit them to obtain information that will help to identify the unnamed informant who tipped off the prosecution that the Congolese politician was bribing witnesses. In a February 20, 2014 filing, defense lawyer Nicholas Kaufman said he needed to contact and interview the individual in order to check the veracity of the information he provided. He said the informants actions may have been politically motivated, or he could be connected to witnesses who will testify for the prosecution. "Alternatively, it is more than feasible that the anonymous informant could possess information which could exonerate the suspect," stated Mr. Kaufman, who is
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
representing Mr. Bemba in the new case. Last November, charges of witness bribery and coaching were brought against Mr. Bemba, his then lead counsel Aim Kilolo-Musamba, and case manager JeanJacques Mangenda Kabongo. Also charged were Narcisse Arido, a defense witness, and Fidle Babala Wandu, a member of the Congolese parliament. Investigations into the alleged crimes started in May 2013 after the informant anonymously provided the prosecutor "verifiable" information on money transfers made by Mr. Bembas lawyers to witnesses. Last month, Mr. Bembas lawyer wrote to the prosecutor inquiring about the name by which the informant identified himself, the email address he used, and the Internet Protocol (IP) addresses from which the emails were sent. In the alternative, Mr. Kaufman sought the disclosure of a redacted version of the email exchanges between the informant and prosecution staff. The prosecution rejected both requests, stating that information provided by the informant was not being relied on directly or indirectly as evidence in the new case against Mr. Bemba. Mr. Kaufman had argued that the information sought was material to the preparation of the defense case and establishing the truth. "Knowing the exact nature of the email exchange between the informant and the prosecutor will permit the suspect to independently assess whether all exonerating circumstances have been considered and investigated," he said. He further argued that the IP address used by the informant would allow the defense to petition judges for an order requesting that national authorities reveal the owner of that address. This would help in identifying the person who communicated with the prosecutor. Furthermore, Mr. Kaufman argued that because a judge recently granted a prosecution request for information on an account managed on behalf of Mr. Bemba at the detention center to enable their investigations, "The defense now requests that the single judge grants equal investigative latitude to the suspect." Mr. Bemba has from November 2010 been on trial at the ICC over murder, rape, and pillaging purportedly committed by his Movement for the Liberation of Congo troops during a 20022003 armed conflict in the Central African Republic. Since Mr. Bemba and his co-accused made their initial appearances before pre-trial judge Cuno Tarfusser, prosecutors and the defense have been filing evidence and submissions that the judge will use to make the decision on confirmation of the charges. Judge Tarfusser has ordered the prosecutor and the defense teams of the other suspects to file their responses to Mr. Bembas request by Monday, March 3, 2014.
Democratic Republic of the Congo

