SPECIAL COURT WANTS MORE MONEY, SUPPORT

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 03 FREETOWN 000484 SIPDIS SIPDIS DEPT FOR AF/W, S/WCI E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/12/2016 TAGS: PREL KAWC SL NL SUBJECT: SPECIAL COURT WANTS MORE MONEY, SUPPORT REF: FREETOWN 360 Classified By: Ambassador Thomas N. Hull, reasons 1.4 (b),(d) -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) On June 9, visiting AF/W Director Phillip Carter and PolOff met separately with three principal officials at the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL): Registrar Lovemore Munlo, Acting Chief Prosecutor Christopher Staker, and Principal Defender Vincent Nmehielle. There appeared to be consensus on the Court's completion calendar, with Munlo and Staker agreeing that CDF and AFRC trials could be finished by the end of 2006 and that the Charles Taylor case could be done within a year from its start. The RUF trial is moving more slowly and is still in the prosecution phase, which may end by August. Staker had glowing reviews of Charles Taylor's current defense counsel, Karim Khan. Munlo and the Chief Security Officer said that they feel comfortable with the security of the Court for now. Munlo said that it would be up to the Management Committee and the UN to determine whether a new trial chamber should be convened for the Taylor trial. Munlo also said that he needs our support in arranging for detainee medical care abroad. Nmehielle said that the Principal Defender's office is unable to provide the support necessary for defense attorneys to provide a basic defense for indictees, but that the SCSL is light years ahead of other international tribunals in protecting the rights of the accused. Munlo does not appear to be a strong leader, as was his predecessor, and future budgets may warrant extra scrutiny of defense-related expenditures to ensure adequate support is being provided to the defense. End Summary. -------------- Completion Calendar for CDF, AFRC, RUF -------------- ¶2. (U) Munlo said that the three ongoing cases are moving along well and that earlier, falsely optimistic estimates of the Court's completion were based on flaws in the operational strategy ("We were not following our own rules," Munlo said.). For example, the defense phase of the CDF trial started later than expected, Munlo said, because no one took into account the time necessary for the defense motion of "no case to answer." (i.e., three weeks for the defense, three weeks for the prosecution, one week for defense rebuttal, four to five month judicial review.) ¶3. (U) The CDF defense phase, Munlo said, should be completed by December, as should the AFRC defense. The CDF judges are now working on the ruling of the Defense request to subpoena President Kabbah. (Note: Staker calculated optimistically that CDF and AFRC defense phase could finish in October, closing arguments would be over by the end of the year, judges' decisions would be available three months later, and then the existing staff could redeploy to the Charles Taylor case. End Note.) ¶4. (U) Munlo said that the RUF prosecution phase, which started in the summer of 2004, he hopes will be complete by August. The RUF defense phase, then, would start next year. (Note: The RUF and CDF cases share a courtroom and have to alternate. The AFRC case has its own courtroom and is moving much faster. End Note.) ¶5. (U) The Appeals Chamber, Munlo said, should take less than six months per case for a total of 18 months. Although the Management Committee has said the projection for the appeals timeline is too long, Munlo said that it is important to remember the non-negotiable timelines written into the Court's rules (i.e., 14 days are allowed to appeal a case, three weeks are allowed to present grounds for appeal, etc.). -------------- Taylor Trial: Back-of-the-Envelope Budget, Timing, Security, New Trial Chamber? -------------- ¶6. (C) Staker had glowing reviews of Charles Taylor's current defense counsel, Karim Khan. "Khan is eminently reasonable," he said, especially since he is filing no preliminary motions in the case (which can save approximately seven months) and it also appears that he is willing to stipulate the facts of the conflict itself. (Note: It has taken a good deal of time in the other cases to establish that certain atrocities took FREETOWN 00000484 002 OF 003 place. Khan's strategy, it appears, will not be to argue these facts: rather, he will argue that Taylor had no connection to them. Khan's provisional contract ends on July ¶4. If he is still deemed to be indigent (the Court has not yet been able to find Taylor's assets),Taylor will get to choose his defense team from a list of attorneys presented to him by the Office of the Principle Defender. End Note.) ¶7. (U) Both Munlo and Staker said that if Taylor's defense is willing to stipulate to the facts of the case, the Taylor case could be finished within one year. Munlo said that his initial back-of-the-envelope calculation for the Taylor trial in The Hague is approximately $23 million. ¶8. (C) Munlo and SCSL Chief of Security Joe Poraj-Wilczynski said that they feel comfortable with the security of the Court for now. Although it looks easy in the movies, Poraj-Wilczynski