“It would be highly presumptuous to
suggest that the mere creation and operation of the STL can wave a magic wand
and alter the conditions that gave rise to the series of assassinations,”
Baragwanath told The Daily Star Thursday. “
The 14 attacks between Oct. 1, 2004,
and Dec. 12, 2005, – which were the last of phase of the 86 assassinations that
had occurred without coming to trial – that was the situation which the
then-government of Lebanon
Supporters of the court, which was
established to investigate and try those responsible for the 2005 assassination
of former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri as well as related attacks, champion the
body as a means to end impunity and the cycle of violence. After six years of
relative calm, Geagea’s report Wednesday that he had escaped an attempt on his
life sent shockwaves through country, fueling fears of a return of
assassinations.
Though Baragwanath, who is a judge
in the court’s Appeals Chamber, said the court could not single-handedly end
impunity, he warned that those who commit violence would be brought to justice.
“We cannot create a cosmic shift,
but to say that we cannot do everything is not to say that we can do nothing,”
he said. “I devoutly hope ... that the message gets through to killers or
prospective killers that it’s just not worth it. They’re going to get chased
with all the effort that can be marshaled ... within the rule of law.”
Baragwanath also defended the
U.N-backed court, which has indicted four members of Hezbollah for the 2005
attack, from the accusations of political bias that have plagued it even before
it began operating.
“There’s been a lot of
misapprehension about things. Suggestions, for example, that the STL is biased
in some fashion. Some were even saying that former President [Antonio] Cassese
was a puppet of a foreign government,” he said. “That’s as good as the
assertion that President Cassese resigned his office of the president because
he was having a fight with someone.”
Cassese resigned from his position
for health reasons last October and died soon after. Some local newspapers had
reported that his resignation was an indication of infighting at the court.
Baragwanath was subsequently elected the tribunal’s president.
In response to a question on whether
members of the court have contacted Hezbollah, Baragwanath said the court
operates without political interest.
“I would cheerfully meet any member
of Hezbollah or any other party. I don’t mean to single Hezbollah out; I’m
speaking of all political parties. My position is that good people, whether
they are in Hezbollah or any other party ... are entitled to the same
protection as everyone,” he said.
Baragwanath, who was on his second
visit to Lebanon, met earlier in the week with President Michel Sleiman, Prime
Minister Najib Mikati and Public Prosecutor Saeed Mirza, as well as members of
the Beirut Bar Association and representatives from over a dozen
non-governmental organizations.
While most members of the current
March 8 Cabinet oppose the tribunal, the judge said he trusts the government to
fulfill its obligations toward the court. “I have implicit confidence in the
government of Lebanon and in
the prime minister in particular to discharge Lebanon
Baragwanath said he met with
Lebanese leaders to brief them on the progress of the STL, including the
landmark decision in February to move to in absentia proceedings against the
accused.
Defense counsel assigned to the four
men have since begun conducting their own investigations, as well as preparing
to challenge the court’s jurisdiction.
Some tribunal detractors, such as
Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hasan Nasrallah, maintain that its creation was
unconstitutional as the agreement between Lebanon
Though Baragwanath could not comment
on possible arguments against the jurisdiction of the court, which was
established by the U.N. Security Council under Chapter 7 and is the first
international tribunal to deal with the crime of terrorism, he said that two
outcomes of such a challenge are possible.
“There are two logical options. One is we have
no jurisdiction. In that event, the sooner the work of the tribunal is brought
to an end, the better,” he said. “If on the other hand, we do have
jurisdiction, that fact equally needs to be made clear at the first
opportunity.”
By Willow
No comments:
Post a Comment