CONVICTS' PRISON LOCATION STILL A CONCERN FOR

C O N F I D E N T I A L FREETOWN 000192 SIPDIS DEPARTMENT FOR AF/W (JHUNTER),S/WCI (BDOHERTY) USUN NEW YORK (MSIMONOFF) E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/22/2019 TAGS: PGOV PREL KAWC SL SUBJECT: CONVICTS' PRISON LOCATION STILL A CONCERN FOR SPECIAL COURT Classified By: Ambassador June Carter Perry for reasons 1.4 (b/d) ¶1. (SBU) Ambassador met with Herman von Hebel, Registrar of the Special Court, as well as Binta Mansaray, his Deputy, on 21 May to discuss his two main concerns regarding Court operations and proceedings. Mr von Hebel, who is leaving his post in Sierra Leone as of 22 May, also thanked the Ambassador for her collegiality and USG support during his tenure. ¶2. (C) Von Hebel is concerned that there is renewed discussion amongst some of the justices that the convicted should serve their sentences in Sierra Leone, rather than uphold the original agreement to be incarcerated elsewhere. Von Hebel stated that Abdul Serry-Kamal, Sierra Leone Attorney-General (AG),supports this view (Note: The AG told Poloff in an informal conversation on April 20 that he has a "conflict of interest" with regards to the Court, because he was "friends" with many of the accused and once represented Issa Sesay. End Note). Justice Jon Kamanda, a Sierra Leone judge in the Special Court's Appeal Chamber, is an ally of the AG, and will likely serve as an advocate for his opinions when he takes over the Presidency of the Court in November ¶2009. Von Hebel's staff is working to move the first 5 convicts (whose appeals have concluded) out of Sierra Leone as quickly as possible, before this new wave of opposition can gain ground. They are acquiring funding, passports, etc. to expedite this process. ¶3. (C) According to von Hebel, President Koroma opposes having the convicted war criminals serve their sentences in Sierra Leone. Von Hebel agreed with the Ambassador and the President that the Sierra Leone prison system is not a viable option for those convicted by the Special Court. The Ambassador made clear that the USG position is firm - as a major donor country, the U.S. believes that the convicted must serve their sentences outside of Sierra Leone. Sierra Leone cannot currently credibly guarantee that the prisoners will serve the sentences handed down in their system. Both the offices of the SCCL and the USG agree that Rwanda could be an acceptable location. ¶4. (C) The Ambassador further stated that this is a question of stability and security for Sierra Leone. In order to progress towards the consolidation of peace, these individuals must be removed from Sierra Leone. Their continued presence could spark unrest among the population, and undermine the last six years of work provided by the Court. As Ms. Mansaray noted, there are at least 150 Sierra Leoneans working for the Court who would require round-the-clock protection should these criminals be allowed to stay in Sierra Leone. Witnesses, guards, and nurses have all made it clear that they would most likely flee the country in this circumstance. The Sierra Leone prisons are notoriously porous, and the expense of maintaining the Special Court detention facility is prohibitive for the GoSL. In addition, it is possible that the GoSL could pardon the convicts at some point during their sentence, which would undermine both the rule of law and the security of the country. ¶5. (C) An additional concern voiced by von Hebel is that some of the Special Court judges seem unhurried to wrap up the Taylor trial, despite the fact that major donor countries have stated that court proceedings must conclude in 2010. The Ambassador reiterated the USG position that the USG funding of the Court is based on FY2010 completion. ¶6. (C) Comment: With trial work in Freetown concluded and the activities of the Court winding down, it is imperative that the USG and other donor countries consistently reiterate the message that the 2010 end-date is an imperative, not a target. Deliberately delaying the remaining work will undermine the Court's reputation, as well as create further budgetary shortfalls that are becoming increasingly intolerable to a weary donor community and the citizens of Sierra Leone, who seek greater development assistance. Supporting Koroma, who seeks to maintain peace and stability by removing the guilty, is also essential. It is significant to note that this issue represents yet another disparity in opinion between the President and his chief legal advisor, the AG. Long a dangerous thorn in the President's side, the AG's frequent insubordination has often appeared to go unchecked. Continuing to push for a change in the sentencing agreements to benefit his old allies, despite the risk to Sierra Leone's stability, could ultimately be his downfall, especially if his opinions become public. End Comment. PERRY