A Professional Editorial Commentary by James N. Jensen/BA. LLB, LLM
In the wake of Liberia’s civil war, a pressing question looms over the nation’s quest for justice: Will the War and Economic Crimes Court follow in the footsteps of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, potentially facing dismissal on procedural grounds? The echoes of Sierra Leone’s legal challenges reverberate, casting doubt on Liberia’s efforts to address its own wartime atrocities.
Curiosity into the future of trials of perpetrators of war and economic crimes after what is expected to be the constitutional and international framework for establishing the Special War Economic Crimes Court for Liberia.
Legal Framework: A Tale of Two Statutes - the Special Court for Sierra Leone and the unknown Statute for Liberia. The Sierra Leone Statute was established on a firm legal foundation - an agreement between the United Nations and a statute created by the government of Sierra Leone through its representatives explicitly mandated to prosecute war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide. Its statute served as a robust blueprint for justice, resulting in Liberia’s former president, Charles Taylor, being sentenced to 50 years in prison.
Beyond the Sierra Leonean success, the proposed War and Economic Crimes Court in Liberia seems to struggle to replicate or create a statute. The discrepancies in the legal framework and an unclear political will have created a quagmire, threatening the court’s inception if care is not taken. The time wasted by the Legislature in passing a joint resolution simply to state that Liberia, through its representatives and Senators, agreed to the establishment of SWECC, followed by an executive order issued by Liberia’s President, Joseph N. Boakai, stating that an office was to be provided by the Executive Branch for the running of the Court. These two instruments did not procedurally establish Liberia’s War and Economic Crimes Court to try perpetrators of war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide, among others. So, where is the statutory existence of Liberia’s War and Economic Crimes Court to which an Executive Director is now appointed? What are the qualifications spelled out? For how long should an Executive Director lead? What is the distinction between the Executive Director and the chief prosecutor, Deputy Chief Prosecutor, or judges of this court? why are there a management team as was in the case of Sierra Leone? Do not tell us that the joint Resolution and the Executive order are the legal instruments for the trial of those perceived to be perpetrators as a motion to dismiss the court may be granted by competent judges.
For purposes of a model, let us take a snapshot of the Sierra Leone Special War Crimes Court establishment. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED NATIONS AND THE GOVERNMENT OF SIERRA LEONE ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SPECIAL COURT FOR SIERRA LEONE: This agreement emphasized Security Council resolution 1315 (2000) of 14 August 2000, expressing deep concern at the very serious crimes committed within the territory of Sierra Leone against the people of Sierra Leone and United Nations and associated personnel and at the prevailing situation of impunity. The Security Council requested the Secretary-General to negotiate an agreement with the Government of Sierra Leone to create an independent special court to prosecute persons who bear the greatest responsibility for the commission of serious violations of international humanitarian law and crimes committed under Sierra Leonean law. The Secretary-General of the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone negotiated for the establishment of a Special Court for Sierra Leone. Thus, the United Nations and the Government of Sierra Leone agreed in Article 1 of the agreement to establish the Special Court. In that article, it is specifically stated that “There is hereby established a Special Court for Sierra Leone to prosecute persons who bear the greatest responsibility for serious violations of international humanitarian law and Sierra Leonean law committed in the territory of Sierra Leone since 30 November 1996. Furthermore, article 2 states that the Special Court shall function in accordance with the Statute of the Special Court for Sierra Leone. The Statute was created and exists even after the trial and existence of the Court. The question we ask, therefore, is why aren’t the framers of Liberia’s Special Court as clear and cogent as the model of Sierra Leone?
Liberia’s Court: Contention and Controversy - the Liberian court, envisioned to bring closure to the wounds of war, finds itself mired in controversy. Questions of legitimacy and feasibility arise, not only from within the nation but also from the international community. The recent appointment of Jonathan Massaquoi, a lawyer previously representing war crimes accused, as the head of the court has sparked outrage and skepticism. This contentious start raises concerns about the court’s ability to operate without bias and maintain public trust. Besides, this is not the concern for the editorial, rather the legal framework for the Court and the Court's probable dismissal at the start of the trial.
Probable Dismissal: On the Brink of Collapse? As the court stands on the precipice of its trial phase, the specter of dismissal looms large if the court legal framework is not right. Political machinations, a lack of cooperation from key stakeholders, and the daunting challenge of marshaling sufficient evidence could all converge to derail the proceedings. The court’s dismissal at the outset of the trial would not only be a blow to the victims seeking justice but also to the principle of accountability that underpins the rule of law.
International Accountability: The Global Gaze - The international community’s role in ensuring accountability for war crimes cannot be overstated. The cases of Sierra Leone and Liberia underscore the delicate balance between justice, reconciliation, and stability. As Liberia navigates the treacherous waters of establishing its War and Economic Crimes Court, it must heed the lessons of its neighbor, ensuring that the pursuit of justice does not falter on the same procedural rocks that once threatened Sierra Leone’s quest.
In conclusion, Liberia’s journey towards justice is fraught with challenges reminiscent of Sierra Leone’s past. The world watches, hoping that Liberia will succeed where others have stumbled, and that it will reinforce the pillars of justice and accountability that are essential for lasting peace and reconciliation, not leaving out the initial funding of the war that killed thousands.
Comments