3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Official Website of the International Criminal Court ICC Public Documents - Situation in the Democratic Republic of the Congo
Judgment in Katanga Case to Be Delivered on 7 March 2014: Practical information ICC Press Release February 28, 2014 On 7 March 2014 at 09:30 (The Hague local time), Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court (ICC) - composed of Judge Bruno Cotte (Presiding Judge), Judge Fatoumata Dembele Diarra, and Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert - will deliver its judgment in the case The Prosecutor v. Germain Katanga. A summary of the judgment will be read during a public Court hearing by Presiding Judge Bruno Cotte, in the presence of the Accused and his Defence team, the Prosecution and the Legal Representatives of Victims. Germain Katanga, alleged commander of the Force de rsistance patriotique en Ituri [Patriotic Resistance Force in Ituri] (FRPI) is accused of three counts of crimes against humanity (murder, rape and sexual slavery) and seven counts of war crimes (using children under the age of 15 to take active part in the hostilities; directing an attack against a civilian population as such or against individual civilians not taking direct part in hostilities; wilful killing; destruction of property; pillaging; sexual slavery and rape). His trial started on 24 November 2009 and closing statements from parties and participants were heard from 15 to 23 May 2012. Bosco Ntaganda Case: Appeals Chamber Confirms the Decision Rejecting the Defence's Request for Interim Release ICC Press Release March 3, 2014 Today, 5 March 2013, the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) dismissed, by majority, the appeal of Bosco Ntaganda against the Pre-Trial Chamber II decision of 18 November 2013. PreTrial Chamber II had rejected the Defences application for interim release. Mr Ntaganda remains in the ICCs custody. In its decision confirming the Pre-Trial Chamber decision, the Appeals Chamber stressed that the appraisal of the evidence relevant to continued detention lies, in the first place, with the Pre-Trial Chamber. The Appeals Chamber reviewed, in particular, the Pre-Trial Chambers reliance on two United Nations Group of Experts reports in light of the legal framework for the assessment of evidence. The Appeals Chamber noted inter alia that the methodology employed by the Group of Experts in the collection of information was quite rigorous and that the excerpts relied upon by the Pre-Trial Chamber were sufficiently detailed to enable Mr Ntaganda to investigate and challenge the relevant information such that he was not prejudiced by the fact that the sources relied upon were anonymous. The Appeals Chamber concluded that the Pre-Trial Chamber did not err in relying on two United Nations Group of Experts Reports to support factual findings relevant to its overall conclusion that the detention of Mr Ntaganda appeared necessary. The Appeals Chamber also found that Mr Ntaganda had failed to establish any error in respect of a number of other factual findings of the Prehttp://publicinternationallawandpolicygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/WCPW_031014_Master_1.html Page 8 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Trial Chamber relevant to the risk of Mr Ntaganda absconding or obstructing or endangering the investigation or court proceedings. Judge Anita U!acka and Judge Christine Van den Wyngaert adopted dissenting opinions, and considered that Pre-Trial Chamber II committed an error of fact in exclusively relying on anonymous hearsay evidence contained in two United Nations Group of Experts reports and press and blog articles in order to support most of the factual findings relevant to its conclusion that the continued detention of Mr Ntaganda appears necessary. Background: The ICC has issued two warrants of arrest for Bosco Ntaganda. As the former alleged Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Forces Patriotiques pour la Libration du Congo [Patriotic Forces for the Liberation of Congo] (FPLC), Mr Ntaganda is suspected of 13 counts of war crimes and 5 counts of crimes against humanity allegedly committed in Ituri, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) between 1 September 2002 and the end of September 2003. On 22 March 2013, Bosco Ntaganda surrendered and is now in the ICCs custody. The confirmation of charges hearing in the case was held from 10 to 14 February 2014. The decision on the confirmation of charges is pending. Judgment on the appeal of Mr Bosco Ntaganda against the decision of Pre-Trial Chamber II of 18 November 2013 entitled Decision on the Defence's Application for Interim Release. Waiting for Judgment: Communities in Ituri Await the Katanga Verdict with Impatience International Justice Monitor By Olivia Bueno March 6, 2014 The verdict in the case against Germain Katanga, the alleged commander of the Forces de Rsistance Patriotique en Ituri (FRPI), for war crimes and crimes against humanity in relation to an attack on the village of Bogoro in Ituri, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) is being awaited with impatience in Ituri. Having followed trials at the International Criminal Court (ICC) for years (the verdict against Katanga will be the third in cases relating to the conflict in Ituri), much of the population are seasoned spectators of the ICC and are well aware of the impending verdict. Not surprisingly, there are mixed feelings regarding the possible outcome of the trial. Apprehension Some in Ituri are awaiting the verdict against Katanga with apprehension. They have lost faith in the credibility of the court and are already making accusations of bias, even before the decision is delivered. Some of this criticism is, as might be expected, coming from members of Katangas community, but it is also coming from activists and other community leaders. The Katanga case has encountered a number of thorny legal issues and the manner in which the court has addressed these has raised concerns on the ground. Members of the Lendu and Ngiti communities, in particular, have used these concerns to argue that the court is biased against their communities. The first legal issue that has caused consternation was the treatment of three of
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Katangas defense witnesses. These witnesses gave evidence at trial that implicated current Congolese President Joseph Kabila in the attack on Bogoro for which Katanga stands accused. The court has wrestled to balance its responsibility to protect witnesses with its obligations to return the witnesses to the DRC under the courts cooperation agreement with that county. Finally, the Appeals Chamber ruled in January that the individuals should be returned provided that arrangements could be made to ensure their security. The decision, however, caused consternation among many activists who see the threat against the witnesses as credible. Although acknowledging that the situation is complicated, they are concerned that the court has not done more to address this need for protection. Members of the Lendu and Ngiti communities, however, are alleging double standards. One community leader interviewed for this piece asked why these individuals should have remained in detention for more than two years since the conclusion of their testimony, especially when they had been invited by the court to contribute to establishing the truth. Why have other witnesses been protected while these witnesses are left in detention? The same community leader went on to argue that the community should stop cooperating with the court as a result of this incident. Another issue that has raised eyebrows has been the severing of the Katanga and Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui trials following on the conclusion of the evidence portion of the trial and the consideration of a change of the mode of criminal liability in the case of Katanga. Although the full legal intricacies are poorly understood, it has raised concerns about the conduct of the court. People ask why Katanga is still in custody when Ngudjolo, who was a subject of the same trial since 2009, has already been acquitted. Civil society activists have raised due process concerns, questioning whether Katangas defense team has had enough time to respond to the new modes of criminal responsibility alleged by the judges. Others, such as the Association of Auxiliaries for Justice and Human Rights, see the ICC judges as trying to force the case in order to secure a conviction. Calls for Conviction Despite concerns about the conduct of the court, there are many on the ground who are hoping for a conviction. For example, one civil society leader said, A conviction would be a good thing for him, because he should reap what he has sown so that this can offer a moral lesson to other executioners. A lawyer at the appeals court in Kisangani said, Katanga deserves a very severe condemnation so that others can understand and abandon the spirit of this massacre [a conviction] would be a great relief to the communities in the Irumu territory. A teacher said, He really deserves a conviction as do his acolytes. Unfortunately, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui was set free because the ICC did not carry out its investigations well. One civil society activist interviewed noted that in the eyes of some, in particular those who identify as ethnically Hema, the Ngudjolo acquittal was a total failure on the part of the court. In this context, some see the Katanga verdict as an opportunity for the court to redeem itself. One Hema leader interviewed for this piece argued that Katanga should be convicted because he is guilty and the victims must get reparations.
Page 10 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Potential Reactions Regardless of what they hope the verdict will be, Iturians are reflecting on its potential impact. Will those associated with Katanga be spurred to retaliatory action in the event of a conviction? Or would a conviction help to reassure victims and counter the culture of impunity in Ituri? Interestingly, few speculated on the possible impact of an acquittal. Some are fearful of retaliation. For example, one analyst has suggested that others, such as the commander Cobra Matata, whose role in these crimes are well known, will be entrenched in their position in the bush, fearful of being delivered to justice as well. A women's rights activist from Katangas region said, We are fearful of a convictionwe don't know how his people will react. Germain Katanga is a man very much admired in Avebathe population will not accept it. Others are concerned that it might negatively impact the relationship between the aligned Ngiti and Lendu communities, if Katanga is convicted while Ngudjolo is acquitted. One civil society activist said, We regret the manipulation of communities in these cases, because both of the sister communities are concerned that a conviction in the Katanga case will poison the accord between the youth of these communities. Others saw more positive potential, particularly in relation to the impact on victims. For example, one civil society activist interviewed for this piece said, the most important thing is that the victims can see that the justice system has done its work. A student said, those who were injured and those who suffered acts of genocide caused by Germain Katanga will be re-established in their rights. A pastor remarked that if Katanga were convicted, the victims could find their smiles again after the long painful period that they have gone through. Others expressed hope that the decision could help to promote peace. In the words of a businessman, the impact of a conviction could be that, the population would be happy and a spirit of peaceful cohabitation between the Hema and Ngiti communities would be established. A political party member speculated that impunity could be diminished and the two collectivities could make peace because on one side and the other the authors of crimes have been punished. Others expressed concern that such potential could be undermined by concerns about the credibility of the court as outlined above. One Hema leader noted that a conviction would be good, but as people no longer have confidence in the ICC, the decision could pass unnoticed, that is, people will not take it into account. The actual, as opposed to anticipated, reaction remains to be seen. In the meantime, some are calling on the court to be proactive. The human rights organization Justice Plus, an NGO based in Ituri, has called on the court to offer clear reasons for their decision. At the same time, the court must conduct outreach to ensure that this decision is clearly explained to affected communities. The court cannot leave confusion about the decision in its wake. Fundamental Fair Trial Questions Remain Unanswered Ahead of Tomorrow's Judgment in the Katanga Case International Justice Monitor By Clair Duffy March 6, 2014
Page 11 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
On Friday at 9:30am The Hague time, Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court will deliver its judgment in the case against Germain Katanga (in the ICC situation country of Democratic Republic of the Congo). It will be the third trial judgment to be delivered by the ICC since the courts inception all of them so far concerning crimes committed in eastern DRC. The same trial chamber acquitted Katangas former co-accused, Mathieu Ngudjolo Chui, in December 2012, about one month after splitting the cases from each other. The only other trial judgment delivered so far by the ICC is in its first casealso emanating from events in eastern DRCagainst Thomas Lubanga Dyilo. Various aspects of both Lubangas and Ngudjolos cases are currently pending appeal. When the trial chamber delivers its verdict against Katanga, he will have been in ICC custody for some six years and four months, more than two of which have been since the last witness testified in the case, and some fifteen months since his former co-accused, Ngudjolo, was acquitted. The trial raises many important legal and evidentiary issues as well as being an important milestone in the lifespan of a fledgling international criminal court with potentially global reach. Significantly, the subject matter of the joint trial concerned the massacre of up to 200 people during an attack on the village of Bogoro in February 2003, as well as allegations of sexual violence and other atrocities. In the context of conflict in DRC, which has spanned a decade and resulted in the deaths of millions, left countless survivors of sexual assault, and still rages today, the call for justice is undoubtedly an urgent one. Not insignificantly, hundreds of victims with fully recognised legal rights have a direct stake in the outcome of the trial. The original joint charges against Ngudjolo and Katanga placed each of them at the head of two armed militia groups in the Ituri region of DRCthe Front des Nationalistes et Intgrationnistes and the Forces de Rsistance Patriotique en Ituri, respectively. Originally, they were said to have acted jointly to carry out the attack in Bogoro via their subordinates. Against this backdrop, however, the Katanga case also raises a number of fundamental fair trial issues that are of equal importance to all of these considerations, not least of all because even those who stand accused of the most heinous crimes must be afforded the fundamental guarantees of due process to which they are entitled under international law. This, of course, because it is their right, but also because the integrity of any criminal justice systeminternational or domesticis always measured against the extent to which it convicts people on a balanced reading of the law and the facts. In Katangas case, a number of fair trial questions stem from significant changes being proposed to the charges against him one year after the last witness testified in his case. That proposed change came after a one year confirmation of charges process (a legal process designed to weed out untenable cases before they go to trial); after a two year trial during which Katanga and Ngudjolo personally testified in their own defenses; after the judges visited crime sites in eastern DRC; and after closing briefs were filed and oral arguments were heard. In fact, Katanga will go into the courtroom Friday morning not entirely sure if the trial chamber will proceed to rule on the charges against him on the basis of one narrative of the case, or another, since at this stage the proposed changes to the charges against him have still only been expressed as a likelihood (although
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
certainly all evidence suggests that the majority will proceed on the new theory of liability). Katanga also still does not know if the testimony he provided in his own defense will be used to support a different case theory to that which was in place when he testified, albeit voluntarily and under the advice of counsel. All of this is quite irregular, to say the least. So how did this come about, is it legal and has it happened before other international criminal tribunals? The ICC has a legal provision in its Regulations (known as Regulation 55) that contemplates that in certain circumstances trial judges would be able to reformulate the description of an accuseds crimes, or the way he carried them out, at any time during the trial. This is subject to a number of fundamental fair trial considerations, some of which are explicitly mentioned in the Regulation itself, and the remainder of which are outlined in the ICCs primary governing instrument, the Rome Statute. Regulation 55 is unprecedented in the founding legal documents of other international criminal tribunals. Its purpose is to close accountability gaps. The whole procedural system upon which the ICC is based is designed (at least in theory) to better streamline cases from the outset by focusing the crimes and the theory or theories of responsibility according to which the accused is said to have committed the offences. At the other end of the system, Regulation 55 is there to make sure that accused persons to not evade criminal responsibility because of overly restrictive descriptions of their alleged conduct contained in the charge sheet. There are a number of limits on the use of Regulation 55 expressed in the text of the regulation itself. Any proposed changes must not exceed the facts and circumstances described in the charges (and any amendments made to them). Additionally, if the trial chamber considers it might invoke Regulation 55 to make certain changes, it must give the prosecution, the defense, and any victims joined to the proceedings the opportunity to be heard on the issue. At the same time, the accuseds rights must be fully respected especially his right to adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his case, and his right to present an effective defense (by allowing him an opportunity to call, or recall witnesses, or conduct further investigations if the case requires it). Additional fair trial considerations emanating from the Rome Statute (and the fundamental human rights norms it reflects) that must equally be respected include the right of an accused person to prompt and adequate notice of the charges against him, the right to be tried without undue delay, the right against self-incrimination, and the right to a fair hearing conducted by an independent and impartial arbiter. It follows quite plainly from the text of Regulation 55 and the underlying fair trial norms that whether or not a particular use of Regulation 55 to alter the charges against an accused is fair and permissible will depend on the circumstances of the case. Obvious factors which are relevant to this kind of analysis are the point in the trial process at which the changes are made, the degree to which the proposed changes alter the case against the accused, and whether any prejudice to the accused can be remedied by permitting further investigation and/or calling of evidence, weighed against the potential delay caused by the changes. Each of these considerations, though, is not mutually exclusive and they will necessarily impact each other. In Katangas case, looking at all of these factors highlights the extent of the fair
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
trial concerns presented by the proposed changes to the theory of criminal liability by which he is now (likely) said to have committed the offences. First of all, unusually, Katanga is going into his judgment hearing without truly knowing which version of the case he is facing (the original one with which he was charged, or the likely new one). Naturally, this lack of clarity raises questions about Katangas right to adequate notice of the charges against him but is perhaps not in and of itself determinative of the issue. Instead, it is better to look further to other factors, and the interplay between them, in combination. Second, the Appeals Chamber has said that the timing of the invocation of Regulation 55 in Katangas case (i.e. very late in the trial and at least six months into the deliberations process) is not per se problematic provided the trial remains fair as a whole. This stands to reason because of the language of the provision itself (at any time during the trial) and also because when a trial chamber is contemplating a change to the charges under Regulation 55 it has at its disposal a number of other tools to remedy any prejudice to the accused (such as allowing the defense to conduct further investigations, adjourning the trial, and/or calling further evidence). Suffice to say, though, that the later in the process the Regulation 55 change is made, the more difficult it may be to use these other tools to lessen the impact of the changes because of their implications on the right to trial without undue delay. Additionally, the greater the proposed changes, the more significant the issue of timing may be. Which leads to the third issue: whether the proposed change to Katangas mode of liability fundamentally alters the case against him. It should be noted that during the one year of litigation surrounding the use of Regulation 55 in Katangas case, the trial chamber was strongly divided on this issue, amongst others. On the one hand, the majority (composed of Presiding Judge Cotte and Judge Dembele Diarra) said that it was a relatively limited step. On the other hand Judge Van den Wyngaert has described the majoritys proposed changes as an impermissible fundamental change in the narrative of the charges in order to reach a conviction. She said that by the proposed changes, Katanga went from being the supreme commander of a hierarchical organization (the FPRI) with almost total control over his subordinates who blindly complied with his orders, to being part of an unidentified subsection of that group. The result was a drastic change in the case against him. Her reasoning is convincing as to the impact of the proposed changes on the prosecution's case theory. The Appeals Chamber has said that a change in the narrative of the case is not per se impermissible but will depend upon the articulation in the trial judgment. In other words, this issue remains open for determination. Fourth, the trial chamber certainly seemed to recognize earlier on in the context of the Regulation 55 litigation in the Katanga case the likely need for further investigations and/or evidence to be called to limit the potential prejudice to Katanga, in accordance with Regulation 55 and the more general rights under the Rome Statute. In various filings over an eight month period (between April and December 2013) the defense has maintained a need for additional time and resources to conduct further investigations to prepare an adequate defense under the new mode of criminal responsibility. In October 2013, Judge Van den Wyngaertwhile maintaining her position that the chamber should proceed to judgment under the original theory of criminal responsibilitysaid that the chamber needed to decide whether it was possible for Katanga to meaningfully defend himself under the new allegations without further investigations. She said
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
that the majority seemed to have accepted this need in its decision of June 26, 2013 but subsequently backtracked from its position. In any case, it has been clear from both the defense and the Registry that certain proposed further investigations could not be carried out due to security problems in eastern DRC. Fifth, concerning the right against self-incrimination and whether it is fair for the trial chamber to use the testimony Katanga gave in his own defense (and in respect of his original mode of liability) as a basis for a conviction (in respect of the later notified mode of liability), the defense has asked for Katangas testimony to be excluded from the chambers deliberations in respect of the new mode of criminal liability. The chamber has indicated its intention to rule on this in the course of its judgment. All indications though are that this is not problematic from the perspective of the majority of the trial chamber for the reason that Katanga testified voluntarily and (presumably) with knowledge of the existence of Regulation 55 and the possibility that the case against may change under that provision. On the other hand, Judge Van den Wyngaert said that the majoritys intention to rely on Katangas own testimony aggravated the unfairness of it changing the theory of liability in his case, especially if it decided to use his testimony as a basis (or even sole basis) for his conviction. For a multitude of reasons, therefore, the Katanga trial chamber litigation on the use of Regulation 55 to potentially change the theory of criminal responsibility in his case leaves many questions to be answered in the judgment. This will include ruling on a defense request filed in December 2013 for a permanent stay of proceedings due to alleged irremediable unfairness. The Katanga recharacterization issues are quite unique in international criminal justice because of the wide range of fair trial rights they engage. Most significantly perhaps, the ad hoc tribunals for Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia (ICTR and ICTY) have consistently ruled in favor of accused persons on issues of the absence of timely, clear, and consistent notice as to the charges they are facing. This has generally resulted in charges being read down or struck out where they were not contained in the original charging document (for example, as alternatives), including where attempts were made to remedy these failures via subsequent filings like prosecution pre-trial briefs and opening statements.
[back to contents]
Kenya
Official Website of the International Criminal Court ICC Public Documents - Situation in the Republic of Kenya
Week When Joshua Arap Sang Turned Court Translator in his ICC Trial Standard Digital By Wahome Thuku February 23, 2014 Language barrier hindered proceedings in the trial of Deputy President
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
William Ruto and Radio journalist Joshua arap Sang at the International Criminal Court (ICC) last week. On two days, the Trial-Chamber V(a) experienced a hitch in the translation of evidence from Kalenjin dialect to Kiswahili and to English. Many a times, Kenyan lawyers Katwa Kigen and Joel Bosek had to come to the aid of the Prosecution, and even the accused, Mr Sang, offered a hand. "We know this is not your job and we are truly grateful for your assistance to the Chamber," Judge Osuji told Mr Kigen and Mr Bosek.The epitome of barrier occurred in the transition of Kalenjin phrases used by witness number 409, who began testifying on Thursday. The witness, a resident of Nandi Hills, testifying in Swahili narrated how Mr Ruto and former Cabinet Minister Henry Kosgey used Kalenjin parables to incite members of the community to violence in 2007. The three judges have been comfortably relying on court interpreters to translate evidence from Kiswahili to English. But the problem arose when the witness used Kalenjin words, which he said were coded parables used by Ruto and Mr Kosgey at different ODM rallies in Nandi Hills in October 2007, to urge the community to evict other tribes from the region. Kalenjin words The witness, though not a Kalenjin, said he understands Kalenjin very well. Rutos lawyer Karim Khan consistently demanded that the witness be made to pronounce the actual Kalenjin words spoken by his client before the translation could be recorded. The first words said to have been used by Kosgey and Ruto were, makimoche ketit ne kiibu chumbek meaning; "We dont want the tree that was brought by the white man." The witness said he understood the words to refer to those people who worked for the white man; the Luhya, Kikuyu and the Kisii. The witness further said the two politicians used the words; kimache kesich ketit tugul ne kiibu chumbek meaning; "The trees should be uprooted," which the witness understood to mean that the non-Kalenjin should be removed from the area. The witness told the judges that further, Kosgey used another parable "ometai suswek kolanda agoi got" (you have allowed grass to grow up to your houses). He understood him to be referring to the other tribes who had bought land in the area. Every time the witness switched to Kalenjin, Kigen and Bosek offered to assist in the translation as officers of the court, but did it in a process keenly verified by the prosecution and the judges. When the witness pronounced the remarks in Kalenjin, lawyer Bosek would repeat them and ask him to confirm if they were the words he had used. ICC Prosecutor Fatau Bensouda Suffers Serious Jolt in Uhuru Kenyatta, William Ruto Trials Standard Digital
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
By Isaiah Lucheli and Felix Olick February 23, 2014 Nearly a half of the witnesses the prosecution lined up in the two Kenyan cases at the International Criminal Court have withdrawn, puncturing Ms Fatou Bensoudas case. The ICC prosecutor had lined up 77 prosecution witnesses to testify against President Uhuru Kenyatta, his deputy William Ruto and Kass FM journalist Joshua Arap Sang. But of these, at least 30 have so far left the cases, according to an analysis by The Standard of official ICC records and reports about individuals who have sworn affidavits withdrawing as witnesses. On January 9, last year, Ms Bensouda had told trial judges the prosecution intended to call 43 witnesses in the Ruto-Sang trial. In Uhurus trial, the prosecution had hoped to call 34 witnesses 31 testifying on the facts of the post-election violence and three expert witnesses. The exodus has jolted the prosecutions cases because among those who have withdrawn are what prosecution labels "insider witnesses" because their testimonies directly implicated the accused. Among those remaining are expert witnesses whose testimony is largely academic. Documents filed by the prosecutor show at least 10 witnesses, including those the prosecution says are at the heart of the case against the President, will no longer testify. Prosecutors have since admitted the case against President Kenyatta is on the brink of collapsing, with the stones left unturned having become pebbles, after testimony by three witnesses on an alleged State House meeting, which was instrumental in confirming the charges, was found to be false. Prosecutors admitted witnesses 4 and 12 gave false evidence about the alleged December 30, 2007 meeting at State House, Nairobi where retaliatory attacks on opposition supporters were allegedly planned. "P-0012 recently admitted that he provided false evidence regarding the event at the heart of the prosecutions case against the accused," Bensouda told the court. "P-0012s account lay at the heart of the prosecutions evidence, providing a critical link between the accused and the crimes in Nakuru and Naivasha." Witness Number 4 was a Mungiki insider who lied he attended the State House meeting and the revelation prompted Bensouda to withdraw the charges against Uhurus co-accused, former Civil Service chief Francis Muthaura. Bensouda admitted the withdrawal of another witness P-001 "undermined the prosecutions case, removing evidence regarding the intermediaries who allegedly oversaw the attacks on the accuseds behalf, as well as evidence regarding the logistical support provided to the attackers." Witnesses 4 and 11 had claimed that the Mungiki carried out the attack in Nakuru. Uhurus lawyer Stephen Kay told judges on February 14 the prosecution had repeatedly ignored the defence pleas that the three witnesses were liars.
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
"We specifically pointed to the issues that have led to the collapse of this case against Mr Kenyatta Witness 4, Witness 11, and Witness 12. We pointed out to the court that the main Witness 12 was a congenital liar, that Witness 4 was a congenital liar. No one listened to us," Kay said. Kay spoke at the crucial hearing called to determine if the Kenyan government had stonewalled on turning over President Kenyattas financial records the last piece if evidence that prosecutors desperately hope can keep their case alive. "Weve made a decision that in the absence of the financial records, the remaining stones unturned are better characterised as pebbles, and the realistic prospect that turning them will yield real potentially conclusive evidence is minimal," said prosecution counsel Ben Gumpert. Naivasha Attacks Prosecution witnesses 2 and 10, whose testimony on Naivasha attacks was used in the confirmation of charges, and P-9, whom Bensouda claims developed cold feet due to "concerns about retaliation against his family from the accused persons, have withdrawn. Bensouda has dropped witness P-66 because she has objected to the disclosure of her identity for fear of reprisal and P-5 was no longer willing to testify at trial. Judges had permitted the prosecution to add P-66 to the list in October as a replacement for P-426 who had quit earlier. Prosecutors withdrew Witness 334 after concluding their evidence is no longer necessary to prove the prosecution case. Also, the number of witnesses who have withdrawn from the case facing Ruto alarmed the prosecution, prompting the issuance of an arrest warrant against a local journalist the prosecution accuses of corruptly influencing three witnesses. Walter Barasa unsuccessfully challenged his extradition at the High Court and has moved to the Court of Appeal. Bensouda is fighting to have the Government compelled to surrender seven "insider witnesses" who have refused to cooperate with the court. These are P-0015, P-0016, P-0336, P-0397, P-0516, P-0524 and P-045, who fled from a hotel overnight as prosecutors were processing his Dutch Visa to travel to The Hague. In Rutos case, around nine witnesses who were to testify on the Kiambaa Church arson attack are among those who swore affidavits recanting their testimony. At least 10 additional witnesses were to testify on alleged planning of attacks. The first witness to withdraw in Rutos case was OTP 8 who wrote a 3,000-page statement, which the prosecution relied on to have the charges confirmed. The witness wrote to the ICC prosecutor stating that he no longer wished to testify against the deputy president. "I refer to the international criminal case number one in which you had listed me as a witness against the accused persons. I have now considered my position in the case and I no longer wish to testify against any of the accused persons," the
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
letter dated May 9 read in part. In a sworn and signed affidavit, the witness, a resident of Uasin Gishu County, explained that he made the decision voluntarily, "without influence from anybody." Sworn Affidavit OTP 2 also swore an affidavit narrating how his children had dropped out of school after the prosecution declined to pay for their education, despite having promised to do so if he agreed to testify. The witness claimed he was jailed for over a year in Netherlands after clashing with an ICC official over the statements that had been attributed to him, which he said had been exaggerated. Witness 0336 that had been working with as a programme officer with an NGO in the North Rift Region during the post-election violence, also withdrew from the case. He cited the prosecutors introduction of input by other parties such as Africa Centre for Open Governance (AfriCOG) and third parties among reasons for his withdrawal. Another witness who quit was an employee of Kass FM until April 2008. He was approached in October 2012 by an ICC investigator to be a witness by virtue of having worked at Kass FM. First Expert Witness Called in Ruto Prosecution Institute for War & Peace Reporting By J.J. Wangui February 24, 2014 Dr Herv Maupeu, a French academic who specialises in Kenyan social and political affairs, wrote an expert report for the case against William Ruto and a former broadcast journalist, Joshua Arap Sang, at the International Criminal Court (ICC). Ruto and Sang are charged with crimes against humanity relating to political and ethnic violence which erupted in the aftermath of a disputed presidential election in Kenya in December 2007. At the time of the vote, Ruto was deputy head of the opposition Orange Democratic Movement party (ODM), led by Raila Odinga. Maupeu lived in Kenya between 2000 and 2004 and has published several articles on a crime gang called the "Mungiki". He is the first of three expert witnesses whom the prosecution has lined up to testify in the case. The witness described the formation of armed groups dating back to the 1980s, when Kenya was under single-party rule. He said the introduction of multi-party politics in the 1990s was accompanied by a "multiplication of groups that were armed." "Outside the election time, you had lots of armed groups who were trying to manage the security of neighbourhoods in the rural areas," he said. "In an electoral period, they are used by politicians to become the armed wing of their candidacy. So they make the rally secure; they beat up opponents."
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Maupeu told Hague judges that armed groups from the Kalenjin ethnic group received training in the Rift Valley in the run up to the 2007 election. Referring to the sources he cited in the document he wrote for the prosecution, he said, "In these reports its explained that Kalenjin militia groups were restructured or created in the autumn of 2007 during the [Kalenjin] initiation ceremonies, and this was linked to a new phenomenon of neo-traditionalism." David Hooper, a member of Rutos legal team, objected to the testimony at this point, pointing out that the witness himself had previously admitted that he was an expert on Kikuyu militia groups rather than the Kalenjin. But presiding Judge Chile Eboe-Osuji overruled Hoopers objection and asked the witness to continue with his evidence. The witness did not expand on the restructuring or training of militia groups, but added later that "what I can say is there is a lack of information, but we can say that these groups were recruited and trained in farms belonging to several individuals." He said these groups were led by local Kalenjin authority figures including civil servants, businessmen and farmers. During his testimony, the witness described patterns of violence during previous polls in 1992, 1997 and 2002, as well as around the 2007 election. "The political culture in Kenya is a very violent one," Maupeu said. What distinguished the 2007 election, he continued, was the expansion of militia groups in the Rift Valley. "One of the things that surprised researchers about the violence in 2008 was the size of the militia groups in the Rift Valley. Before 2008, the different militia groups in the region only had scores of members, but in 2008 the militia groups had thousands of members." The witness said that in academic circles there were many theories as to the cause of the 2007-08 unrest, but that everyone agreed land ownership was the main factor. "Undeniably, land was at the very heart of the violence in 2008," he said. The witness said that although Daniel Arap Moi, a Kalenjin, had ruled Kenya as president from 1978 to 2002, the Kalenjin people felt they had not benefited in terms of land ownership. According to the witness, the land issue was manipulated in the during the 2000s to create a common Kalenjin identity and remove tensions that existed among the many subgroups. "The Kalenjin identity was forged to try to regain control of the land," the witness explained. "And the Kalenijin identity was also forged on this feeling of historical injustice the fact that they were set aside, neglected, dismissed." Maupeu told judges that Ruto was formally declared spokesman for the Kalenjin at a ceremony held in the Eldama Ravine area of the Rift Valley. Over a dozen
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
members of parliament, Kalenjin leaders and even Mois son attended the ceremony. The witness described Rutos rise as a politician from the beginning of his career, when he became the head of a political youth group in the early 1990s. "It is true [Ruto] does have the reputation of being an electoral beast, so to speak; someone who is extremely good to get the vote out, to get the people," the witness said. "He is someone who knows how to run an election campaign." Lawyers for both Ruto and Sangs defence objected to the witnesss evidence, accusing him of presenting a report based on the untested opinions of other authors. Hooper, acting for Ruto, said the witness had no knowledge of some of the events he described, and had instead relied on books. "You may recall the opening words of this experts testimony when he said that this report is not my view of the violence but the view of others," Hooper said. Sangs lawyer, Caroline Buisman, accused the witness of relying on hearsay. "We know from this witness himself that his expertise in relation to the Kalenjin culture and Kalenjin customs is only based on what other people have said about it," she said. "He has no personal information, as he said himself." Both defence counsels opposed the prosecutions efforts to have Maupeus report admitted as evidence. "This is not an expert who has done any fine research," Hooper said."So there are no facts that he attests to in the course of this report that are primary. Not even secondary. His is a tertiary hearsay of complaints made." However, Lucio Garcia for the prosecution said that in the written report, the witness had explained his answers and the way he arrived at his conclusions. "An experts report is the witnesss account or explanation of his conclusions indepth, and I dont see why we would deprive the chamber of professional judges of that information," Garcia said. ICC Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda Seeks to Appeal William Rutos Excusal from Presence at Trial Standard Digital By Wahome Thuku February 25, 2014 International Criminal Court ( ICC) Prosecutor Fatuo Bensouda has sought to challenge permission granted to Deputy President William Ruto to skip sessions of his trial at The Hague. Bensouda filed the application before Trial Chamber V(a) seeking permission to appeal the decision of the same court pronounced on January 15. If granted the leave, she will file the appeal at the Appeals Chamber. Bensuoda wants a determination on whether Rule 134 of the ICC rules on which Ruto was excused from attending some sessions, is consistent with Article 63 of the Rome Statute, which requires all accused persons to be present in court.
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
And if its consistent, does it allow the Trial Chamber to conditionally excuse the Deputy President from being present at the trial? Property Stolen Ruto has not attended any session since the trial restarted this month. He is represented by his lawyers Karim Khan, David Hooper and Shyamala Alagendra. Tuesday, Ruto will leave the country for Kinshasa, DRC, where he will represent President Uhuru Kenyatta at the 17th Summit of the Comesa Heads of State and Government. The Summit will take place at Palais Du Peuple Hotel, Kinshasa, DRC, from February 26 and 27, the DPs office said in a statement Monday. In The Hague, a witness Monday recalled how his house was broken into and property stolen during the 2007 post-election violence. Witness number 409 told the ICC that his household goods were taken away on a night he and other residents sought refuge at a local school when violence broke out in December 2007. He said houses belonging to his Kalenjin neighbours in Nandi Hills were not targeted. He also lost land and seven cows, among other property. The witness was testifying on his third day in the trial of Deputy President William Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang in The Hague, Netherlands. He told Trial Chamber V(a) that with other residents, he took cover at the school, which was not disclosed, when the violence broke out. Women and children slept inside the school while men stayed outside. The witness told the court that at night, Kalenjin men moved around with spotlights and sang circumcision songs. "Such songs are not sung anyhow. They are only performed during private circumcision events when the boys are escorted to be initiated." War Cries He said that year, the circumcision season for Kalenjin boys was in August because the elections had been scheduled for December. He added the same night, they could hear Kalenjin women screaming and making war cries. Prosecutor: What kind of noises were these; were they noises of mourning or war cries? Witness: They were war cries because they were from the hills where there were no houses. Prosecutor: Had you ever heard such war cries before? Witness: No. He said they could not hear what the women were saying.
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Colonialists The witness said he went back to his house in the morning and found it broken into and property stolen. The witness recalled that earlier, Ruto had on three occasions told area residents to reject "trees brought there by the colonialists" which he understood to mean people from other tribes. He said Ruto made the call in Kalenjin parables during ODM rallies. He had asked the people to "uproot the trees." The witness said he had two parcels of land, one large and one small. He kept his livestock on the larger parcel. ICC Witness: William Ruto Never Said Madoadoa Standard Digital By Wahome Thuku February 26, 2014 A witness has exonerated Deputy President William Ruto from claims that he used the Kiswahili word madoadoa (spots) in Nandi Hills to incite members of the Kalenjin community to engage in violence ahead of the 2007 elections. Witness 409 told the International Criminal Court that neither Ruto nor former Cabinet minister Henry Kosgey used the word in the five political rallies he attended. However, the witness said the two leaders talked about clothes of different colours to refer to non-Kalenjins. They used parables, which he understood to mean that non-Kalenjin living in Nandi Hills should be removed. Madoadoa has featured in the case as one of the coded words used by Ruto and journalist Joshua Sang to refer to non-Kalenjins, who were to be targeted for attacks and eviction from the area. "I did not hear Kosgey or Ruto use the word madoadoa. They used the example of clothes," he said. At one point, the proceedings were turned into a learning session as the witness, a non-Kalenjin speaker, engaged defence lawyer Katwa Kigen in different interpretations and use of the word suswek (grass). He interpreted the word in Kiswahili as nyasi (grass) and magugu (weeds). He described magugu as a mixture of grasses, prompting Presiding Judge Eboe Osuji to intervene. Osuji: If I have a garden of roses and one morning I find wild plants growing in it, what would you call that in Kiswahili?" Witness: I would call that magugu.
Page 23 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Osuji: Do you understand suswek to mean magugu? Witness: Yes. Osuji: Do you also know the word suswek to mean nyasi? Witness: Yes. Osuji: Are you telling us that nyasi and magugu mean the same thing? Witness: I didnt say it means the same thing. Magugu is what grows in planted grass. Osuji: What do you understand suswek to mean in the context in which the expression has been used here all along? Witness: Grass. The witness claimed Ruto and Kosgey used five Kalenjin parables, which they repeated word for word in three rallies. "The phrases were used seven years ago, and you are saying you can remember the exact words?" the lawyer asked as the witness responded in the affirmative. Hearing continues. Ruto was not at Rallies Purported by ICC Witness Capital News By Judie Kaberia February 26, 2014 Deputy President William Rutos Defence Counsel Karim Khan on Tuesday used prosecution video evidence to counter allegations that Ruto incited Kalenjins against other communities ahead of the 2007 General Election in Kenya. In a video clip played in court, Ruto is heard telling people in Kapsabet not to be deceived that devolution means people being chased from where they live. "If you are a Luhya dont be deceived. They say with this devolution you will be chased out. If you have bought a farm here whether you are from Western Province or from Pokot or from Lamuif you have a farm here, this is your home. The constitution guarantees the rights of every Kenya. Kenyans fighting against Kenyans is not on ODMs agenda," Khan translated. According to Khan, the witness allegations that Ruto called for eviction of nonKalenjins were false and that is why there was no evidence available to prove the alleged incitements. "The reason why there is no video given by the prosecution or found by us of any words like this at any of these rallies, is because Mr Ruto never said anything else expect that all people live freely and safely," Khan argued. "Is it your evidence that the message you have attributed to Ruto at the three meetings was that one that non-Kalenjins including Luhyas should be uprooted and chased away or is that not your evidence?" Khan put to the witness.
Page 24 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Witness, "I did not say that, I said they used methali katika lugha." Khan, "and your evidence is the figurative language was meant to convey a message that non-Kalenjins including Luhyas should be chased away from the area." "Yes that is the case," the witness responded. Khan further informed the court that in the ODM 2007 election campaign was organised in such a way that Ruto and Musalia Mudavadi usually paired to sell the party in various parts of the country. In reference to a newspaper article exhibited at the International Criminal Court (ICC), Khan read that Mudavadi and Ruto were on a campaign trail in the North rift where they attended rallies in Kipkaren, Saliant, Kabsaret, Kessis, Mosop and Eldoret East. "Does this help refresh your memory that William Ruto and Musalia Mudavadi used to campaign very frequently together? Khan asked. "I cannot accept," the witness responded to which Khan asked, "you dont agree or you dont know?" Witness, "I dont know." Khan further played a second video clip in which Mudavadi and Ruto were campaigning in Rarieda and Ugenya constituencies in Nyanza Province. The other ODM top brass leaders concurrently held campaigns in Mosop and Nandi Hills where former Prime Minister Raila Odinga and other ODM leaders who included the then ODM Chairman and former Industrialisation Minister, Henry Kosgey were present. On Tuesday, the 12th witness told the court that he had attended three rallies in which Ruto and Kosgey incited Kalenjins against other communities. According to the witness, Ruto and Kosgey campaigned together in Rift Valley as Kosgey could not miss out because he was the ODM Secretary General. He alleged that Kosgey would first address the rally where he used Kalenjin derogatory phrases to incite Kalenjins to evict other communities then Ruto would repeat the same message. He said he attended rallies at Nandi Hills Stadium and Kapchorwa where he heard the pair urge Kalenjins to uproot Luhyas and other non Kalenjin communities. Khan before showing the clips to the witness told him that Ruto didnt go to Nandi Hills Stadium with Kosgey as alleged. "Ruto never attended a rally at Nandi hills during 2007 along with Kosgey, is that right?" Khan asked. The witness who had difficulties in identifying Nandi Hills from the photos and video displayed to him responded; "No, that is not true." On the Kapchorwa campaign, Khan exhibited a visitors book from the Kapchorwa Tea Estate which had Kosgeys signature and name entered on
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
December 20, 2007. "At no time did Ruto attended a meeting at the tea estate together with Kosgey. If you went to the tea estate you would have known that Kosgey went alone on a campaign trail for MP and not presidential campaign. No entry of Ruto on that day," Khan said. The witness however insisted that Ruto and Kosgey were present at the meeting he attended at Kapchorwa, and he heard them incite Kalenjins against other communities. On cross-examination the witness also told the court that he did not watch the confirmation of charges hearings conducted in September 2011 and that he only became interested when he heard that ICC was recruiting witnesses. "Were you not interested in what was happening in what you wanted to be part of?" Khan asked. "When I heard they were recruiting witnesses that is when I got interested," the witness replied. Khan continues with cross-examination on Thursday morning. Phone Records Place ICC Witness in Nyanza, not Rift Capital News By Judie Kaberia February 27, 2014 Lawyer Karim Khan has produced phone records before the International Criminal Court (ICC) to prove that the 12th prosecution witness was not in the North Rift during the 2007 elections as he has told the court. Khan gave the witness the duration and the time of his calls he made on December 27 and 29, 2007, telling him it was possible to track down such details. "The day of elections on 27th December, at 3 minutes and 46 seconds past 5am in the morning on that day you made a telephone call from North Nyanza. Did you?" Khan asked during hearing of the case against Deputy President William Ruto and former journalist Joshua arap Sang. "I dont know if I made a call. I cannot remember," the witness responded. "Later on in the day on 27th at 44 minutes past 8pm, you made a phone call for 49 seconds in duration and you made it again from the North Nyanza part of Kenya. Does that refresh your memory?" "I dont remember that one," the witness answered. "On the 29th of December 2007, you were again in North Nyanza, were you? At 7.21pm. That is where you were, isnt it witness?" Khan asked and the witness said: "I disagree." All this happened alongside a series of private sessions meant to protect identity of the witness from the public. Khan told the witness that there are also records to show where people voted
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
from and told him that he was not in the North Rift region during the 2007 General Election. "Contrary to your testimony to this court, you were not in the North Rift region in 2007, were you? Do you know when you go to vote IEBC check the identity card against your vote? You registered to vote in Kisumu West in 1997," Khan charged. The witness insisted that he was in Nandi during that 2007 election but before he could answer other questions he requested to be heard in private. The 12th witness referred to as P-0409 in his evidence alleged that he attended three rallies in which he heard Ruto use phrases to ask Kalenjins to evict other communities from the Rift Valley. Kenya: Uhuru and Ruto Out of Country the Same Time All Africa By Nzau Musau February 27, 2014 President Uhuru Kenyatta and Deputy President William Ruto were both away from the country yesterday. The two have on several occasions told the ICC that they cannot be out of the country at the same time because doing so would violate the constitution. Yesterday, Uhuru left for Juba, South Sudan for a one day visit. Ruto left the country for Democratic Republic of Congo on Tuesday. He is attending the 17th Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa summit. Uhuru was however expected back in the country yesterday but Ruto may not be back until Friday. He is scheduled to go to Nigeria from Kinshasa to represent Uhuru in the country's centenary celebrations. "We will work with ICC, but it must understand that Kenya also has a Constitution. Ruto and myself cannot therefore be away at the same time," Uhuru said last September in Ruiru stadium where he and Ruto attended a prayer rally. "When Ruto is at the Hague, I will be here, and when I am at the Hague, Ruto will be in Kenya." "We have agreed to work with the court but they must respect our Constitution." Their lawyers at the ICC relied on a similar sentiment while seeking to change the schedules for their trials, both which were to start last year. The court agreed to alternate the trial sessions after factoring their arguments as well as the fact that the court has only two courtrooms. Uhuru's trial was however later postponed. In Juba yesterday, Uhuru was to take part in talks to resolve the crisis in the country. He was accompanied by Foreign Affairs Secretary Amina Mohamed and his special envoy in the peace process Dalmas Otieno. Kenya: Stop Bensouda from Appealing my Excusal, Ruto Tells Icc All Africa By Nzau Musau March 3, 2014 Deputy President William Ruto has asked ICC trial judges to deny Chief
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda the chance to appeal the decision granting him conditional excusal from attending his trial at the ICC. Ruto, through his lawyer Karim Khan, said the reasons advanced by Bensouda on why she wants to appeal the decision do not meet the legal threshold set by Article 82(1)(d) of the Rome Statute. The Article says parties may appeal but only on decisions, which involve issues that would significantly affect the fair and expeditious conduct of proceedings or outcome of trial. The matter must also be such that its resolution would "materially advance the proceedings." Khan says that neither of the two issues advanced by Bensouda are appeallable within the terms of Article 82(1)(d) "and in any event neither satisfies the additional mandatory criteria for the grant of leave to appeal." He said the issues Bensouda raised amount to recycling, rehashing and repeating issues, which have already been determined by the court. "All the arguments advanced in the application collapse into the single concern that a trial from which an accused has been granted excusal under Rule 134quater of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence may later be nullified by the Appeals Chamber," Khan said. He said the concern is unfounded and highly speculative. Khan said the Appeals Chamber has already ruled that Article 63(1) on the basis of which Ruto was excused does not operate as an absolute bar to the continuation of trial proceedings in the absence of an accused. Khan said that further to the Appeals Chamber finding that the trial chamber has discretion to excuse an accused from presence at trial, the Assembly of States Parties adopted various amendments to the rules to clarify the scope and application of Article 63(1). "Properly considered, the application is simply motivated by the need to test the correctness of the chamber's resolution of a novel legal question for the court," he said. Khan said contrary to prosecution claims, the terms of the waiver filed in the Court record preclude Ruto from raising on appeal "any natural consequence of [his] own voluntary absence from the courtroom." Bensouda had claimed that it is foreseeable that the Appeals Chamber will be called upon to review the decision in any eventual appeal against conviction, acquittal or sentence and thus parts of the trial not attended by Ruto will have to be re-heard. "The reality is that the decision serves to ensure the expeditious conduct of the trial. The grant of excusal means no adjournments and changes to the trial schedule have been sought due to the functions of Ruto as Deputy President of the Republic of Kenya," Khan said. He said Bensouda seems to think because she was granted leave to appeal a similar decision last year she ought to be granted leave in this instance. Khan said that this is an "overly simplistic view which does not withstand scrutiny."
Page 28 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Kenya: Fergal Gaynor, the Man who Speaks for 20,000 Victims in Kenyatta Case All Africa March 3, 2014 Interview Early last month, Fergal Gaynor, the lawyer appointed to represent the 20,000 victims estimated in the Kenyatta case at the International Criminal Court, gave an extensive interview to The Hague Trials Kenya. Questions were crowd-sourced from followers of THTK's Facebook page and the interview was produced by RNW. The interview took place on February 13 in the lobby of the ICC in The Hague. Whom do you represent? I represent the victims of the crimes charged in the Kenyatta case. All of them were living in Naivasha and Nakuru in January 2008. After the post-election violence, many of them were forcibly transferred to the Western region and the Nyanza region of Kenya. Do you have all the victims' names? No. We estimate that there are approximately 20,000 victims of the crimes charged in Case 2. I've only met 585 of those. We certainly have the names of those 585. But I haven't met the rest of the victims of the case. Do you know where all the victims are? The location of the victims is a real challenge. We know that a great number of them are located in the Nyanza region and the Western region. There are also a great number in the Rift Valley. As everyone knows, there is a certain level of hostility towards the ICC in Kenya. Therefore, it is something of a challenge to identify where the victims live and to make contact with them in a secure fashion. How did you get appointed? When the previous common legal representative resigned, the registry of the International Criminal Court advertised for a new common legal representative for the victims in the Kenyatta case. The advertisement was also sent to the Law Society of Kenya. And after the registry received applications from a number of people, they did a shortlist and they did an interview process, and at the end of that, I was appointed. Can you say how much your job pays? Yes, the pay for counsel representing defence for victims at the ICC is published in documents which are available on the ICC website. I can't remember the number offhand. I think the maximum we're paid is around 8,200 euros per month. Have you ever been accused of just being in this for the money? When I was a lawyer in a big London firm, I was earning quite a lot of money. And most people in that firm were there certainly for the money. After I left that job, I took a pay cut of about 60 per cent, which I never regretted. If I had wanted to make a lot of money, I would have stayed at the law firm in London. I think I would have made a fairly comfortable living.
Page 29 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
Do you represent people killed by police? I do not represent people who were killed by police. Police killings, as everyone knows, were extensive during the post-election violence from Mombasa to Kisumu and from Nairobi to Eldoret. And in the Waki report, the number of people killed by police is 405, I think. Now, the charges in Case 2 originally included police killings, I believe -- this is before I came on board. The charges were not confirmed against the then commissioner of police, Mr Ali. So, the police killings were removed from the charges in Case 2. Would you call victims of the violence victims of genocide? Neither the prosecutor nor the court has ever characterised killings during the post-election violence as genocide. As legal representative for the victims, it's not my role to characterise the crimes committed as any particular crime. But on the basis of my experience as a prosecutor in Rwanda and in Bosnia, the postelection violence killings did not constitute genocide. What do you say to victims who have forgiven their perpetrators? The question of forgiveness is a personal question for each victim. If a specific victim finds it in his or her heart to forgive the perpetrator, I have no business interfering in that decision. It's a very personal decision. My role is to represent the legal interests of the victims. Now one thing that has been made clear to me by many, many victims is that the process of justice, they believe, will help the reconciliation process in Kenya. And the question of forgiveness is for each individual. Have you found that some victims were also perpetrators? I believe that there is a fairly high chance that some of the perpetrators in the PEV were themselves victimised. I have not in fact, to my knowledge, met anyone who was a perpetrator and a victim. I'm not ruling it out. It might have been the case, but my job is not investigative. It is really to represent the views and concerns of the victims. Do you agree with the statement that all Kenyans are victims of the 2007-2008 violence? The question as to whether all Kenyans were victims of the 2008 post-election violence, I think, is to be answered by each Kenyan individually. I think many Kenyans felt somewhat ashamed about what had happened during that period. Many Kenyans that I have spoken to questioned the patriotism of those who unleashed violence against their fellow Kenyans. As a matter of the law, not every Kenyan was a victim of crimes committed during the post-election violence. But I can certainly understand if an individual feels aggrieved by what happened during that period, that they themselves feel in their own way a victim. How do you feel about being seen by some as against the President of Kenya? I'm most certainly not against the President of Kenya. The President of Kenya, in terms of the Office of the President of Kenya, is not on trial. Kenya is not on trial. The democratic system in Kenya is not on trial. What is on trial is the fact, or what are on trial, are the persons who are believed to have participated in orchestrating extremely serious crimes committed against thousands of Kenyan people. What do you say to some people who see you as a neo-colonialist? It's a very interesting question to be called a 'colonialist'. I come from Ireland, which was in fact a colony of the British Empire for a long time, for about 800 years. So
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
generally, the Irish see themselves as, in a sense, the colonised, rather than as the colonisers. When you go to a country like Kenya and you speak to the victims of the post-election violence, nobody has accused me of being a colonist. They know that I am there to represent their interests in the ICC proceedings. Whatever views or concerns they have are what matter. What do you say to Kenyans who are deeply sceptical of the ICC? If anyone in Kenya is sceptical of the ICC, and they're free to express that, and many have expressed that in the past and will express it in the future. Of the victims of the Kenyatta case that I've met, they unanimously support the ICC process. We haven't had a single person in our meetings say, "You know, I want this process to stop." The level of cynicism towards justice that I have encountered is cynicism towards Kenyan courts and Kenyan prosecutors and judges. The view that's been expressed to me on more than one occasion -- I would say dozens of occasions -- is that they believe that if you are rich and powerful and you're before a Kenyan court, that you will get off the hook. So the level of cynicism towards Kenyan courts is something that I've heard a great deal of. What do you say to Kenyans who prefer to see a local system of justice implemented? If there were credible prosecutions at the local level taking place under impartial prosecutors that would be a fantastic step forward. We've seen efforts to move towards, for example, a model such as the International Crimes Division of the High Court. That model has been talked about for a long time. Currently, it's not operational. If there were to be a credible, local tribunal to deal with the postelection violence, and there were credible prosecutions of high-level and midlevel as well as low-level figures at that tribunal, that would be a brilliant step forward. And we all look forward to the day that that might happen. Are you concerned that justice for the victims will be served through false evidence? Any lawyer who's an ethical lawyer doesn't want to participate in a process where false evidence -- presented as false evidence -- is accepted as a basis for conviction. That's obviously, clearly wrong. Now in a case such as the present case, where you have heavy reliance on the evidence of insider witnesses, it can sometimes be very difficult to figure out which parts of the evidence are false and which parts are true. And in any major prosecution that I have participated in, there is a considerable reliance on insider evidence. Insiders, by their own nature, can sometimes be inclined to give evidence protective of their own interests and will often lie and they will often tell the truth. It's an incredibly complex body of evidence. But certainly, does anybody want the trial to proceed on evidence that is wholly false? No, of course not. What, if any, independent investigation have you undertaken to make sure that information and evidence are accurate? The role of the legal representative is not to investigate. That primarily falls to the prosecution. If the investigation appears to be going in a way which is insufficient, it's certainly up to the legal representative of the victims, as a general matter, to make submissions to the court or to try to encourage the prosecution to work harder in its investigations, but it's not an investigative capacity.
Page 31 of 119
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
If the Kenyatta case collapses, what options, if any, do your victims have? If the Kenyatta case collapses, one option which the victims do not have is justice at the domestic level. Just recently, on the February 5, 2014, the Director of Public Prosecutions made a statement in which he confirmed that none of the 4,000-plus files which have been reviewed by the multi-agency task force is prosecutable. And he confirmed that this means that there will be no postelection violence cases prosecuted by the International Crimes Division if the International Crimes Division is set up. So the first thing we all have to understand is that there will be no domestic justice for the victims of the postelection violence, apart from what is happening at the ICC. For the victims of Case 2, that means no justice whatsoever. The second issue to realise is that the level of assistance provided by the government has been totally inadequate. That has been a theme that has been made clear to me in dozens of meetings with victims. And they all report that they received next to no assistance from the government. The third thing that will happen if the Kenyatta case collapses is that there is no real, credible prospect of knowing the truth about what really took place in Naivasha and Nakuru in January 2008. And given the hell of what happened at that time in those locations, it's a terrible shame that we'll never know exactly what happened and who was responsible for it. If the ICC decided President Kenyatta were innocent, what would be your next step as the victims' representative? The court is not faced with a request to declare whether he's innocent. The court is faced with a request to dismiss proceedings against him. That is not in fact a request to declare him innocent. If the case terminates, then my mandate will also terminate, and I will find another position elsewhere. If President Kenyatta offered to settle charges through an out-of-court settlement, would you endorse that? In the context of an ICC proceeding, a settlement out of court would mean a plea agreement. This is where the accused person agrees to plead guilty to certain parts of the indictment. It's generally driven by the prosecution and the defence. The legal representative of the victims would probably have a somewhat minor role. It's never happened at the ICC. I've participated in the plea agreement negotiations at the Yugoslavia Tribunal. In many cases, I think it's a very good idea from the victims' perspective. It throws an awful lot of light on what happened. It can bring a genuine expression of remorse and contrition from the accused. So I think as a general, abstract idea in international criminal law generally, I think it's a good idea. Do you believe there is justice in the world? I believe there is justice in the world, yes, I do. I believe that you sometimes have to work hard for it. Sometimes those who hold power don't necessarily exercise their power in favour of the powerless. But as history goes on, we always move towards a more just world. From the Kenyan cases, what have we learned? I think that one of the most important contributions that an institution like the ICC can make is to act as a credible deterrent against atrocity. Thankfully, there were very few acts of violence during the 2013 elections. It may be many years before we understand why that was. But I'm personally convinced that the threat
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
of ICC prosecution may well have been a significant factor in the fact there was no election-related violence -- almost none at least -- in 2013. So, one of the great lessons that we can draw from this process is that the justice process must be handled in such a way as to constitute an effective deterrent. And we've already seen in 2014 atrocities committed in the Central African Republic and in South Sudan which cry out for the existence of an effective deterrent. ICC Judges Hear of ODMs Pre-Poll Plan to Cause Chaos Standard Digital By Wahome Thuku March 4, 2014 A witness Tuesday narrated how Orange Democratic Movement ( ODM) leaders prepared the ground for the December 2007 post-election violence in the North Rift. Prosecution witness 442 at the International Criminal Court ( ICC) gave accounts of how the leaders including the partys presidential candidate Raila Odinga, the then national chairman Henry Kosgey and councilors organised meetings in which they asked the local people to reject "the rule by one tribe." She also narrated how broadcaster Joshua Sang used the Kalenjin radio station, Kass FM, to rally the community to reject the proposed Constitution in 2005. The witness started testifying yesterday against Deputy President William Ruto and Sang. She recalled of an alleged meeting of ODM delegates at Kipchoge Stadium in Kapsabet where she claimed Kosgey told the crowd in Kiswahili," Wakikuyu wakipatiwa nafasi ya kutawala tena watatukojolea (if Kikuyus are given another chance to rule they would urinate on us). The meeting was held between September and October 2007. Raila is also said to have allegedly told the gathering amidst cheers thus: "Tuungane sisi wote tutoe utawala wa kabila moja. Iwapo watajaribu kuiba kura wataona Tsunami (we should unite and remove the rule by one tribe. Should they try to rig, they will see Tsunami.) The witness told the Trail Chamber V(a) that after the remarks, the name Tsunami became a common phrase among the Kalenjin, Luo and Luhya. He said although Ruto also spoke at the meeting, she did not hear what he said. Secret Meetings She explained how local councillors held several secret meetings before the elections discussing ODM politics and the polls. She testified that as campaigns heightened, the civic leaders openly said the Kikuyu would be removed from the area. The witness, a non-Kalenjin speaker, said after voting, she went home and listened to Kass FM where she heard Sang warning listeners to be on the look out for any attempt to steal votes. She said after the counting of the votes, Sang sounded angry as he announced that the votes had been stolen. "He said Kibaki had stolen votes in some parts of the country and making other commentaries about the rigging," she told the court.
3/12/14, 8:44 PM
The witness also alleged that Sang used Kass FM to campaign for the Orange camp during the 2005 referendum and even hosted studio guests who included Raila, Ruto and even then opposition leader Uhuru Kenyatta. Earlier, the court allowed an application for the witness to be given extra protection. Hearing continues.
[back to contents]
Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast)

