| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Yugoslavia Tribunal Prosecution Recalls Experience with Telecom Data, False Witnesses, Crime Scene Tampering |
| 2010-10-22 |
| [An Nahar] The morning period of the second day of the International Media Forum organized by the Special Tribunal for Leb in the Dutch city of The Hague was characterized by a visit to the headquarters of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The highlight of the visit was a demonstration made by one of the officials of the prosecutor's office of the Yugoslavia tribunal. The aforementioned presentation triggered a quest by the Lebanese journalists in an attempt to find answers for the thorny questions the Lebanese are bickering about. These questions are considered part of the junctures and essentials of the investigation conducted by Danielle Bellemare, Prosecutor of the Special Tribunal for Leb probing the murder of ex-PM Rafik Hariri and his In this regard, the following headlines must be contemplated: 1. Telecommunications Data: Asked whether investigations into crimes under the jurisdiction of the tribunal he was part of had focused on telecom data, and whether the database of phone calls can be considered as an evidence to be relied on in indicting individuals, the official at the prosecutor's office of the Yugoslavia tribunal, Australian, said the investigations into the cases the tribunal was looking into had not been based on the phone calls issue because it was not an element in the probe. "Had they existed, we would've used them ... and nothing prevents resorting to them (telecom data) in other probes if they existed," he added, noting that before he joined the Yugoslavia tribunal, he had managed during his tenure in Australia to unveil two major drug trafficking cells through analyzing the database of phone calls. After intercepting and monitoring phone calls, he added, an "empire" for drug trafficking and dealing had been dismantled. The aforementioned database was used to unveil the cells and interrogate their members in addition to being used, along with other material, as accusatory instruments and criminal evidences, according to the Australian official. 2. False Witnesses: Asked whether the investigation had bumped at some stage into "false witnesses" who had given incorrect information that led to misleading the probe, and whether those witnesses had negatively affected the investigation's credibility and the indictment, the official at the prosecutor's office of the Yugoslavia tribunal said that such matters cannot affect the probe's credibility if it was based on other data, presumptions and evidences that lead to the same result. He added that the prosecutor can drop some testimonies and even presumptions from his indictment, even during the trial, without that affecting the credibility of his indictment. But if the prosecutor was to act against all individuals who give information he deems as incorrect, that would require him to prosecute all defense witnesses because they usually contradict prosecution witnesses, said the official. He clarified that the false witnesses to be prosecuted are the ones who appear before court and give their false testimonies under oath, adding that only one person was tried over this charge before the Yugoslavia tribunal, which gave him three months in prison. 3. Faltering with Crime Scene: Asked about faltering with the crime scene and whether the crimes investigated by the Yugoslavia tribunal had witnessed such cases, and whether those responsible had been prosecuted, the official at the prosecutor's office of the Yugoslavia tribunal said that a case of faltering with the crime scene had been recorded during the Srebrenica massacres. He noted that the then U.S. secretary of state, Madeleine Albright, had disclosed in the media pictures of mass graves in that region. But the authorities, he added, moved the bodies buried in the mass graves to other places after the news broke out. "But the international investigators managed, through the advanced technologies they used, to find a link between the Srebrenica mass graves and the unearthed bodies," he said, adding that "no matter how much the perpetrators try to clean their crime scene, they can't remove all evidences." He noted that the remnants of a blood drop for instance can lead to unveiling a lot of evidences. As to trying those behind faltering with the crime scene in former Yugoslavia, he added, the international tribunal did not look into the case, given that its jurisdiction was limited to probing the massacres as acts of killing. The Australian official noted that probing the act of faltering with the crime scene was under the jurisdiction of the Sarajevo tribunal. Lebanese journalists sought to project the controversial topics accompanying the investigation conducted by STL Prosecutor Bellemare into the Hariri crime on the course of the investigation conducted by the prosecutor of the Yugoslavia tribunal. They tried to compare between the courses of the two probes and to anticipate the answers Bellemare is supposed to present in his indictment regarding the telecom data, evidences and other information; testimonies given by individuals whose "credibility is in question"; and the criminal liability of those behind tampering with the crime scene. If the Lebanese are divided, due to their political backgrounds, in tackling these issues and defining their legal worth, that is because they read in conflicting political and factional books. However, The infamous However... the international prosecutors seem to have one legal opinion in evaluating the questions being raised, even without prior coordination, because they read in the same book of law, which has nothing to do with the divides and disputes of the Lebanese. |
| Posted by:Fred |