An Obstreperous Defendant
The long anticipated trial of former Liberian President Charles Taylor has started in the Hague - without the defendant. In a letter, Taylor called the U.N.-backed Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL, website) a farce and challenged the court's ability to "dispense justice". Furthermore, Taylor's lawyer Karim Khan informed the court that he had been fired by his client and refused to represent Taylor during the initial meeting. Despite the absence of both defendant and counsel, the court decided to hear the prosecution's opening statements. The trial will continue in three weeks. For further information on the events, click here (JURIST article, in English).
Charles Taylor, who is charged with crimes against humanity and violations of international humanitarian law, seems to assume a similar strategy as former Yugoslavian President Slobodan Milosevic: Both tried to discredit the court before which they were summoned. The fact that both the SCSL and the ICTY are ad hoc tribunals, i.e. U.N.(-backed) courts that are established for one particular conflict, certainly invites such conduct. Accordingly, it is all the more important to endorse the International Criminal Court (ICC, website) - an independent and permanent institution with jurisdiction over genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.
3 comments:
If I remember correctly, there are certain conditions which need to be met such that the ICC can intervene. Are these current criteria satisfied in this case? If yes, why is Taylor not facing the ICC?
Thanks in advance for your explanations.
Thank you for your comment. You probably allude to the principle of complementary, further specified in Article 17 of the Rome Statute. This principle makes admissibility of a case before the ICC contingent on the lack of a genuine prosecution in the national state. Here, Taylor is tried by a so-called "hybrid" or "mixed" tribunal consisting of both national and international judges. While this is not, strictly speaking, a prosecution in the national state - given that Taylor is tried abroad before a tribunal consisting of a considerable amount of international judges - there is no real lack of a genuine jurisdiction. In such a case, the ICC's jurisdiction will be subsidiary to the special jurisdiction of the SCSL.
Thanks.
Post a Comment