Official Website of the International Criminal Court ICC Public Documents - Situation in the Republic of Cote d'Ivoire
Gbagbo's Party Recovers Political Might Ahead of Ivorian Elections All Africa By Marc-Andre Boisvert February 25, 2014 Armand Konan stood in front of the Palais des Sports, a stadium in Abidjan's popular neighbourhood, Treichville, selling videos and speeches of former Ivorian President Laurent Gbagbo. "People need to remember what our president said... He is our president. And we want him back," Konan told IPS. While Gbagbo waits for his trial at the International Criminal Court (ICC), his party, the Ivorian Popular Front (known by its French acronym FPI), is slowly recovering its political might in this West African nation. Gbagbo is accused of crimes against humanity for his alleged role in the 2010 to 2011 post-electoral crisis. More than 3,000 people died in the violence that followed Gbagbo's refusal to concede victory to current President Allassane Ouattara. But as the country's 2015 elections approach, the future of the FPI, one of the most important political forces in Cte d'Ivoire, hangs in the balance. While the next presidential polls will be held in October 2015, the FPI has not decided if it will run or continue its boycotting of elections - which it began doing during the 2012 legislative elections. And, so far, they have no official presidential candidate. Inside the walls of the Palais des Sports, in the Ivorian economic capital of Abidjan, there were about 2,500 people who agreed with Konan. While it was not the first FPI rally held since the post-electoral crisis, this Feb. 21 to 23 convention was the first major political meeting to be held in Abidjan that was approved by authorities. The ex-president might still be held at the Dutch prison complex in
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Scheveningen, but Gbagbo's influence over his party remains strong. "This convention is a tribute to [him]. We are determined to struggle for his liberation," said Pascal Affi N'Guessan, the new president of the FPI, to much applause. Affi N'Guessan urged the government "to invest in peace" and to ensure that "the peace and security conditions are there so every Ivorian will be ensured to live and work without fear for their lives." Affi N'Guessan, who still claims his party was victorious in the 2010 elections, predicted the FPI would soon take office again. "The FPI will soon be back in power through the only way [we] have been taught: a peaceful transition to democracy." Henriette Broh is a hardliner who refuses any alternative to Koudou, as many here fondly call Gbagbo. She is certain that by the time the 2015 elections come around, Gbagbo will be free and she will be able to vote for him again. "Laurent Gbagbo will be liberated soon. This is what god wants. We know it. The ICC has no proof. And he will come back to clean the mess that was [made by] Ouattara. They are robbers! They stole the elections. And now they steal the money," the 50-year-old told IPS. Like many Ivorians, she accuses the government of "kidnapping" the economy and favouring its own group of supporters at every level of the administration. Locals have even created a word for this: "Bakayoko-isation" -- it is a grouping of the last names of several figures around Ouattara including, the current Minister of Interior Hamed Bakayoko, and others who have the same surname but are not from the same family. "The almost 10 percent growth rate? No Ivorian has seen [the benefits of] this. The cost of living is higher than ever. The government is lying," said Anselme, another militant FPI supporter, who refused to give his last name as he feared reprisals. A national roundtable? Since last August, President Ouattara has made several attempts to open dialogue with the FPI. The opposition leaders have met the government on several occasions and there have been constant rumours - which were never acknowledged - that a national coalition government will be formed. But it will take more than talks for FPI supporters to forget the hardships they experienced over the last few years. Affi N'Guessan was arrested when Gbagbo's regime collapsed in April 2011. He was liberated on Aug. 6, 2013. A hundred other FPI leaders, who were present at the convention, were also imprisoned and then released on bail or went to exile. Several FPI supporters are still imprisoned, while others have had their assets frozen and claim to have been illegally evicted from their homes. On Sunday, Feb. 23, the FPI closed the convention with a popular rally in an historic place for the FPI, the Ficgayo Square in Yopougon - a neighbourhood that has been very supportive of Gbagbo.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Affi N'Guessan asked for "real justice". "For an effective, sincere and frank reconciliation, we have to move away from the victor's justice. We have to free the ones still in prison, because they are there in the name of this victor's justice," Affi N'Guessan said. But while the FPI was reconnecting with its supporters, in a pro-Ouattara neighbourhood the Collective of the Ivory Coast Victims was protesting against the liberation of post-electoral criminals and the "political interference in the justice system." Doudou Diene, United Nations independent expert on human rights, who visited Cte d'Ivoire last week, seemed to agree and called for the prosecution of perpetrators. "There is considerable progress made, but more needs to be done in terms of political dialogue," Diene said. At a bus stop in central Abidjan, Awa Konate, a 25-year-old law student, agreed with Diene's analysis that no matter the outcome, the FPI needs to get involved in the political process to avoid another violent crises. "I did not vote for the FPI. But almost half of Ivorians voted for them. You have to respect that. We are tired of crises. "The government and Gbagbo now need to talk. It is not for the people to die for politicians. And we need to make sure that this will never happen again. We have yet to find the balance between impunity and letting the FPI become a constructive opposition."
[back to contents]
AFRICA
Chad
ECOWAS Court Refuses to Suspend Case Against Hissene Habre Human Rights Brief By Brittany West February 23, 2014 The Economic Community of West African States adjudicatory body, the Community Court of Justice (ECCJ), recently denied Hissne Habrs
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
petition to suspend the ongoing trial against him in the Extraordinary African Chambers. The Chambers, an ad hoc tribunal in Senegal, indicted Habr on June 2, 2013, for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and torture committed during his rule in Chad between 1982 and 1990. Habrs regime was responsible for 200,000 victims of torture and more than 400,000 deaths. The victims of Habrs rule attempted to seek justice in several different forums prior to the establishment of the Chambers. Seven of the victims first brought a case against Habr in a domestic Senegalese court in 2000, but the victims later brought the case in Belgium because the Senegalese court found Habr could not be tried domestically for crimes committed outside Senegal. The Senegalese courts, however, found they lacked jurisdiction to rule on an extradition request from Belgium. Before the Chambers took on the case, Senegals inability to try Habr came under international scrutiny. The United Nations Committee against Torture issued a decision against Senegal in response to the lack of legal remedies for the victims, finding that Senegal violated the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT). Under Articles 5 and 7 of the CAT, a State Party must establish jurisdiction over and prosecute an offender of the Convention if the offender is in the State Partys territory and the State Party cannot extradite him. Amidst international pressure and with the passage of new domestic legislation in 2007 that allowed for the prosecution of war crimes, crimes against humanity, and torture, Senegal prepared to try Habr in domestic courts. However, a later 2010 ECCJ ruling found that Habr had to be tried by an ad hoc tribunal of international character and not a domestic Senegalese court because Senegalese domestic law did not incorporate universal jurisdiction at the time of Habrs rule. A domestic court, therefore, would have to apply universal jurisdiction retroactively in violation of Article 15 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. International pressure to take concrete action on Habrs case continued and, in 2012, Senegal and the African Union (AU) created the Chambers as an ad hoc tribunal, integrating it into Senegals domestic legal system. On April 23, 2013, Habr asked the ECCJ to suspend all activities of the Chambers, arguing the illegitimacy of the Chambers and the inability of the Chambers to provide him a fair trial. The ECCJ dismissed the petition on November 5, 2013, finding that it did not have the authority to grant such a request because the Chambers were established through an agreement between Senegal and the AU. The ECCJ does not have jurisdiction to rule on the African Unions actions. Although a small decision in the lengthy trial, this recent ruling by the ECCJ may help guarantee justice for the victims, support for international criminal prosecution in Africa, and legitimacy for the ECCJs own rulings. The Habr trial carries the burden of proving that African courts can prosecute African leaders for international crimes. Discontent among African nations with the actions of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has led to support for international criminal prosecution of African leaders in African courts rather than in the IC C. Kenyas recent withdrawal from the jurisdiction of the ICC in September 2013 threatens to instigate a mass exodus of several other African countries from the ICC. Adding to the tension, the AU has debated whether to add international criminal jurisdiction to the pan-African court for several years.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
The ECCJs November decision in Habrs case allows the Chambers to prove that African courts can prosecute African leaders under international criminal law without the ICC.
[back to contents]
EUROPE
The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber

Official Website [English translation]
Public Session in the Case v. Zoran Dragi!evi" Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina February 27, 2014 A public session in the case v. Zoran Dragi!evi" before the Section I for War Crimes of the Appeals Division, Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, is scheduled to take place on February 28, 2014 beginning at 12:00 hrs in Courtroom 5. The Trial Panel of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina handed down today the Trial Verdict finding the Accused Zoran Dragi"evi# guilty of the criminal offense of Crimes against Humanity in violation of Article 172(1)(h) and sentenced him to imprisonment for a term of 11 years. The Accused Zoran Dragi"evi# is found guilty because in the period from May 2, 1992 to July 1993, within widespread and systematic attack of military and paramilitary forces of the Serb Republic of BIH, later called Republika Srpska, targeting civilian population of the city of Sarajevo, knowing of that attack and that his acts constitute part of the attack, as a member of those forces, conducted persecution of civilian non-Serb population of Grbavica settlement, Municipality of Novo Sarajevo, on discriminatory, ethnic and religious grounds, by rape, torture, imprisonment, other inhumane acts and looting. Trial Verdict to be Pronounced in the Case v. Najdan Mla#enovi" et al.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina March 3, 2014 Pronouncement of the Trial Verdict before the Section I for War Crimes of the Court of BIH in the case v. Najdan Mla#enovi" et al. is scheduled to take place on March 4, 2014 starting at 1.00 p.m. in Courtroom 6. On August 7, 2012, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina confirmed the Indictment under which the Accused Najdan Mla$enovi# and Savo %ivkovi# are charged with the criminal offense of Crimes against Humanity. The Indictment alleges, among other things, that within a widespread or systematic attack against non-Serb civilian population in May 1992 in the territory of Bratunac Municipality, the Accused Najdan Mla$enovi#, in the capacity as one of the Bratunac Territorial Defense commanders, ordered, committed and aided, while Savo %ivkovi#, in the capacity as the Bratunac Territorial Defense member, committed and aided the persecution of non-Serb civilian population on national, ethnic and religious grounds by way of unlawful deprivation of liberty, physical and mental abuse and destruction of non-Serb civilian population property. Custody Terminated and Prohibiting Measures Ordered in the Case v. Ned$ad Hod$i" Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina March 4, 2014 In the procedure of custody justification review, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina rendered the Decision dated February 24, 2014, terminating custody of the Accused Ned$ad Hod$i" and ordering the following prohibiting measures: 1. Ban on leaving the place of residence (house arrest - members of the relevant Police Station shall make random checks on his place of residence on a daily basis); 2. Travel ban (including the seizure of travel documents, prohibition of issuance of travel documents, as well as the prohibition to use the identity card for crossing the State border of Bosnia and Herzegovina); The imposed prohibiting measures may last as long as necessary, while the review of their justifiability shall be carried out on a bimonthly basis. If the Accused violates any of the imposed prohibiting measures, he may be ordered into custody. Ned&ad Hod&i# is charged with the criminal offense of War Crimes against Civilians and War Crimes against Prisoners of War. Najdan Mla#enovi" Received a Sentence of 3 years and 6 Months in Prison Savo %ivkovi" Acquitted of Charges Court of Bosnia & Herzegovina March 4, 2014 The Trial Panel of the Section I for War Crimes of the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina delivered today a Verdict finding the first-accused Najdan Mla#enovi" guilty that he committed the criminal offense of War Crimes against Civilians under Article 142 of the Criminal Code of the Socialistic Federative Republic of Yugoslavia, taken in conjunction with Article 22 of the same Code, and sentencing him to 3 years and 6 months in prison.
Page 39 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Pursuant to Article 50 of the CC of the SFRY, the time the accused Najdan Mla$enovi# spent in custody shall be credited towards the imposed sentence of imprisonment. Pursuant to Article 188(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Accused must reimburse the costs of criminal proceedings in a scheduled amount of 300.00 KM, within 30 days after the Verdict became final. The same Verdict acquitted the accused Najdan Mla$enovi# of certain counts of the Indictment that he committed the criminal offense of Crimes against Humanity under Article 172(1)(h), as read with items (a), (d), (e), (i), (f) and (k), of the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, taken in conjunction with Article 180(1) and Article 29 of the same Code. The accused Savo %ivkovi# was acquitted of the charges that he committed the criminal offense of Crimes against Humanity under Article 172(1)(e) and (k) of the CC of BiH, as read with Articles 29 and 180(1). In addition, since the BiH Prosecutors Office dropped charges under Counts II.1.e), II.2.a), c), d), e) and (f) and II.3.a) and b) for the criminal offense of Crimes against Humanity under Article 172(1) in relation to the accused Najdan Mla$enovi#, the accused Mla$enovi# is relieved of the duty to reimburse the costs of proceedings. Also, the Court has issued a decision extending the prohibiting measures imposed on the accused Najdan Mla$enovi#, and cancelling the prohibiting measures in relation to the accused Savo %ivkovi#. Bosnia Jails Serb for Burning Houses in Bratunac Balkan Transitional Justice March 4, 2014 The court in Sarajevo on Tuesday found Mladjenovic guilty of the destruction of property by showing a group of Serb soldiers which Bosniak homes to burn, and also of torching a house himself. But he was cleared of charges accusing him of having command responsibility for murders and the destruction of property during the attacks on the villages of Glogova and Hranca in May 1992. His co-defendant Savo Zivkovic was acquitted of all charges. They were orginally indicted for allegedly taking part in a widespread and systematic attack on civilians in Bratunac and helping the persecution of non-Serbs through arrests, abuse and the destruction of property. But the judge said that the prosecution had failed to prove that Mladjenovic was the deputy commander of the Territorial Defence Reconnaissance Section, which was allegedly involved in the attack, or even to prove which armed group was responsible for the violence in one of the two villages, Hranca. "Even if we had accepted that he commanded and gave the orders listed in the indictment, none of the witnesses in this case heard those orders," said presiding judge Zeljka Marenic. Marenic added that it was also not proved that Mladjenovic committed the crimes in Glogova because witness testimonies were inconclusive.
Page 40 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Despite being originally charged with crimes against humanity, the court instead convicted Mladjenovic of crimes against the civilian population because, Marenic said, the prosecution failed to prove the existence of a "widespread and systematic attack on Bosniak civilians". As mitigating circumstances, the court took into account the fact that Mladjenovic was a father of three without previous convictions and had shown a positive attitude towards post-war Bosniak returnees. [back to contents]
International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY)

Official Website of the ICTY
Karadzic Witnesses Deny Camp Atrocities Institute for War and Peace Reporting By Velma Saric February 28, 2014 The trial of former Bosnian Serb political leader Radovan Karadzic continued this week with testimony from several defence witnesses who spoke about events in the northwestern Bosnian municipalities of Prijedor and Sanski Most in 1992. Both were captured by Serb forces at the beginning of the 1992-95 war in Bosnia and were subsequently controlled by Karadzics Serb Democratic Party (SDS). Karadzic is accused of crimes of genocide, extermination, persecution, murder and forcible transfer of non-Serbs from the territories under the control of Bosnian Serbs. The indictment against him alleges that crimes committed against non-Serbs in Sanski Most and Prijedor municipalities amounted to genocide. The first witness to testify this week was Dusan Jankovic, who served as commander of the police station in Prijedor, close to where the Bosnian Serb-run prison camps of Omarska and Keraterm were located. Last year, Jankovic was sentenced to 21 years in prison by the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina for his part in the execution of about 200 Bosniaks at Koricanske Stijene on August 21, 1992. Testifying at Karadzics trial this week, Jankovic told judges that in his role as police commander in Prijedor, he did not receive reports from Omarska and Keraterm and he had no knowledge of what was going on there. He said these reports were sent to his superior, Simo Drljaca, who was chief of police for Prijedor. Drljaca was indicted by the Hague tribunal in March 1997, but he was shot and
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
killed by NATO soldiers during an attempt to arrest him in July that year. According to Jankovic, Drljaca was subordinate to the Banja Luka regional police department and above that the Bosnian Serb interior ministry "but not to Karadzic". "Drljaca had no contact with the president, and there was no need for that," Jankovic said in court. Momcilo Gruban, a former guard at the Omarska prison camp, also testified this week. In 2008, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina found Gruban guilty of crimes against non-Serbs in the Prijedor area and sentenced him to 11 years imprisonment. In 2009, his sentence was reduced to seven years on appeal. Gruban told Karadzics trial this week that there was "no maltreatment or any bad behaviour towards the detainees at the Omarska camp". He referred to Omarska not as a detention camp, but as a "shelter and investigation centre". He said the police were there to protect and help the people held there "as far as the law and the circumstances allowed". In the cross-examination conducted by prosecutor Ann Sutherland, Gruban said that he "had never seen any beatings or incidents" but that he had "heard of cases when people from the outside would come to the camp to settle scores with some of the detainees, sometimes violently". The witness added that those responsible were paramilitary soldiers from "groups outside the system". "These people were well armed and there was nothing that the police who were securing the camp could actually do to stop them," Gruban told the court. Asked by the prosecution about cases where people died in Omarska due to insufficient medical care and malnutrition, the witness responded by making a comparison with conditions at the Hague tribunals detention unit. "You see, people are dying here too, and there are complaints about the quality of the food here as well, although unlike us, you have everything you need to ensure good food for the people. Maybe the food wasnt good and plentiful in Omarska back then, but there is no such thing as good food for detainees," Gruban said. The third witness to testify for Karadzics defence this week was Dusan Mudrinic, who was an SDS party member in Sanski Most in 1992. "We cannot speak of any organised war crimes in Sanski Most," Mudrinic told the court. "There were crimes committed by individuals without any support from the government, but those were sporadic incidents." "Muslims were asking us for protection and they got it," Mudrinic continued. "And when they asked us to let them leave their homes, we did that, too. We allowed them to go."
Page 42 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
When prosecutor Bronagh McKenna put it to the witness that the property of nonSerbs was taken by force, and noted that Mudrinic himself became the proprietor of a caf previously owned by a Bosniak, the witness insisted that the prosecution had "got it all wrong". He claimed that Bosniaks gave away their homes, cars and cafs "to their Serb friends", including himself, "of their own free will", and that this transfer of property had occurred "absolutely legally, in the presence of a lawyer". The trial continues next week. Mladic Prosecution Rests Its Case Institute for War and Peace Reporting By Rachel Irwin February 28, 2014 The Hague tribunal prosecution this week officially rested its case against wartime Bosnian Serb army commander Ratko Mladic. On March 17, a process known as 98-bis will begin, in which tribunal rules allow the accused to seek an acquittal on all counts on the grounds that there is no evidence to support a conviction. If the judges deny Mladics request and the defence case moves forward, it is set to begin on May 13. Prosecutors allege that Mladic is responsible for crimes of genocide, persecution, extermination, murder and forcible transfer which "contributed to achieving the objective of the permanent removal of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb-claimed territory". He is also accused of planning and overseeing the 44-month siege of Sarajevo that left nearly 12,000 people dead, as well as the massacre of more than 7,000 men and boys at Srebrenica in July 1995. Mladic was arrested in May 2011 after 16 years on the run. His trial commenced in May 2012 and the final prosecution witness took the stand in December of last year. Karadzic Lobbies Judges Over "Immunity Deal" Institute for War and Peace Reporting By Rachel Irwin February 28. 2014 Trial judges at the Hague tribunal have agreed to take into consideration an alleged agreement promising Radovan Karadzic immunity from prosecution when they decide the length of his prison sentence, if he is convicted. Since he was arrested in July 2008, Karadzic has claimed that in 1996 several months after the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement ended the Bosnian war he made a deal with American diplomat Richard Holbrooke that he would be "immune from prosecution at the tribunal if he agreed to withdraw from public life". Holbrooke, who died in 2010, publicly denied these allegations. Karadzic, however, has continued to maintain that such a deal had been made, and that the tribunal therefore did not have jurisdiction to try him. In July 2009, the pretrial chamber in The Hague ruled that even if the agreement did exist, it was not
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
binding on the tribunal and had no impact on jurisdiction. The judges noted, however, that information pertaining to the alleged agreement "may be relevant to any eventual appeal and any eventual sentence". The appeals chamber agreed, stating that "such allegations could be considered for the purposes of sentencing, if appropriate". With his trial now nearing an end, Karadzic asked to submit 14 documents supporting the existence of the agreement. He further argued that according to tribunal jurisprudence, "the character and acts of the accused subsequent to the conflict may be a mitigating factor in sentencing". Karadzic contends that his resignation as president of the Bosnian Serb entity Republika Srpska in 1996 was his "contribution to the implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement". He "went further by resigning as president of the SDS [Serbian Democratic Party] and all public functions, and withdrawing from public life". Karadzic argues that he is "entitled to argue for a sentence reduction as a result of his reliance upon the agreement he had with Richard Holbrooke that he would not be prosecuted at the tribunal if he resigned from office and withdrew from public life an agreement he kept to his detriment, but one which the tribunal refused to honour". In response, the prosecution argued this week that "to the extent that they address the existence of the Holbrooke agreement", the documents Karadzic wanted to have admitted as evidence "are not capable of mitigating the sentence and thus are not admissible". Judges this week noted that both the pre-trial chamber and the appeals chamber had found that material relating to the alleged agreement might be relevant for sentencing. Given the additional information provided by the accused, they decided that "the material is prima facie relevant to sentencing and should be admitted into evidence". As for the prosecutions objections, judges stated, "this is a matter of weight given to the material and considered during sentencing deliberations, if any". The last defence witness to testify in Karadzics trial, referred to by the number KDZ-584, will take the stand on March 3. Prosecutors allege that Karadzic, the president of Bosnias self-declared Republika Srpska from 1992 to 1996, is responsible for crimes of genocide, persecution, extermination, murder and forcible transfer which "contributed to achieving the objective of the permanent removal of Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Croats from Bosnian Serb-claimed territory". He is also accused of planning and overseeing the 44-month siege of Sarajevo that left nearly 12,000 people dead, as well as the massacre of more than 7,000 men and boys at Srebrenica in July 1995. Karadzic was arrested in Belgrade in July 2008 after 13 years as a fugitive. [back to contents]
Page 44 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Domestic Prosecutions In The Former Yugoslavia

Croatian Serb Leader Hadzics Acquittal Plea Rejected Balkan Insight By Marija Ristic February 21, 2014 The Hague Tribunal has refused a motion for acquittal from former Croatian Serb leader Goran Hadzic, who is on trial for war crimes during the conflict in Croatia in the early 1990s. The International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia on Thursday dismissed Hadzics motion for acquittal on eight counts of his indictment that accuse him of serious violations of human rights. Hadzic, the former president of the Republic of Serbian Krajina, a self-proclaimed Serb statelet in Croatia during wartime, is on trial over a series of crimes including the deportation of tens of thousands of non-Serbs and the murders of hundreds more from June 1991 to December 1993. In December, at the mid-point of his trial, Hadzics defence asked the court to reconsider his indictment, arguing that he didnt actually have power in Serbcontrolled areas of Croatia and that crimes there were committed by Yugoslav Peoples Army, which was not under his control. Rejecting the motion for acquittal, the Tribunal found that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence for the court to find that crimes were committed and to create the basis for a possible ruling that Hadzic participated in a joint criminal enterprise, as alleged in the indictment. "But the presence of evidence capable of sustaining a conviction does not mean that the Trial Chamber will enter a conviction at the end of the case," judge Guy Delvoa cautioned. Hadzic was initially indicted in June 2004, and after being at large for almost seven years, he was arrested by the Serbian authorities in July 2011 the last fugitive wanted by the Tribunal to be sent to The Hague. His defence is expected to start presenting its case in April. Bosnian Serbs Demand Acquittal Over Mosque Killings Balkan Insight February 25, 2014 Lawyers for former Serb fighters accused of involvement in killing and burning Bosniak civilians at a village mosque near Prijedor in 1992 said their guilt had not been proved. Defence lawyers for two of three former fighters on trial, Dragomir Soldat and Velemir Djuric, who are accused of shooting the Bosniaks in the village of Carakovo near Prijedor, said in their closing arguments on Monday that the men should be acquitted. "Not one single piece of prosecution evidence suggesting that Soldat had or
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
demonstrated command power over any other units but his unit, that he issued orders to any squad or that he knew the [other] indictees, was presented during the main trial," said Soldats lawyer Savan Zec. Soldat is accused of ordering the killings in Carakovo on July 23, 1992, while Djuric and Babic carried them out, taking Bosniak men from their homes in Carakovo and then shooting them dead outside the village mosque. The indictment also alleges that some of the men who survived the shooting died soon afterwards when Djuric and Babic set the mosque on fire. According to the charges, Soldat was a military policeman with the 43rd Motorised Brigade of the Bosnian Serb Army, Djuric a member of the armys Intelligence Centre, and Babic a reservist policeman in Prijedor. Soldats lawyer said that the indictment was based on a statement given by witness Sefik Karupovic who stood to benefit if his client was jailed, he alleged. "In 1993, Karupovic sold Dragomir Soldats house, but he has never given the money to Soldat. After having performed this fraud, Karupovic must have been aware of the fact that he would be criminally prosecuted later on, so he realised that he could get rid of Soldat," the lawyer said. Djurics lawyer said meanwhile that the prosecution had not proved that he was in Carakovo on July 23, 1992, adding that the defence had offered many pieces of evidence indicating that he was somewhere else that day. Lawyer Branko Dakic also said that the prosecution had not proved that a widespread and systematic attack by Bosnian Serb forces was carried out in the Prijedor area, adding that the incident on July 23, 1992 was "an isolated event". Babics defence is due to present its closing argument on March 3. Witness Recalls School Beatings by Bosnian Croat Fighter Balkan Insight February 28, 2014 A prosecution witness accused former Croatian Defence Council fighter Josip Tolic of assaulting him twice while he was detained at a primary school in Odzak in northern Bosnia in 1992. Witness Slavko Cajic, a former Yugoslav Peoples Army reservist, told the Sarajevo court on Thursday that in the spring of 1992, he fled from the village of Trnjak in the Bosanski Brod area of northern Bosnia to another village, Novi Grad, in order to avoid shelling by Croat forces. "There was a deal between the [local Serb and Croat] crisis headquarters [in the area] that we were to go to free Serbian territory and surrender weapons," recalled Cajic. But he said the deal was not fulfilled and that instead, Serb locals were detained at the primary school in Odzak by Croatian Defence Council fighters. The witness said that he was repeatedly beaten while held at the school and that the defendant Tolic assaulted him twice. "They took me to the classroom. He beat me with his hands and with a stick and kicked me with his leg like karate," said Cajic. Tolic, a former member of the 102nd Odzak Brigade of the Croatian Defence Council, is charged with having participated in the abuse of Serb prisoners in the Odzak and Bosanski Brod area of northern Bosnia from May to October 1992.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Another witness at the trial on Thursday, Boro Lesic, said he was also held at the school in Odzak, where he saw Tolic assault another prisoner. "Once [prisoner] Slavko Topic was holding a bottle and he [Tolic] stopped him and asked, Where [are you going]? He then hit him with the bottle, with his palm and with his foot. He [the prisoner] collapsed," Lesic recalled. The defence said the witness did not mention Tolic at all in his first statement in 2007, and did not mention the bottle incident in his second statement in 2013. "I remembered it when I saw the man in the courtroom," the witness responded. The trial is due to continue on March 14. Bosniak on Trial in Banja Luka for Killing Serb Balkan Insight March 3, 2014 The trial of former Bosniak fighter Dzevad Zec started in the Bosnian Serb city of Banja Luka with a witness claiming that the defendant bragged about killing a Serb civilian in 1992. Prosecution witness Borislav Vasiljevic told the court on Monday that while he was detained in the village of Vecici near Kotor Varos in the summer of 1992, he hear Zec saying he killed a man called Slavo Vasiljevic. "After Slavo was killed, my father Mirko and I were detained by men from Vecici. When they brought us to the village, [two fighters called] Sulejman Beculic and Rukib Hibic asked my father why he killed Slavo. Then Zec came and said: Dont harass these people, I killed Slavo. I fired from Bojos meadow," said the witness. He added that before the war he had good relations with Zec, and so the defendant did not beat or abuse him during his detention. The Banja Luka district prosecution charges Zec with killing Vasiljevic with an automatic rifle on June 19, 1992, in the village of Staza, near Kotor Varos. The indictment alleges that Zec went to a meadow owned by a man called Bojo Vasiljevic in the evening and fired a round at Vasiljevic, who was standing on his porch. The second witness in the trial on Monday, Milenko Vasiljevic, said that in June 1992 he was near the village of Staza when he saw Zec running across the road with a rifle in his hand. "I went to Staza to pick up my father, aunt and her children. When we were coming back from the woods, several people shot at us and wounded my aunt and I. Later I saw the defendant running across and going into the woods," the witness said. The trial continues on April 15. Four Bosnian Serbs Convicted of Smoluca Prisoner Abuse Balkan Insight March 5, 2014 Four former Bosnian Serb Army soldiers were sentenced to a total of 18and-a-half years in prison for abusing prisoners of war in the village of Smoluca near Tuzla in 1992.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
The cantonal court in Tuzla on Wednesday sentenced Svetomir Ilic to six years in prison, Milorad Cvijanovic and a fighter with the same name, Milorad Cvijanovic, to five years in jail each, and Vaso Ilic to two-and-a-half years for assaults on Bosniak detainees during wartime. "They are found guilty of the violation of the international laws and customs of war, as well as the violation of some provisions of the Geneva Convention," said presiding judge Fetija Pasic. All four men were convicted of repeatedly inflicting severe injuries to four members of the Territorial Defence forces from Srebrenik and Tinja in the Tuzla municipality in June and July 1992, and of violating their human dignity. The verdict can be appealed at the supreme court of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. [back to contents]
MIDDLE EAST AND ASIA
Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC)

