October 1, 2009 - Daily Star - Special Tribunal faces foreign reluctance to protect witnesses

STL looks to interpol for alternatives as neighboring states stall

By Patrick Galey

BEIRUT: Six months after its inception, the UN Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) is facing obstruction from abroad due to concerns over witness protection, according to the court’s latest report. “The STL Six Months On: A Bird’s Eye View,” was written by tribunal President Antonio Cassese and is designed to provide the public with a “succinct and unvarnished overview” of the court’s activities. It was made available to the media Tuesday.
The report highlighted a number of issues to be addressed in order for the STL to bring to justice the killers of Lebanon’s former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, who was assassinated on February 14, 2005.
“Assistance from states, in the form of witness relocation agreements and protection of witnesses, is of vital importance for the success of the tribunal,” the report said.
It added that attempts to reach deals with a number of other countries over witness protection “so far have not yet borne fruit.”
State cooperation, according to the report, remained the main challenge facing the STL.
Retired General Elias Hanna told The Daily Star that Arab countries in particularly were wary of the STL and would be reluctant to reach an agreement over witnesses.
“We have to go back to the core issue that an international tribunal is not traditional in the Arab world – we don’t have this culture,” he said. “From this perspective, why should Arab states ink a deal with the tribunal?”
He said that potential witnesses were reluctant to come forward, as Hariri’s killers remained at large and protection would be difficult to guarantee.
“Maybe a witness saw something but doesn’t have the whole picture. Maybe witnesses don’t like to get involved,” he said.
“We have to wait until this tribunal comes to something like accusing someone,” before witnesses may be willing to step forward, Hanna added.
Shafik Masri, professor of international law, said that in spite of some examples of international reluctance, the report demonstrated the STL was moving forward. “There was progress – not progress in the court but progress in preparing for the court,” he said.
“[Cassese] did not specify which Middle Eastern states [were not cooperating.] But all those countries outside Lebanon are not essential. The essential thing was when the court got an undertaking from the Lebanese government to defer judiciary power.”
The STL has been plagued by allegations of politicization even before it was officially established in March this year. Hanna said that such accusations would ultimately hamper the court’s progress, in spite of it constantly rejecting claims of partisanship.
“In this region we have problems with accusation, and anyone who comes forward will be accused of [having political motivation],” he said.
He added that regional interplay could be behind certain Middle Eastern states’ reluctance to cooperate with the STL.
“For example, Jordan won’t seal a deal with the tribunal if in the back of its mind it thinks that Syria might be implicated,” he said.
Responsibility for Hariri’s assassination has been widely laid at Syria’s door.
In April, four former Lebanese generals, who headed the country’s major intelligence services when Syria held sway in Lebanon, were released by the STL after being held for four years. Damascus has repeatedly denied involvement in the killing.
The difficulties surrounding contracts with other countries may be rendered moot, because the STL is seeking an “interim agreement” with Interpol. This could enable the court to bypass protocols with individual states under international law, according to Masri.
“If states will not sign a contract with the court, then the [tribunal] can go another way,” he said. “If there is a refusal to indict [a suspect] then Interpol can be contacted.
“These contracts are not essential for the court, but are of course preferable.”