Prosecutor of Sierra Leone's Special Court David Crane
Credit: IRIN |
The Special Court for Sierra Leone was created through an agreement between the United Nations and the government of Sierra Leone to try people responsible for violating international humanitarian law during Sierra Leone's 10-year rebel war.
In an interview with IRIN in Freetown, capital of Sierra Leone, Prosecutor David Crane discussed its mandate, jurisdiction and other issues.
QUESTION: What is the mandate of the Special Court for Sierra Leone?
ANSWER: The mandate of the Court is really quite simple and quite specific: to try those who bear the greatest responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity in violation of international humanitarian law.
Q: What is the extent of your jurisdiction? In other words, whom can you prosecute?
A: The statute of the Court gives us a rather broad jurisdiction [geographically] and is not held within the limits of Sierra Leone. We have a broad statutory jurisdiction. Our current jurisdiction limits us to crimes that took place after 30 November 1996 to the present.
The statute very clearly allows us to follow the evidence where it may lead, to investigate those who bear the greatest responsibility in Sierra Leone, the region and internationally.
Q: How then would you compare this Court with the International Criminal Court (ICC)?
A: The ICC is a very important institution and has very broad-based jurisdictions that are wide but are, of course, defined in the statute. Each Tribunal is currently working - be it the ones of Rwanda, Yugoslavia, here in Sierra Leone or the ICC - and their jurisdictions, plus their limits, are statutorily based. The international community writes into the statute the jurisdictional limits of whatever tribunal it may be.
[...] The Special Court for Sierra Leone war crimes should not be perceived just as a Sierra Leone-specific war crimes tribunal but [as one mandated] to try those who bear the greatest responsibility for the tragedy that took place there for the past 10 years. We've been investigating these, certainly in the regional as well as the international context.
Q: How independent is the Special Court?
A. Absolutely independent. I work for no one other than the 4.5 million people of Sierra Leone. My job as a Chief Prosecutor is to represent those who are not with us any more: 100,000 or so dead; 250,000 maimed, raped [or otherwise violated] and 2.5 million people who were forcibly displaced.
I represent them and I represent the other citizens of this country. I am an absolutely independent international prosecutor.
Q: What would you say about the cooperation you are receiving from various arms of government in doing your work?
A: The cooperation we are getting within the law and within the reality has been good and very helpful. The United Nations Mission in Sierra Leone (UNAMSIL) has been very helpful and the government was certainly helpful in the question of setting up the Court: its physical creation. It has also been working very closely with the registrar in the trials and the administration of the court.
But as far as my work as the prosecutor is concerned, I have no links with the government of Sierra Leone. It is very judicious about the court and is trying to avoid any appearance that they are trying to involve themselves in it. And this is very important for the Court.
We get support from them and also from other countries. The Special Court exists because of contributions from other countries from all over the world and the government of Sierra Leone. We appreciate the work that our contributors have done for us.
Q: Investigations are ongoing. Is the Court working to a particular timetable? Do you have a set number of persons you would like to try and is there a time frame for this?
A: There is a court strategy that we began to develop last summer. Then, in August, we began to refine that strategy. We began to follow the evidence wherever it might lead. It is important to realise and understand that we had no set agenda as far as who we were looking at was concerned.
It became very apparent, quickly, that we were looking at those who bear the greatest responsibility, so we began to develop our cases around them. Then we narrowed our field down to possible defendants. Now, we have a very set timetable as to when we are doing things.
The execution of our operation of justice on 10 March [when the Special Court made its first indictment, that of seven people who are to stand trial for crimes against humanity] was a specifically planned operation, which was started back in October last year. So we have a very specific timetable and we are meeting this timetable.
Q: What is the Court's life span?
A: The Court was set up to finish its mandate in three years. So we have a very set time to do this [work]. We don't have a lot of time but, if we properly manage our assets as we work with the plan, we can get to the end as scheduled.
Q: With some indictees at large and who knows how many more likely to follow suit, how feasible is this timetable?
A: We know there are people we are not going to get our hands on immediately but again, over time, I'm sure we will. You know, whoever is indicted of war crimes, international law requires that the countries in which they are either prosecutes them for those crimes themselves or turns them over for prosecution.
So, if we know where somebody is, we can put maximum pressure on the UN Security Council to exert diplomatic pressure on such countries. Harbouring an [alleged] international war criminal is a very dangerous thing for a country to do and they will pay a heavy political price to harbour somebody [under indictment and at large].
Q: So far there have been some arrests of those who allegedly bear the greatest responsibility for crimes against humanity. What happens to those who actually committed the crimes? Are they going to go scot-free?
A: We have to follow the law. The law says that we try those who bear the greatest responsibility so I can only try those who bear the greatest responsibility. As a matter of fact, there are people who did terrible things - behaviour I cannot condone - but my task from the international community is to try those who bear the greatest responsibility so I will do that.
But there are going to be people out there who may not be prosecuted because of lack of evidence. If we have a case on which we have information, we will turn it over to the authorities. Yes, some people will not be prosecuted [by us] because we cannot prosecute thousands and thousands of people.
So what do we do with them? Do we keep them or reconcile and move forward. It is true some of them did terrible things but we have to face reality: the Special Court is designed to try those who bear the greatest responsibility. We have to do that, but I can't speak for the others because they would need another jurisdiction.
Those are some of the issues that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TCR) would probably handle.
Q: What is the linkage between the Special Court and Sierra Leone's TRC?
A: The Special Court and the TRC have to succeed together. They are complementary institutions - each with a different mandate, each with a different objective but moving in the same direction: to achieve just and sustainable peace for this country.
The TRC was set up to look at the history of what happened. Through that process, to bring out the truth, and the truth will bring peace and reconciliation. The Special Court is a criminal court set up to prosecute and to convict those who started this terrible tragedy.
Together, the two have this important ability to help the country move forward to a just and sustainable peace.
Q: What would you say is the Court's role in Sierra Leone's peace and reconciliation process?
A: In order for this country to move forward and have long-term peace, we have to stop impunity and the circle of people coming forward and seizing what they think is theirs, and terrorising the country.
The Special Court is to stop this impunity and to see the start of a new circle of the rule of law versus the rule of the gun.
Q: What would your comment be on the notion that the Special Court offers justice and not genuine reconciliation?
A: I believe that once people see justice being done in front of their eyes - and it is transparent and that no one is above the law - that they begin to realise that the rule of law is where they should go.
That, in itself, is the peace and reconciliation process. That the common man will have returned to the rule of law rather than the rule of the gun will definitely help in the restoration of peace, and reconciliation.
Q: It might turn out that some of those arrested may not be in a position to meet the legal fees for their lawyers. Does the court have any back-up arrangements for these kinds of cases?
A: Absolutely. We are trying to show the people of Sierra Leone that justice is fair, open and transparent, but that there is no one above the law. We also want to show that if you are accused and brought before a court of justice, you have a right to a fair trial and can be confidently represented by an attorney.
And so the court has put in place a system to ensure that defendants can get a proper attorney, either on their own or through the help of the court. The court registry deals with this.
All in all, people have to realise that this is a success story: that the Special Court for Sierra Leone is going to do fulfil mandate and is going to do it fairly.
It is going to prove that international criminal justice can succeed in Africa - and particularly in West Africa.
[ENDS]
|