Official Website of the Extraordinary Chambers Official Website of the United Nations Assistance to the Khmer Rouge Trials (UNAKRT)
Chams' Long Wait Nearly Over The Phnom Penh Post By Kevin Ponniah & Koam Chanrasmey February 21, 2014 More than 100 ethnic Cham villagers sit around the grounds of a local pagoda, chatting languidly, the women dressed in colourful patterned blouses and headscarves. They have already prayed once today, and will do so four more times before the day is over. The simple freedoms they are enjoying the ability to speak the Cham language, wear traditional clothing and practice their Sunni Muslim faith are not taken for granted by these mostly middle-aged and elderly people. Targeted for their ethnicity and religion under the Khmer Rouge, many lost their entire families in coordinated killings. They have gathered for a village forum organised by the Documentation Center of Cambodia (DC-Cam), to inform them that charges related to genocide against the
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Cham are expected to finally be heard at the Khmer Rouge Tribunal when Case 002/02 gets under way in the next few months. "Before the Khmer Rouge came, we used to study with Khmer people. There was no conflict. We could speak Cham and follow Cham culture and religion. But after the Khmer Rouge came, everything was forbidden," says Hak Sary, a gregarious 57year-old, who lost 30 members of her extended family and her mother, under Democratic Kampuchea. "If we still tried to follow our religion, they would kill us. We had to cut our hair and we couldn't wear our headscarves. They forced me to eat pork at gunpoint. I vomited afterwards because I felt so disgusted. "But I knew Allah would not punish us, because he would understand that we were forced." The Cham ethnic group are descendants of the kingdom of Champa, which ruled over parts of central and southern Vietnam from the 7th to 19th centuries. About 350,000 Muslims remain in Cambodia today, according to DC-Cam, most of whom are Chams. This area, the Svay Khleang village and commune of Kampong Cham's Kroch Chmar district, a picturesque spot on the banks of the Mekong, was a vibrant centre of Cham life before the communists decided to break up the community in 1975, according to Ysa Osman's The Cham Rebellion: Survivors' Stories from the Villages. In that year, villagers here got wind of a plan to arrest a group of people who had held a dawn prayer at the local mosque to celebrate the end of the Ramadan fasting month. Wielding swords, they rose up in rebellion, killing a Khmer Rouge cadre. A brutal assault by the Khmer Rouge followed. Hundreds were killed and the villagers were forcibly evacuated to a number of different locations. Most would never see home again. More than 6,200 people lived here in 1970s, Osman writes, when the communists first took hold of the area, which then held a prestigious Islamic school, a village mosque and a beautiful three-tiered minaret that, though dilapidated, still stands today. But by the time the Vietnamese invaded in 1979, only 600 Cham, mostly women and children, were still alive to return to Svay Khleang, finding buried Korans and human remains around their homes. Court prosecutors have officially asked the Trial Chamber to include the "1975 dispersal or 'break-up' of the Cham population" in the next trial, as this forced movement "is essential" in proving a policy to persecute the Chams existed, they say. Historians including David Chandler, however, have said they do not believe conclusive evidence exists proving that genocide was committed against the Cham. But according to Dale Lysak, a senior assistant prosecutor at the tribunal who travelled to Svay Khleang to brief villagers, the Chams were clearly targeted as an ethnic and religious group by the Khmer Rouge. "The stories of the mass execution of the Cham are some of the most horrific stories
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
of the period, because it was done a little differently than a lot of other executions. "The way the execution happened, is that at some point, it was determined it was time to get rid of the Cham people." To Lysak, the fact that Chams were gathered and brought en masse to killing sites, without political interrogations, "tells you they were being targeted purely because [they] were Cham they [Khmer Rouge] didn't decide who were the good Cham and who were the bad Cham. If you were Cham, you were killed." The number of Cham who died under the Khmer Rouge is unclear. Historian Ben Kiernan estimates that 87,000 Cham perished, while Osman has concluded that between 400,000 and 500,000 Cham died. Like many Cambodians, the Cham in Svay Khleang feel that the court has taken too long to convict senior Khmer Rouge leaders. But those who have been following proceedings are grateful that crimes committed against their communities will soon be given a public hearing, even if many of those who suffered haven't lived to see it. "I am very happy that the court will start finding out what happened to the Cham people. It is a little too late for us, but I'm still positive it is good and will find justice for the Cham when the court finishes the case," Man Auseit, 49, said. In 1978, as the Khmer Rouge conducted its bloody purge of the Eastern Zone, Auseit, then a teenager, huddled at a pagoda for two nights with thousands of other Chams who had also been ordered to gather there, waiting for what he knew was certain death. But an idea born out of desperation saved him. "I was so lucky. I was saved because I pretended to be a Khmer. I said I was a Khmer who lived with my uncle." When that "uncle", a friend of his late father, was summoned by the cadres to prove Auseit's story, he lied and corroborated the story. "He said I was his nephew. He saved my life." According to Lysak, having genocide against the Cham heard at the court would fulfil an important part of its mandate, namely not excluding any victims' groups. "Having some Cham witnesses coming to court and telling their stories of what happened to [their] people, would be a very key and historic part of the trial." But despite the prosecutor's efforts to reassure villagers that the court is being pushed to work as quickly as possible, some feel they have waited long enough. "Why is the trial taking so long to reach a verdict?" Man Sleh, a frail and weathered man of 67 who filed as a Cham civil party for both Case 001 and 002, asked at the forum. After his question was answered, a few minutes later, he was back up again. "But we have so much evidence. We have all the documents. Why does it still take so long? I am old and I am going to die soon. And I am very worried that I might not see justice." KRT Civil Party Co-Lawyer Simonneau-Fort to Bow Out The Phnom Penh Post
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
By Stuart White February 24, 2014 International civil party lead co-lawyer Elisabeth Simonneau-Fort announced her resignation from her position at the Khmer Rouge tribunal on Friday, saying that she will continue work on Case 002/01 for three more months, but will not be taking the reins as the court transitions into Case 002/02. In her three years at the court, Simonneau-Fort was at the centre of an unprecedented experiment to introduce the concept of civil party participation which allows for the direct involvement of victims in criminal proceedings to international justice. "I will finalise all the process of reparations in Case 002/01, and will continue to serve in a pro bono capacity as the Lead Co Lawyer until 31 May 2014," SimonneauFort said in a statement. She added that she would "remain at the court's disposal" to assist in ensuring a "thorough and efficient handing-over of duties" to her replacement. In an email yesterday, Simonneau-Fort thanked her legal team, saying the choice to resign had been "a personal decision", and that she was "proud and happy" to have had the opportunity to carve out a place for victims in the court's proceedings. "It has also been an extraordinary and moving experience," she said. "Even if it has also been an exhausting task, I feel really happy that we could plead and close the debates in case 002/01. That was quite unbelievable 3 years ago." Simonneau-Fort said she would be returning to domestic legal practice, but hoped to return to international law "sometime or other". Prosecutor William Smith yesterday praised Simonneau-Fort for helping to create "a culture of co-operation and communication" with the prosecution. "She was determined that the civil parties receive the justice they expected," Smith said in an email, noting her ability to unify the voices of the other civil party lawyers. "It was a difficult balancing act but she did it very well." Doctors Centre Stage at KRT The Phnom Penh Post By Stuart White February 25, 2014 The Khmer Rouge tribunal's trial chamber has ordered a physical and psychiatric assessment of Khieu Samphan and Nuon Chea with the aim of determining whether the octogenarian defendants are fit to stand trial as Case 002 transitions into its second and possibly final segment. In a filing dated February 17 and posted to the court's website two days later, the trial chamber appointed Dr Seena Fazel, geriatrician Dr Chan Kin Ming and psychiatrist Dr Huot Lina to examine Samphan and Chea who are 82 and 87, respectively and to report back on their "level of physical and/or cognitive ability". "The examination of the Accused shall take place on 24-25 March 2014 and a report finalized in English by 25 March 2014," the chamber's filing reads. "The Chamber
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
has tentatively scheduled a hearing for 28 March 2014, to be held only upon the request of the parties, in order to permit questioning of the Experts on the conclusions contained in their Reports." Though neither defence team has asserted that its client is unfit to stand trial, both have requested shorter or less frequent courtroom hearings given that their clients' ability to follow proceedings for long periods has deteriorated. In court, however, the Samphan defence team has maintained that its client's health is fine, and should not be used as justification to rush Case 002/02 to trial. "Mr Khieu Samphan is requesting that we wait for the full adjudication of the case [002/01], and he wants to uphold all his rights" Samphan defender Arthur Vercken said at a hearing in December. "For the time being, he is in good health, and he would like to be tried in accordance with principles of the law." In its response to the defence teams' positions, the prosecution had argued against allowing the medical assessment, while at the same time granting the request for shorter hours at least while the appeals process in Case 002/01 is ongoing. More Money Sought for KR Tribunal Reparations The Cambodia Daily By Zsombor Peter February 26, 2014 The Khmer Rouge tribunal's victims support unit Tuesday made a last-ditch push for donations to pay for reparation projects for the victims of the Pol Pot regime ahead of a March 31 deadline. A verdict in the first phase of the war crimes trial against Khmer Rouge leaders Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan is expected in the coming months. Though the few thousand civil parties to the case cannot receive individual financial awards in the event of a guilty verdict, they can receive moral and collective reparations. "A number of projects do not yet have secured funds and consequently are at risk of not being recognized by the court, nor implemented," the victims unit said in a statement soliciting more donations. The 13 proposed projects include a set of six memorials around the country, facilitated self-help groups, a traveling exhibit, and a new chapter in a Khmer Rouge regime teaching guide for the country's public schools. They've secured $693,000 from donors including the Swiss and German governments but need at least $1.6 million more to fund all the projects. Lars Olsen, a spokesman for the court, said the Trial Chamber needed to know what funds were available for reparations by March 31 to help it decide which projects to award in its judgment if the accused are found guilty. Chum Mey, a civil party in the case who now sells copies of his memoir of life under the Khmer Rouge outside S-21, the prison and torture center he was one of the few to survive, said the projects would help ensure that future generations never forget what happened. "If the court does not have enough money to do the projects, I think that we won't have evidence to show the next generations so that they know about the Pol Pot regime," he said.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Mr. Mey said he most wanted to see a memorial stupa built at S-21, which is now a museum. Long Khet, head of the NGO Youth for Peace, said the reparations were an important symbol of accountability. "In the context of [this tribunal], symbolic, moral and collective reparations are very crucial and needed for the Khmer Rouge victims and survivors because they can help to restore the value and dignity of the victims," he added. Ban on Ta An's Case File Upheld at KR Tribunal The Cambodia Daily By Lauren Crothers February 26, 2014 Ta An, a Khmer Rouge war crimes suspect in the case known as 004, will continue to not be allowed access to his case file, according to a new document published Tuesday by the court. The January 15 document, which was released Tuesday, supports a July 31 decision by the Khmer Rouge tribunal's International Co-Investigating Judge Mark Harmon to deny Ta An access to his file because he has not officially been charged with a crime. Lawyers for Ta An, a former Central Zone deputy secretary during the Pol Pot regime, had appealed Judge Harmon's decision, but the Cambodian judges in the five-member Pre-Trial Chamber, Prak Kimsan, Ney Thol and Huot Vuthy, dismissed it, saying that they agreed with Judge Harmon. The chamber's two international judges, Chang Ho-Chung and Rowan Downing, however, argued that they considered Ta An to be a "charged person" and that Judge Harmon's decision should be overturned. Ta An's lawyers have said that a refusal to grant them access to the file that concerns their client means that they do not know how the investigation against him is proceeding. Judge Harmon has pressed on with investigating Case 004, which the government is adamant should not proceed. Mr. Harmon's national counterpart, Co-Investigating Judge You Bunleng, in line with the government's position, considers Case 004 closed as it falls outside the tribunal's mandate to only investigate senior regime leaders and those most responsible for crimes. Tribunal Lacks Funding for Victims Reparations, Officials Say VOA Khmer By Kong Sothanarith February 27, 2014 The victims support unit of the UN-backed Khmer Rouge tribunal is urging international donors to continue funding the court, as it seeks to determine reparations for victims of the regime. The court "lacks funding" for 13 separate reparation requests by victims, Hang
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Vannak, head of the Victim Support Section of the court, said in a statement Tuesday. Among the reparation requests are memorials for those who perished under the regime and a psychological treatment center for the traumatized survivors. Victims have also requested a memorial day and a peace studies center. The Trial Chamber is processing its verdict in the first of two phases of an atrocity crimes trial for aging Khmer Rouge leaders Nuon Chea and Khieu Samphan. Both men are facing charges of atrocity crimes, including genocide, for the actions of Khmer Rouge cadre under their command. As it considers the verdict, which is expected later this year, the court will also decide what reparations victims will receive. Neth Pheaktra, a spokesman for the tribunal, said the victims unit has received pledges of some $600,000, but more is needed if the reparations request are "to be secured."
[back to contents]
Iraqi High Tribunal

Grotian Moment: The International War Crimes Trial Blog [back to contents]
Syria
World Powers Responsible for Failing to Stop Syria War Crimes: U.N. Reuters By Stephanie Nebehay March 5, 2014 All sides in Syria's civil war are using shelling and siege tactics to punish and starve civilians and big powers bear responsibility for allowing such war crimes to persist, U.N. human rights investigators said on Wednesday. The independent investigators, presenting their latest report documenting atrocities in Syria, called again on the U.N. Security Council to refer grave violations of the rules of war to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for prosecution. "The Security Council bears responsibility for not addressing accountability and
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
allowing the warring parties to violate these rules with total impunity," Paulo Pinheiro, who leads the U.N. commission of inquiry, told a news conference. "One of most stark trends we have documented is the use of siege warfare, the denial of humanitarian aid, food and basic necessities such as medical care and clean water have forced people to choose between surrender and starvation." More than 140,000 have been killed in the conflict, which enters its fourth year next week, 2.5 million refugees have fled abroad and 6.5 million people are uprooted within Syria. Divided world powers have backed both sides in the conflict and a diplomatic deadlock has exacerbated the bloodshed. Fighters and their commanders may be held accountable, but also states which transfer weapons to Syria, the report said. Syrian government forces under President Bashar al-Assad have besieged towns including the Old City of Homs, shelling relentlessly and depriving them of food as part of a "starvation until submission" campaign, the report said. It said the Syrian air force had dropped barrel bombs on Aleppo with "shocking intensity", killing hundreds of civilians and injuring many more. "I remember most vividly speaking to a doctor who was treating survivors of barrel bomb attacks. Some victims including infants had lost limbs," said Pinheiro. Insurgents fighting to topple Assad, especially foreign Islamic fighters including the al-Qaeda affiliated ISIS, have stepped up attacks on civilians, taken hostages, executed prisoners and set off car bombs to spread terror, it said. The report, covering July 15-January 20, is the seventh by the United Nations since the inquiry was set up in September 2011, six months after the anti-Assad revolt began. The investigators have not been allowed into Syria, but their latest findings were based on 563 interviews conducted by Skype or by telephone with victims and witnesses still in the country or in person with refugees in surrounding countries. FOUR LISTS OF SUSPECTS All sides have violated the rules of war embodied in the Geneva Conventions, according to the team of two dozen who include former U.N. war crimes prosecutor Carla del Ponte. It has now drawn up four confidential lists of suspects. War crimes had been committed on both sides, including torture, massacres, rapes and recruitment of child soldiers. Pinheiro, asked about Assad's responsibility, declined to be more specific about names on the lists of suspects. "We mentioned several times the responsibility of people in high echelons in the government." "The reports, if they were not able to ensure accountability in the present, I think that they will be important material for the future. But also our data bank and list of
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
perpetrators that we have established," he added. Despite some tactical gains by Syrian government forces backed by more foreign combat forces of Lebanese Hezbollah and Iraqi militia, the fighting has reached a stalemate, causing significant casualties and material losses, the report said. "The government relied extensively on the superior firepower of its air force and artillery, while non-state armed groups increasingly resorted to methods of asymmetric warfare, such as suicide bombs and use of improvised explosive devices." As part of a strategy aimed at weakening the insurgents and breaking the will of their popular base, government forces have besieged and bombarded civilian areas, it said. "Partial sieges aimed at expelling armed groups turned into tight blockades that prevented the delivery of basic supplies, including food and medicine, as part of a 'starvation until submission' campaign." Rebels throughout Syria have "inflicted severe physical or mental pain or suffering on civilian populations in areas under their control", including on prisoners, it said. Referring to the northern Raqqa area under control of an al Qaeda affiliate, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, the report said: "The acts committed by nonstate armed groups ... in areas under their control against the civilian population constitute torture and inhuman treatment as a war crime and, in the context of (Raqqa), as a crime against humanity." Rebels have encircled Nubl and Zahra, besieging 45,000 people in the two Shi'ite towns in Aleppo province, it said. "The siege is imposed by groups affiliated to the Islamic Front, Jaish Al Mujahedeen, Jabhat Al-Nusra and the Syrian Revolutionary Front by checkpoints erected around the area and by cutting off their electrical and water supply lines."
[back to contents]
Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Official Website of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon In Focus: Special Tribunal for Lebanon (UN)
Lebanon First Bloc to Ask Ban to Refer Political Assassinations to STL Naharnet February 21, 2014 The Lebanon First parliamentary bloc is planning to send a petition to U.N. chief Ban Ki-moon to ask him to refer all assassinations committed in Lebanon after Dec.12, 2005 to the Special Tribunal for Lebanon.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
The petition has been drafted and is awaiting the signature of the bloc's members, An Nahar newspaper reported on Friday. The daily said that the petition includes a request for the STL to also probe the latest assassination against former finance Minister Mohammed Shatah. It also stresses that the STL should deal with the crimes to stop the series of assassinations that have rocked Lebanon, An Nahar added. The U.N.-backed STL, which was set up to try the killers of former Premier Rafik Hariri, announced earlier this month that it was adding a fifth suspect to the trial of four Hizbullah members accused of his Feb. 2005 murder. The four - Mustafa Badreddine, Salim Ayyash, Hussein Oneissi, Assad Sabra - went on trial in absentia before the tribunal last month for the massive suicide truck bombing that killed Hariri. The fifth suspect, Hassan Habib Merhi, also an alleged Hizbullah member, was indicted last year. STL Adjourns Hariri Trial Until Mid-May The Daily Star By Kareem Shaheen February 26, 2014 The trial of five Hezbollah members accused of complicity in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri has been adjourned until mid-May at least, according to a court document. Judges at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon ordered the delay to allow defense lawyers for the fifth suspect, Hasan Habib Merhi, to prepare after their client's case was merged with that of four other suspects indicted back in 2011. Merhi is accused of being a leading member of the assassination team that ordered Hariri's killing and of helping orchestrate an alleged false claim of responsibility. The order was included in a court document published on the tribunal's website discussing the reasons for joining the cases and outlining the roadmap for trial. The delay could dent the court's momentum less than two months after it opened trial proceedings. The trial of the first four suspects began last month in absentia at the STL's headquarters in Leidschendam, a suburb of The Hague. March 14 Calls on STL to Probe More Assassinations The Daily Star February 28, 2014 The March 14 bloc handed a petition Thursday to United Nations Special Coordinator for Lebanon Derek Plumbly demanding that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon investigate the assassinations of Lebanese officials, a U.N. spokesperson confirmed. "The March 14 bloc has handed U.N. Special Coordinator for Lebanon Derek Plumbly a petition signed by 69 MPs to be given to U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon,"
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Future Movement MP Samir Jisr announced in a statement. The petition calls for the STL to include in its mandate the investigation of assassinations that targeted Lebanese officials, starting with the attempted killing of MP Marwan Hamadeh in October 2004 up until the most recent assassination of former Minister Mohammad Shatah, adviser to former Prime Minister Saad Hariri, in December 2013. The petition was signed by four former premiers as well as the Future Movement, the National Struggle Front, the Lebanese Forces, the Kataeb Party and independent MPs. "Through this petition we reaffirm our devotion to justice in the face of assassination and the need to punish criminals and whatever new crimes they have committed," the statement said. "We would like to say that if the criminals have succeeded in assassinating elite politicians, they will not succeed in escaping punishment," is said. "If the criminals have succeeded in assassinating elite politicians, they will not succeed in escaping punishment." STL Gives Merhi Defense Team More Time to Work The Daily Star March 5, 2014 The Special Tribunal for Lebanon convened its latest conference Tuesday by saying that it would reassess the preparedness of the legal team for a newly adjoined defendant at some point next month, according to statements on the body's official Twitter account. The Hague-based tribunal held a one-day status conference to examine how much time was needed for Hassan Merhi's defense team to get up to speed with the case, after he was named as the fifth suspect last month in the assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. "Counsel for Mr. Merhi stressed the importance of the preparatory phase 'to analyse the case file & evidence calmly and independently,'" the STL tweeted Tuesday. The Prosecutor's Office is set to file a new, consolidated indictment for the five suspects by March 7. Merhi's defense team has recruited a legal staff member and another translator to help them with the case load, according to the STL, while in court today his lawyers "suggested convening another conference in 6-7 weeks to discuss the readiness of his [Merhi's] team once relevant material is reviewed." As he adjourned the day's hearing, Presiding Judge David Re said another status conference "would be convened in the future, as needed," according to the tweeted statement. The trial chamber also discussed developments in the cooperation between Lebanon and the STL. The legal team of Assad Hassan Sabra "noted receiving a reply from the Lebanese authorities to a joint request made in 2012 & is now in the process of reviewing it."
Page 58 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
The Mustafa Amine Badreddine's counsel said a cooperation request to Lebanon sent in May 2013 had not yet received a response.
[back to contents]
Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal

Justice Enayetur Rahim New ICT-1 Chairman The Daily Star February 23, 2014 Justice M Enayetur Rahim, a High Court judge, has been appointed chairman of the International Crimes Tribunal-1 today. A gazette notification on this appointment will be issued within a couple of hours, Law Minister Anisul Haque said while talking to The Daily Star. The post of the ICT-1 chairman has fallen vacant after Justice ATM Fazle Kabir retired on December 31 last year. Tribunal Calls for Nizami's Re-argument The Dhaka Tribune By Udisa Islam February 26, 2014 The International Crimes Tribunal has called for further arguments in the war crimes case against Jamaat-e-Islami Chief Motiur Rahman Nizami. The Justice M Enayetur Rahim-led Tribunal 1 set the date for re-argument to commence from March 10 on Wednesday morning. The case of Nizami for his crimes against humanity during 1971 was left pending after ex-Tribunal 1 chairman ATM Fazle Kabir retired in December last year. On February 23, the law ministry appointed High Court Division Judge M Enayetur Rahim as the chairman of International Crimes Tribunal 1. Nizami was indicted on May, 2012 over 16 counts of war crimes, including rape, murder, abduction and inciting violence during the Liberation War of Bangladesh. He is said to have been a key figure in the setting up of the Peace Committee and Razakar force, meant for oppressing pro-liberation Bengalis. On January 30, Nizami and 13 others, including ex-junior home minister Lutfozzaman Babar, were sentenced for the gallows in a 10-truck arms haul case. Prosecutors Miss Attendance at ICT The Daily Star February 28, 2014
Page 59 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
None of around 22 war crimes prosecutors appeared at International Crimes Tribunal-1, which was to hear yesterday a New York-based rights body's reply on a contempt petition over the verdict against former Jamaate-Islami chief Ghulam Azam. Talking to The Daily Star, two prosecutors expressed surprise at the absence, while one said the date was not fixed beforehand, a claim refuted by the tribunal's registrar, AKM Nasiruddin Mahmud, who said if not fixed earlier, it would not come up on the day's cause list. Senior prosecutor Syed Haidar Ali said he was in the Supreme Court and so did not know the reason of the absence. "Are you sure none attended the tribunal?" he asked. "It should not happen. At least one person should have been present. I'm looking into the matter." The prosecution filed the contempt petition after Human Rights Watch (HRW) posted an article on its website on August 16 last year, claiming that the trial of Ghulam Azam was "deeply flawed" and "it had not met the international standards". It also said the "judges had improperly conducted an investigation on behalf of the prosecution" and expressed worries over "collusion and bias among prosecutors and judges". Ghulam Azam, considered by many as the symbol of war crimes during Bangladesh's Liberation War in 1971, was jailed for 90 years on July 5 by the tribunal-1. Another state lawyer, Tureen Afroz, said she was occupied with a case and not aware of yesterday's proceedings. "The date was not fixed beforehand and therefore the matter was not mentioned in our diary," claimed Prosecutor Zead Al Malum, adding that since the defence was to file its reply, the prosecution did not have any possibility of being prejudiced. During the day's proceedings, HRW lawyer Anisul Hassan prayed for deferment of the hearing on the reply till June and for allowing HRW attorney Dinah Pokemner, a US citizen, to send an affidavit copy of the reply through the Bangladesh embassy in Washington DC. Otherwise, she will have to fly to Dhaka which would take time, said Anisul. In response, the tribunal fixed March 6 to hold a hearing on its plausibility and set April 10 to file the reply. The three-member tribunal-1 served a show cause notice on HRW on September 2 last year for its post.
[back to contents]
War Crimes Investigation in Burma

