APRIL 22 SESSION OF GRANVILLE/ABBAS MURDER TRIAL

UNCLAS KHARTOUM 000599 SENSITIVE SIPDIS DOJ FOR NATIONAL SECURITY DIVISION DEPT FOR M, P, L, AF, DS, S/USSES, CA AND S/CT DEPT FOR USAID E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ASEC PTER PGOV SU SUBJECT: APRIL 22 SESSION OF GRANVILLE/ABBAS MURDER TRIAL ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY: On April 22, 2009, five U.S. Embassy Foreign Service National (FSN) employees from the Regional Security Office, Political/Economic and Public Affairs sections attended the trial of five Sudanese men accused in the January 1, 2008 murders of USAID Officer John Granville and FSN driver Abdelrahman Abbas. A Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) personnel officer who was expected to testify did not appear. Deputy Defense Chair Adil Abdelghani accused the Government of threatening the last two defense witnesses and arresting their weapons expert, SAF Captain Mohammed Abdelgader Abdorabbo. In a lengthy and emotional presentation to the court, Abdelghani accused the Government of interference in the case and cautioned the prosecution about the negative reflection this alleged intimidation of witnesses will have on Sudan's judicial system. The judge ruled that under Sudan Armed Forces Law, authorization from the Army must first be obtained before an officer is called to testify in civilian court, and that the court could not force a military officer to testify. When the judge encouraged the defense to find a new weapons expert, the third defendant, Muhanned Osman Mohamed, spoke out and asserted that he did not believe another expert witness would be useful. Judge al-Badri set the next court date for April 23. END SUMMARY. ¶2. (U) The trial of the five Sudanese men accused of the January 1, 2008 terrorist murders of USAID Officer John Granville and FSN driver Abdelrahman Abbas continued on April 22, 2009. The prosecution was represented by Chair Mohamed Mustafa Musa, Juma Al Wakul Al-Asir, Granville family attorney Taha Ibrahim, and Abbas family attorney, Ismail Abu Sugra. The Defense was represented by Deputy Chair Adil Abdelghani, Ahmed Abu Agla, and Wajdi Salih. ¶3. (U) The defense panel called for a Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) personnel officer to testify, but he was not present. After noting the absence of the defense witness, Deputy Chair Adil Abdelghani told the court that the defense's weapons expert, Captain Mohammed Abdelgader Abdorabbo, was arrested by members of the SAF Military Intelligence Directorate (MID) and had been held since he first testified for the defense on April 12. In a lengthy, prepared speech, Abdelghani told the court that the Government's arrest of his witness not only impinged on the procedures of this case, but also had a much greater consequence on the administration of justice throughout Sudan. He insisted that the Government end the practice of arresting defense witnesses. "This causes people to whisper about our judicial system, and allows some people like (International Criminal Court Prosecutor Louis) Ocampo to say our judicial system is not capable, efficient, or transparent," Abdelghani told the judge. ¶4. (U) Abdelghani requested the court open a criminal case against the Director of Military Intelligence under Article 115/1 and 115/2 of the Sudanese Criminal Code, and that Captain Abdorabo be released or brought to the court under police escort to continue his testimony. Abdelghani requested the court issue an order for the security services "to keep their hands off the defense's case and stop interfering in the trial." Before resting, Abdelghani cautioned that in light of the threats made against the defense's previous two witnesses, the judge should issue a strong and clear order for all security organs to respect the sovereignty of justice. ¶5. (U) The prosecution accused Abdelghani of grandstanding, and told the court they would not respond until the court rendered a decision on SAF's position that a military officer could not be compelled to testify in a civilian court without the approval of Army. ¶6. (U) Judge Al-Badri deliberated for more than an hour before he rendered a decision. He told the court he would not open a case against DMI, but that the defense could do so through normal legal procedures. Referencing the Sudan Armed Forces Act, he told the court that only the Army can authorize an officer's testimony in a civilian court. The judge also encouraged the defense to find another weapons expert. Abdelghani responded that the defense would need ten days to identify another weapons expert. However, t Mohamed, the third defendant, interrupted the discussion. He told the judge he did not believe this would be useful, and did not want to delay the trial any further. ¶7. (U) Mohamed became visibly angered when the judge informed the court that the SAF personnel officer would be called to testify on April 23. He told the judge that this was the same personnel officer who processed his termination from SAF, and that he would not come to court if the witness was allowed to testify. Judge al-Badri did not acknowledge Mohamed's objection, but adjourned the court until April 23 and scheduled a session on April 30 for the defense to present a new weapons expert. (Note: According to Granville family attorney, Taha Ibrahim, the April 23 session was cancelled due to the defendants threatening not to attend in protest against the SAF's refusal to let the weapons expert testify. In a closed session, the prosecution moved for the judge to disqualify the witness. The judge denied that motion, and announced that he would make another request to the SAF to allow the weapons expert to testify. End Note.) FERNANDEZ