said, it would be extremely difficult for Taylor supporters to penetrate the Mongolian-guarded complex. "If the Nigerians were still guarding the Court, it would be another story," Poraj-Wilczynski said. Asked whether there were any indications that Taylor supporters were planning any disruption, Poraj-Wilczynski mentioned that they were monitoring Taylor's supporters in country. He also mentioned Amcit Michael Chemidlin's recent photographs of the Court complex (for which he is still facing charges, see reftel), but then dismissed the issue. "We think that they took those pictures hoping they could sell them to someone," Poraj-Wilczynski said. (Comment: Given Chemidlin's travel plans and connections with dubious "church" officials, we are not so sure about that, but we have no other evidence to offer. End Comment.) ¶9. (U) As for convening a new trial chamber, Munlo said that it would be up to the Management Committee and the UN Office of the Legal Advisor. Staker added that convening a third trial chamber would also require an amendment to the statutory agreement between the UN and the Government of Sierra Leone and that the UN Secretary General and the GoSL would each get to nominate candidates. Names of potential candidates are already being floated, and Staker mentioned a few: Gabrielle Kirk-McDonald (Former ICTY president),David Hunt (ICTR),and Florence Mumba (ICTY, ICTR Appeals Chamber). Staker said that if a new tribunal is to be convened for the Taylor case, then it would be crucial to choose judges who have experience in overseeing war crimes cases, since it takes them a while to "get on their feet" (i.e., move the judicial process along and not grant too much leeway to the defense.) -------------- Medical Care in Senegal for Norman, Sesay -------------- ¶10. (U) Munlo said that he is particularly concerned about the medical needs of two indictees. Hinga Norman, he said, needs hip replacement surgery and Issa Sesay has a bullet lodged in his hip. Although neither has a life-threatening condition, permanent damage could result if the conditions are left untreated. (Note: Norman's tests for prostrate cancer came back negative, but he could break his hip because of his current condition. Sesay's bullet wound has caused a crack along the bone. End Note.) ¶11. (U) Neither detainee can receive appropriate medical care in Sierra Leone, Munlo said, and consulations with other nations in the region (Ghana, Nigeria, Senegal) have been unsuccessful. The best hope for a solution is with the Government of Senegal, which is willing to take the detainees but is not willing to sign an agreement stipulating, among other things, that the detainees would not be allowed to request asylum. The Government of Canada is currently negotiating with the Senegalese, but Munlo requested U.S. assistance in helping to close the deal. (Comment: Carter was noncommittal. End Comment.) Munlo is worried about public opinion, especially since many believe that Norman is wrongfully incarcerated. -------------- Principal Defender's Office: The Bureaucratic Underdog -------------- ¶12. (U) The Principal Defender's Office is unable to provide the support necessary to provide a basic defense, Nmehielle said, and defense teams are starting to file motions to that FREETOWN 00000484 003 OF 003 effect. While investigators for the prosecution conduct both local and international investigations, Nmehielle has trouble securing even one vehicle for transportation upcountry to visit former fighting bases, Nmehielle said. One of the most basic problems, he said, is bureaucratic. Unlike the Prosecutor's Office, which is independent, the Principal Defender's Office is subordinate to the Office of the Registrar. "When we submit a request for funding," Nmehielle said, "the budget staff will say, 'You don't need that.'" One of the problems is that the budget staff sees the accused as already guilty, which negatively affects the quality of service to the Defense. ¶13. (U) When making up the draft staffing list for Taylor's trial in the Hague, it was the same thing. Nmehielle asked for a staff of three: duty counsel, legal advisor, and a support staffer. The prosecution has more than that, he said, and he was still told that he needed to pare down the request to include only a legal advisor. ¶14. (U) On the bright side, Nmehielle said, the SCSL is light years ahead of other international tribunals when it comes to defending the rights of the accused. In convening future tribunals, however, creating an independent office of the defense will be an important point. -------------- Comment -------------- ¶15. (C) The new Registrar appears to be feeling more comfortable with his new job, but his comments regarding budgets, timetables and Hinga Norman's medical needs make him appear to be more observer and reporter than driver. Charles Taylor's upcoming trial will represent a significant new budget requirement is only beginning to be calculated, since the $23 million is only a rough estimate. Funding to support the Defense may merit particular scrutiny to ensure sufficient support and avoid possible grounds for appeal. End Comment. ¶16. (U) AF/W Director Carter did not have an opportunity to clear this cable before departing Post. HULL