3/12/14, 8:45 PM
UN Envoy Remains 'Convinced' of Maungdaw Killings DVB By Colin Hinshelwood February 21, 2014 The United Nations Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Burma, Toms Ojea Quintana, says he remains convinced that serious violent incidents took place last month in the village of Duchira Dan, including lootings, rapes and the loss of Rohingya lives, as well as the disappearance of a local police officer. The UN's Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights had previously issued a statement saying it had "credible evidence" that an Arakanese mob had attacked the Muslim Rohingya community in the village, causing an estimated 48 deaths. Speaking exclusively to DVB on Friday, Quintana said that he has received "extremely serious allegations" about the incidents in Maungdaw Township between 9- 13 January from "reliable sources" built up over his six years as envoy to Burma. With regard to the presidential appointment of an inquiry commission to investigate the incidents last month in Duchira Dan [also written Du Char Yar Tan], the UN special rapporteur said he did not believe the commission was independent, but that he was "looking forward to seeing the progress of the investigation" and would await its findings. In discussions with Burmese Home Minister Lt-Gen Ko Ko in Naypyidaw, Quintana said the Home Minister had told him the government had already carried out an investigation into the events in Maungdaw and that it concluded that nothing serious happened. The UN rapporteur said he brought up what he termed the commission's "lack of capacity and independence", to which Lt-Gen Ko Ko responded along the lines of, "OK, Mr Quintana, what do you propose?" "I was very clear," Quintana said in reply. "[I told him] 'You need to engage with the international community. You will need international experts, including forensics." He said he also advised the inclusion of the UN Human Rights Council and the introduction of a witness protection mechanism. However, the UN envoy could not comment about accusations of police involvement in the alleged killings or the circumstances that led to about 20 Rohingya houses being burnt down in Duchira Dan on 28 January. With regard to the more than 100,000 persons displaced by the communal violence in Arakan State, Quintana called on the Burmese government to develop a "master plan" which would include the resettlement of the IDPs to other parts of Arakan State if they are unable or unwilling to return to their homes, and the provision of land for those people. With regard to his meeting with Arakanese Buddhists, including members of the Rakhine Nationalities Development Party, Quintana said, "We [the UN] are ready to listen to the Rakhines [Arakanese] about their grievances too." After a tumultuous six-year tenure as special rapporteur, the Argentine diplomat said he was "quite happy" with the progress of President Thein Sein's government
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
but remained "concerned" about the situation in Arakan State. Quintana is due to present his final report to the UN in Geneva on 17 March. Quintana said he was unsure what involvement he would have with Burma in the future, and that three candidates were being considered to replace him as Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in Myanmar diplomats from South Korea, Finland and the United States. Burmese React to Fortify 'Persecution' Report DVB By Alex Bookbinder February 26, 2014 A report released on Tuesday by Thailand-based watchdog Fortify Rights, detailing discriminatory and persecutory policies targeting Rohingya Muslims in Arakan, has been met with mixed reviews, evincing the deep divide within Burma on the "Rohingya question". "The information we've collected through leaked documents, analysis of public records, and testimony indicates that all the elements needed to demonstrate crimes against humanity are in place in Rakhine [Arakan] State," Matthew Smith, executive director of Fortify Rights, told DVB. "We don't make these allegations lightly and we hope the government responds in a way that promotes and protects human rights." While patterns of harassment and oppression are already well-documented, the report entitled Policies of Persecution: Ending Abusive State Policies Against Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar is the first to publish official documents corroborating observed patterns, shedding light on the mechanics of a long-running campaign to deny the Rohingya basic rights. National identity in Burma is perhaps best defined by its complexity. Its most prominent sacred cow is the notion that only members of "indigenous" ethnic groups subdivided into 135 arbitrary categories are deserving of "full" citizenship. The Rohingya are not on this list, making the term itself contested territory. Their detractors see the word as an "artificial" term, a fraudulent attempt at asserting indigeneity devised to drive the Arakanese from their land. Government officials and Arakanese nationalists prefer the term Bengali, which implies origins in neighbouring Bangladesh. The documents pertaining to Arakan acquired by Fortify Rights date between 1993 and 2008, and these "instruct law enforcement agencies to impose abusive action on Rohingya, including enforced birth control, coercive limits on childbirth, restrictions on marriage and private relationships, and restrictions on movement." The report also draws on four government documents dating to March 2013, "relating specifically to Muslim citizens in areas outside Arakan State," but for "security reasons" Fortify Rights has chosen not to make their contents public. "Arakanese people have been living with the Muslim community for many decades, but the so-called Rohingya are calling for their own sovereignty," said Kyaw Myint, the vice-chairman of the Arakan League for Democracy (ALD), which has itself been on the receiving end of government repression. The party inked a deal last month to amalgamate with another nationalist party, the Rakhine Nationalities Development Party, but Burma's electoral commission has not yet approved the merger. "I have
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
many Muslim friends but after the Bengali people created the name Rohingya, there is a separate feeling," he said. Arakanese nationalists feel trapped between a union government that does not have their best interests at heart, and the alleged threat posed by the Rohingya. Despite empirical evidence to the contrary, conventional wisdom teaches that the Rohingya are multiplying much faster than their Arakanese neighbours, and that northern Arakan is suffering from the effects of a wave of migration from the other side of the border. For this reason, Kyaw Myint agrees with the mobility restrictions and birth control measures documented in the report, and claims that the fundamental issue preventing progress is a failure to uphold "the rule of law" including a controversial 1982 citizenship law that has left the vast majority of Rohingya stateless. This feeling of entrapment has prompted wild theories to emerge. "The current Rakhine state government is not elected by the Arakanese people. It is authorised by the central government, which is blocking the Bengali refugees from returning to Bangladesh. The reason is because they might need to get more votes [in the 2015 elections]," Kyaw Myint said. "Over a million people have been provided white cards [temporary IDs] and will be allowed to vote, and they will vote for the [USDP]. Rakhine people are scared." But it is not as though the Rohingya have many friends on the national stage. Contacted by DVB for this article, presidential spokesman Ye Htut slammed the report, claiming Fortify Rights "has been lobbying for the Bengalis all the time, and so we have nothing to comment about their one-sided allegations, and we neither respect nor pay attention to them." A particular point of contention has been the presence of foreign relief agencies in Arakan. In recent weeks, thousands of protesters have demonstrated against their activities in Sittwe, the capital of Arakan State. "Most of the INGOs are funded by Islamic countries, so that's why people don't have faith in INGOs. They feel that they are only to aid [Muslims]," said ALD secretary Myo Kyaw. "They're dressed like NGO workers, but their real message is Islam." Naypyidaw has wholeheartedly denied allegations that it incited bouts of anti-Muslim violence that spread from Arakan to other parts of the country starting early last year. But the unreleased documents in Fortify Rights' possession, which relate "specifically to Muslim citizens in areas outside Rakhine [Arakan] State," may serve to corroborate a widely held belief that anti-Muslim violence around the country has been coordinated by elements within the government and/or security services. The Burmese government's policies towards the Rohingya constitute crimes against humanity, according to Fortify Rights, but its policies in Arakan may run afoul of Burmese law, as well. "The current activities imposed on Rohingya Muslims are illegal, because the orders are not consistent with the constitution," said Shwe Maung, Member of Parliament for Buthidaung Township in northern Arakan. A Rohingya himself, his advocacy for Rohingya rights in Parliament has earned him many detractors in his home state. "When I read the report, I saw some recommendations that are urgent for national identity. Instead of naming on the ID cards religious names or ethnic names, it's better to have [one national name]," he said. In Burma, identity cards list individuals' ethnicity as well as alternate ethnic names, where applicable. "According
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
to the constitution, the state, or any law, should not discriminate by race, religion, sex, etc." Despite Shwe Maung's efforts, there is little political will in Naypyidaw to address the plight of the Rohingya. "The perpetrators of abuse against the Rohingya are now firmly outside the reach of domestic courts, which is another way to say these abuses are happening with complete impunity," Smith said. For Kyaw Myint, the issues are much more clear-cut. "There is an old Burmese saying," he said. "The Bengali never speaks the truth except by accident."
[back to contents]
NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA
United States
Lawyers, Judge Hold Secret Hearing on CIA Black Sites Miami Herald By Carol Rosenberg February 23, 2014 A military judge held a secret war court session Saturday on defense lawyers efforts to uncover evidence of what the CIA did to the alleged USS Cole bomber during years in the agencys clandestine overseas prison network. Both the public and the alleged terrorist were excluded from the 111-minute hearing in the case that seeks the execution of Abd al Rahim al Nashiri as mastermind of the Oct. 12, 2000, terror attack that killed 17 U.S. sailors off Aden, Yemen. Only prosecutors and defense lawyers attended the hearing with the judge, Army Col. James L. Pohl, and a court recorder creating a classified transcript of the proceedings. Nashiri, 49, spent four years in secret CIA prisons where, according to declassified reports, agents waterboarded him and interrogated him nude with a hood on his head and handcuffs on his wrists. One U.S. agent threatened to kill the Saudi with a power drill and handgun, and threatened to have his mother raped. At issue Saturday, according to the judges closure order, was some aspect of a sweeping motion by Nashiris lawyers that seeks a list of the places where the CIA kept Nashiri from 2002-2006. It also seeks details of his interrogations; the names of the agents and other staff at the CIA prisons, including medical personnel; blood
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
and saliva tests conducted on him and drugs given to him; and White House memos on the secret program. "The government cannot be allowed to withhold information related to Mr. alNashiri's detention and torture in blacksites," the lawyer argued in the motion. "The inhumane treatment Mr. al-Nashiri sustained in these blacksites is one of the many areas of mitigation the defense must independently investigate to meet the standard of care in this capital case." Judge Pohls order said he closed the hearing "to protect information that, if publicly disclosed, would pose a grave danger to national security." He ordered a transcript released later, "excising only classified national security information." Pohl also noted in his order that the material was not something prosecutors planned to present at trial, now scheduled to start Sept. 2. Nashiris lawyers filed the motion with the judge in September 2012. A federal prosecutor on loan to the case, Anthony Mattivi, responded in a court filing two weeks later that Nashiris team had already gotten "information that is relevant, material to the preparation of the defense, and necessary." Now its up to the judge to decide. This is the second closed hearing of the case. Pohl excluded the accused terrorist and public from a full hearing for the first time in June. Ten days later, the Pentagon released a partially censored transcript that showed that the government had found CIA photos of Nashiri sought by defense lawyers nine months earlier. The chief prosecutor, Brig Gen. Mark Martins, says the closures are narrowly tailored to protect classified information, not to cover up crimes or embarrassment. Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2014/02/22/3952982/lawyersjudge-hold-secret-guantanamo.html#storylink=cpy ! Guantnamo Judge Pushes USS Cole Trial to Dec. 4 Miami Herald By Carol Rosenberg March 4, 2014 A military judge has pushed to Dec. 4 the trial date of a Saudi man accused of orchestrating al-Qaidas USS Cole bombing in 2000 that killed 17 U.S. sailors, according to military sources. If that timetable holds, it will be the first death-penalty prosecution at Guantnamo. It will also be the first at the war court that President George W. Bush created after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, and President Barack Obama reformed. Army Col. James L. Pohl, the trial judge, set Oct. 6 for the start of jury selection, according to the sources, whove seen a sealed order dated Feb. 26 on the Pentagons military commissions website. Abd al Rahm al Nashiri, 49, is charged with terrorism, conspiracy, murder in violation of the law of war and other war crimes. Suicide bombers blew up a bombladen skiff alongside the warship during a refueling mission off Aden, Yemen, on Oct. 12, 2000.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
He was captured two years later and held by CIA agents who, according to federal investigations, waterboarded him and interrogated him with other now forbidden techniques, including while hooded and nude at the point of a revving power drill. He got to Guantnamo in 2006 but was not formally charged until 2011 after the Obama administration revamped the war court. Pohl had initially set the trial date at Sept. 2. Defense lawyers had requested a 2015 date, which the judge rejected. Because the CIA held Nashiri in its secret prison network, his is a national-security trial that so far has had three secret pretrial hearings and shielding 14 percent of pretrial case evidence, called discovery, from the accused bomber. Under the present timetable, a senior Pentagon official would in October send a pool of U.S. military officers men and women with Top Secret security clearances serving at different posts across the globe to the U.S. Navy base in Cuba. Once chosen for the jury, they would be returned to duty until the actual trial began. Congress military commissions law expects a death penalty panel to number 12 or more military officers but allows for as few as nine U.S. military officers to sit in judgment "because of physical conditions or military exigencies" if a senior Pentagon official justifies it in writing. ! U.S. Prepared to Place Unilateral Sanctions on Russian Officials, Businesses The Washington Post By Karen DeYoung and Anne Gearan March 4, 2014 The Obama administration is prepared to take unilateral steps to sanction Russian individuals and business entities it holds responsible for corrupt and illegal behavior in Ukraine while it moves to persuade its European partners, some more reluctant than others, to consider more substantive sanctions to directly affect the Russian economy, according to senior administration officials. The officials declined to provide a timeline but said Tuesday that Russian actions over the next few days would demonstrate whether President Vladimir Putin has any interest in an early de-escalation of the situation in the autonomous Ukrainian region of Crimea. Even as it tried to provide Putin with a face-saving way out, the administration publicly challenged his stated reasons for deploying thousands of Russian troops across Crimea, where they have surrounded government buildings and military installations. In statements of disbelief bordering on ridicule, President Obama and Secretary of State John F. Kerry dismissed Putins assertions that his troops are protecting ethnic Russians in Crimea threatened by pro-Western Ukrainians who took over the country last week in what Putin called a "coup." "Mr. Putin can throw a lot of words out there," but "facts on the ground" tell a different story, Obama said following a Putin news conference in Moscow. Kerry, during a visit to Kiev, said that Russian allegations of "ultranationalists" and
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
"Nazis" on the streets of Ukraine were a "pretext" to further expand military occupation beyond Crimea, perhaps into Ukraines eastern industrial heartland. "Not a single piece of credible evidence supports any one of these claims," Kerry said of Putins charges. "None." Administration officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity about internal deliberations, outlined four steps that Russia could take to remove the alleged threat to its own interests and avoid sanctions. Any danger to ethnic Russians in Ukraine could be verified and addressed by the deployment of international monitors from the United Nations or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe. Charges that Ukraines current U.S.-backed interim government is illegitimate, they said, could be resolved with elections in Ukraine that are currently scheduled for May. Russia does not have to withdraw its troops from Crimea, officials said, just return them to bases it currently operates there under a long-standing agreement with Ukraine. Although Putin said Tuesday that no additional Russian troops had been sent to Crimea, administration officials have assessed that at least 6,000 were deployed late last week, in addition to about 11,000 permanently stationed there under the existing agreement. Finally, Russia should immediately begin a dialogue with the interim government to reconfirm its long-term interest in stable relations with the neighboring state. Obama, speaking during a visit to Powell Elementary School in the District, said there had been "some reports that President Putin is pausing for a moment and reflecting on whats happening." The situation could go one of three ways, officials said. Putin could accept whats on offer: sending his troops back to bases, accepting international monitors and opening a dialogue with the interim government. Russia could escalate its aggression in Ukraine, sending troops into the eastern part of the country. That possibility, while not desirable, would likely strengthen the administrations case to European allies, led by Germany, that are reluctant to impose full-scale sanctions. Obama spoke for an hour Tuesday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has indicated a desire to serve as an interlocutor with Russia. Perhaps the most challenging scenario for the administration is the status quo, with Russian troops deployed throughout Crimea in a standoff. A similar situation has existed for years in breakaway parts of Georgia, where Russian troops have occupied northern regions of the country since 2008 while Western threats have dissipated. Kerry plans to meet Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov this week in Europe, diplomats said. Speaking in Kiev, Kerry announced U.S. assistance of $1 billion in loan guarantees and technical help for the placeholder government and warmly endorsed the interim leaders as statesmen. Washington will continue to support a democratic Ukraine
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
with money and diplomatic muscle, he said, but he made no mention of a miliary show of force to counter Russias intervention in Crimea. In Washington, a senior lawmaker who is expected to help steer a Ukrainian aid package through Congress, said Tuesday that the pledge of $1 billion was "welcome news." "The time to act is now," House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Edward R. Royce (R-Calif.) said in a statement shortly after Kerry announced the aid package. "We must place crippling sanctions on Russian high-ranking officials, state-owned banks and commercial enterprises, and key individuals behind the Russian intervention. Only by forcing Putin to reverse aggression and by supporting Ukraine in this time of national crisis can we hope to restore peace in the region." Congress plans to debate the aid next week. It is intended in part to help protect Ukraine from likely price increases for energy if Russian supplies are slashed. During his tour of Kiev, Kerry visited a memorial to some of the scores of civilians killed when government forces opened fire last month on street protests against the Moscow-backed government of then-President Viktor Yanukovych. Yanukovych fled to Russia more than a week ago and maintains he is still Ukraines legitimate leader. Putin agreed with that Tuesday, justifying Russian intervention in Crimea as a legal response to a request from its president. Kerry has argued that Yanukovych lost his claim to power when he fled and that the new government deserves solid Western backing to begin work and to recover stolen national assets. Walking along muddy Institutska Street, the site of dozens of deaths from sniper and automatic weapons fire last month, Kerry passed piles of soggy flowers, many snarled in barbed wire. Remnants of barricades built of tires, packing crates, garden gates and a mattress remained. Most of the people he spoke to appeared to be supporters of the new government. "We are helping you," Kerry told one woman. "President Obama wants to help you. I want to help you." A few moments later, a group of people who identified themselves as Russians called out to Kerry, and he also told them that the United States wants to help. Later, Kerry met with acting President Oleksandr Turchynov, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk and other officials who until two weeks ago were part of opposition protests calling for Yanukovychs ouster. ! US Asks UN to Act Against NKorea for Missile Tests Associated Press March 5, 2014 The United States is asking the U.N. Security Council to take action against North Korea for firing two rounds of ballistic missiles in the past week in "clear and calculated violations" of U.N. sanctions.
Page 68 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
A report by the United States to the council committee monitoring sanctions against North Korea, which was seen by The Associated Press on Wednesday, asks its members and experts to examine the Scud missile launches and take "appropriate action" in response to the violations of multiple Security Council resolutions. Under U.N. sanctions dating back to 2006, North Korea is prohibited from carrying out any launches that use ballistic missile technology. Subsequent U.N. resolutions require the North to abandon all ballistic missile programs. Ballistic missiles can be used to launch nuclear weapons, and the resolutions also demand that North Korea halt nuclear tests and abandon all nuclear weapons and nuclear programs. The report said that according to U.S. government information, North Korea launched two Scud short-range ballistic missiles from its southeastern coast on Feb. 27 and two more Scud missiles from the same coast on March 3. It said all four missiles flew in a northeasterly direction and landed in the sea. "Both the Feb. 27 and March 3 launches clearly used ballistic missile technology and were therefore prohibited," the report said. The launches appear to be a continuation of North Koreas protest of the ongoing annual military exercises between South Korea and the United States. Pyongyang calls the exercises preparation for an attack, and a test of weapons systems. The U.S. report noted that when North Korea last launched Scud missiles on July 4, 2009, the Security Council "strongly condemned and expressed grave concern at the launches," saying they violated U.N. sanctions resolutions "and pose a threat to regional and international security." The sanctions committee will consider the U.S. report and decide whether to recommend action by the Security Council. Luxembourgs U.N. Ambassador Sylvie Lucas, who chairs the sanctions committee, expressed appreciation to the United States for its notification and encouraged U.S. authorities investigating the launches to continue to cooperate with the committee. North Korea routinely test-fires short-range missiles, and outside analysts said the recent launches werent expected to raise tensions. Last spring, North Korea repeatedly threatened to launch a nuclear war following its third nuclear test in February 2013. Recently, North Korea has pushed for improved ties with South Korea and taken conciliatory gestures, including rare reunions of Korean War-divided families last month. The two Koreas are divided along the worlds most heavily fortified border since the 1950-53 Korean War ended with an armistice, not a peace treaty. ! Trial of Osama Bin Ladens Son-in-Law Begins The Washington Post By Adam Goldman March 5, 2014 Opening statements began Wednesday in the Manhattan trial of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, the son-in-law of Osama bin Laden and a high-ranking alQaeda member who was captured last year after he left Iran, where he had
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
been held for more than a decade. Assistant U.S. Attorney Nicholas Lewin told an anonymous jury that Abu Ghaith, a Muslim cleric from Kuwait, had played a critical role in the terrorist group before and after the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Lewin said Abu Ghaith had a "twisted view of Islam" and used the "murderous power of his words" to inspire hundreds of recruits and attract others from around the Persian Gulf region. His job was to "provide the al-Qaeda with its very lifeblood fighters," the federal prosecutor said. The balding Abu Ghaith, in a blue suit and tie and his graying beard neatly trimmed, listened impassively through a courtroom interpreter. The 48-year-old faces several terrorism charges, including conspiracy to kill Americans and providing material support to terrorists. If convicted, he faces life in prison. Prosecutors said that although Abu Ghaith did not plan al-Qaedas attacks, bin Laden relied on him heavily in the weeks and months after the Sept. 11 attacks and that he produced propaganda videos at the request of the al-Qaeda leader. One of the videos depicted Abu Ghaith warning that the "storms shall not stop, especially the airplane storms." He warned Muslims "not to board any aircraft and not to live in high rises." Stanley Cohen, Abu Ghaiths attorney, said the government has no real evidence against his client, only "words and associations." He said the trial, taking place 10 blocks from where two hijacked planes brought down the World Trade Center, is about fear mongering. He said that "9/11 hangs heavy over this courtroom." Cohen said there will be a "substitution of evidence with fright" and attacked the governments case, which he said rested almost entirely on two unreliable witnesses and the videos. Cohen said his client was a "talker" and an "ideologue" who said some dumb things but is not guilty of the crimes with which he has been charged. The lawyer compared Abu Ghaith to Capt. Thomas Preston, a British soldier acquitted of ordering the 1770 Boston Massacre. Cohen conceded that he was no John Adams, who defended Preston and later became president. The lawyers comment elicited a few chuckles in the courtroom. Members of Congress are expected to closely watch the trial because of the continuing debate about whether civilian courts or military commissions are the proper venue to try terrorism suspects captured overseas. Critics of federal criminal trials recall the case of Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani, who was acquitted in 2010 of all but one of 280 charges in the same courthouse where Abu Ghaith is on trial. Ghailani was convicted of conspiring to damage or destroy U.S. property but was acquitted of multiple murder and attempted murder charges in the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in East Africa, which killed 224 people, including 12 Americans. Ghailani, who had previously been held by the CIA at secret prisons around the world and at the Guantanamo Bay detention center, was sentenced to life in prison. He is the only Guantanamo detainee to be tried in a federal court. Among the witnesses against Abu Ghaith is Saajid Badat, who is expected to testify by video link from London that he was planning to bring down a plane with a shoe
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
bomb at the same time that Abu Ghaith was issuing his video decrees. Badat never carried out the plot and was arrested in 2003 in Britain, where he was in prison until 2010. He previously provided testimony in a New York terrorism case in which a man from Queens was convicted in 2012 of trying to blow up the citys subway system. In that trial, Badat said he was tasked to detonate the shoe bombs aboard airplanes with Richard Reid, a British citizen. Badat has refused to come to the United States because he remains under indictment here in the shoe-bomb conspiracy. Lewin said Abu Ghaiths threats about the "airplane storms" were "deadly real" and told the jury that the videos would be damning. "You will literally watch him commit his crimes," the prosecutor said. But Cohen said Badat cannot connect his client to the shoe-bomb conspiracy. Prosecutors also plan to call Sahim Alwan, who was a member of the Lackawanna Six, a group of Yemeni Americans from the Buffalo area who were convicted of providing material support to al-Qaeda. Alwan traveled to Afghanistan briefly and encountered Abu Ghaith at a compound there.
[back to contents]
South & Central America Chile

