STL Defense 2nd Bid to Declare Tribunal Illegal, Argues Lebanon didn't Sign Establishment Decision
إقرأ هذا الخبر بالعربية
The Special Tribunal for Lebanon's Appeals Chamber kicked off on Monday a second open hearing to hear the appeal against the decision on the jurisdiction and the legality of the Tribunal.
The Trial Chamber dismissed on July 27 the four Defense motions challenging the jurisdiction and legality of the Tribunal.
Suspect Mustafa Badreddine's lead counsel Antoine Korkmaz said that Lebanon failed to sign on the decision to establish the Tribunal.
He noted that the legality of establishing the Tribunal is linked to its jurisdiction.
The Hizbullah members, accused of being involved in the February 2005 attack that killed former Premier Rafik Hariri, Salim Ayyash, Badreddine, Hussein Oneissi and Assad Sabra remain at large.
Korkomaz argued that the U.N. Security Council has no legal power to establish the STL, thus it abused its powers when it adopted resolution 1757 in 2005.
He insisted that Lebanese justice should try the four suspects rather than the Netherlands-based Special Tribunal for Lebanon.
The assassination of “Hariri could not in any sense be considered to pose a threat to international peace and security,” he said.
However, STL Vice President Lebanese Judge Ralf Riachi pointed out that the Tribunal has continuously announced that it has no jurisdiction in monitoring the decisions taken by the U.N. Security Council.
Korkomaz considered in his argument that the 2005 attack is considered a “political assassination” and not an “international crime,” noting that the decision to establish the STL was approved by only 10 members at the Security Council.
"Terrorism is not an international crime for which you can set up an international criminal tribunal," he said, noting that no special tribunal was set up to try those behind the September 11, 2001 attacks in the U.S.
The STL announced in July that the trial would provisionally start on March 25 next year.
Hizbullah chief Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has said he doubted the four indictees will ever be found and has branded the tribunal a U.S.-Israeli conspiracy aimed at bringing down the party.
Ayyash and Badreddine face five charges including that of "committing a terrorist act by means of an explosive device" and homicide, while Oneissi and Sabra faced charges of conspiring to commit the same acts.
01 October 2012, 16:12
06
Why fear the truth......unless you have something to hide! SCUM Iranian militia!
01 October 2012, 16:54
07
Trying to win the trial on a technicality instead of proving their innocence---what does this say about the defendants?
01 October 2012, 17:38
00
The tribunal might not have jurisdiction over squat (I don't know and it's a complicated matter), but for what it's worth, if it proves the guilt then it is a big thing. Truth is a weapon... (right?).
I wonder if contesting the jurisdiction of the tribunal is a valid defense, but it sure can do some harm in the way of invalidating the decision of the judge and the outcome of the tribunal. This is making the tribunal look more and more like a political tool, but not so enough, I believe, to justify totally disregarding it's findings and calling it a fabrication.
01 October 2012, 17:39
04
Finally Hezz, Iranian, Bashar, type lies are going against reason and people who do not live inder the fear of their boot. Their criminal propaganda does not play well in a quality court where threats cannot be made by thugs.
01 October 2012, 19:50
10
A court has the jurisdiction to rule on its own competency to hear a case--that's what a determination of jurisdiction, without which a trial cannot proceed, is. If the STL is saying its jurisdiction came out of a mysterious but convenient cloud, like those giving rise to the State of Israel and the Taef Accord (as to its "equality" of Muslims and Christians in Parliamentary representation), then it is saying it has no jurisdiction.
One reason for the determination of jurisdiction is the prevention of miscarriages of justice, as would be the case if the former colonial power and its allies were able to meddle in Lebanon's political liberation (via the installation of one person, one vote) by this STL.
01 October 2012, 20:16
01
""Terrorism is not an international crime for which you can set up an international criminal tribunal,"
it is when a foreign country comes and kills people for their ideas with the support of their local collaborators...
02 October 2012, 00:07
01
Are we this childish to be fighting and bickering over which sect should have more seats? The sectarian system is injustice to both Muslims and Christians. As long as we don't have a secular state there will be no improvement in Lebanon.
02 October 2012, 01:12
20
This whole Tribunal costs more than the State budget for justice. Instead of reforming the Lebanese justice, police and prison sectors, which is what is really needed, the international community chose to finance this Tribunal for ust one high-profile assassination. It is highly likely that it will be a political trial. moreover, most of the international staff hired by the Tribunal are second-rate UN officer and/or spies from various western countries. Finally, this generous bonanza poured onto few people, who have exorbitant salaries and luxurious villas in Monteverde (east of Beirut) plus benefits, or stellar judge emolument for basically doing nothing in the Hague are psychologically obliged to find someone guilty. How could they say: we were wrong, there were not enough evidences?
02 October 2012, 01:30
20
There is not one good reason for establishing an entire new Tribunal, building up the facilities, hiring several hundreds of people, in order to try the 4 or 5 defendants in one terrorist act. In the Hague there is the International Criminal Court, and it would have been natural and sensible to entrust an already established tribunal of this task. But, the ICC judges maybe were not so obedient? Better to waste 70 million USD a year. it's a great deal of money, and it will last another 7 yrs at least. think what we could have done for the justice system with that one billion dollar spent (in 10 yrs) on the STL.
