Taylor trial unique but sends key signal on impunity

Enlarge Photo Former Liberian President Charles Taylor sits in the courtroom of the International Criminal Court before...

Sun, May 18 03:13 PM

By Alexandra Hudson

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Charles Taylor's war crimes trial has recovered from a shaky start to become a model for bringing a former ruler before an international court and has helped send a message that the days of impunity are over.

The relatively smooth running of the former Liberian president's trial, on charges of inciting murder, rape and terror, has been in marked contrast to the delays and theatrics at trials for former Yugoslav and Iraqi leaders.

Although the mandate of the court trying Taylor, who has pleaded not guilty, is limited to crimes committed in Sierra Leone, the U.N.-backed Special Court serves as an example to other tribunals that might try former rulers such as the International Criminal Court.

"There is substantial progress in this crucially important trial ... both from a structural assessment and an impact assessment," said Elise Keppler of Human Rights Watch.

The ex-Liberian president is the first former African head of state to stand trial in front of any court.

"Taylor is notorious in West Africa and without trying Taylor the feeling was this court would have failed," she said.

"The fact he is sitting there, that there is real momentum, and that invaluable information is being put forward coupled with disturbing detail of the atrocities, is already a huge contribution to international justice," she said.

The U.N.-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone was set up to try those with the greatest responsibility for war crimes in the country. More than 250,000 people died in intertwined wars in Liberia and Sierra Leone, characterised by brutal attacks on civilians, drug-crazed child soldiers and amputations of limbs.

"It would be unrealistic to expect that we could create ad-hoc tribunals to investigate every situation," said Andre de Hoogh, an international law specialist at Groningen University.

It was also unlikely long-seated African leaders could find themselves suddenly on trial for past rights abuses, he added.

However, several African countries had ratified the statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), set up in 2002 in The Hague as the world's first permanent court to try individuals for war crimes.

"Its jurisdiction does not work retroactively, but for conflicts from 2003 onwards we could see the possibility of it calling leaders to account."

The court has had mixed success. It is preparing the trials of three Congolese rebel leaders, but arrest warrants for two Sudanese suspects -- including a former minister accused over war crimes in Darfur -- have been ignored. So have those for Ugandan rebel leaders.

COURT MOMENTUM

Since Taylor's trial began in earnest five months ago, all parties including him, have sought to keep disputes to a minimum, unlike in other major war crimes trials.

The trial of former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic dragged on for four years, with frequent grandstanding by Milosevic, who the judge accused of "wasting time". Milosevic died before a verdict was reached.

Although proceedings began dramatically when Taylor failed to show up and demanded more money to fund his defence, prompting a six-month delay, the court has now heard 27 of some 72 prosecution witnesses and is making steady progress.

Taylor, who pleaded not guilty to all charges, is almost always in attendance in court, listens keenly and makes notes.

"Taylor has been much more cooperative than others," said Michael Scharf, an international law professor who helped train judges of the Iraqi Special Tribunal.

"Someone like Milosevic or Saddam Hussein would be bombastic in the court room and a real disruption, forcing the court to have them removed which makes the trial look unfair."

Granting the long delay, allowing Taylor enough funds to hire a top notch defence lawyer and allowing the defence to make their points in court has cut out boycotts and prevented the hurling of insults at witnesses, he added.

"This is the first major war crimes trial of a leader where we haven't seen that," Scharf said.

SMOKING GUN?

As trials at the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) have shown, prosecutors face huge difficulties in convicting leaders and high-ranking officials for command responsibility for crimes.

"The job is not to show that there is a smoking gun, that Charles Taylor ordered each and every crime, but that rather he was the head of this."

"Some of the things the prosecution thought they were proving have been undermined by the defence but at the end of the day they are getting the job done," Scharf said.

Taylor's defence counsel, Courtney Griffiths, disagrees and says prosecution witnesses' evidence is not standing up to scrutiny.

While an acquittal for Taylor or only a minor conviction would cause huge disappointment to victims in Sierra Leone it need not be a loss for justice, experts said.

"For international justice in the big sense it is a good thing if the judges can be so impartial and fair as to acquit him partially or wholly if that is where the evidence leads," Scharf said.

"The victims will be outraged, and the historic narrative will be muddied but it doesn't mean that there weren't atrocities in Sierra Leone," said Scharf.

RECOMMEND THIS STORY