By Mirella Hodeib
BRUSSELS: One of the main reasons for the delay in setting a tentative date for the start of trials at the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is the flood of requests the Defense Office has submitted to the prosecution, court officials hinted this week. “[The Pre-Trial Chamber] is now dealing with the ninth or tenth request from one of the defense teams; so we’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg in terms of what the defense is asking the prosecution to give, and the prosecution must give because this is an ongoing obligation,” Christopher Black, one of the legal officers at STL’s Pre-Trial Chamber, told The Daily Star.
Black spoke during a news briefing on STL’s upcoming trial phase in Brussels Thursday. The panel was also attended by the court’s Acting Registrar Daryl Mundis and spokesman Marten Youssef.
Court officials said pretrial Judge Daniel Fransen would set a tentative date for the start of trials only when he was certain that the date is “attainable and realizable.”
The three officials also confirmed that an internal enquiry has been launched into the publication of an alleged confidential witness list in Lebanese media outlets in the past month, but refused to elaborate as investigations were ongoing.
They reiterated that the STL was not the source of the leaks.
The previous start of the trial date, tentatively set for March 25, was postponed in February by Fransen following a request from the defense, citing the prosecution’s failure to disclose all relevant documents.
Black revealed that the Office of the Prosecutor would submit to Fransen the last batch of information it was required to disclose, in line with the court’s statute, on June 17.
“The prosecution informed the pretrial judge that by the 17th of this month it will have achieved a final disclosure of all exculpatory material; in other words all the evidence it has which might suggest the innocence of the accused or at least undermine the reliability of the prosecution’s evidence,” Black said.
The legal officer explained that evidence must be disclosed by the prosecution according to three categories.
First, Black said, the prosecution must provide all the information it relies on to make a case – in other words – the concerned witnesses, the exhibits that they will be submitting and all the information concerning the evidence it will be making use of, so that the defense can prepare for the case.
Black said the prosecution has already fulfilled that requirement.
Second, the prosecution is required to provide any information that it knows it has in its position “which either undermines its own case or demonstrates the innocence of the accused.”
“There is no deadline for that,” said Black, who added that this was an ongoing process on the part of the prosecution that had yet to be achieved but did not hinder the trial process as the prosecution could and should be giving out this type of information throughout the pretrial and trial phases.
“I can say for now that the prosecution has now provided everything that they know they should provide but that through the course of the trial they will continue to execute that obligation,” he added.
The third category is the information which the defense itself requests and there is no deadline for submitting those requests.
Black maintained that the pretrial chamber would have a clearer idea after June 17 with regard to setting a second tentative date for the start of trials.
Asked whether Sept. 1 could become the new date as circulated in media and political circles, spokesman Youssef explained that Fransen had not set a new date but based on submissions from the court’s organs – the prosecution, the defense and the victims’ representatives – the last quarter of 2013 has been suggested as a potential date.
“This, however, does not mean that this is when the tribunal will begin trials,” said Youssef.
Black noted that the “last quarter of the year runs from the first of September to the 31st of December.”
He added: “Are we still working toward a tentative trial date toward the end of the year – in the last quarter? Yes. Does that mean the first of September? No.”
According to Black, one of the reasons why that decision is taking more time is because the chamber knows that it is important to get it right and he intends to “set a date that is “attainable and defensible and realizable.”
“Because it makes no sense either to the people of Lebanon it would be unfair to the defense and inefficient for us simply to set another date that will have to be amended and reset and delayed,” Black continued. “Please rest assured that at such time when the pretrial judge announces the next tentative date for trial will be announced after deep reflection and research and after consulting with all concerned organs and it will be fully realizable.”
As for efforts exerted by Lebanese authorities to arrest the four Hezbollah operatives the STL has accused of plotting the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, Youssef said the STL’s trial chamber concluded in its decisions that “all reasonable steps have been taken by the Lebanese to secure the appearance of the accused and to notify them of the charges against them.”
He explained that Lebanon did have an ongoing obligation to search for and arrest the accused and they also had an ongoing obligation to report to the president on a monthly basis about the steps they had been taking to fulfill that obligation.
“Lebanese authorities have been submitting reports on the 19th of every month,” Youssef said.
Black said the state of Lebanon “is not obliged to arrest the suspects.”
“But it should do its best to arrest them,” he added. “If they stop trying then this is a problem.”
Copyrights 2011, The Daily Star - All Rights Reserved
08/06/2013
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Politics/2013/Jun-08/219743-official-blames-stl-delays-on-flood-of-requests.ashx#axzz2VcRzeuVX
