The Special Tribunal for Lebanon: One small step for Lebanon, one giant leap for Middle East Democracy

05.06.2007

I went searching on the web for information on the Special Tribunal for Lebanon that was established on 30 May 2007 by the UN Security Council. My purpose was to learn about that mechanism from an International law perspective and to try to comprehend its future implications for, not only Lebanon , but the whole Middle-East.

The Special Tribunal for Lebanon was established to try the suspected killers of the former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. A resolution endorsing the tribunal’s formal establishment was adopted after 10 Council members voted in favour and no members voted against. Five countries – China, Russia, Indonesia, Qatar and South Africa – abstained. This Tribunal would enter into force on 10 June unless Lebanon ratified the tribunal itself before that date.

Scanning through the web, I learn that one important aspect of the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is the fact that it is based on Chapter VII of the United Nations Charter. Chapter VII entitles the Security Council to authorize economic, diplomatic, and military sanctions, as well as the use of military force, to resolve disputes. It gives the resolution based on it a special binding force under international law. [1]

I am also reminded that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon is not the first of its kind, though it is the first time that a UN-based international criminal tribunal is set up to try a “terrorist” crime committed against one specific person. A handful of tribunals had been set up under Chapter VII of the UN Charter before. The first such tribunal was the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY), created in 1993 to provide a judicial solution to the breaches of international humanitarian law that occurred in the region. And just two days ago Zdravko Tolimir, a high ranking Bosnian Serb Army officer indicted for genocide and other crimes committed in Srebrenica in 1995, was transferred into the Tribunal’s custody after having been on the run for more than two years.

In 1994, the Security Council formed the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) to contribute to the process of national reconciliation in Rwanda and to the maintenance of peace in the region. The first trial at the ICTR started in January 1997. By June 2006, the ICTR had handed down 22 judgments involving 28 accused. Twenty-five of them were convicted. And in 2002, another Special Court was set up, for Sierra Leone this time, in order to “try those who bear greatest responsibility” for the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Sierra Leone after 30 November 1996.

Finally, in 2007, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon, set up to try a terrorist crime, makes its entrance on the political and judicial scenes after more than 30 years of war, of unpunished crimes, of terrorist acts and of continued massacres in the country. This may sound paradoxical, thus providing an argument to those who have claims against the Tribunal and its legal foundations. Whatever the arguments against the legitimacy of the Tribunal may be, one should bear in mind, that at last now, for the first time in Lebanon, and for the first time in the Middle East, a crime will be tried and punished. If the establishment of an independent judicial body is a means to an end, the end being the prosecution of crime … then what other alternative means can better this one? Certainly not war.

Furthermore, we can consider the establishment of such a Tribunal as living proof of an international consensus to create a climate of confidence and to bring back stability to Lebanon. Indeed, this decision may be a one step further in that direction since UNSCR 1595 (2005), 1636 (2005), 1644 (2005), 1664 (2006), 1701 (2006), 1748 (2007)… But, history has taught us that this sort of “international consensus” in favour of Lebanon may not last. Let’s not miss our chance and let us seize this opportunity to build national unity and revive our country.

Eventually, the Tribunal should not limit itself to Rafik Hariri’s assassination, and as certain groups such as Human Rights Watch have been advocating, it should have jurisdiction over all the other attacks perpetrated in Lebanon since October 1, 2004. Then we will have entered a new era in the Middle East and reached a moment where we can watch how such a mechanism will serve as a lesson to all criminals running free in the region. It will unquestionably serve as a reminder that crimes cannot go on being unpunished forever.

[1] By opposition, a number of Security Council resolutions not based on Chapter VII have been interpreted as having the mere character of a recommendation and therefore considered to have no binding force under international law: various examples are the resolutions relating to the Arab-Israeli conflict, UNSCR 267 (1969), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 471 (1980), 478 (1980), 497 (1981), among others….