MGLE01: FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION CASE DISMISSED BY

C O N F I D E N T I A L BEIRUT 001204

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

NSC FOR ABRAMS/DORAN/WERNER/SINGH

E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/18/2016
TAGS: KDEM LE PHUM PREL
SUBJECT: MGLE01: FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION CASE DISMISSED BY
MILITARY TRIBUNAL

REF: BEIRUT 01106

Classified By: Charge Christopher W. Murray. Reason: Section 1.4 (b).


1. (U) In an unexpected development, the slander case
against human rights activist Mohammad Mugraby was dismissed
by Lebanon's appellate-level Military Court of Cassation on
April 15, two days before the case was scheduled to be heard
by the country's Military Tribunal. This decision, in
effect, closes the file and no further action against Mr.
Mugraby is anticipated.


2. (U) The case against Mohammad Mugraby dates back to
testimony he gave before the Foreign Affairs Committee of the
European Union Parliament on November 4, 2003. In his
statement to the committee, Mr. Mugraby described the poor
human rights record of Lebanon's judiciary, particularly in
its military justice system, as well as the poor conditions
in the country's prison system. Under laws passed while
Lebanon was under the control of the Syrian regime, the
Office of Military Justice brought charges against Mr.
Mugraby in June 2005 that accused him of "slandering the
reputation of Lebanon's military institutions and its
officers." Following an extended period of legal
maneuvering, the trial was scheduled to held on April 17,

2005.


3. (C) In early April, Embassy Beirut made it known to the
Attorney General of the Office of Military Justice, as well
as at appropriate levels in the Ministry of Justice, that we
viewed this case with serious concern, due to its apparent
violation of the basic human right of freedom of expression,
and we would closely monitor its progress.


4. (C) According to the Attorney General, the government
also was uncomfortable with this legacy of the previous
government and was trying to find a satisfactory way to
dismiss it. The Attorney General, Jean Fahed, maintained
however that Mr. Mugraby would not cooperate with his office
and seemed intent on having his day in court. Fahed did give
the Embassy permission to send observers to what would
normally be a closed proceeding.


5. (C) The appellate-level Military Court of Cassation met
in an unanticipated session on April 15 and ruled that the
Military Tribunal did not possess jurisdiction and dismissed
the case without prejudice. Interestingly, the appellate
court also noted in its decision that, "...Mugraby's original
testimony in November 2003 was merely general criticism...and
did not show an intention to slander the military." The
Office of Military Justice notified the Embassy immediately
following the appellate decision and stated the government
has no further issues with Mr. Mugraby.

6. (U) Mr. Mugraby held a news conference on April 17 at
which he thanked his supporters and said he would continue to
work for the full implementation of freedom of expression in
Lebanon, as defined by the UN Declaration of Human Rights.
One of his chief supporters, British MP Julian Brazier,
stated that Lebanon had "passed an important test in the eyes
of the world...(regarding) freedom of speech, respect for
democratic institutions and ...whether the Lebanese army
would restrict its activities to its proper sphere."

COMMENT
--------------


7. (C) It is not known with certainty what persuaded the
Office of Military Justice to take this unanticipated action.
The case was beginning to generate interest both in Lebanon
and with human rights NGOs, but it was also apparent from
discussions with the Attorney General that he realized the
government had made a serious error and was trying to correct
it.


8. (C) Despite the favorable outcome for Mr. Mugraby, there
still remains the important issue that Lebanon's legal code
contains numerous statutes from the Syrian era that fall far
short of the standards expected of a democracy. Embassy
Beirut will continue to engage with both the Siniora
government and Lebanon's parliament to encourage review and
cancellation of those laws that violate those standards in
order that the country continue its transition to full
democracy. End comment.
MURRAY