Piera Pushes for Use of Anti-Terrorism Law in Land Dispute Cases The Santiago Times By Sam Edwards February 26, 2014 President Sebastin Piera defended the tactic of successive governments to charge crimes committed by indigenous land activists as terrorism and questioned the incoming administrations promise to abandon the tool in a speech in the Araucana Region marked by the arrest of 11 protesters Tuesday. Pinera affirmed the governments strong position on combatting hardline Mapuche activists in a region considered the epicenter of the conflict, only hours after three farm vehicles were torched, apparently by militant indigenous activists. The Presidents address at the inauguration of a new airport protested by Mapuche groups due to its location on sacred grounds reiterated his support for the anti-terrorism law which critics say jeopardizes the rights of defendants by
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
instituting anonymous witness testimony in trials and harsher sentences for those convicted. This month, four Mapuche activists became the latest to be acquitted or have their convictions overturned after multiple courts threw out the testimony of a secret witness believed to be Raul Castro, a police informant who allegedly committed arson and other serious crimes with the permission of authorities. "We are improving the anti-terrorism law to better guarantee due process, the legitimate right to defense and the presumption of innocence that are part of our judicial system," he said. Although enacted under Gen. Augusto Pinochets military dictatorship, the legislation has been watered down and ratified several times under democracy. Piera challenged President-elect Michelle Bachelet and members of her incoming administration, over promises to abandon the law in Mapuche trials, a reversal of policy from previous Concertacin governments. "We are applying the law we ratified in Congress so it surprises me that those who applied the law when it lacked the safeguards of the current legislation now denounce it," Piera said. "This is a tremendous error and could cause great harm to the majority of Chileans who want to live in peace." The president also challenged accusations made by the United Nations and human rights groups that the anti-terrorism law has been used disproportionately against Mapuche activists. "[The government] has maintained a clear position: In Chile we have a law to combat crime, drug trafficking and terrorism and this legislation is not used with one person in mind, even less with a people in particular," he said.! Human Remains Found Near Notorious Former-Nazi Compound The Santiago Times By Charlotte Karrlsson-Willis February 26, 2014 The Legal Medical Service (SML) confirmed Wednesday the discovery of human remains near Villa Baviera, once known as Colonia Dignidad a German commune set up by a Nazi doctor made infamous for the violence and torture that took place within its walls for decades following its founding in 1961. The remains were reportedly discovered by a group of tourists walking along the Itata river near the Casino Familiar restaurant. Although the SML and police told The Santiago Times they cannot release information at this time, local press reported that the remains included a skull and other bones and that it is currently unclear whether they belong to one victim or several. Set up by Paul Schfer in 1961 a former Nazi army medic who fled to Chile after World War II Colonia Dignidad promoted itself as a German oasis in Southern Chile. However, as several court cases and victims testimonies have uncovered, behind the walls of the commune was a far more sinister reality. Schfer set up the community to allow for systematic child abuse as well as illegal and inhumane medical testing. During Chiles dictatorship (1973-1990) led by Gen. Augusto Pinochet, Colonia Dignidad was also used as a torture center for dissidents and leftist prisoners. Although Schfer died in 2010 while serving time in a Chilean
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
prison for his crimes, ongoing cases continue to seek justice for his victims. Last year six former leaders of the German colony were sentenced to prison time for their roles in the commune. There are several open cases of individuals who were "disappeared" and believed to have been held at the compound, including the only U.S. citizen on the list Boris Weisfieler who went missing while hiking near Colonia Dignidad in 1985. !
Colombia
15 Members of Colombia Military Wanted for Arms Trafficking Colombia Reports By Mimi Yagoub March 3, 2014 Colombias Prosecutor Generals Office has issued 15 arrest warrants following recent investigations into corruption within the Armed Forces. The military servicemen are wanted for their supposed involvement in the illegal trade and trafficking of arms in different battalions around the country. This is the most recent development regarding investigations that began in 2012 surrounding a corruption network within Colombias Armed Forces. The 15 warrants were directed at four active and six retired servicemen, as well as two members of the National Police. According to Colombian newspaper Semana, 12 of the 14 currently in liberty have already been captured. At the head of the arms trafficking ring is Colonel Robinson Gonzalez del Rio who is already in prison since 2012 for his alleged involvement in the "false positives" scandal, and who was a central figure in an embezzlement revelations disclosed last February by Semana. Intercepted phone calls provided by state authorities show that, although imprisoned and on trial for two murders, Gonzalez directed the sale of decommissioned military weapons to illegal groups. The weapons were reportedly disarmed and removed from military bases to be sold to "Los Urabenos," the most powerful criminal organization in Colombia, and a dissident faction of the criminal group ERPAC, based in the east of the country. Recorded evidence also links Gonzalez to a former magistrate of the Disciplinary Chamber of the Supreme Council and a family member, with which the colonel discussed the purchase of arms and ammunition. Investigations began in 2012 following a series of accusations regarding the trade and trafficking of arms in military battalions. Until last month the Colonel Gonzalez enjoyed little to no security from prison officials, taking advantage of his high rank to leave the prison walls at his will, control illicit activities and maintain close contact with various other important military officials implicated in the corruption scandal. He was transferred to La Picota prison in Bogota last February following Semanas leaks.
Page 73 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Gonzalez will now have to defend himself at an open hearing against charges of conspiracy, arms trafficking and the trafficking of arms for private use by the Armed Forces. This comes amidst inquiries regarding the embezzlement accusations implicating a number of military officials, in which high ranking officers received kickbacks from army contracts reaching up to 50 percent of the original agreement. Those wanted for arrest will be investigated by a specialized prosecutor in Monteria, Cordoba, to where they will be transferred imminently. ! Former Paramilitary Commander Asks Forgiveness for Torture and Killing Colombia Reports By Daniel E. Freeman March 4, 2014 A former commander of the now-defunct AUC on Monday asked forgiveness to the families of victims he admitted to have tortured and killed while he was with the paramilitary group. Ramon Isaza, alias "El Viejo," testified before a Bogota human rights court about crimes he committed during his time as the commander of the AUCs Middle Magdalena bloc. Isaza asked forgiveness for nearly 324 cases designated crimes against humanity, according to W Radio. El Viejo admitted that he had tortured and assassinated several people and hurled their bodies into rivers. Victims groups had asked El Viejo for his motivation for his cruelty, but the presiding judge urged the victims groups to uncover more paramilitaries involved to prosecute. "I am asking for clarity on who else collaborated with these deaths," the judge reportedly said. The additional crimes that are building up against ex-paramilitaries such as Isaza include forced prostitution, sexual slavery, terrorism, kidnapping, torture, drug trafficking, and false investiture. After this round of testimonies conclude, all of the information will be handed over to the prosecutor general of Colombia, who will review the charges, the admissions of guilt, and the attention paid to victims to ultimately determine if they qualify for the Justice and Peace law, according to newspaper El Espectador. Colombias Justice and Peace Law was enacted in 2005 to legally sustain a demobilization treaty between right-wing paramilitary group AUC and the government of former President Alvaro Uribe. In exchange for cooperating with authorities and demobilizing, the AUC received a pledge that no-one who came in as a result of the law would receive more than eight years in prison. !
Haiti
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
UN Expert Applauds Haitian Decision to Probe Alleged Abuses by Baby Doc Duvalier UN News Centre February 25, 2014 An independent United Nations human rights expert today applauded the decision by a Haitian court to order further investigations into alleged abuses committed by former President Jean-Claude Duvalier during his 15year rule. On 20 February, the Court of Appeals reversed a January 2012 decision that stated that the former leader could not be charged with crimes against humanity during his reign because the time for the prosecution of those offences had elapsed. Haitian and international human rights groups have extensively documented serious human rights violations, including torture, rape and extrajudicial killings, said to have occurred while Mr. Duvalier known as "Baby Doc" was in power from 1971 to 1986. "The decision of the Court of Appeals is a significant rectification in the path in which impunity for past human rights violations was so far engaged in Haiti," said Gustavo Galln, the Independent Expert on the human rights situation in the country. "It unequivocally reverts the incomprehensible ruling taken previously by the lower chamber judge, who threw out the human rights charges against Duvalier and only charged him for the alleged financial crimes," he added in a news release. The three judges from the Court of Appeals found that there was significant evidence of Mr. Duvaliers criminal responsibility in his capacity as head of State. "I now encourage the Haitian Government to provide the appointed investigating judge an independent and secure environment to perform his long-awaited and difficult task," Mr. Galln stated. He also praised the victims and their lawyers for their courage to pursue justice against all odds, and invited the Government to take the necessary measures to protect them. Independent experts or special rapporteurs are appointed by the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Council to examine and report back on a country situation or a specific human rights theme. The positions are honorary and the experts are not UN staff, nor are they paid for their work. Mr. Galln, who has served in his post since June 2013, will present his report on Haiti to the Council at its session next month.
Mecixo
Mexico Kingpins Arrest a Victory That May Fuel Violence Reuters By Dave Graham February 23, 2014
Page 75 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Mexico's government scored a huge victory with the capture of the country's most wanted drug lord but the cartels will remain a powerful force and could unleash a fresh wave of violence as they fight for control of his turf. In a lightning raid early on Saturday, Mexican marines arrested Joaquin Guzman, whose dominance of the drugs trade and ability to elude the law since escaping from prison in 2001 had lent him almost mythical status. Immortalized in songs and revered by many in his home state of Sinaloa, Guzman leaves behind a criminal organization that employs thousands and flourished even as it fought brutal turf wars with rival cartels. Experts say his Sinaloa Cartel should have no trouble in continuing without him. "Chapo was the strategy guy, he was the CEO, but he still has his board of directors who are running things," said drug war expert and retired U.S. Air Force captain Sylvia Longmire. "Day-to-day on the ground, I don't think there is even going to be a hiccup in the drug flow," she added. Nevertheless, Guzman's imprisonment could encourage rivals to try to muscle in on the turf his business empire has held for years from its base in northwestern Mexico. For now it is a personal triumph for President Enrique Pena Nieto, who took office in December 2012 pledging to cut spiraling violence in Latin America's second biggest economy. Doubts about his strategy on organized crime have grown as the violence continued and his government made a risky alliance with vigilante groups in a confrontation with a drug gang in the state of Michoacan. The arrest of Guzman offers a strong riposte to the president's critics. Pena Nieto's predecessor Felipe Calderon staked his reputation on bringing the gangs to heel, but despite capturing or killing many capos, violence leapt during his six year term. No-one was a more telling reminder of the Calderon government's shortcomings than Guzman. After escaping from prison in 2001, the drug lord built up an empire and made his way onto the Forbes list of billionaires. THRIVING DRUGS MARKET Pena Nieto has taken a more low key approach to fighting organized crime than Calderon, and the cross-border intelligence operation that led to Guzman's capture is a boost for Mexican-U.S. cooperation on organized crime. Initially focusing on the Zetas, a brutal cartel that has been behind many of the most shocking atrocities of the last few years, Pena Nieto's government put the group on the back foot by capturing the gang's boss Miguel Angel Trevino last July. Murders fell by more than 16 percent during his first full year in the job, but he had hoped for a greater decline and serious problems remain.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Homicides are still well above the levels recorded when Calderon took power, and extortion and kidnapping rose last year, according to government figures. The removal of Guzman from the scene does not mean there is any less for the cartels to play for. Trafficking remains a highly lucrative business: according to U.S. State Department figures, the gangs send between $19-29 billion each year from the United States to Mexico. In spite of steps to decriminalize marijuana usage in parts of the United States, the drug is still smuggled in vast quantities, and the market for harder narcotics is thriving. Between 2008 and 2012, the amount of heroin seized at the U.S. southwest border increased by 232 percent, according to National Seizure System (NSS) data. And though cocaine seizures are down, that has been offset by higher consumption in Mexico and Europe, said Alberto Islas of consultancy Risk Evaluation. Meanwhile, demand for Mexican methamphetamine is still enjoying "double digit" growth annually, Islas added. RISK OF VIOLENCE Such is the size of the illicit drugs market, that by the time of his fall, Guzman was probably overseeing an empire with as many as 150,000 people in its employ, said Malcolm Beith, author of "The Last Narco", a biography of the kingpin. The fallout will likely be violent, he said. "Whenever the leadership of a drug cartel is compromised, there are turf wars at lower levels," Beith told Reuters. "We've seen increased violence already in recent months in Sinaloa since the capture or death of several high-ranking lieutenants, I expect more to follow." Blows against capos have sparked conflagration in the past. Killings surged in the border city of Tijuana during a lengthy battle for control of the local cartel following the capture of kingpin Francisco Arellano Felix in 2006. Guzman's lieutenant Ismael Zambada could now take over but he is over 65 and younger rivals may seek to exploit the sudden opening. In the meantime, the government must press home the attack on the Sinaloa Cartel, said Michael Braun, managing partner of security consultancy SGI Global who was formerly a top official at the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). "Now is the time to throw every available asset and resource, Mexican and U.S., at the cartel and relentlessly strike at every aspect of the organization," Braun told Reuters. But Mexico's efforts to stamp out organized crime will fail if the government does not do more to tackle the corruption that has sustained Guzman and his ilk for years, said Edgardo Buscaglia, a crime expert at Columbia University. "The politicians who protected El Chapo aren't being arrested, nor are the
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
businessmen who worked with him," he said. "Without that, the arrests end up being inconsequential for dismantling the organization."
[back to contents]
TOPICS
Terrorism
Terrorism Case in Military Court Columbus Dispatch By Medina Roshan February 22, 2014 A defense attorney for the Saudi man charged with masterminding the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000 that killed 17 U.S. sailors argued yesterday that he should not face the death penalty because the murders were not premeditated. The move was among several pretrial motions heard in the murder case against Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, 49, at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It was viewed via closed-circuit television at Fort Meade. The charges against Nashiri among them murder, terrorism and conspiracy carry the death penalty. A closed session is to take place today in Guantanamo to review classified material in the case, according to U.S. Army Col. Judge James Pohl. The open sessions are to continue on Monday. Experts think that because the Nashiri case comes before a military court and involves the death penalty, it will set many precedents. N.Y. Mans Prosecution in Terrorism Case Relied Partly on Surveillance Done Without a Warrant The Washington Post By Ellen Nakashima February 25, 2014 The Justice Department on Tuesday notified a Brooklyn man serving a 15year sentence for supporting terrorism that evidence in his case derived from surveillance conducted without an individual warrant. Agron Hasbajrami, sentenced in January 2013, is the third criminal defendant since
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
the fall to be told that his prosecution involved surveillance under Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. The law is being challenged as unconstitutional by Jamshid Muhtorov, a Colorado man who in October became the first criminal defendant to be notified that evidence used against him derived from Section 702. Another defendant, Mohamed Osman Mohamud, was told in November. Mohamud was convicted of trying to detonate what turned out to be a fake bomb at a Christmas tree lighting in Oregon in 2010. He has not been sentenced. "Were only now starting to learn how this warrantless wiretapping statute was used," said Jameel Jaffer, deputy legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, which is part of Muhtorovs defense team. Last year, the department reversed its policy of not notifying defendants after the solicitor general, Donald B. Verrilli Jr., learned of it and objected to it. Earlier in the year, Verrilli had been under the impression that the department was notifying defendants and assured the Supreme Court that that was the case. The court rejected a constitutional challenge to the law by a group of lawyers, human rights activists and journalists on grounds that the plaintiffs could not prove that theyd been subject to the surveillance. It also reasoned, based in part on Verrillis assurances, that a way existed to challenge the law that is, by a defendant notified that such evidence was used in his case. Jaffer, who argued the Supreme Court case on behalf of the plaintiffs, said that questions remain about how the Justice Department arrived at its initial policy. "They dont actually explain how they could have concluded that it was lawful to conceal the role that the FISA Amendments Act played in criminal investigations," he said. "They havent explained their prior policy or how they arrived at it. Terrorism Trial to Begin Blocks from Former World Trade Center Los Angeles Times By Richard A. Serrano March 1, 2014 Weeks after he took office, President Obama met privately with 40 grieving Americans, many clutching photographs of loved ones lost in terrorist attacks. The new president told them he would be closing Guantanamo Bay military prison within the year and putting many of the detainees there on trial in the U.S., where justice would be swifter. Five years later, the first and probably only federal court trial of a Sept. 11-related case will start with jury selection on Monday at a U.S. District courthouse in Lower Manhattan, blocks from ground zero, where the World Trade Center once stood. In addition to being the first opportunity for Obama to fulfill that 2009 pledge, it will probably be the only chance for the community most damaged in the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history to have such a trial on their home turf, decided by a jury of New Yorkers. Obama's plans to relocate other Guantanamo detainees, most notably selfconfessed Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and four others accused
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
in the plot, ran into congressional roadblocks that prevented the president from trying them in New York and closing the Cuba detention facility as he promised. But when Osama bin Laden's son-in-law Sulaiman abu Ghaith, 48, who is accused of being a top Al Qaeda propagandist, was arrested last year, the Justice Department brushed aside pressure to send him to Guantanamo and launched proceedings in New York, partly as a test case to demonstrate that high-profile terrorism trials could be handled safely and efficiently in the U.S. Already Abu Ghaith's trial has moved far faster than the military process at Guantanamo Bay, where only a handful of tribunals have been completed. Half of the remaining 150 detainees have been cleared for release yet remain locked up, and the other half are still being held indefinitely as enemy combatants. Mohammed and his fellow defendants have been in custody for 11 years with no trial in sight. Federal prosecutors in New York are hoping to prove that justice can move faster there. They are seeking life in prison with no parole for Abu Ghaith, who is accused of being an Al Qaeda leader and calling for additional attacks after Sept. 11. Prosecutors did not seek the death penalty because Abu Ghaith is not accused of directly planning or carrying out acts of terrorism. According to the government, soon after the twin towers fell, Abu Ghaith began encouraging Muslims to battle the U.S. "Jihad is a duty," he reportedly said. "Americans must know that the storm of airplanes will not stop, God willing, and there are thousands of young people who are as keen about death as Americans are about life." Retired Deputy New York Fire Chief Jim Riches, whose son, firefighter Jimmy Riches, died at the World Trade Center, says he is eager to attend the Abu Ghaith trial in New York. "This is where they committed the crime," said Riches, who has also attended hearings at Guantanamo Bay and criticized those tribunals for their frustratingly slow pace. "We'll get justice here. I'll be dead before there's a trial down there." But despite the president's assurance that the U.S. court system is a better place to administer justice, many relatives and politicians question whether terrorism suspects should be prosecuted in the U.S. Some have said foreign terrorism suspects should not benefit from the same legal due-process rights afforded to American citizens. They worry detainees will exploit the U.S court system and use trials as public platforms to spread their ideology. And they say those accused of war crimes belong in the military legal system at Guantanamo Bay, safely away from U.S. shores. "I just don't like the thought they would even be allowed to be here, where they hurt so many people," said Rosaleen Tallon, another parent of a firefighter lost on Sept. 11, Sean Patrick Tallon. "I don't like the idea of giving them the satisfaction to be here near us." For the Justice Department, much is riding on the trial and verdict in Abu Ghaith's case. Anything short of a life sentence could be seen as a failure. The government has collected crucial evidence, including a 22-page statement Abu Ghaith gave the FBI while being flown from Jordan to New York, and recordings of his rants calling for more attacks. An as-yet unnamed prosecution witness is scheduled to testify through a live feed from England. (Abu Ghaith tried unsuccessfully to have his own statement suppressed, claiming he was mistreated
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
and coerced.) The defense's star witness could be Mohammed. The defense team was granted permission to question Mohammed in writing, theorizing he would describe Abu Ghaith as merely a low-level member of Al Qaeda. Mohammed submitted written statements that helped two other terrorism suspects, one defendant who avoided the death penalty and another who was eventually released from Guantanamo. But the defense has had setbacks too. It lost a key witness, Salim Hamdan, Bin Laden's former chauffeur, who first agreed to testify for Abu Ghaith, then changed his mind and decided to sit out the trial. Hamdan was released from Guantanamo Bay and is living in Yemen. Legal observers say a conviction would serve as vindication for the Obama administration and Atty. Gen. Eric H. Holder Jr. "The attorney general can use this as an example that the courts are capable of handling terror trials," said Aitan Goelman, who helped prosecute the Oklahoma City bombing and served as a government lawyer in New York. Asked if Abu Ghaith's public trial might inspire others to commit terrorist acts, Goelman said, "Some of the followers of this toxic ideology may support this guy no matter what he gets." Holder, speaking at a University of Virginia forum in February, said he still believed Mohammed and the other four Sept. 11 figures should face trial in New York, even though a political firestorm forced him to relinquish the case to military prosecutors in Guantanamo Bay. "Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and his confederates would be on death row right now instead of awaiting trial in a military commission," Holder said. "I was right on that one." But those opposed to court trials believe just as strongly that Guantanamo Bay is the proper forum for prosecution. Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) said Abu Ghaith "undoubtedly possesses tremendous knowledge about Al Qaeda" that in the federal court system could go untapped without the kind of interrogations that detainees have received at Guantanamo Bay. "Treating him like a common criminal," she said, "the administration makes it more difficult to gather the intelligence needed to capture other members of Al Qaeda and prevent future attacks, potentially endangering our national security." Trial of Osamas Son-in-Law Starts Monday, Serving as a Major Test for Federal Court System New York Daily News By Daniel Beekman March 2, 2014 The high-stakes Manhattan terrorism trial of Osama Bin Ladens son-in-law starts Monday. The federal prosecution has major legal and political implications because Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, 48, is the highest-ranked Al Qaeda figure to face trial on U.S. soil since the 9/11 attacks, experts told the Daily News. The Obama administration wants the trial to prove the strength of the civilian court system and to silence politicians on the right who clamored for a military trial, said Zachary Goldman, executive director at the NYU Center on Law and Security.
Page 81 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
"This trial sends a message. We have slowly chipped away at the senior leadership of Al Qaeda over the last decade," he said "While there may be certain circumstances in which military commissions are necessary, this case will probably demonstrate the continued appropriateness of using the civilian court system to try terrorists," said Goldman, a former special assistant to the Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman. The transparency gained by holding the trial in Manhattan Federal Court off Foley Square, just blocks from Ground Zero, may increase the deterrent effect of a verdict, Goldman said. "The public has more access, and so do people who are contemplating terrorism," he said. "It must be demoralizing (for would-be terrorists) to see the son-in-law of Osama Bin Laden shackled and escorted into court every morning like some drug dealer." Abu Ghaith is charged with conspiring to kill Americans and providing support to terrorists while working as a spokesman for Al Qaeda around the time of the 9/11 attacks. He faces up to life in prison if convicted. Prosecutors allege the bearded Kuwaiti native spent the months before 9/11 recruiting would-be terrorists to deadly Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. In a video with Bin Laden made the day after 9/11, Abu Ghaith urged Muslims to do battle against "the Jews, the Christians and Americans" and in a speech he warned that "the storms shall not stop, especially the airplane storm," prosecutors charge Abu Ghaith was captured last March in Jordan after spending more than a decade in Iran. He has pleaded not guilty. The entire world will be watching the trial, said Thomas McDonnell, a Pace University professor who specializes in terrorism law. "This is a son-in-law of Osama Bin Laden, the greatest actor of terrorism in contemporary history," he said. "There will be pressure to impose a heavy sentence." Judge Lewis Kaplan, who has tried several terrorism cases, sentenced Al Qaeda plotter Ahmed Ghailani to life in prison in 2011. Abu Ghaith has sought to obtain information from 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and Bin Ladens former driver may testify via video from the United Kingdom for the defense. Saajid Badat, a man who plotted with 2001 shoe bomber Richard Reid, will likely testify via video from Britain for the prosecution. ! Michigan Man Gets up to 40 Years for Highway Shootings USA Today By Lisa Roose-Church March 4, 2014 Law enforcement and victims say the case of the man who shot at
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
motorists along a southeast Michigan highway corridor ended with his sentencing Monday, but the shooter's mother says the fight continues. The defendant's mother, Lana Timmer Hunt, said her son, Raulie Wayne Casteel, was not in his right mind and while she knew he "was going to have to answer" for shooting at 23 motorists in four Michigan counties in October 2012, she believes he should be in a mental facility and not prison. "I love my son with all my heart, and I don't care what anybody said. He would not have done this if he was in his right mind," Hunt said after the hearing Monday in Livingston County Circuit Court. Casteel, 44, was sentenced to 16 to 40 years in prison for terrorism and an additional two years for felony firearms. The sentences run consecutively to one another, but concurrently to the two-and-a-half years to four years he received for felonious assault and three years to five years for carrying a weapon with unlawful intent. "I think terrorism is so wrong because I don't think he planned it," Hunt said. "I think he was warning people to stay away from him. I hope (Michigan Attorney General) Bill Schuette is happy. It's not over yet because I'm his mother and I'm going to make sure." Casteel chose not to speak in court. Casteel, of Wixom, Mich., terrorized motorists along the Interstate 96 corridor for several days in October 2012. After his arrest, he was diagnosed with a serious mental illness that included delusions. Casteel told investigators he was shooting at cars because he believed they were part of a government conspiracy against him. Schuette's office prosecuted the case and at a news conference after the hearing, Schuette said terrorism was the appropriate charge because Casteel's actions caused fear across southeastern Michigan. He called the sentence imposed by Livingston County Chief Judge David Reader "tough, responsible." Reader said the widespread effects Casteel's shooting had including residents changing their the daily routines are "indeed terrorism." He said while no one was physically hurt, they were traumatized. Reader empathized regarding Casteel's mental illness, however, he noted, that although Casteel has a mental diagnosis and believed the government was somehow out to get him, there is nothing in the reports he's received "to indicate that he was delusional in his use of deadly force or the possible outcome of what that could be." "He knew and admitted on the witness stand that he was using a lethal weapon and if he wanted to shoot someone ... what the possible outcome could be," the judge noted. "What prompted him to shoot may have been delusional, but he certainly knew when he was shooting at various cars and people what the possible outcome could be." Last month, Casteel was sentenced to up to 10 years for the shootings in Oakland County, Mich., as part of a plea deal. A Livingston County jury found him guilty of terrorism in January.
Page 83 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Victim Stacy Banks was less sympathetic about Casteel's mental illness claims, telling him that she found his claims he was paranoid, driven by demons and meant no harm to be "ridiculous." She asked for the maximum sentence, which is life in prison. "You aimed a gun at human beings and you pulled the trigger," she said. "You meant harm and you meant to terrorize people. ... Mr. Casteel, what you are is a criminal, and you need to be separated from society." Prosecutors argued at trial that Casteel came within "milliseconds" of shooting and killing Jennifer Kupiec, who testified that she was driving a Cadillac about 80 mph to 85 mph on I-96 on Oct. 18, 2012, when she noticed a slower-moving Malibu in front of her. She said as she passed the vehicle, she heard a sound that left a ringing in her ears. She stopped at a gas station and she noticed a bullet hole in the backseat door handle on the driver's side. At a news conference after the sentencing, Kupiec said the only way she could describe what she felt when she realized someone had shot at her was "sheer hysteria." She said she was grateful she was speeding that day because had she been going slower, she believes Casteel's bullet would have struck her in the rib cage and killed her. It was the prosecution's position that Casteel receive the high end of the state's minimum sentence guidelines, between 11.25 years and 18.75 years in prison, while the defense said the guidelines exceed "that which is necessary ... and they don't apply in a rational way to somebody who is mentally ill and has now found his way to treatment." Defense attorney Douglas Mullkoff pointed to Casteel's Oakland County cases, where he was recently sentenced for multiple charges including assault with intent to commit great bodily harm less than murder and felony firearms. He said the Oakland judge and prosecutor's office "were not being soft on crime." "They were showing a recognition of the terror the victims endured, but also a compassion for the victim of mental illness, Mr. Casteel," the defense attorney said. "We should applaud the Oakland County solution to this problem because in a civilized society, I believe, we treat the sick and infirm with compassion, not hatred. The courts dole out justice, but it has to be tempered with mercy to be just." Casteel testified during the trial that he was not trying to harm people, but was shooting at cars because he was told to by a coded message he received in a Detroit Tigers game and because the long lines of traffic triggered the "demons" in his mind. His paranoia included believing people were targeting his family and that military aircraft were flying over his home when he lived in Kentucky. "He's certainly a troubled individual," Mullkoff said. "I think the public views him as sad. ... Most people feel sorry for him. He told the court he wasn't shooting at people. ... He wanted the delusions to stop."
[back to contents]
Page 84 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Piracy
Italian Marines Case: Law Ministry Concurs with MEA on Non-Applicability of Anti-Piracy Law The Economic Times Feb 22, 2014 In a fresh development in the Italian Maries case, the Law Ministry today concurred with the External Affairs Ministry on non-applicability of a controversial anti-piracy law which is being strongly contested by the Italian government. The Law Ministry is of the view that the Suppression of Unlawful Acts (SUA) against the safety of Maritime Navigation should not apply in the case against the two Italian marines who have been accused of killing two Indian fishermen two years ago, sources said. This view, which concurs with that of the External Affairs Ministry, was conveyed to the Home Ministry today, the sources added. The ball is now in the court of the Home Ministry. The development assumes significance as the Law Ministry has given its view just two days ahead of the hearing in the Supreme Court which had asked the government to sort out differences on applicability of SUA. During the last hearing on February 18, Attorney General G E Vahanvati told the Supreme Court that the government is waiting for the Law Ministry's opinion on the issue. The Italian government is strongly contesting the applicability of SUA. In a petition in the SC, it has argued that invoking of SUA "would tantamount to the Republic of Italy being termed a terrorist state and acts of its organs, which were in repression of piracy, as being deemed as acts of terrorism, which is wholly untenable and unacceptable in the facts and circumstances of this case and in keeping with the comity of nations and international cooperation". The case pertains to the killing of two Indian fishermen allegedly by Latorre and Girone on board 'Enrica Lexie' off Kerala coast on February 15, 2012. The two officers contended that they had apprehended a piracy attack. The marines were arrested on February 19, 2012. ! U.S. Anti-Piracy Ship Crew Treatment in India 'An Outrage' Marine Link February 24, 2014 The International Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots (MM&P), says 35 U.S. anti-piracy ship crew members are being treated unfairly, following the arrrest of their ship, 'Seaman Guard Ohio', describing it as 'an outrage' that they are being subjected to inhumane conditions in an Indian prison. MM&P inform that officials are withholding proper medical treatment, bathing
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
facilities and adequate food and, additionally, the courts have denied bail three times since the men were arrested four months ago on charges of illegally carrying weapons and straying into domestic waters. A new bail application may be heard later this week. According to court documents, on October 12, 2013, an Indian Coast Guard cutter intercepted the Ohio, after it allegedly, unlawfully obtained 10 barrels of diesel fuel in, what the government contends, was a clandestine manner. Indian authorities say the fuel was loaded on a fishing boat and taken out to sea to the Seaman Guard Ohio. Once in the port, 25 officials from eight different law enforcement agencies converged on the vessel; confined all crew members and guards; and falsely claimed that the ship was intercepted, according to the vessel's owners AdvanFort. Police seized 35 automatic weapons and nearly 5,700 rounds of ammunition from the security guards on the ship. Eight crew and 25 security guards aboard the vessel were arrested after they failed to produce documents allowing them to carry the weapons, according to Indian authorities. The owners, AdvanFort, of Herndon, VA. contend: the vessel was "not involved in any activity prejudicial to the safety and security of the court" and based on the Doctrine of Innocent Passage as envisaged in Section three of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982, no charge could be levelled against the crew or the vessel for violating the rules and regulations of India. "This is an outrage -- a violation of every civilized standard," says Captain James Staples, an MM&P senior advisor and spokesperson. "The circumstances surrounding the arrests is circumspect and the manner in which authorities are treating the crew is disconcerting." He continues, "For example, the men were imprisoned for two months before they were formally charged."
[back to contents]
Gender-Based Violence
Sudan Court Convicts Ethiopian Woman Over Gang-Rape BBC February 21, 2014 An Ethiopian woman who says she was gang-raped in Sudan has been convicted of "indecent acts". The woman of 18 was three months' pregnant at the time of the alleged attack. She was arrested after video of her allegedly being sexually abused was circulated on social media. Three men who admitted having sex with the woman and two who distributed the video were reportedly sentenced to being whipped. The three were each sentenced to 100 lashes for adultery, while two got 40 lashes for distributing indecent material, according to women's rights group Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa (SIHA). 'Brutal' The woman was sentenced to a one-month jail term but this was suspended because she is pregnant, her lawyer, Samia al-Hashmi, told the AFP news agency.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
She was also fined 5,000 Sudanese pounds ($880; 530). She had also faced charges of adultery and prostitution, which could have led to a penalty of death by stoning, but these were dropped after she convinced the court she was divorced, reports SIHA. The campaign group says the woman was house-hunting when she was lured to an empty property and attacked in Omdurman, just across the River Nile from Khartoum. It says she now faces deportation. The group's regional director Hala Elkarib condemned the conviction, saying it would prevent women from reporting sexual abuse. "The levelling of immigration charges against the victim further denies her protection by the state and protracts the punishment and emotional stress against her whilst she has been subjected to the most brutal of crimes," she said. Sudanese law is based on Sharia and women have been punished for wearing trousers or not covering their hair. ! Namibia: To Withdraw or Not Gender-Based Violence Cases AllAfrica Mathias Haufiku The Namibian Police Inspector General, Lieutenant Sebastian Ndeitunga, wants all gender-based violence cases to be regarded as state cases in order to prevent victims from withdrawing charges laid against abusive partners. "I will be a happy man if we can have a law that prohibits victims from withdrawing cases. All gender-based violence cases should be state cases and should progress until their logical conclusion," said Ndeitunga while also chastising families that influence victims to withdraw criminal cases. Human Rights Activist Professor Nico Horn is against plans to stop victims from withdrawing cases, adding that the state instead needs tough and proactive prosecutors who are not swayed to withdraw cases easily. "You do not have to change the law, the prosecutors are in charge therefore they have the power to withdraw the case or not. Prosecutors must be proactive," said Horn. He also urged magistrates to be more inquisitive and make it harder for prosecutors to allow cases to be withdrawn easily, adding that if the complainant does not want to testify other witnesses must be roped in. "I say we must leave the ball in the hands of the prosecutors because you cannot have a situation where people are forced to testify in a democratic Namibia," Horn said. "In the past rape cases were not withdrawn, but then you would find the families of the victim and the accused coming together and sorting things out, next thing you see the victim and the accused come to court in the same car," he said, adding that in such instances you seldom make a conviction because there is no cooperation
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
from the victim. "If you want to stop victims from withdrawing cases, it means there must be tough sentences for those who refuse to testify. By doing so, the victims will be doublyvictimised, so I would rather try a new approach of having tough prosecutors," said the professor. FGM Branded a Barbaric Practice International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics Carla Mackenzie An official in the UK has welcomed efforts by the government to clamp down on female genital mutilation (FGM). Vera Baird, police and crime commissioner in Northumbria, described FGM as a "barbaric practice" that causes a great deal of pain and suffering. As a result, she believes it is good that education secretary Michael Gove has pledged to provide all head teachers in England with information on the subject and guidance on how to deal with the issue effectively. "This terrible abuse must be brought to an end," Ms Baird commented. She went on to stress that raising awareness of FGM and the fact that it is illegal in the UK is a priority in the north-east of England. Ms Baird said the Violence Against Women and Girls Strategy was set up to ensure adequate help is available to victims and survivors, so they can speak with trained specialists and access appropriate support services. FGM Branded a Barbaric Practice
[back to contents]
REPORTS
United Nations Reports

North Korea Refutes UN Report Likening it to Nazi Business Standard February 22, 2014 North Korea has reportedly rejected reports by the United Nations that accused the country of carrying out barbaric war crimes against its own
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
people, comparing it with the Nazi. North Korea's foreign ministry said that the report was based on lies and fabrications deliberately cooked up by hostile forces and riff-raffs. The ministry added that the report was set up by the US and its satellite forces out of inveterate repugnance towards the DPRK (Democratic People's Republic of Korea), the Sky News reported. The UN Commission of Inquiry released its report earlier this week, detailing the crimes committed by North Korea against humanity that included murder, torture, rape, starvation and the suppression of religion. ! India Likely to Back UN War Crimes Investigation of Sri Lanka Press TV By Tim King February 24, 2014 A leaked report from India states that the government will back the inquiry into war crimes against Sri Lanka when the case reaches the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHCR) next month. Sri Lanka was convicted of Genocide The Permanent Peoples Tribunal Session II 7th 10th December 2013, in Bremen, Germany. This was the straw that broke the camel's back. "The Tribunal found that genocide against the Eelam Tamil group has not yet achieved the total destruction of their identity. The genocidal coordinated plan of actions reached its climax on May 2009, but it is clear that the Sri Lanka Government project to erase the Eelam Tamil identity, corroborated by the above mentioned conduct, shows that genocide is a process and that process is ongoing". Sri Lanka's government was heralded for its 2009 defeat of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), but years of reports of severe war crimes against the "Tamil Tigers" are coming home to roost. All of denials of responsibility Sri Lanka has become famous for, will mean little once the case reaches the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHCR) next month. The LTTE was essentially a band of revolutionaries and like the Americans in the Revolutionary War, they diversified from standard military tactics. The Tamil Tigers, however imperfect, was formed to protect the Tamil people from a government focused on ethnic cleansing, and establishing an all Buddhist nation. The "Tamil Tigers" were declared a terrorist organization, by 32 different countries over time. Sri Lanka declared that the LTTE was a terrorist group from January 1998 to 4 September 2002, when a cease fire was declared. As the government prepared an all out effort to defeat the LTTE during the final phase of the nearly three-decade long civil war, it again designated the LTTE as a terrorist organization on 7 January 2009. This was the launch of the period of torturous Genocide. At this point, India has not fully committed to the process against Sri Lanka; however, the government of Indian prime minister, Dr Manmohan Singh, is under pressure from Great Britain and other countries that have increased lobbying efforts. Analysts believe India will do what it takes to hold onto its Tamil allies as the Spring general election nears. Singh did surprisingly choose to boycott last year's
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Commonwealth Heads of Government summit in Colombo, succumbing to pressure from key allies, including the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK), which is one of India's two main parties in the state of Tamil Nadu. Sri Lankan President Majinda Rajapakse Under Pressure Rajapakse will in the end, have an impossible task; that is explaining the countless atrocities that were carried out against Tamils in the final stages of Sri Lanka's civil war. Driving the matter forward, is UN Human Rights Commissioner Navi Pillay. The timing of the release of her 20-page submission to both the United Nations and the Sri Lankan government, happened less than three weeks before a highly anticipated UN meeting in Geneva where the UK and US are expected to propose a formal war crimes inquiry. The United Nations human rights chief has called for an international war crimes investigation into alleged atrocities carried out in the final stages of the Sri Lankan civil war, according to reports. There are consistent findings that the LTTE also committed human rights abuses and war crimes. While the evidence of the acts of the Sri Lankan Army are well documented, far less evidence exists to demonstrate the LTTE's wrongdoings. In an interview with Asian Human Rights Commission last year, Navi Pillay, said Sri Lankan Tamils feel completely threatened by the very heavy military presence there. As has been reported many times, the Sinhalazation process by the Buddhist govt. of Sri Lanka is a continuing element of the ethnic cleansing process that has been underway in Sri Lanka for decades. Pillay said, "I met about 700 people in IDP camps, all of them has been fishing folk or planted rice on paddy fields and their lands have been confiscated without compensation, some of them said that the military have built their structures over that." The UN Human rights Commissioner cited huge levels of insecurity, fear, and surveillance. "I saw that for myself. People whom I'd interview such as a Jesuit priest, a Christian father were immediately visited by the military even while I was still in the country and I complained to the Government about this." Sri Lanka will long be known for its atrocious acts against Tamil civilians who were directed to enter so-called "No Fire Zones" and then ruthlessly attacked by artillery. Some of the rounds fell on and near a UN compound in the Vanni, perhaps this grinds at Pillay's heart, along with the fact that the UN's decision to pull its observers from the ground in Sri Lanka in 2009 basically facilitated the Genocide of up to 160,000 people. LLRC: Sri Lanka's Lost Opportunity In the wake of the violence in Sri Lanka, the government directed the creation of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission, which went to work and created a massive report detailing some of the abuse, treading lightly though on Rajapakse's military mission. The report assessed plenty of blame on the LTTE, referred to many of the dead as "human shields". Had Sri Lanka followed the LLRC, it may have shown an adequate degree of responsibility, but it did not. Instead the government has consistently scoffed at the idea of being accountable for crimes it says never happened. In fact the thousands of dead Tamils, according to the govt. of Sri Lanka, were all victims of the Tamil Tigers, which is an impossible claim as the acts of Sri Lanka's
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
army were heavily witnessed, and former soldiers of this army have provided some of the most damning evidence against the government themselves. The allegations against Sri Lanka include sex crimes and mutilation, responsibility for thousands of dead prisoners, thousands of Tamils locked away in camps never to be seen again, and even darker things like torture and using rape as a weapon against both men and women. Sri Lanka is famous for using white vans to abduct and murder journalists who write negatively about the Rajapakse regime, and the murdered journalists are not all Tamil. Pillay is only one world leader who tired of the Rajapakse regime's flippant attitude. This all takes place with the United States in an interesting rebound. The US and UK are both considered to be complicit in the Genocide itself, according to the ruling of The Permanent Peoples Tribunal. Officials in Washington DC were aware of the slaughter of Tamils in 2009 and it did not raise their voice. If India ultimately joins this quest to force Sri Lanka to accountability, it will undoubtedly give confidence to a battered Tamil population.! Sri Lanka Rejects UN War Crimes Probe as More Bodies Found in Mass Grave The Telegraph By Dean Nelson February 25, 2014 More than forty new bodies were found in a mass grave in Sri Lanka's Tamil north, officials said on Tuesday, after the government rejected a UN call for an international inquiry into alleged war crimes. The discovery of the grave in Mannar, a key battle zone in the last stages of Sri Lanka's long civil war, will increase pressure on the United Nations Human Rights Council to support an independent war crimes investigation when it meets in Geneva next month. Eighty bodies, including those of children, have now been recovered there and another mass grave with 155 bodies was discovered in 2012. The report by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, highlighted these mass graves in her report and said they demonstrated the "magnitude and gravity of the violations alleged to have been committed" by both sides. The thousands of civilians killed in the last months of the war in 2009 and allegations of summary executions of surrendering or arrested Tamil Tiger leaders demanded an independent investigation, the report said. The UN believes 40,000 Tamils were killed in the last months of the war before the defeat of the LTTE in May 2009. Many of them were killed in Army shelling of civilians in official "no-fire zones". David Cameron, the prime minister, and other leaders had warned President Mahinda Rajapaksa at last year's Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Colombo that there would be an international inquiry if Sri Lanka did not launch its own credible and independent inquiry before March 2014. Ms Pillay effectively called time on its delays when her report calling for an international investigation was released late on Monday evening. Its failure to launch "independent or credible investigations," reflected a lack of political will, it added.
Page 91 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
It cited political interference in the judiciary, continuing disappearances and intimidation of witnesses as further reasons for an international inquiry which would guarantee witness protection. "The international community has a duty to take further steps, which will advance the right to truth for all in Sri Lanka," the report said. Its criticisms of Sri Lanka's own reconciliation attempts were rejected by the government which said the report "reflects bias and is tantamount to an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state". Critics said Sri Lanka is hoping that support from China and Russia might help it defeat the war crimes inquiry proposal at the Human Rights Council meeting next month. But they will not be able to veto the proposal if a simple majority of the 47 council members support it. Gordon Weiss, the UN's former Sri Lanka spokesman and author of The Cage, an account of the slaughter of civilians in the last months of 2009, said he believed the allegations are credible and must be investigated. "There's a simple reason these allegations have been repeated for years: They have merit. An independent international investigation will answer questions the government of Sri Lanka has proven incapable or unwilling to resolve," he said. ! UN Rights Boss Seeks International Probe into Sri Lanka War Crimes Global Post By Stephanie Nebehay February 25, 2014 The U.N. human rights chief called for an international inquiry into war crimes committed by both sides during Sri Lanka's civil war, saying the government had failed to do its own credible investigation. In a much anticipated report ahead of a U.N. Human Rights Council debate next month that could order action on the issue, Navi Pillay on Monday recommended an "independent, international inquiry mechanism, which would contribute to establishing the truth where domestic inquiry mechanisms have failed". U.S. plans to propose a resolution against Sri Lanka at the meeting and Pillay's report, based on her visit to the country last August, add to pressure on the government. President Mahinda Rajapaksa's administration, in 18 pages of comments as long as Pillay's report, rejected the recommendations as "arbitrary, intrusive and of a political nature". Many thousands of civilians were killed, injured or remain missing after the 25-year conflict between government forces and separatist Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in the north of the island that ended in May 2009, Pillay said in her report to the Geneva forum. She said there had been little progress in establishing accountability for "emblematic" wartime crimes, including the January 2006 killing of five students on a beach and the execution of 17 aid workers later that August. "None of these cases has ... resulted in the perpetrators being brought to justice," she said.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Conclusions of a national Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission have been rejected or ignored, such as its finding that the army was responsible for shelling civilian areas, Pillay said. Her report did not just direct criticism to the government, but also suggested Tamil Tiger rebels ought to be investigated for any involvement in some of the incidents. "The High Commissioner (Pillay) is also concerned that legal proceedings have not begun against any LTTE suspect for alleged war crimes or other human rights abuses," the report said. The report also focused on allegations of abuses after the end of the conflict, although the government says the country is on the path to reconciliation helped by fast economic growth. It drew attention to concerns that women were vulnerable to sexual harassment and violence when there was a heavy military presence, such as in the northern Tamil heartland, an allegation rejected by Sri Lankan government. The government said its survey covering 2007-2012 had shown that a majority of the reported incidents of sexual violence in the north were carried out by close relatives or neighbors and "only a very few could be attributed to the security forces". Pillay also voiced concern at rising attacks by Buddhist monks on minority Muslims and Christians and at harassment of activists, lawyers and journalists. Pillay said she had received information on 280 incidents of threats and violence against Muslims and 103 against Christians in 2013 alone.
[back to contents]
Non-Governmental Organization Reports

