Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare amended the draft indictment he wrote twice since first submitting it in January. (AFP Photo/Marcel Antonisse)
The long wait for public accusations against suspects in Lebanon’s most prominent murder mystery could stretch on longer than a Lebanese summer. Special Tribunal for Lebanon Prosecutor Daniel Bellemare, investigating the 2005 assassination of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and others, has twice amended a draft indictment he initially finished in January, prompting the court to say in a media advisory that a review of the document could be “completed in the coming months.”
When the indictment was first submitted in January, court officials said the review process could take six to ten weeks. An important caveat then and now, however, is that there is no formal time limit for the review, but the pre-trial judge “is working to complete this process as quickly as possible,” the STL announced on May 6. So comments about it taking weeks or months are nothing more than guesses.
Bellemare’s first amendment, filed in February, prompted much speculation in Beirut that the pre-trial judge – who does an initial read-over of the prosecutor’s case to determine whether he thinks it is worthy of going to trial – was not impressed and quietly asked for more evidence. The latest amendment, which a court press release said “include[s] substantive new elements unavailable until recently,” revived this line of thinking for many.
In an e-mail exchange with NOW Lebanon, however, Sophie Boutaud de la Combe, the prosecutor’s spokesperson, said: “The two amendments were not made at the request of the [pre-trial judge] but at the initiative of the Prosecutor [emphasis hers]." Both press releases announcing the amendments said they were the result of gathering more evidence during the ongoing investigation, which is common at international tribunals, according to Morten Bergsmo, a researcher at the University of Oslo and visiting fellow at Standford University who spent years with the prosecutor’s office at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Court (ICC).
“Investigations in international and internationalized tribunals continue essentially until just before the trial starts or even when the trial starts,” Bergsmo told NOW Lebanon. “That is the standard practice, and it would be exceptional if an investigation stopped at the stage of the first indictment or submission of charges. I have never heard of any case before any internationalized tribunal in my 15 years of experience in this field,” Bergsmo noted.
He added that indictments before the ICTY were frequently amended because “the indictment must give a clear statement of material facts which the prosecutor is alleging and must reflect the information which his or her office possesses.” Therefore, as new facts are gathered, indictments are amended.
“There is nothing strange, unusual or conspiratorial about such amendments of indictments,” he said.
As soon as news of the latest indictment became public, Lebanese blogger Beirut Spring speculated that a Syrian official “struck a bargain with the STL exchanging valuable information for a witness protection program.” True or not, the Lebanese press began reporting it around a week after the amendment was filed, citing unnamed sources.
STL spokesperson Marten Youssef told NOW Lebanon that, in general, any information about witnesses or victims is kept confidential and that the court cannot comment on whether or not one or more Syrians are in the witness protection program.
After many initially assumed the STL would eventually indict high-ranking Syrian officials, Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah in July 2010 said that then-Prime Minister Saad Hariri told him members of the party would be indicted. Since then, the conventional wisdom has it that Nasrallah is correct, and many fear an indictment will spark sectarian conflict in Lebanon.
In announcing the most recent amendment, the court said Bellemare does not plan to change the indictment again. It does note, however, that he could amend or even file a new, separate indictment “in the future if warranted by the evidence.”
As was the case with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Bellemare could be issuing indictments in stages, going after those against whom he has the most evidence at first, hoping to nab more suspects by eliciting more evidence during a trial or getting suspects to name other suspects.
Either way, it seems he is keen to keep the indictment secret as long as possible in an effort to ensure suspects are apprehended. If and when the indictment is confirmed, the court will either summon suspects to appear or issue arrest warrants against them. Based on the STL’s rules, the indictment should become public once the pre-trial judge approves it. However, under certain circumstances, the judge can keep it sealed.
In an interview with the Daily Star published May 12, de la Combe, the prosecutor’s spokesperson, said, “A warrant of arrest may be requested at the same time the indictment is filed. Experience at other international tribunals has shown that the successful execution of warrants is enhanced if the indictment remains under seal until served.”
When the indictment was first submitted in January, court officials said the review process could take six to ten weeks. An important caveat then and now, however, is that there is no formal time limit for the review, but the pre-trial judge “is working to complete this process as quickly as possible,” the STL announced on May 6. So comments about it taking weeks or months are nothing more than guesses.
Bellemare’s first amendment, filed in February, prompted much speculation in Beirut that the pre-trial judge – who does an initial read-over of the prosecutor’s case to determine whether he thinks it is worthy of going to trial – was not impressed and quietly asked for more evidence. The latest amendment, which a court press release said “include[s] substantive new elements unavailable until recently,” revived this line of thinking for many.
In an e-mail exchange with NOW Lebanon, however, Sophie Boutaud de la Combe, the prosecutor’s spokesperson, said: “The two amendments were not made at the request of the [pre-trial judge] but at the initiative of the Prosecutor [emphasis hers]." Both press releases announcing the amendments said they were the result of gathering more evidence during the ongoing investigation, which is common at international tribunals, according to Morten Bergsmo, a researcher at the University of Oslo and visiting fellow at Standford University who spent years with the prosecutor’s office at the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Court (ICC).
“Investigations in international and internationalized tribunals continue essentially until just before the trial starts or even when the trial starts,” Bergsmo told NOW Lebanon. “That is the standard practice, and it would be exceptional if an investigation stopped at the stage of the first indictment or submission of charges. I have never heard of any case before any internationalized tribunal in my 15 years of experience in this field,” Bergsmo noted.
He added that indictments before the ICTY were frequently amended because “the indictment must give a clear statement of material facts which the prosecutor is alleging and must reflect the information which his or her office possesses.” Therefore, as new facts are gathered, indictments are amended.
“There is nothing strange, unusual or conspiratorial about such amendments of indictments,” he said.
As soon as news of the latest indictment became public, Lebanese blogger Beirut Spring speculated that a Syrian official “struck a bargain with the STL exchanging valuable information for a witness protection program.” True or not, the Lebanese press began reporting it around a week after the amendment was filed, citing unnamed sources.
STL spokesperson Marten Youssef told NOW Lebanon that, in general, any information about witnesses or victims is kept confidential and that the court cannot comment on whether or not one or more Syrians are in the witness protection program.
After many initially assumed the STL would eventually indict high-ranking Syrian officials, Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah in July 2010 said that then-Prime Minister Saad Hariri told him members of the party would be indicted. Since then, the conventional wisdom has it that Nasrallah is correct, and many fear an indictment will spark sectarian conflict in Lebanon.
In announcing the most recent amendment, the court said Bellemare does not plan to change the indictment again. It does note, however, that he could amend or even file a new, separate indictment “in the future if warranted by the evidence.”
As was the case with the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, Bellemare could be issuing indictments in stages, going after those against whom he has the most evidence at first, hoping to nab more suspects by eliciting more evidence during a trial or getting suspects to name other suspects.
Either way, it seems he is keen to keep the indictment secret as long as possible in an effort to ensure suspects are apprehended. If and when the indictment is confirmed, the court will either summon suspects to appear or issue arrest warrants against them. Based on the STL’s rules, the indictment should become public once the pre-trial judge approves it. However, under certain circumstances, the judge can keep it sealed.
In an interview with the Daily Star published May 12, de la Combe, the prosecutor’s spokesperson, said, “A warrant of arrest may be requested at the same time the indictment is filed. Experience at other international tribunals has shown that the successful execution of warrants is enhanced if the indictment remains under seal until served.”
No comments:
Post a Comment