[allAfrica.com]


The Irony of Taylor's Hague Trial

The Analyst (Monrovia)
ANALYSIS
11 May 2007
Posted to the web 11 May 2007

The capture, turnover, and transfer of former President Mr. Charles Taylor to
face charges for war crimes and crimes against humanity may be dramatic
alright.
But one seemingly difficult things that many, mainly prosecution, defense, and
interest groups, don't seem to take seriously or acknowledge as a hurdle is who
will testify against or in behalf of the accused.
In a suspicious alignment of vocal former aides, millions of former victims,
and an overbearing international stakeholder community, analysts cannot help
but to wonder about the prospects of Taylor's June 4th trial.
"Will the UN go back on its travel sanctions and assets freeze in order to
nullify the "shortchange" trump card that Taylor's defense is all-too-prepared
to use? Where the sanction is allowed to remain in force, will Taylor's
loyalists dare the consequences any violation may bring and stand up to be
counted?
Or in other regards, will ordinary victims muster the courage to testify
against Taylor and risk being marked as 'the one who sold the Papay?" are the
lingering questions observers are pondering.
The Analyst's Staff Writer adapts this review of the questions from an FPA
article.
Taylor's June 4th trial date is drawing near and the common concern amongst
prosecutors, defense lawyers, and international stakeholders seem to be about
the nature, rather than the outcome, of the trial.
Key defense lawyers recently alleged that many former Taylor aides were ready
to proceed to The Hague to testify on his behalf, but that they were unlikely
to do so unless the restriction and spectre of the UN travel and asset freeze
sanction were removed.
Shortly after Mr. Taylor's indictment in 2003, the UN short-listed a number of
his former associates and family and passed a resolution prohibiting them from
traveling and transacting business abroad. It is this batch that defense
lawyers are arguing constitute the potential core of Taylor's witness nest that
is threatened by the travel sanctions.
None of these individuals have made public their intentions to testify in favor
of Taylor but reports say that has not subtracted from the arguments of
Taylor's defense team that the restriction placed on them will hamper Taylor's
chances at the trials.
Potential pro witnesses? Former dictator Mr. Taylor, Grace Minor, Monie Captan,
Tom Woewiyu and Gus Kouwenhoven, himself recently indicted for arm-related
offenses but denied ties to Taylor. Woewiyu fell out with Taylor while Minor
and son-in-law Captan were later sidelined.
"Witnesses will come from Liberia, witnesses will come from Sierra Leone;
witnesses will come from other parts of Africa; witnesses will come from
Europe, witnesses will come from the United States; witnesses will come from
all over the place because this case is a case that involves threats to
international peace.
So whatever it takes to bring the truth out so that mankind will have a basis
for judgment as to what really took place in Sierra with respect to the role
Mr. Taylor might have played is crucial," Cllr. Lavelli Supuwood, one of the
lawyers for the former dictator, told VOA's James Butty in a recent interview.
Supuwood contended that there was no shortage of witnesses to defend Taylor
provided the sanction spectre was removed by the UN in time for the defense to
set up its witness pool.
Supuwood, also a former solicitor general of Liberia who recently returned from
The Hague having met with Taylor, says the former Liberian president would call
an array of witnesses to make his case.
The boast however appears to contradict concerns by another Taylor lawyer who
openly complained this week that Taylor's defense is finding it difficult to
bring witnesses to the stand because of the travel ban and assets freeze
imposed on people deemed close associates of Taylor.
At a pretrial hearing in The Hague, Taylor's Karim Khan said his efforts to
build a defense were being hampered by the perceived threat of U.N. sanctions.
"Numerous individuals ... are unwilling to speak to the defense (because) they
are petrified of having travel bans imposed upon them and having their assets
frozen by the Security Council because they are associated to the defense of Mr
Charles Taylor."
The chief defense lawyer said he would file a motion asking judges at the court
to grant witnesses protection from sanctions. According to him allowing the
sanctions to remain up to the trial date "would amount to witness intimidation,
whether it comes from a group or a party or even as august a body ... as the
Security Council of the United Nations".
Khan told the hearing that Taylor is being shortchanged compared to the late
former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic, who had a much larger defense
team when he went on trial for genocide at the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal.
"The concern of my client is that he is being shortchanged," Khan said, adding
that Taylor was having trouble meeting court officials to discuss the problem.
Familiar names top potential witness list
At the height of Taylor's rule and rise to rule in the bushes, the names of
Benoni Urey, Edwin Snowe, Grace Minor, Kadietou Diarra- Finley, Belle Dunbar,
Emmanuel Shaw, Kanda George, Tom Woewiyu and a host of others, now on the
United Nations travel ban, openly displayed their support for Taylor.
But in the waning days of Mr. Taylor's reign, many fell by the wayside in a bid
to escape international justice over their association with the dictator.
FrontPageAfrica.com recently gathered that Finley, who has made several trips
over to Europe and the U.S. over the last year, would testify against her
former boss.
However, Finley contacted FPA recently to denounce the report and stated that
she has no intentions whatsoever of testifying against Taylor.
Asked whether she would testify in his defense, Finley declined to respond, but
repeatedly declared that she has no intentions of testifying against Taylor.
Despite Finley's denial, Taylor's family members insist that, the former Taylor
aide has struck a deal to testify against him. Finley explained that her trips
to Europe were to seek medical treatment.
Kanda George sits in the office of former President Charles Taylor. Mr. Taylor
is charged with 11 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity for his
alleged role in the Sierra Leone civil war. Both the prosecution and Taylor's
defense lawyers are busy preparing for the case.