Razed to the Ground Human Rights Watch January 30, 2014 Since July 2012, Syrian authorities have deliberately demolished thousands of residential buildings, in some cases entire neighborhoods, using explosives and bulldozers, in Damascus and Hama, two of Syrias largest cities. Government officials and pro-government media outlets have claimed that the demolitions were part of urban planning efforts or removal of illegally constructed buildings. However, the demolitions were supervised by military forces and often followed fighting in the areas between government and opposition forces. These circumstances, as well as witness statements and more candid statements by government officials reported in the media indicate that the demolitions were related to the
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
armed conflict and in violation of international humanitarian law, or the laws of war. Human Rights Watch concluded that seven cases of large-scale demolitions documented in this report violated the laws of war either because they served no necessary military purpose and appeared intended to punish the civilian population, or because they caused disproportionate harm to civilians. Those responsible for the wanton destruction of civilian property or for imposing collective punishment have committed war crimes and should be investigated and held to account.
[back to contents]
TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSIONS
Sri Lanka
Doubts over Sri Lanka's Reconciliation Efforts Deutsche Welle By Gabriel Dominguez February 26, 2014 The Sri Lankan government has repeatedly come under fire from critics for failing adequately to investigate war crimes and promote reconciliation with the country's Tamil minority following a decades-long civil war. Last week, it said it was considering a process similar to South-Africa's postapartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Colombo sent a high-level delegation to South Africa to see, according to a spokesman for Nimal Siripala de Silva, Sri Lankan minister for water, who led the five-member team, "what lessons it could learn." During their two-day trip, the Sri Lankans held talks with South African officials about the "procedures and experiences of the commission" that was set up almost two decades ago to probe political crimes committed during the apartheid era. The ColomboPage newspaper reported that the visit was aimed at exploring the possibility of using the South African mechanism for the reconciliation process in Sri Lanka. Colombo has yet to formally announce whether or not it will set up such a commission, although those in favor of a body modeled after the South African TRC say it would enable offenders to publicly admit their atrocities and avoid prosecution.
Page 94 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
'Unlikely to convince detractors' Alan Keenan, a Sri Lanka analyst at the International Crisis Group, regards the trip to South Africa as a last-minute attempt by the Sri Lankan government to undermine a US-sponsored resolution that is due to be introduced at the upcoming UNHRC session in March, expected to call for an international investigation into alleged atrocities committed in the final stages of the decades-long civil war. Keenan says it is "unlikely to convince the governments detractors," who accuse it of failing to thoroughly investigate these allegations. After making a trip to Sri Lanka earlier this year, US Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia Nisha Biswal accused Colombo of failing to conduct credible inquiries and making slow progress in implementing the recommendations of the Lessons Learnt and Reconciliation Commission (LLRC), which the Sri Lankan government set up in the aftermath of the conflict. "There hasn't been sufficient action taken by the government to address the issues of justice and accountability." The New-York based Human Rights Watch has also claimed that there can be no credible TRC process in the South Asian nation at the moment "as there is no political will." In a statement sent to DW, it criticized the government's failure to promote ethnic reconciliation, saying "there is no way, given the hostility Sri Lanka displays towards calls for accountability, that it is in any way serious about delivering justice, whether through a TRC or through its own investigations and prosecutions." A similar view is shared by Amnesty International (AI). "The pattern of harassment, surveillance and attacks against those opposing the Sri Lankan authorities is deeply disturbing and shows no sign of letting up," Polly Truscott, AI's Deputy Asia- Pacific Director, said in a statement. "Sri Lanka is doing whatever it can to avoid accountability for the alleged horrific violations by its security forces during the armed conflict," she added. Atrocities on both sides For 25 years, the countrys armed forces fought against the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE), militant separatists seeking to create an independent state for the Tamil-speaking minority in the north and the east of the country. In May 2009, the army recaptured the last area controlled by the LTTE in the north of the country, putting an end to a civil war that cost the lives of up to 100,000 people, according to the United Nations. Nearly 40,000 of them were killed in the last five months of the conflict. Human rights organizations accuse both the military and LTTE of committing war crimes, including deliberate attacks on civilians, executions of combatants and prisoners and enforced disappearances, during the long-running conflict. 'Unwarranted interference' The country's growing international isolation became evident during a Commonwealth summit in Colombo last year, when the leaders of India, Canada and Mauritius stayed away from the event. Moreover, the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Navi Pillay, recently
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
slammed Sri Lanka for "heading in an increasingly authoritarian direction," with human rights activists, journalists and ordinary citizens facing growing military harassment four years after the end of the civil war. "The war may have ended, but in the meantime democracy has been undermined and the rule of law eroded," she said. This week, the UN official also issued a draft report recommending an "independent, international inquiry mechanism" into alleged violations of human rights and humanitarian law in the final stages of the war. Colombo categorically rejected the conclusions and recommendations of the report, calling it biased and "tantamount to an unwarranted interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state." In the state media, it also pointed to numerous post-conflict achievements such as the rehabilitation of internally displaced people, economic and infrastructure development in the war-torn areas as well as the establishment of the LLRC. "This list of achievements, in the very short period since 2009, extends further, but it doesn't seem to satisfy those who are determined to present yet another resolution in Geneva," Palitha Kohona, Sri Lanka's permanent representative to the UN, told the state-owned Daily News. Last September, Sri Lanka held its first provincial election in the former northern war zone, which was regarded by many observers as a step in the right direction. The landslide victory of the island's main ethnic Tamil minority was seen as reflecting a strong feeling among the community for a negotiated political solution. However, although the ruling coalition in Colombo had promised to share limited power with Sri Lankan Tamils, the electoral victory has not yet led to a greater degree of autonomy in Tamil-majority regions, say critics. "The central government has blocked the northern council from using even its limited constitutional powers," criticizes Keenan from International Crisis Group. "Instead, the region remains under de-facto military occupation. Unfortunately, all the trips to South Africa wont matter until the Sri Lankan government decides to treat the Tamil people as equals."
Nepal
The Rights Debate EKantipur The UCPN (Maoist) is insisting that parties pass legislation on the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) before they move on to constitution drafting. The issue of transitional justice has been long been disputed and as a result, has been repeatedly shelved. The Maoist party has for a while now envisioned the TRC as a method of ensuring that their members are not arrested on criminal charges. The party wants all conflict-era cases to be addressed through the TRC, which could then grant amnesties to perpetrators of rights violations during the conflict.
Page 96 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Human rights activists, on the other hand, have long been arguing that the TRC should not have the right to grant amnesty and that the courts should continue prosecuting conflict-era cases independently of the TRC. Activists also argue that the last TRC ordinance gave too much power to the political parties. The Supreme Court verdict of January on the TRC ordinance offers a standpoint to restart the TRC debate and revise legislation. In a number of ways, the Courts judgment accords with that of activists. The judgment states that the ordinance grants too much discretionary power to the government and commissioners, not least in forcing victims and perpetrators to reconcile. It states that there should be two commissions as originally planneda TRC and a Disappearance Commission rather than just one, as the ordinance stated. The judgment also holds that the ordinance grants too much power to the TRC to grant amnesties and rejects the idea that amnesties can be given for serious crimes. On the other hand, the judgment does not just repeat the arguments of rights activists. In contrast to some arguments from the human rights community, the judgment mentions that the TRC can grant amnesties in specific cases and has said that criteria for amnesty should be listed in the legislation. In some ways, therefore, the Courts judgment mediates the disparate positions of the parties and rights activists. The political parties now need to revise the transitional justice legislation in accordance with the judgment. This should not be such a difficult task and can be accomplished swiftly if political will exists. In the meantime, there needs to be widespread public discussion regarding the functions of the TRC. There is much confusion about this issue in the public sphere and even those in the know have differing interpretations. For example, the specific relationship of the TRC to the criminal justice system when it comes to transitional justice has not been adequately delineated. The parties, activists and victims groups need to come together to resolve such outstanding matters.
Argentina
Argentina Ready to Nix AMIA Truth Commission Pact With Iran InSerbia Citing a lack of progress and growing internal opposition, Argentine President Cristina Fernndez de Kirchner has said that she will abrogate the pact signed with Iran with an alternative plan to be implemented in its place. Fernndez de Kirchner made the comments as she spoke to the nations Congress about the legislative year ahead, which usually spans from March to March. In addition to speaking about her political opposition, the crisis in Venezuela and the economy, she mentioned the pact made with Iran last year. The wheels were set in motion last month when the Delegacin de Asociaciones Israelitas Argentinas (DAIA), an umbrella organization of Argentine Jews, made yet another plea for the government to cancel their cooperation with Iran in the case. Dr. Julio Schlosser, the President of DAIA, met with Argentinas Foreign Minister, Hctor Timerman, to discuss the investigation. Timerman has been involved with the Iran pact since its inception, and Dr. Schlosser decided to finally make another
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
push against the pact when Timerman, a Jew himself, admitted that there was very little progress made with Iran. Dr. Schlosser said that it is "crucial that the government recognises this lack of progress because from day one, we have said that Tehran is not an appropriate intermediary, and also from that day, we have always said that we disagree with the Truth Commission." In January of 2013, the governments of Argentina and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding to establish a Truth Commission, intended to investigate the bombing cooperatively within the legal framework of both countries. The memorandum was approved by the Congress of Argentina but in the first sign of friction, took nearly a year to be ratified by the Iranian parliament. Fernndez de Kirchner had repeatedly expressed her frustration at the lack of developments within the agreement, especially in recent weeks, and Timerman further revealed that dialogue with Iran has been at a standstill since early December of 2013. At the same time, opposition lawmakers in the Argentine Senate have also pledged to do all they can to have the agreement with Iran canceled. All of these factors contributed to Fernndez de Kirchners most recent comments made at the hearing on legislative plans. She said that she "challenges Argentine Jewish institutions and opposition politicians and blocs to work on an alternative project" in order to find justice. The incident in question dates back to July 18, 1994 when a catastrophic bomb attack destroyed the the AMIA building in Buenos Aires, killing 85 people and injuring well over 300 more. The building housed the Asociacin Mutual Israelita Argentina (AMIA), a Jewish organization and community center. It is thought that Hezbollah was behind the attack at the behest of the Iranian government, an allegation that Iran has repeatedly denied. "In December," the President recalled, "I met with Hctor (Timerman) and the leaders of the AMIA Jewish Center, and I respectfully asked them to prepare an alternative, one that is different from the current Memorandum of Understanding and Truth Commission plans, to finding the facts." "This will have to be done, of course, within the margins of international law and due judicial process," she added. The Argentine leader concluded by making a promise that "as President, I pledge to terminate the current agreement with Iran and carry out and implement what they (Timerman and AMIA officials) propose. Memory, truth and justice should not just be a slogan in Argentina," she said, referring to the public holiday held every March 24th in the country with the aim of remembering the victims of the Dirty War (1976-1983). For its part, the DAIA said that they welcome the words of Fernndez de Kirchner, confirming that they are, indeed, working on other alternatives. "First, however, it is necessary that the memorandum with Iran is abolished, and if it is not, we will launch a national campaign to negate the Memorandum of Understanding as we feel this is the step needed to advance," said Waldo Wolff, DAIAs Vice-President. The AMIA attack came two years after the March 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires that killed 29 and wounded nearly 250 people. A highhttp://publicinternationallawandpolicygroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/WCPW_031014_Master_1.html Page 98 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
ranking official of the ruling Netanyahu administration is set to travel to Buenos Aires later this month to mark the anniversary, and the news of deteriorating relations with Iran should serve as a boon to Argentine-Israeli relations, which have been steadily warming. Dr. Alberto Nisman, the Argentine prosecutor charged with leading the investigation into AMIA, also welcomed the Presidents words. Dr. Nisman was always against involving Iran directly in the investigations, and urged Argentinas Supreme Court to declare the memorandum signed with Tehran unconstitutional. Nstor Kirchner, former President of Argentina (2003-2007), declared the initial investigation of the bombing a "national disgrace," and issued a decree that, among other things, placed more importance on the case and within a year (2005), the respective judicial teams of Argentina, Israel, and the US concluded that Hezbollah was behind the bombings at the behest of the Iranian government. In Argentinas civic society, which holds the largest Jewish community in the Americas after the United States at over 300,000 people, there was always apathy, mistrust and mockery toward the agreement from local and international Jewish groups.
[back to contents]
COMMENTARY AND PERSPECTIVES

