Fugitives Take Note: Justice Can Be Done
Article
Comments (10)
email Email
print Print
pdfSave
separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation
By Elise Keppler*
April 30, 2012 — Liberia’s "big man" surely thought he’d enjoy a
comfortable retirement when he left power back in 2003. But on April
26 the Special Court for Sierra Leone convicted Charles Taylor for war
crimes and crimes against humanity, proving that even the most
powerful aren’t immune from justice.
As I watched Taylor looking on somberly as the verdict was read, I
recalled that for years, the prospects for Taylor’s surrender looked
extremely bleak. Despite an international arrest warrant for him, the
Nigerian government offered Taylor safe haven and he went into exile.
The judges at the United Nations-backed Special Court for Sierra
Leone, a mixed international-national war crimes court sitting in The
Hague, found Taylor guilty of aiding and abetting all 11 counts of war
crimes and crimes against humanity on which he was charged. He was
also found guilty of planning the crimes during attacks on three
districts in Sierra Leone. This decision is the first of its kind
against a head of state.
The conviction is a triumph for the Sierra Leone victims. When I
traveled to Freetown in 2004, people consistently told me they
wouldn’t consider justice complete for the country’s armed conflict,
which ended in 2002, unless Taylor was brought to the dock. Activists
emphasized that because of Taylor’s involvement with Sierra Leone’s
rebel forces during the conflict, he was central to any effort to hold
those responsible to account.
While Taylor got on with a quiet existence in Calabar, Nigeria,
activists across West Africa joined with international groups such as
Human Rights Watch to campaign for his surrender. We sought to make
clear that seeing to it that he faced trial was not simply a matter of
“Western concern,” as some critics suggested, and to keep the issue on
the international agenda.
President Olusegun Obasanjo, Nigeria’s president at the time,
indicated he would consider extraditing Taylor to Liberia if a duly
elected Liberian president requested it. However, Liberia’s new
president, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, who took office in January 2006,
initially indicated that Taylor’s surrender was not a priority.
Perhaps partly due to our campaigning, accompanied by urging for
Taylor’s surrender by the UK and US governments, Johnson Sirleaf did
an about face. In March, explaining that international pressure had
made it impossible for Liberia to address other issues until Taylor
was surrendered, she submitted a request to the Nigerian government
for his transfer.
An international chase that seemed the stuff of Hollywood films
followed. But in the end – and with the apparent threat that a
scheduled meeting between the Nigerian president and US President
George Bush would be cancelled unless Taylor was arrested – Taylor was
taken into custody on Nigeria’s border with Cameroon and sent to
Freetown. His trial was transferred to The Hague in June 2006 due to
concerns over instability if his case were tried in West Africa, and
opening arguments began in June 2007.
The trial was complex. Some 115 witnesses testified, more than 1,000
exhibits were admitted, tens of thousands of pages of transcripts were
generated, and hundreds of motions were decided. Taylor himself took
the stand for nearly seven months.
After more than a year of deliberations, the judges announced their
verdict in a session lasting more than two hours, which provided
detailed findings on Taylor’s role in committing war crimes and crimes
against humanity in Sierra Leone. Specifically, the court found that
Taylor was individually criminally responsible for the crimes by
providing arms and ammunition, military and financial support, and
encouragement to the Revolutionary United Front and Armed Forces
Revolutionary Council, rebel groups responsible for terrorizing
civilians, rape, murder, enslavement, and child recruitment, among
other crimes. Appeals are now anticipated, while sentencing is
scheduled for late May.
Critics of international justice often question the significance of
charging suspects when they seem beyond the reach of law. The Taylor
verdict shows how short-sighted that perspective is. Though Taylor did
not immediately face justice after his indictment was unsealed, he
ultimately was taken into custody, tried and judged for his crimes.
The verdict should put fugitives from justice – even at the highest
levels of power – on notice. Notably, while President Omar al-Bashir
of Sudan who is wanted by the International Criminal Court on crimes
committed in Darfur is at liberty today, he may be brought to trial in
the future.
Of course, whether suspects are held to account depends on the actions
of governments, and the long-term impact of the verdict beyond Sierra
Leone rests with countries that are committed to accountability for
the worst crimes. Countries that are members of the International
Criminal Court, for example, should insist that al-Bashir is
surrendered for trial. For crimes not subject to the ICC’s
jurisdiction, including crimes committed in Liberia under Taylor’s
presidency before the ICC became operational, we look to governments
to pursue prosecutions through national courts with international
support as needed.
Victims obtained some justice for Taylor’s brutal crimes on April 26.
Governments should build upon this landmark decision to ensure that
victims everywhere have the same opportunity.
*Elise Keppler is senior counsel with Human Rights Watch’s
international justice program.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/SouthSudanKob?hl=en.