"Mr. Taylor is doing well. As you know, he's a man with a very strong will
power. He is looking forward that this wonderful case can start. As you know,
Mr. Taylor, as a defendant in a major criminal case, does not have the burden
to prove his case. It is the prosecution that has the burden to prove the
crimes charged. So we are all looking forward to see this day," he said.
Potential witnesses - with family ties
Besides Finley, potential witnesses could include Snowe, a former son-in-law
and former managing director of the Liberian Petroleum Refinery Corporation
(LPRC).
However, much of the burden to testify could rest on Urey, who was cited by the
Coalition for International Justice (CIJ) in 2005 as working with the deposed
Liberian dictator to maintain Taylor's interest in Liberia.
Snowe, Urey, Shaw and Minor served as economic enforcers for the deposed
dictator in Liberia, through a network of shady companies' setup in Liberia and
around the world.
Die-hard loyalists to Mr. Taylor, including Cyril Allen, an ex-Chairman,
National Patriotic Party could also be called as a character witness, so could
the three former wives of the former president - Jewell Howard Taylor, now a
Senator from Bong County, Agnes Reeves Taylor, currently in London, England and
Taupee Taylor. Reeves-Taylor was also mentioned as a witness against her former
husband, but she too has denied that she will testify against her former
husband.
Potential witnesses - with ties to arms
While much attention will be placed to the close relatives and aides of the
former president, prosecutors may turn to those directly associated to Taylor's
alleged arms dealings as it relates to aiding and abetting the civil war in
Sierra Leone.
Observers say this batch of potential witnesses may actually testify against
Mr. Taylor to save their necks rather stand up for a pariah former underworld
boss.
Chief among them is Ibrahim Baldeh, an arms dealer cited by the U.N. for being
in contravention of Security Council resolution 1343.
Baldeh is a strong a strong supported Mr. Taylor's alleged effort to
destabilize Sierra Leone and gain illicit access to diamonds; involved in
illicit diamond sales.
Others, likely to be mentioned but difficult to call include, businessman
Victor Bout. Bout is an arms dealer and transporter of weapons and minerals
also citied by the U.N for breaching UNSC resolution 1343 by supporting
Taylor's effort to destabilize Sierra Leone and gain illicit access to
diamonds.
Though Bout has been investigated by police in several countries, he has never
been prosecuted for arms dealing. But he is among more than 60 people under a
UN travel ban for their association with Taylor.
Also in the list are Richard Ammar Chichakli, a Syrian-born US citizen and a
family friend of the bin Ladens, Mamadee Mousa Cisse, a former Chief of
Presidential Protocol and chairman of Mohammad Group of Companies, Orhan
Dragas, a business partner of Slobodan TESIC, Duane Eckli, Chief Executive
Officer of Ducor World Airlines, Talal Eldine, a Lebanese businessman and
paymaster of ex-President Taylor's inner circle, and Baba Jobe, a former
Director of the Gambia New Millennium Air company.
Despite a laundry list of potential witnesses, fear of repercussions appears to
be the key that could decide Taylor's fate or perhaps lay the groundwork for
appeal. Legal experts say Taylor's defense could claim that witnesses' fear of
testifying is ground for a claim of unfair trial - a motion, Khan has promised
to file in a bid to have the judges grant witnesses protection from sanctions.
Nevertheless, Supuwood believes that his client would get a fair trial.
Contrary to what some had suggested, Supuwood said Taylor does not intend to
use his case to put the system on trial the same way that the late Yugoslav
President Slobodan Milosevic did.
"I don't see Taylor using this case for any other purpose than to defend
himself against those who have charged him for being responsible for the socio-
political problems of Sierra Leone," Supuwood said.
A consultant to the prosecution team declined to confirm some of the names to
FPA late Wednesday, but suggested that there may be some surprises.
"Anyone who complains about travel ban, it is obvious that that person is
planning to testify in his favor, because if the prosecution wants anybody to
testify, they will not have the problem of worrying about the travel ban, the
ban will be lifted on that person," said the consultant, who preferred
anonymity for this report.
"It's going to be an interesting trial, but I'm not sure Taylor is going to go
down that easy. One thing the defense has succeeded in doing is they have
succeeded in infiltrating the prosecuting team," according to the consultant.
The Prosecutors' Headaches - The Flipside
For now, interests would be high in those sidelined to testify on Taylor's
behalf or against him. In the high-stakes game of loyalty and betrayal,
compensation and a promise of the freedom to travel again may be the ticket
that decides Taylor's fate or bring to light his one-time friends, aides and
family members who may have turncoat in pursuit of freedom from UN sanctions.
Added to the other extremes where there are high chances that ordinary
Liberians and former victims may refrain from testifying against Taylor for
fear of being branded "selling-outs", observers say there is no question that
the nature, rather than the outcome of the trial remains yet a major concern.
Analysts say while it is only the defense that is making noise about witness
intimidation, the prosecution has its own headaches with credible witness
selection and that they too stand a slimmer chance since they have the burden
to prove guilt.
"Fear of being branded a sellout and the likely sparing use of incentives may
hamper the prosecutors' chances. They have not said so, but their recent trip
to Monrovia is an indication that they have their problem too.
They've to draw a thick line between incentives to encourage witnesses to come
out and bribery. They need credible witnesses like former fighters and battle-
front commanders to make their case.
These are unlikely to take the stand without adequate incentives. Who will
believe former terror-mongers and former foot-soldiers let off the hook, is
another million-dollar question," said one analyst.

===============================================================================
  Copyright © 2007 The Analyst. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica
                        Global Media (allAfrica.com).
===============================================================================