Should Ukraine be on the International Criminal Courts Radar? Justice in Conflict By Mark Kersten February 20, 2014 Things were supposed to settle down earlier this week when opposition activists in Kiev accepted an amnesty in exchange for vacating government buildings. Within hours, however, a new spate of violence broke out. On Wednesday evening it once again appeared that a new truce would lead to a simmering of tensions. But the truce quickly collapsed. Parts of the Ukrainian city erupted. The images emerging from Kiev evoke scenes that many havent seen in a European capital in years perhaps not since the Balkan wars and the shelling of Sarajevo. According to one observer, the situation in Ukraine is unprecedented: The situation is now more dangerous than it has ever been. Ukraine voted for independence and separated from the dying Soviet Union peacefully in the autumn of 1991. Its Orange Revolution in 2004-5, a street response to rigged elections, was also completed without bloodshed, though some panicky reactions on both sides brought it pretty close. Since then, Ukrainian politics have been messy and tainted by corruption, but more spontaneous and democratic in many ways than in the countries around it. It has now descended, for the first time, into violence, and that may be hard to reverse.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Estimates vary, but it appears that about 20 protesters and 10 police officers have been killed in clashes this week. As the international community scrambles to address the ongoing violence, the numbers of dead and injured continue to grow. The European Union is now considering the imposition of targeted sanctions against the Ukrainian government for what they described as "unjustified use of excessive force by the Ukrainian authorities". Russian Prime Minister responded by declaring that the Ukrainian authorities should not be a "doormat", a statement widely interpreted as supporting the governments crackdown on protestors and activists. US President Barack Obama has also intervened, calling for a "transitional government". He also attacked Russia for supporting the Ukrainian governments crackdown on protestors, drawing parallels to Moscows support for the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad. For the moment, there is far more rhetoric being strewn about than concerted action to end the violence. But a question that is almost certainly going to be asked with greater frequency in the coming days and weeks is whether the situation in Ukraine should be investigated by the International Criminal Court. Importantly, despite numerous statements that it supports international criminal justice and would join the ICC, Ukraine is one of the few European states which is not a member of the Court. As a result, the Court can only investigate alleged crimes in Ukraine if the United Nations Security Council referred the situation in the country to the ICC. Of course, any discussion of a referral would once again pit Russia against European Union members of the Council, a battle which could easily end in stalemate. Broadly speaking, Russia supports the government and has gone to lengths to paint the opposition as "extremists" and even "terrorists". They have blamed the "West" for encouraging protestors and sowing dissent. The European Union (EU) is widely seen as sympathetic to the opposition activists who are, by and large, supportive of greater integration with the EU. This is undoubtedly an over-simplification. Some believe that that "this is now an internal, Ukrainian conflict" and "the proxy Russia v EU element seems to have receded." But the division of international positions on Ukraine have been in place since at least the countrys 2004 Orange Revolution when Russia backed the Presidency of Viktor Yanukovych while the European Union threw its support behind Western-leaning Viktor Yushchenko. Given these tensions, getting the Security Council to refer the situation in Ukraine to the ICC would thus be immensely difficult but perhaps not impossible. If all sides truly believe they are in the right and that the parties they support are innocent, they could agree to have the responsibility for violence adjudicated by the Court. That being said, it seems rather clear that, where their interests are at stake and they have taken firm positions in support of one side over another, major powers prefer that no party to a conflict is investigated over the investigation of all parties. Of course, they may also simply not trust the process or they may conclude that it would be deleterious to have the ICC involved when the situation remains fragile and a negotiated settlement to ongoing violence in combination with an amnesty is their preferred option. Notably, major human rights groups have remained silent on the question of the ICC. Amnesty International has called for an "end to impunity" for Ukrainian police. Human Rights Watchs most recent statement likewise demands that President Yanukovych put an end to "police impunity". To date, neither have thrown their
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
support behind an ICC referral. But if the situation continues to deteriorate, that could change very quickly. For the Court, an intervention into Ukraine would be unique. Not only would it get the Court "out of Africa" but it would mark its first investigation into the conduct of what is ostensibly (if very precariously) democratically elected government. Given harassment of reporters, it could also mark the first time that violence perpetrated against journalists featured centrally in an ICC investigation. Still, the current level of violence and death may not (currently) satisfy the gravity threshold required by the Courts Prosecutor to investigate allegations of an atrocity crime. As and if violence continues, however, this could change. Moreover, it remains unclear what, exactly, gravity means to the Office of the Prosecutor. Notably, it has rejected the view that gravity is simply a numbers-game of counting body-bags. It may be premature to talk of an ICC intervention in Ukraine. Clearly, a number of key obstacles remain. But this should not preclude collecting of evidence for a potential investigation in the future. In the case of Syria, which also would have to be referred to the Court by the Security Council, investigators have collected evidence which could eventually be used to prosecute those responsible for war crimes and crimes against humanity. If violence continues, the same could and indeed should happen in Ukraine. Justice in the Central African Republic: A Role for the ICC Justice in Conflict By James P. Rudolph February 24, 2014 Fatou Bensouda, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC), recently announced that her office was launching a preliminary investigation into alleged war crimes being committed in the Central African Republic (CAR). Bensoudas announcement noted that much of the violence in the CAR has disproportionately affected civilians, more than a million of whom have been displaced. Several reports have detailed "acts of rape and sexual slavery, destruction of property, pillaging, torture, forced displacement and recruitment and use of children in hostilities". The situation, Bensouda said, has "gone from bad to worse". Chillingly, the risk of genocide is ever-present. Bensouda is not the only high-level official warning of the dangers in the CAR. "The dark clouds of mass atrocities and sectarian cleansing", UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said, "loom over the Central African Republic". This dreadful state of affairs, in which Christians and Muslims have engaged in unspeakable tit-for-tat violence, has unfolded with alarming rapidity and attracted worldwide attention. The African Union (AU) already has 6,000 peacekeepers in CAR. France, the former colonial ruler, last year sent a contingent of 1,600 troops to support the mission. (According to recent reports, France will send an additional 400 troops this month.) The United States, for its part, has contributed $100 million to supplement this military effort, and the European Union has committed to sending 500 soldiers by the end of this month. Whether any of this is enough to stop the violence is the subject of great controversy and debate. But one thing is for sure, at least for Bensouda and the ICC: the preliminary investigation is not, in any legal way, dependent on these otherwise important military and financial commitments.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
The ICCs jurisdiction is complementary, acting as a veritable Sword of Damocles. This means, first and foremost, that CAR officials must have an opportunity to address these allegations head-on. The ICCs goal, after all, is not to supplant national sovereignty but to supplement it. In keeping with this spirit of support and supplementation, Samantha Power, the American ambassador to the United Nations, last year called on CAR officials to organise a national commission of inquiry to look into human rights abuses. Moreover, UN Security Council Resolution 2127, adopted in December 2013, called for the establishment of an international commission of inquiry the composition of which was recently announced to investigate reports of human rights abuses by all parties. The "first responders", then, must legally be CAR officials; there can, in other words, be no room for an ICC irruption when a nations criminal justice system is working as it should. If, however, homegrown efforts to respond to the allegations are deemed insufficient because of unjustified delays or the proceedings are seen as a sham, the ICCs preliminary investigation will become more intrusive. This, of course, is the raison dtre of the ICC: to act as an impetus; to remind states of their primary responsibility to protect civilians from war crimes, crimes against humanity and genocide; and to act when the state is unable or unwilling to do so. In other words, to ensure the possibility of justice by investigating and, if warranted, prosecuting those who have violated internationally recognised norms. To be sure, national efforts, even coupled with the ICCs involvement, are not a panacea: they will not bring the dead back and will not mollify the extremists clamoring for on-the-spot, vigilante justice. The "tyranny of the mob", as Ms. Power called it, has a thirst for revenge and violence that is viscerally understood, as many have seen loved ones hacked or burned to death. Nevertheless, a commission of inquiry by CAR officials should proceed in parallel with the international commission sanctioned by the UN. None of this guarantees reconciliation or justice. Indeed, as in the case of Kenyas opportunity to investigate allegations of crimes against humanity related to its post-election violence six years ago, theres a chance that CAR officials will simply stonewall. If this occurs, Bensoudas preliminary investigation might very well mature into a full-fledged prosecution, in which case the findings from the commissions of inquiry could assume even greater relevance. With that said, prosecutions are not necessarily the only way forward for CAR. The lesson of South Africa and its approach to communal violence offers some helpful clues. Many doubted that any kind of reconciliation could be achieved by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but it was. On balance, both truth and reconciliation emerged, contributing eventually to the restoration of peace, stability and democracy. CAR is in a similar situation: family members informing on one another; neighbours engaged in acts of appalling brutality; and innocent civilians being killed or forced to flee to neighbouring countries. If CAR officials, like South Africans before them, opt for a truth commission with amnesties, the ICC will be put between Scylla and Charybdis. Ignoring the commission would be to discount a sovereign nations decision regarding the best path forward. Yet recognizing the commission and amnesties as an "investigation" for purposes of the Rome (ICC) statute would effectively sideline Bensouda and the court. The butchery and internecine warfare within CAR has brought the country to the brink of collapse. Solutions seem maddeningly out of reach. And the ICCs contribution seems at this point to be rather meagre. After all, the ICCs
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
involvement, at least at this preliminary stage, doesnt offer much in the way of solace to those who have borne the brunt of this chaotic situation. But, coupled with French and African troops, the investigation is part of the opening efforts to stop the carnage, get people back to normalcy, achieve justice and accountability and lay the groundwork for democracy. It seems a tall order. And it is. But as CAR President Catherine Samba-Panza has noted, all of these goals are nigh impossible without robust and generous external intervention, something we should keep firmly in mind when others contend that the terms of engagement and intervention any engagement or intervention smack of meddling and neo-colonialism. In this spirit, the ICC, however irrelevant to the civilians caught in the middle of this inter-communal conflict, will play its part in bringing about some justice, even if simply to remind CAR officials that the world is watching. Ukraine and the International Criminal Court: Out of Africa and Into Europe? Justice in Conflict By Mark Kersten February 27, 2014 Ukraines Parliament has voted to send its discredited thug of a President Viktor Yanukovych to the International Criminal Court (ICC). After losing his grip on power and fleeing Kiev, Yanukovych is a man on the run. But if he is arrested, Ukraines parliament has signalled its intention to send him and members of his coterie packing for The Hague. Ukraine may not have been on the ICCs radar, but the Court is certainly on the minds of many in Ukraine. Ukraine is not a member-state of the ICC. It signed the Rome Statute but failed to ratify it after the countrys Constitutional Court found that the statute was unconstitutional. Some have argued that this will prevent Ukraine from referring itself to the Court. But this is, at the very least, unclear (see here and here). Importantly, parliament is not seeking to ratify the Rome Statute but to volunteer jurisdiction over a specific period of time to the ICC. According to its official statement, Ukraines parliament is seeking to refer "crimes against humanity during peaceful protests in Ukraine since November 30, 2013 until February 22, 2014, particularly, Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovych President of Ukraine and other officials determined by the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court." The ICCs Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) has not responded and reports suggest that no official request has yet been filed at the Court. Moreover, some believe that the ICC wont or shouldnt be interested in taking on any cases pertaining to events in the Ukraine. David Bosco, for example, has argued that it is not clear that crimes under the jurisdiction of the ICC have been committed, that the crimes under consideration likely would not meet the Courts "gravity" threshold and that if Ukraines judiciary is able and willing to genuinely prosecute Yanukovych, the ICC wont investigate. There are clearly obstacles to ICC trial of Ukraines ousted President. But the picture is murky at best. Here are a few thoughts on some of the political and legal issues swirling around a potential ICC intervention in Ukraine. A Mixed Bag: Out of Africa and Into Europe
Page 103 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
As numerous commentators have suggested, an intervention in Ukraine would get the ICC out of Africa. The Court quite obviously suffers from a perception problem. Whether real or not, the ICC is widely seen as a Western tool with a bias against African states. But proponents shouldnt be overly enthusiastic that a potential intervention into Ukraine would mark a significant shift in this perception. Yes, it would get the ICC out of Africa (it should be noted that the Court has numerous preliminary investigations outside of the African continent). However, in going after someone widely seen as a disgraced adversary of the European Union, the Court could easily reaffirm the widespread belief that it is an institution which ultimately in the service of European interests. Russian Into It? It isnt clear how Russia would react to an ICC intervention in Ukraine, especially one that targeted its ostensible ally, Yanukovych. Indeed, if the ICC were to pursue him, would Russia provide Yanukovych with safe haven or exile? Not much is known about the Courts relationship with Russia. It doesnt seem that the ICC focuses much attention on the subject either. Still, there is an ongoing preliminary investigation into Russias 2008 war with Georgia and perhaps some tensions over Russias flat-out rejection of any referral of Syria to the ICC. Would the Court strike back by pursuing Yanukovych or would it prefer to tread softly when it comes to Russia? If the Court proceeds, how it deals with Russia is crucial. Ukraine is currently in a precarious political situation and if Russia is part of the problem, it also needs to be part of the solution. This message was intimated by US Secretary of State John Kerry: "This is not a zero-sum game, this is not West versus East. It is not Russia or the United States, this is about the people of Ukraine and Ukrainians making their choices about the future and we want to work with Russia and other countries, with everybody available, to make sure this is peaceful from this day forward." Complementarity Games While it may have its share of problems, Ukraine clearly has a functioning judiciary. And, as Bosco observes, the country "boasts a judiciary more capable of managing a domestic trial than other countries the ICC has worked in." As a result, given the ICCs complementarity regime, it isnt clear whether the Court would find any prosecution of Ukrainian officials admissible. But the existence of a functioning judicial system able and willing to conduct trials doesnt tell the whole story. In some instances, states have agreed to send some perpetrators to The Hague while putting others on trial themselves. They are able to do so because, in the words of Darryl Robinson, complementarity is not a one-step process of determining whether a state is able or willing to conduct an investigation or prosecution but a two-step process which first requires the Court to find whether the state in question is conducting or has conducted any investigation or prosecution of a given case. There is precedence for this kind of outsourcing. The Ivory Coast shipped former President Laurent Gbagbo to face trial at the ICC while insisting that other ICC indictees, including Gbagbos wife Simone, be prosecuted in-country. In short, a case could be admissible at the ICC if Ukraine simply decided that it would not
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
investigate or prosecute crimes pertaining to the recent violence in Kiev. "Gravity" Weighing Down Justice Some might argue that the alleged crimes committed in Kiev are not of sufficient gravity for the ICC to investigate or prosecute. The problem here is that theres no consensus on what gravity actually entails. Moreover, it is largely the discretion of the Prosecutors office to decide what acts are grave enough to warrant investigation and potential prosecution. As Alana Tiemessen and others have argued, gravity is a tool used by the Prosecutor to justify the selection of cases. If the OTP determines that it is in its interests to investigate and prosecute Yanukovych and other senior figures in Ukraine, then we should expect that a legal justification that the crimes are, in fact, "grave enough" will be found. Popular Sentiment The biggest potential stumbling block is thus not the Courts complementarity regime or its gravity threshold. The primary obstacle may, in fact, end up being popular public opinion. It is not clear how Ukrainians feel about their former President being sent to The Hague. According to Paul Waldie of the Globe and Mail who has been reporting from Kiev, "[m]ost folks I run into just want [Yanukovych] locked up." Exactly where theyd like to see him locked up remains unclear. If there is an outpouring of support for bringing Yanukovych to justice in Ukraine, then the OTP could very well decide that pursuing an investigation and potential prosecution simply isnt worth it. As Bosco writes, if theres a public thirst to try Yanukovych domestically, "the court will almost certainly keep its distance". The ICC learned its lesson the hard way in Libya. After referring the situation in Libya to the Court, states completely flip-flopped by subsequently declaring that it was ultimately up to Libya to decide where ICC indictees were to be tried. Within a few short months, support for the Courts mandate in Libya evaporated. In response, the Prosecutor decided not to push for the cases. There has been a precarious silence in Western capitals over Ukraines request to send Yanukovych to the ICC. European governments in particular are likely waiting in order to get a better sense of popular opinion in Ukraine. The Prosecutor would be wise to be careful before intervening into another situation where support for the Courts mandate could very well be fleeting or altogether non-existent. New ISO Standard for Private Maritime Security Companies Communis Hostis Omnium By Dirk Siebels February 27, 2014 Since the statistics peaked in 2011, the number of piracy incidents off Somalia has dropped from 237 to just 15 in 2013. Nonetheless, private maritime security companies (PMSCs) are by now an integral part of the shipping industry and it is estimated that there have been about 20,000 passages with armed guards through the High-Risk Area in the Indian Ocean in 2013. Demand for PMSCs in other regions, most notably in West Africa, is also rising and ship operators are eagerly waiting for the new ISO/PAS 28007 standard. During a seminar organised by the Security Association for the Maritime Industry
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
(SAMI) in January 2014, the representative from the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) underlined that the first certification bodies for the new standard will be accredited over the coming weeks. Currently, four companies are waiting for their certificates which will enable them to audit PMSCs against the new ISO standard. While the number of potential auditors may be small compared to other ISO standards, it is important to note that the market is limited. Nevertheless, PMSCs will be able to choose between different auditors. Other companies could enter the market at any point, based on their ability to identify business opportunities and to pass UKASs thorough accreditation process. For the time being, the new ISO standard is a so-called Publicly Available Specification (PAS) which may be issued when there is an urgent market requirement for such a document. After further reviews, a PAS can be transformed into a regular international standard. In this case, the market requirement for ISO/PAS 28007 came from the shipping industry as many companies where looking for a reliable standard. While armed security guards on civilian vessels would have been unthinkable just a few years ago, there has been a sea change within the industry. Ship owners and operators have realised that armed guards are not just providing protection. Other benefits are just as important, most notably an added sense of confidence felt by crews and captains. Many ship operators would even like to transfer the successful PMSC model from the Indian Ocean to other regions with security problems. The legal environment in regions such as West Africa, however, is a lot more complex and has caused shipping association BIMCO to shelve its planned publication of an amended version of Guardcon, a standard contract for the employment of PMSCs. At the same time, BIMCO points out that the introduction of the new ISO standard is an important step forward. ISO/PAS 28007 will allow independent certification yet governments are still able to control critical functions. Over the past couple of years, the only international standard available to PMSCs was the International Code of Conduct for Private Security Service Providers (ICoC). While the ICoC Association is an independent organisation based in Switzerland, the US government has played a major role in drafting the document itself. Various incidents during which private security contractors killed or injured civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan had made it necessary to introduce some form of qualitycontrol for private security providers. Influenced by such developments, the ICoC was first and foremost focussed on land-based security. It has since been developed into an ASIS standard which has been adopted by the US Department of Defense in May 2012, and the United Kingdom in December 2012 for all future contracts with private security companies. Neither the ICoC nor the ASIS standard are really applicable to the maritime environment though. For the shipping industry, ISO/PAS 28007 therefore looks set to become the most important global standard. It remains to be seen whether flag states will require ISO certification or use it to replace licensing requirements they have introduced in the recent past. Germany provides an interesting example for a unique licensing regime; as of 18 February 2014, only eight companies (six of them based in Germany) had completed the necessary process.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
The large majority of PMSCs would rather spend money and resources on certification against ISO requirements. It seems to be a good bet as the shipping industry has been looking for such a standard and industry requirements have been very important for political decisions in the most important flag states over the past years. Chinese Victims of Forced Labor Sue Japanese Companies in Chinese Courts; They Might Even Win Opinio Juris By Julian Ku February 27, 2014 In a legal wrinkle to the ever-worsening Sino-Japanese relationship, the Chinese government has now publicly backed a lawsuit filed in Beijing courts against Japanese companies that used Chinese citizens as forced laborers during World War II. The lawsuit names Mitsubishi Materials Corporation and Mitsui Mining and Smelting as defendants and asks for compensation of 1 million yuan ($163,000) for each defendant as well as apologies in the Chinese and Japanese languages to be placed with the countrys major media outlets. Japans government has already opposed these lawsuits, saying that any such war reparation claims were settled by postwar agreements between China and Japan. Its spokesman: "I can say that since such problems were included in the Japan-China communique, there is no case," he said. "The individual rights for seeking (compensation) were included in the communique." In a prior post, I noted that Korean courts have allowed similar lawsuits against Japanese companies to proceed despite pretty clear language blocking such lawsuits in the Korea Japan Agreement on the Settlement of Property. Unless I am missing something, however, I dont see any similarly clear language in either the ChinaJapan Peace Treaty or in the 1972 Communique re-establishing diplomatic relations. The Communique does contain this clause: 5. The Government of the Peoples Republic of China declares that in the interest of the friendship between the Chinese and the Japanese peoples, it renounces its demand for war reparation from Japan. This language could be read to bar claims by wartime victims against Japanese companies for forced labor, but that reading is far from clear (at least to me). If you compare this language to the Korea-Japan Agreement ("problems concerning property, rights, and interests of the two High Contracting Parties and their peoples (including juridical persons)" were settled) (emphasis added) and the US-Japan Peace Treaty ("the Allied Powers waive all reparations claims of the Allied Powers, other claims of the Allied Powers and their nationals arising out of any actions taken by Japan and its nationals in the course of the prosecution of the war") (emphasis added), then the Japan-China Communique language looks far less protective.. In the China-Japan Communique, only the "Government of the Peoples Republic of China" has "renounced its demand for war reparations." The people of China, or individual Chinese people, might still have claims, and there is also no mention of waiving claims against Japanese persons or nationals. Normally, governments only
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
have claims for reparations from other governments. Moreover, while the U.S. took lots of Japanese property in "compensation" during its occupation of Japan before waiving its further claims, and Korea got the Japanese to pay a cool $300 million in 1965 dollars before settling its claims, the Chinese government got nothing (at least financially) for its agreement to waive its claims. This seems to further support the idea that some wartime claims still exist. So read in context, the Chinese plaintiffs have a better case than their (already victorious) Korean brethren. It is also possible that the Communique (unlike the Peace Treaty) is a non-binding international agreement, which would also not have any direct effect in Chinese courts. So based on the relevant treaties and agreements, I think the plaintiffs have a decent case here. Inded, it is surprising that no similar lawsuit was filed before in Chinese courts. The reason probably has more to do with the nature of Chinese courts than the international treaties and agreements relating to this lawsuit. Mueller on Kenya and the ICC Opinio Juris By Kevin Jon Heller February 27, 2013 Susanne Mueller, who works at Boston Universitys African Studies Center, has published a very interesting essay on the relationship between Kenya and the ICC. I want to bring it to our readers attention, because its published in the Journal of East African Studies, which many internationallaw folk may not normally read. Here is the abstract: Kenyas 2013 election was supremely important, but for a reason not normally highlighted or discussed. Uhuru Kenyatta and William Rutos run for president and deputy president as International Criminal Court (ICC) indictees was a key strategy to deflect the court and to insulate themselves from its power once they won the election. The paper maintains that the strategy entailed a set of delaying tactics and other pressures to ensure that the trials would not take place until after the election when their political power could be used to maximum effect to halt or delay them. However, unlike in 200708, the 2013 election did not result in mass violence. The KenyattaRuto alliance united former ethnic antagonists in a defensive reaction to the ICC. The analysis has implications for theories seeking to explain why countries ratify and comply with treaties. It develops an alternative political economy argument to account for outliers like Kenya and has implications for international criminal justice and democracy in Kenya. Its an illuminating and persuasive argument, well worth the read if you are interested in Kenya and the ICC. A free copy can be downloaded here Let the U.N. Unmask the Criminals of Sri Lankas War New York Times By Louise Arbour February 28, 2014 In early 2009, as many as 40,000 civilians were killed in the final days of Sri Lankas civil war, having been herded into an area about the size of Central Park and subjected to relentless shelling. No one has been held accountable for these crimes, and even now the government in Colombo remains intent on burying the past. Only an international commission of
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
inquiry stands any chance of rectifying this omission. So when the United Nations Human Rights Council meets Monday in Geneva, it should seek an investigation. It would be a decisive step toward justice and reconciliation in Sri Lanka. The 26-year civil war in Sri Lanka, in which ethnic Tamil rebels rose against a government dominated by the ethnic-majority Sinhalese, was regularly punctuated with massacres and rights abuses by government forces, as well as by suicide bombings and other attacks on civilian targets by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. Since the governments crushing defeat of the rebels, the predominantly Tamil northern province has been under de facto military occupation, with widespread reports of serious rights violations against the civilian population. As the fifth anniversary of the wars end approaches this spring, Sri Lankan officials say they need more time for reconciliation initiatives to take root. They argue that an international investigation will only further polarize Sri Lanka. They have reacted angrily to a new report by Navi Pillay, the United Nations high commissioner for human rights, that advocates an international investigation and heavily criticizes the government. As the International Crisis Group has documented in a series of reports, the governments postwar policies have entrenched an increasingly authoritarian regime in Colombo, deepened the rift between Tamils and Sinhalese, and drawn dangerous new lines of ethnic and religious conflict. To date, the government has rejected calls by the Human Rights Council to conduct an independent investigation into war crimes allegations against both sides that have been documented by the United Nations secretary generals panel of experts and by nongovernmental organizations like ours, and to adopt reforms that could foster postwar reconciliation. The United States, which has a record of leadership within the Human Rights Council, would be the best sponsor for a resolution seeking an inquiry. The other members of the council should give it their strong support. They should also reject the Sri Lankan governments endless delaying tactics and its global public-relations counterattack, which includes a half-hour infomercial that has been shown on American television. Momentum for such an investigation is building. Six United States senators, led by Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, called for an international commission of inquiry in a letter sent this month to Secretary of State John Kerry. Three days later a resolution was introduced in the Senate calling for an independent investigation (not necessarily by a commission). Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, other senior European Union politicians and Indian officials also have taken clear exception to Sri Lankas failure to pursue accountability for atrocities. Meanwhile, in response to victims pleas for justice, a newly elected northern provincial council in Sri Lanka has joined the calls for an international investigation. But the government of President Mahinda Rajapaksa has rejected all such recommendations, even when they came from Sri Lankas own reconciliation commission. He has also gravely weakened the independence of the judiciary and the police with the impeachment last year of Sri Lankas chief justice, placing the possibility of using Sri Lankas courts to achieve accountability further out of reach. An inquiry mandated by an intergovernmental body like the Human Rights Council would produce a more complete record of the scale of civilian suffering, and would
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
challenge the Sri Lankan governments denials that government forces were responsible for any significant loss of civilian life. A commission is also likely to uncover evidence of abuses by the defeated Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam in a form that would be hard for Tamils and Tamil organizations to deny. That would deflate a romanticization of the Tigers among Tamils that keeps alive Sinhalese fears that the Tamil insurgency might resume, and also gives the government an excuse for continued militarization and repression. By showing survivors of wartime abuses that the international community hasnt abandoned them, a commission mandated by the council could also undercut growing calls by Tamil diaspora organizations for more radical measures, and encourage victims of rights abuses from all of Sri Lankas ethnic and religious communities (the countrys main faiths are Buddhist, Hindu and Muslim) to continue seeking an end to institutionalized impunity. Such an inquiry wont solve all of Sri Lankas problems; the islands crisis of accountability and democratic governance runs too deep and is too complex to be resolved quickly. Nonetheless, increased authoritarianism, Sinhalese ethnic triumphalism and simmering Tamil resentment are clearly not the ingredients for a secure future. Both justice and reconciliation are needed for the Sri Lankan body politic to one day be healed. The Human Rights Council has an opportunity, and should seize it. A number of the councils current member states for instance Chile, Costa Rica, Botswana, South Africa, Sierra Leone, Morocco and Macedonia have led on other human rights issues and should press the council on this one. Sri Lankas government is playing a waiting game, hoping the international community will lose interest, while also proffering the crude argument that reconciliation is attainable without justice. But the costs of doing something now would be very small compared with the years of strife that would be the likely result of letting impunity win in Sri Lanka. Healing Wounds, Fostering Change: Reparations for Women Victims of International Crimes Justice in Conflict By Noemi Manco March 3, 2014 Well-crafted and implemented reparations are both able to redress women victims for atrocities as well as prevent their repetition. Can reparations today fulfil these aims and meet these expectations? To answer this question, one must look into womens multiple and overlapping identities in conflicts and subsequently adapt reparation schemes in order to address these goals. It has long been recognized that women are affected by armed conflicts in different ways than men. But the experiences of women in war continues to be overlooked. Despite recent progress, this is also broadly true of the realm of international criminal justice. Crimes suffered by women are not restricted to sexual and reproductive violence but also entail a variety of crimes that affect both sexes in different ways, to different extents and for different reasons. It is also recognized within the realm of international law that, in the aftermath of conflict, victims are entitled to reparations. Historically, reparations for international
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
crimes were intended to restore the victim to his/her situation prior to the harm. This included the provision of homes for displaced individuals, achieving freedom for prisoners, etc. It soon became clear, however, that these measures were insufficient and, in some cases, even cynical. If structural injustices that triggered or worsened armed conflict were left unaddressed,gender-biased violence and atrocities could be repeated and durable the building of lasting peace could not be guaranteed. In this context, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in Tamayo v. Peru (1997) defined reparations in a novel way, ruling that any scheme should take into account the victims self-development and their expectations for the future. This considerably broadened the range of reparations, opening the door to service provisions, political and legal reforms, as well as complex financial programmes. Women Victims, Women Agents The experience of many women in conflicts has long been shunned from conflict narratives. This is at least partly due to the fact that there are relatively few women combatants. The expectation attached to womanhood is often as a care-taker to stay at home and care for the family and its possessions. The risks of staying behind in times of conflict, however, are considerable. Women are often more exposed to abuse, economic hardship, land destruction, or may find it impossible to escape from danger when it arrives close to home. At the end of the war, women may also be indirectly victimized. Secondary victimization designates the repercussions on women of the harm done to others. These repercussions are often the result of social, legal or political systems which favour men. For instance, a widow whose husband was killed in combat may not be allowed by law or custom to work and earn a living, thus subjecting her to poverty. It would be reductionist, however, to only describe women as victims. Those who do not join active conflict also have meaningful agency as actors in the context of violent political conflict. In the absence of men, women often become the family breadwinners, a role traditionally left to men. Guarding stocks, producing goods, earning an income and even ensuring the familys safety can come under womens purview. In other words, through conflict, women can gain unprecedented access to the public sphere and can achieve a degree of economic independence. This may, however, place women under increased hardship and their role as social agents of change often overlaps with victimhood: a woman who has been raped and forced to leave her house may also be the familys breadwinner and protector. In order for reparations to be successful and effective, they ought to address the needs of women victims in their complexity with respect to both victimhood and agency. A balance can and must be found. Yes, many women are victims of gross human rights abuse precisely because of their gender. But women victims are also agents of change, able and willing to actively participate in reconstruction efforts. In other words, reparations must both be backward-looking (bringing closure and redress) as well as forward-looking (providing tools to build lasting peace and prevent further gender-based inequality). This is the conclusion of the 2007 Nairobi Declaration on Womens and Girls Right to a Remedy and Reparation. Addressing the past, looking to the future Reparations must strike a subtle balance. On the one hand, redress solely directed at victims would fail to address structural gender-based inequalities. On the other hand, deep social, economic or legal reforms, benefitting all women, may stop
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
constituting specific reparation schemes for victims of abuse, and be closer to development programmes. Deep reforms are indeed needed, but should be combined with addressing the immediate and specific needs of women victims. A tailored, balanced response to these challenges would be to offer collective benefits with favoured access for victims. For instance, reparations could be aimed at building of school facilities accessible to all, complemented by financial support for victims to cover their childrens fees. Such measures would ensure both specific reparations to victims, long-term social transformation, and positive impact on womens and girls conditions Similarly, professional training could be opened for all women in a community. But women victims could also benefit from a grant to start their career at the end of the course. These measures follow the logics of the IACHR in Tamayo v. Peru which provided to girls and women not only redress for the harm they have suffered but also the opportunities they should have had in the first place, as rights-holders, economic agents, and community members. Gender-sensitive reparations may also be used as leverage to reform domestic law. There is a risk of financial reparations to women victims falling into the wrong hands, particularly in situations where domestic or customary law prevents women from possessing wealth in their own name. A savvy reparation measure would be to give victims regular sums of money as compensation as well as pursuing legal reforms with the goal of guaranteeing and protecting womens right to effectively access and manage their own finances. Once again, this measure fulfils the double requirement of specific reparation to victims and transformative potential for all women. Balancing Short-term Relief and Long-term Change The aforementioned measures are but a few examples from the wide range of possibilities that reparation schemes can offer. The aim here is not be exhaustive but to highlight the necessity of addressing women victims needs specifically, taking into account the multiplicity of roles women have in conflicts and in their aftermath. These examples show the difficulty of balancing direct and specific reparations with deep societal transformations. Short-term relief and long-term change must be equally satisfied in order for reparations to be just, efficient and empower women durably. ICJ Opens Hearings in Croatia v. Serbia EJIL: Talk! By Marko Milanovic March 3, 2014 Today the International Court of Justice opens a month of hearings in the pending case between Croatia and Serbia for state responsibility for genocide allegedly committed during the 1990s conflict. In the afternoon the Court will also be delivering its provisional measures order in Timor Leste v. Australia. The latter will at least to my mind be vastly more interesting than the former. Why? Because the outcome of the Croatia/Serbia case is a foregone conclusion, bearing in mind that the Courts jurisdiction is limited solely to breaches of the Genocide Convention, and that it cannot rule on either partys responsibility for any other wrongful acts, be it war crimes, crimes against humanity, or aggression.
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
In its 2007 Bosnian Genocide judgment the Court, relying on the findings of the ICTY, found that the only instance of genocide in the otherwise far more brutal Bosnian conflict was Srebrenica, for which Serbia was not responsible, and did so by 13 votes to 2. It seems extremely unlikely that the Court will adopt a different methodological approach in the Croatian case, especially because nobody was even charged, let alone convicted, for genocide in Croatia by the ICTY. The (many) acts of ethnic cleansing committed by both sides in the Croatian conflict simply lack the requisite specific intent to physically or biologically destroy a protected group, and thus cannot reasonably be qualified as genocide. And without genocide, the Court is without jurisdiction. This is, in other words, one of those few cases in which we can actually predict the final outcome with 99% certainty the Court will find that terrible atrocities were committed in Croatia, but that none of them qualify as genocide, and will accordingly dismiss both Croatias claim and Serbias counter-claim. (It may say something interesting en passant, especially regarding Serbia/FRYs relationship with the Croatian Serbs, but I doubt it). And while both parties have hired some of the best international lawyers out there, no amount of great lawyering by your Crawfords and Zimmermanns can change this assessment. The only item of uncertainty is that the composition of the Court has changed since 2007, with 8 judges currently on the bench who did not sit in the Bosnian case or the jurisdictional phase of the Croatian one. But even among these judges theres perhaps only one or two mavericks who would be prepared to go off in a radically different direction from that of the nearly-unanimous Court in 2007. Just like any informed observed knows what will happen, so do the two governments. But while they have been discussing the possible withdrawal of the case for years, they were ultimately unable to reach any kind of settlement that they could sell to their domestic constituencies. The public at large simply does not understand the limited jurisdictional scope of the case, sees everything through the prism of the dominant nationalist narratives (e.g. many in Croatia think that the ICJ will find Serbia responsible for aggression and war reparations, while many in Serbia think that the Court will find the present state of Croatia responsible for the World War II ustasha crimes), and especially in Croatia the government feels that it would be far less politically costly for the case to proceed than for it to be withdrawn. And so both governments will have spent millions on legal fees, while risking inflaming nationalist passions and wasting the Courts time all for nothing. Nor will the public airing of the atrocities of the 1990s have any impact on public opinion, beyond solidifying what people already believe and want to believe.
[back to contents]
WORTH READING
Charging War Crimes: Policy & Prognosis from a Military Perspective Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 14-6 By Michael A. Newton February 18, 2014
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
This chapter highlights the import of the war crimes provisions found in Article 8 of the Rome Statute and describes the correlative considerations related to charging practices for the maturing institution. It discusses the subtleties of the Rome Statute structure insofar as they facilitate a harmonious balance between the prerogatives of responsible military commanders and the vitally important role of the Court in prosecuting perpetrators of war crimes. The text of Article 8 should not be understood either as a rejection of prior practice or an evisceration of the core precepts that were widely accepted prior to 1998. When properly understood and applied in light of the Elements of Crimes, the Courts charging decisions with respect to the war crimes found in Article 8 ought to reflect the paradox that its operative provisions are at once revolutionary yet broadly reflective of the actual practice of warfare. Even as Article 8 embodied notable new refinements, the Rome Statute made such sweeping legal advances against a backdrop of pragmatic military practice. The logical conclusion is that the carefully constructed Statute will have been effectively abandoned if the Court habitually overrides the permissible discretion of domestic officials by displacing the proper authority of responsible military commanders based on its own preferences or the expediency of political considerations. To be more precise, judicially superimposed preferences would effectively amend the Rome Statute contrary to the intentions of the States Parties. The text of Article 8 in essence baked in a complex commingling of lex lata hard law and established state practice, as informed by the much more diffuse expectations and assessments of expert practitioners. Section 2 of this chapter examines the explicitly permissive aspects of the laws and customs of war, while Section 3 details the conformity of the Rome Statute and its constituent Elements of Crimes with that basic framework. Section 4 builds on these foundational principles to identify some of the most important consequences of the design of the Rome Statute. The chapter concludes with a series of specific recommendations that should guide prosecutorial discretion in charging decisions as well as the range of judicial decisionmaking. To wit, Section 4 of this chapter explains how the Court should 1) recognize the principle of the jurisdictional floor for war crimes charging that is embedded in the Rome Statute, 2) understand the implications of the Status of Forces agreements widely employed in international military operations, and 3) respect and reinforce the rationale behind the principles embedded in Article 28. International Law in U.S. State Courts: Extraterritoriality and False Conflicts of Law American Society of International Law Proceedings, Forthcoming By Anthony J. Colangelo February 25, 2014 With the U.S. Supreme Court recently cutting back the reach of federal jurisdiction over causes of action arising abroad for violations of international law, questions have arisen about the ability of state law to provide the vessel through which plaintiffs may bring suits alleging such violations. Here litigants and courts must address two key questions: First, to what extent may state law implement or incorporate international law as a rule of decision? And second, to what extent may state law incorporating international law authorize suits for causes of action arising abroad? The second question is both especially urgent because it involves a potential alternative avenue for litigating foreign human rights abuses in U.S. courts,
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
and especially vexing because it juxtaposes different doctrinal and jurisprudential conceptualizations of the ability of forum law to reach inside foreign territory. Against this backdrop, I want to make a few points. First, there is nothing wrong as a general matter with state law incorporating international law. Second, the idea of state law having broader extraterritorial reach than federal law is nonetheless in tension with federal foreign affairs preemption. And third, this tension basically disappears when the state law incorporating international law presents whats called a "false conflict" of laws among the relevant jurisdictions laws. Here the fields of private international law and conflict of laws gain salience and supply a doctrinally and historically grounded mechanism for entertaining claims arising abroad in U.S. courts. More concretely, if state law incorporating international law is fundamentally the same law as that operative in the foreign jurisdiction, there is no conflict of laws and the sole applicable law applies. In sum, ever-tightening constraints on federal extraterritoriality have generated multilayered tensions with traditional and contemporary fields of conflict of laws and private international law. At present, the flashpoint for these tensions promises to be claims alleging international human rights violations abroad in state court. The concept of "false conflicts" of law can remove the flashpoints ignition source. False conflicts hold immense jurisprudential, doctrinal, and practical potential to handle these multilayered tensions with an equally multilayered concept capable of capturing principles not only of conflict of laws but also of federal extraterritoriality, foreign affairs, and due process. False conflicts should be the starting point for any evaluation of international human rights claims in state court under state law. The Nature of International Crimes and Evidentiary Challenges: Preserving Quality While Managing Quantity Pluralism in International Criminal Law, Elies van Sliedregt and Sergey Vasiliev, eds (Oxford University Press, 2014 Forthcoming) By Elinor Fry March 4, 2014 This Chapter shows that certain typical features of international crimes set these crimes apart from ordinary crimes. Such features lead to an exponential increase of information that must be considered and managed at all stages of investigation, prosecution, and adjudication. The amount of information can help prove the relevant fact where, due to subpar quality of individual pieces of evidence, it serves the purpose of corroboration (and not merely repetition). But quantity also leads to time- and informationmanagement problems that should not be underestimated. This Chapter does not come up with new evidentiary rules allowing to better deal with the tremendous amount of information relevant in the prosecutions of international crimes. Instead, it mainly illustrates the point that the search for procedural solutions that may prove effective in international crimes cases both at the international and national level should proceed from the systematic review of the unique characteristics of international crimes. Such review will also be indispensable for identifying the problems intrinsic in core crimes prosecutions and the extent to which the available solutions provide an adequate response to those problems. Hence, it could be useful for any investigation, prosecution and adjudication of international crimes, whether conducted by an international criminal tribunal, a hybrid court, or a domestic court. Essentially, the Chapter suggests a change of perspective
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
on the law of evidence and advocates for a different methodology that focuses on the crime, not the court.
[back to contents]
War Crimes Prosecution Watch Staff
Founder/Advisor Professor Michael P. Scharf Editor in Chief Hilarie Henry Managing Editors Audrey Balint Rachel Berman-Vaporis Senior Technical Editor Peter Beardsley Associate Technical Editors Morgan Kearse Sarah Hutnik Casey McCullen Aaron Kearney Emerging Issues Advisor Judge Rosemelle Mutoka Contact: warcrimeswatch@pilpg.org
International Criminal Court

Central African Republic &Uganda Abigail Omojola, Senior Editor Sara Grout, Associate Editor Darfur, Sudan Andrew Udofia, Senior Editor Andrew Krumwied, Associate Editor Democratic Republic of the Congo Shira Straus, Senior Editor Amanda Soraiz, Associate Editor
Page 116 of 119
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Kenya Tonise Webb, Senior Editor Andrew Moore, Associate Editor Libya Joshuah Lisk, Senior Editor Amanda Soraiz, Associate Editor Ivory Coast Michelle Faraji, Senior Editor Jiefei Yang, Associate Editor
Africa
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda Abigail Avoryie, Senior Editor Sara Grout, Associate Editor Mali Emily Gibbons, Senior Editor Patrick Maloney, Associate Editor Chad Chelsea Shenton, Senior Editor Kelly Gans, Associate Editor Special Court for Sierra Leone Joshuah Lisk, Senior Editor Jon Dawson, Associate Editor
Europe
Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Section Laura Smolley, Senior Editor Tyler Kimberly, Associate Editor International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia Laura Smolley, Senior Editor Andrew Krumwied, Associate Editor Domestic Prosecutions in the Former Yugoslavia Alix Noureddine, Senior Editor Jiefei Yang, Associate Editor
Middle East and Asia

Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia Casandra Tice, Senior Editor Lois Yu, Associate Editor Special Tribunal for Lebanon Shefali Saxena, Senior Editor Jeong Soo Kim, Associate Editor Iraqi High Tribunal Tahera Javed, Senior Editor
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Samie Farhat, Associate Editor Syria Tahera Javed, Senior Editor Samie Farhat, Associate Editor Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal Shefali Saxena, Senior Editor Madeline Jack, Associate Editor War Crimes Investigations in Burma Emily Gibbons, Senior Editor Lois Yu, Associate Editor
North and South America

United States Harrison Blythe , Associate Editor South & Central America Malea Hetrick, Associate Editor
Topics
Terrorism Abigail Omojola, Senior Editor Jacqueline Hazzan, Associate Editor Piracy Michelle Faraji, Senior Editor Kyunghwa Kim, Associate Editor Gender-Based Violence LeAnne Dao, Senior Editor Malea Hetrick, Associate Editor
Reports
UN Reports Abigail Avoryie, Senior Editor Kelly Gans, Associate Editor NGO Reports Samuel Dodoo, Senior Editor Tyler Kimberly , Associate Editor
Truth and Reconciliation Commissions

John Rogers, Senior Editor Sarah Stula, Associate Editor
Commentary and Perspectives

James Stevick, Senior Editor Richard Wanerman, Associate Editor
3/12/14, 8:45 PM
Worth Reading
Elizabeth Horan, Senior Editor David Litman, Associate Editor
War Crimes Prosecution Watch is prepared by the International Justice Practice of the Public International Law & Policy Group and the Frederick K. Cox International Law Center of Case Western Reserve University School of Law and is made possible by grants from the Carnegie Corporation of New York and the Open Society Institute. Grotian Moment: The International War Crimes Trial Blog: http://law.case.edu/grotian-moment-blog/ Frederick K. Cox International Law Center: http://law.case.edu/centers/cox/ Cox Center War Crimes Research Portal: http://law.case.edu/war-crimes-research-portal/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this newsletter, please email warcrimeswatch@pilpg.org.
Page 119 of 119

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 - March 10, 2014

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 - March 10, 2014

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol.

8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

FREDERICK K. COX INTERNATIONAL LAW CENTER

WAR CRIMES PROSECUTION WATCH

Founder/Advisor Michael P. Scharf

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

Democratic Republic of the Congo

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast)

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

MIDDLE EAST AND ASIA

Iraqi High Tribunal Syria

Special Tribunal for Lebanon

Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal

War Crimes Investigations in Burma

NORTH AND SOUTH AMERICA

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

South & Central America

South & Central America

South & Central America

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSIONS

COMMENTARY AND PERSPECTIVES

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

International Crimes EJIL: Talk!: ICJ Opens Hearings in Croatia v. Serbia

INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT

Central African Republic & Uganda

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

Democratic Republic of the Congo

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

Cote d'Ivoire (Ivory Coast)

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

War Crimes Prosecution Watch, Vol. 8, Issue 25 -- March 10, 2014

The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, War Crimes Chamber